<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_01_25_1334220</id>
	<title>The Apple Paradox, Closed Culture &amp; Free-Thinking Fans</title>
	<author>CmdrTaco</author>
	<datestamp>1264428180000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>waderoush writes <i>"The secrecy surrounding the expected Apple tablet computer is only the latest example of the company's famously closed and controlling culture. Yet millions of designers, musicians, and other creative professionals love their Apple products, and the Apple brand is almost synonymous with free-thinking creativity. How can a company whose philosophy of information sharing is so at odds with that of most of its customers be so successful? This Xconomy essay <a href="http://www.xconomy.com/national/2010/01/25/the-apple-paradox-how-a-company-thats-so-closed-can-foster-so-much-open-innovation/">explores three possible explanations</a>. 1) Closed innovation, overseen by a guiding genius like Steve Jobs, may be the only way to build such coherent, compelling products. 2) Apple's hardware turns out to be more 'open' than the company intended &mdash; Jobs originally wanted to keep third-party apps off the iPhone, for example. 3) Related to #1: customers are pragmatic about quality, and the open source and free software movements haven't produced anything remotely as useful as Mac OS X and the iPhone."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>waderoush writes " The secrecy surrounding the expected Apple tablet computer is only the latest example of the company 's famously closed and controlling culture .
Yet millions of designers , musicians , and other creative professionals love their Apple products , and the Apple brand is almost synonymous with free-thinking creativity .
How can a company whose philosophy of information sharing is so at odds with that of most of its customers be so successful ?
This Xconomy essay explores three possible explanations .
1 ) Closed innovation , overseen by a guiding genius like Steve Jobs , may be the only way to build such coherent , compelling products .
2 ) Apple 's hardware turns out to be more 'open ' than the company intended    Jobs originally wanted to keep third-party apps off the iPhone , for example .
3 ) Related to # 1 : customers are pragmatic about quality , and the open source and free software movements have n't produced anything remotely as useful as Mac OS X and the iPhone .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>waderoush writes "The secrecy surrounding the expected Apple tablet computer is only the latest example of the company's famously closed and controlling culture.
Yet millions of designers, musicians, and other creative professionals love their Apple products, and the Apple brand is almost synonymous with free-thinking creativity.
How can a company whose philosophy of information sharing is so at odds with that of most of its customers be so successful?
This Xconomy essay explores three possible explanations.
1) Closed innovation, overseen by a guiding genius like Steve Jobs, may be the only way to build such coherent, compelling products.
2) Apple's hardware turns out to be more 'open' than the company intended — Jobs originally wanted to keep third-party apps off the iPhone, for example.
3) Related to #1: customers are pragmatic about quality, and the open source and free software movements haven't produced anything remotely as useful as Mac OS X and the iPhone.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890560</id>
	<title>Re:Nice Troll</title>
	<author>PhilHibbs</author>
	<datestamp>1264437060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Android isn't really a product of the free software movement, it's a product of Google. Sure they used FOSS tools and components, but so did Apple. They are both in-house products, not community products.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Android is n't really a product of the free software movement , it 's a product of Google .
Sure they used FOSS tools and components , but so did Apple .
They are both in-house products , not community products .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Android isn't really a product of the free software movement, it's a product of Google.
Sure they used FOSS tools and components, but so did Apple.
They are both in-house products, not community products.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889326</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30893562</id>
	<title>The new religious wars...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264447860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As an IT professional, I own an Apple laptop because it is the only tool that lets me support my Windows, Mac, and Unix clients on 1 platform (Mac OS and BSD you get by default, and I run XP, Vista, and 7 on it via virtualization...) on one computer. To not have to bother with performance robbing anti virus/spyware/worm/trojan software, and daily security updates from Microsoft on the primary OS is also a bonus.</p><p>What I love are the comment-wars this type of paragraph invariably generates. Adherence to certain brands of technology, mac vs. pc., iphone vs. blackberry, are the closest things to religion we seem to have in today's "advanced" western cultures. These adherents appear to want to start the new religious wars of our times.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As an IT professional , I own an Apple laptop because it is the only tool that lets me support my Windows , Mac , and Unix clients on 1 platform ( Mac OS and BSD you get by default , and I run XP , Vista , and 7 on it via virtualization... ) on one computer .
To not have to bother with performance robbing anti virus/spyware/worm/trojan software , and daily security updates from Microsoft on the primary OS is also a bonus.What I love are the comment-wars this type of paragraph invariably generates .
Adherence to certain brands of technology , mac vs .
pc. , iphone vs. blackberry , are the closest things to religion we seem to have in today 's " advanced " western cultures .
These adherents appear to want to start the new religious wars of our times .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As an IT professional, I own an Apple laptop because it is the only tool that lets me support my Windows, Mac, and Unix clients on 1 platform (Mac OS and BSD you get by default, and I run XP, Vista, and 7 on it via virtualization...) on one computer.
To not have to bother with performance robbing anti virus/spyware/worm/trojan software, and daily security updates from Microsoft on the primary OS is also a bonus.What I love are the comment-wars this type of paragraph invariably generates.
Adherence to certain brands of technology, mac vs.
pc., iphone vs. blackberry, are the closest things to religion we seem to have in today's "advanced" western cultures.
These adherents appear to want to start the new religious wars of our times.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889454</id>
	<title>Subjectivity presented as fact</title>
	<author>slim</author>
	<datestamp>1264432860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>From TFA:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>The programs people are inspired to write for the Mac OS X operating system are routinely more elegant and useful and less annoying than their Windows counterparts.</p></div><p>Quite the claim! Yet there are no examples.</p><p>I own a Mac. I've not installed much extra software on it. But what I have installed appears very similar to its Windows equivalent.</p><p>So can anyone give an example of what he's talking about?</p><p>I guess iLife should be showcase software for Mac.<br>
&nbsp; - iPhoto is a confusing mess compared to Picasa<br>
&nbsp; - GarageBand has some pretty neat amp simulation software in it. But the UI is the opposite of intuitive.<br>
&nbsp; - iTunes is clumsy and inconsistent. I've been using it for over 5 years on Windows and Mac, and it still throws me curveballs.<br>
&nbsp; - I once put together a slideshow in iMovie. I still don't know what was going on.<br>
&nbsp; - iDVD is pretty easy to use. But that's because it's basically a wizard.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>From TFA : The programs people are inspired to write for the Mac OS X operating system are routinely more elegant and useful and less annoying than their Windows counterparts.Quite the claim !
Yet there are no examples.I own a Mac .
I 've not installed much extra software on it .
But what I have installed appears very similar to its Windows equivalent.So can anyone give an example of what he 's talking about ? I guess iLife should be showcase software for Mac .
  - iPhoto is a confusing mess compared to Picasa   - GarageBand has some pretty neat amp simulation software in it .
But the UI is the opposite of intuitive .
  - iTunes is clumsy and inconsistent .
I 've been using it for over 5 years on Windows and Mac , and it still throws me curveballs .
  - I once put together a slideshow in iMovie .
I still do n't know what was going on .
  - iDVD is pretty easy to use .
But that 's because it 's basically a wizard .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From TFA:The programs people are inspired to write for the Mac OS X operating system are routinely more elegant and useful and less annoying than their Windows counterparts.Quite the claim!
Yet there are no examples.I own a Mac.
I've not installed much extra software on it.
But what I have installed appears very similar to its Windows equivalent.So can anyone give an example of what he's talking about?I guess iLife should be showcase software for Mac.
  - iPhoto is a confusing mess compared to Picasa
  - GarageBand has some pretty neat amp simulation software in it.
But the UI is the opposite of intuitive.
  - iTunes is clumsy and inconsistent.
I've been using it for over 5 years on Windows and Mac, and it still throws me curveballs.
  - I once put together a slideshow in iMovie.
I still don't know what was going on.
  - iDVD is pretty easy to use.
But that's because it's basically a wizard.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889994</id>
	<title>Because art by committee sucks...</title>
	<author>vtTom</author>
	<datestamp>1264434900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>The author is confusing "free-thinking" with democratic values.

In my experience, creativity usually flows from primarily 1 person.  Either that person is alone (like an artist in their studio) or a dictatorial over-lord calling the shots (eg. a stage or movie director, or a music conductor or producer).

So, "free-thinking" should not really imply an open, democratic environment.  If you think of it this way, these "free-thinking" artists are not all that unlike Apple after all.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The author is confusing " free-thinking " with democratic values .
In my experience , creativity usually flows from primarily 1 person .
Either that person is alone ( like an artist in their studio ) or a dictatorial over-lord calling the shots ( eg .
a stage or movie director , or a music conductor or producer ) .
So , " free-thinking " should not really imply an open , democratic environment .
If you think of it this way , these " free-thinking " artists are not all that unlike Apple after all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The author is confusing "free-thinking" with democratic values.
In my experience, creativity usually flows from primarily 1 person.
Either that person is alone (like an artist in their studio) or a dictatorial over-lord calling the shots (eg.
a stage or movie director, or a music conductor or producer).
So, "free-thinking" should not really imply an open, democratic environment.
If you think of it this way, these "free-thinking" artists are not all that unlike Apple after all.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891298</id>
	<title>Re:Lesson: Apple marketing i working!</title>
	<author>hitmark</author>
	<datestamp>1264439520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>alcohol makes you attractive to the opposite sex</i></p><p>only if its the other side doing the drinking<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>alcohol makes you attractive to the opposite sexonly if its the other side doing the drinking ; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>alcohol makes you attractive to the opposite sexonly if its the other side doing the drinking ;)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889362</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891836</id>
	<title>Re:I guess Apple did all that themselves...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264441140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's OS X not OS/X, jeebus</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's OS X not OS/X , jeebus</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's OS X not OS/X, jeebus</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889768</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890312</id>
	<title>Re:Designed to stay out of your way</title>
	<author>Stregano</author>
	<datestamp>1264436160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I have no idea what Windows apps you are using where drag and drop does not work.  I have never run into a Windows application where drag and drop does not work.  I have used multiple different gui's for *nix systems and also have not run into any drag and drop issues.
<br> <br>
I am also curious to know which Windows or *nix products you refer to when you say that they do not work as intended.  When you say drag and drop is hit or miss, than I am very, very curious what applications you are running since I have been a *nix, Windows, and Mac user for years and have not run into issues like that since Windows 3.1 and early versions of *nix gui's like Ubuntu.
<br> <br>
Also, I was under the assumption, correct me if I am wrong, that OSX now works with Intel based chips, which would mean that if we are looking at it strictly from a OS standpoint, Apple has no control over hardware.  Since you went into issues that Windows has, I am going to assume you went on a basis of OS only and not a full hardware and software standpoint.
<br> <br>
I am also curious as to what this "Apple way" is when it comes to software "Just Working".  Getting an internet connection working again on a Mac is always fun.  There are variables to every single computer and Macs will not always "Just Work".  Sure, many times Windows is the same, but to assume that you can buy a computer and never have an issue, excuse me, but that sounds a little naive.
<br> <br>
All computers will run into issues regardless of where you buy them from.  It could be a Mac, it could be Windows, it could even be one of those eeePC netbooks that was bundled with Linux.  There is no way to avoid issues.  I will never dispute that the Windows OS has issues.  It has plenty of problems, but the approach this post took makes Apple out to be the computer company that will never break.
<br> <br>
Unfortunately, Macs will break.  Don't feel bad, Windows based breaks as well.  There is nothing you can do about it.  Your Mac will break.  This is the kicker though, when your machine breaks, which it will, they all break after so many years, you need to ask yourself: which one will cost you more in the long run to repair?
<br> <br>
Now the people that come back and say, "I can afford it", you might as well buy a Dellienware.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have no idea what Windows apps you are using where drag and drop does not work .
I have never run into a Windows application where drag and drop does not work .
I have used multiple different gui 's for * nix systems and also have not run into any drag and drop issues .
I am also curious to know which Windows or * nix products you refer to when you say that they do not work as intended .
When you say drag and drop is hit or miss , than I am very , very curious what applications you are running since I have been a * nix , Windows , and Mac user for years and have not run into issues like that since Windows 3.1 and early versions of * nix gui 's like Ubuntu .
Also , I was under the assumption , correct me if I am wrong , that OSX now works with Intel based chips , which would mean that if we are looking at it strictly from a OS standpoint , Apple has no control over hardware .
Since you went into issues that Windows has , I am going to assume you went on a basis of OS only and not a full hardware and software standpoint .
I am also curious as to what this " Apple way " is when it comes to software " Just Working " .
Getting an internet connection working again on a Mac is always fun .
There are variables to every single computer and Macs will not always " Just Work " .
Sure , many times Windows is the same , but to assume that you can buy a computer and never have an issue , excuse me , but that sounds a little naive .
All computers will run into issues regardless of where you buy them from .
It could be a Mac , it could be Windows , it could even be one of those eeePC netbooks that was bundled with Linux .
There is no way to avoid issues .
I will never dispute that the Windows OS has issues .
It has plenty of problems , but the approach this post took makes Apple out to be the computer company that will never break .
Unfortunately , Macs will break .
Do n't feel bad , Windows based breaks as well .
There is nothing you can do about it .
Your Mac will break .
This is the kicker though , when your machine breaks , which it will , they all break after so many years , you need to ask yourself : which one will cost you more in the long run to repair ?
Now the people that come back and say , " I can afford it " , you might as well buy a Dellienware .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have no idea what Windows apps you are using where drag and drop does not work.
I have never run into a Windows application where drag and drop does not work.
I have used multiple different gui's for *nix systems and also have not run into any drag and drop issues.
I am also curious to know which Windows or *nix products you refer to when you say that they do not work as intended.
When you say drag and drop is hit or miss, than I am very, very curious what applications you are running since I have been a *nix, Windows, and Mac user for years and have not run into issues like that since Windows 3.1 and early versions of *nix gui's like Ubuntu.
Also, I was under the assumption, correct me if I am wrong, that OSX now works with Intel based chips, which would mean that if we are looking at it strictly from a OS standpoint, Apple has no control over hardware.
Since you went into issues that Windows has, I am going to assume you went on a basis of OS only and not a full hardware and software standpoint.
I am also curious as to what this "Apple way" is when it comes to software "Just Working".
Getting an internet connection working again on a Mac is always fun.
There are variables to every single computer and Macs will not always "Just Work".
Sure, many times Windows is the same, but to assume that you can buy a computer and never have an issue, excuse me, but that sounds a little naive.
All computers will run into issues regardless of where you buy them from.
It could be a Mac, it could be Windows, it could even be one of those eeePC netbooks that was bundled with Linux.
There is no way to avoid issues.
I will never dispute that the Windows OS has issues.
It has plenty of problems, but the approach this post took makes Apple out to be the computer company that will never break.
Unfortunately, Macs will break.
Don't feel bad, Windows based breaks as well.
There is nothing you can do about it.
Your Mac will break.
This is the kicker though, when your machine breaks, which it will, they all break after so many years, you need to ask yourself: which one will cost you more in the long run to repair?
Now the people that come back and say, "I can afford it", you might as well buy a Dellienware.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889406</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30894668</id>
	<title>Re:I'm off-duty</title>
	<author>Sandbags</author>
	<datestamp>1264452960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In theater maybe and even that's a generalization, but I have several close personal friends in creative writing, photographic arts, computer design/graphics, and more.  Best I can tell, not only is the number of homosexuals less, actually there seems to be quite a bit MORE heterosexual sex going on in the art schools I've visited over the decades.  There also seems to not only be more sex, but it's sex more consistently with the same partner and less simply sleeping around.</p><p>I think I'm going to have to ask you for some sources on your data....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In theater maybe and even that 's a generalization , but I have several close personal friends in creative writing , photographic arts , computer design/graphics , and more .
Best I can tell , not only is the number of homosexuals less , actually there seems to be quite a bit MORE heterosexual sex going on in the art schools I 've visited over the decades .
There also seems to not only be more sex , but it 's sex more consistently with the same partner and less simply sleeping around.I think I 'm going to have to ask you for some sources on your data... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In theater maybe and even that's a generalization, but I have several close personal friends in creative writing, photographic arts, computer design/graphics, and more.
Best I can tell, not only is the number of homosexuals less, actually there seems to be quite a bit MORE heterosexual sex going on in the art schools I've visited over the decades.
There also seems to not only be more sex, but it's sex more consistently with the same partner and less simply sleeping around.I think I'm going to have to ask you for some sources on your data....</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889380</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891706</id>
	<title>Why ...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264440660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>is this tagged as flamebait?  I don't understand.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>is this tagged as flamebait ?
I do n't understand .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>is this tagged as flamebait?
I don't understand.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30893760</id>
	<title>Re:It's not designed by committee</title>
	<author>Culture20</author>
	<datestamp>1264448820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If Apple would release an "alpha" product to "test the waters" like so many other companies do, the iPod (and iPhone, for that matter) would have died at birth or would be so hideously deformed that it would be unrecognizable.</p></div><p>Except they do.  They release hundreds of rumors just to see which ones get people talking the most, then they *almost* fulfill the wishes of the masses (Total wish fulfillment in version 3 or 4; by which time new wishes will crop up).</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If Apple would release an " alpha " product to " test the waters " like so many other companies do , the iPod ( and iPhone , for that matter ) would have died at birth or would be so hideously deformed that it would be unrecognizable.Except they do .
They release hundreds of rumors just to see which ones get people talking the most , then they * almost * fulfill the wishes of the masses ( Total wish fulfillment in version 3 or 4 ; by which time new wishes will crop up ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If Apple would release an "alpha" product to "test the waters" like so many other companies do, the iPod (and iPhone, for that matter) would have died at birth or would be so hideously deformed that it would be unrecognizable.Except they do.
They release hundreds of rumors just to see which ones get people talking the most, then they *almost* fulfill the wishes of the masses (Total wish fulfillment in version 3 or 4; by which time new wishes will crop up).
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889790</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889846</id>
	<title>Re:Not sure in USA but in Spain...</title>
	<author>Fahrvergnuugen</author>
	<datestamp>1264434360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Or they could be programmers looking for the best tool for the job.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Or they could be programmers looking for the best tool for the job .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or they could be programmers looking for the best tool for the job.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889256</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30893076</id>
	<title>Re:Not sure in USA but in Spain...</title>
	<author>Matey-O</author>
	<datestamp>1264445940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The loudest debators in a topic are the ones that are cost-constrained. I don't debate consoles because I have all or them. I don't debate OSX vs Linux vs Windows because I have all of them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The loudest debators in a topic are the ones that are cost-constrained .
I do n't debate consoles because I have all or them .
I do n't debate OSX vs Linux vs Windows because I have all of them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The loudest debators in a topic are the ones that are cost-constrained.
I don't debate consoles because I have all or them.
I don't debate OSX vs Linux vs Windows because I have all of them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890432</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30896940</id>
	<title>Apple secretiveness</title>
	<author>Estanislao Martínez</author>
	<datestamp>1264418400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>The company is secretive about upcoming, not-yet-available products. Which is not information that customers require in their day-to-day work anyways. As a user or as a developer, it is information about the current, existing products that you need most. And as both I've always found that to be readily available whenever I needed it.</p></div></blockquote><p>Frankly, no.  The company is just very often secretive for no good reason.  The unreleased products part isn't as clear-cut as you make it, because (a) Apple makes many products where the developer community could definitely benefit from a lot more information before the release, and (b) Apple <b>does</b> share such information with hand-picked outside developers before a release (folks from the companies that they bring into their announcement events, to advertise games under development for the iPhone and such).

</p><p>Granted, the unreleased product examples aren't the best ones, because they're examples where you can easily argue either way.  But there are other examples where Apple is excessively secretive about existing products for no good reason that I can discern.  Here are two that I've personally encountered:
</p><ol>
<li>I bought an Apple Airport Extreme because Apple said that it would support their upcoming Time Machine feature with an external USB hard disk.  In the end, it never did, which is really bad; but what's worse is that Apple simply dodged user questions about it for months.</li>
<li>Apple simply won't respond to questions from Aperture users about when (or whether) RAW support will be added for specific camera models.</li>
</ol></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The company is secretive about upcoming , not-yet-available products .
Which is not information that customers require in their day-to-day work anyways .
As a user or as a developer , it is information about the current , existing products that you need most .
And as both I 've always found that to be readily available whenever I needed it.Frankly , no .
The company is just very often secretive for no good reason .
The unreleased products part is n't as clear-cut as you make it , because ( a ) Apple makes many products where the developer community could definitely benefit from a lot more information before the release , and ( b ) Apple does share such information with hand-picked outside developers before a release ( folks from the companies that they bring into their announcement events , to advertise games under development for the iPhone and such ) .
Granted , the unreleased product examples are n't the best ones , because they 're examples where you can easily argue either way .
But there are other examples where Apple is excessively secretive about existing products for no good reason that I can discern .
Here are two that I 've personally encountered : I bought an Apple Airport Extreme because Apple said that it would support their upcoming Time Machine feature with an external USB hard disk .
In the end , it never did , which is really bad ; but what 's worse is that Apple simply dodged user questions about it for months .
Apple simply wo n't respond to questions from Aperture users about when ( or whether ) RAW support will be added for specific camera models .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The company is secretive about upcoming, not-yet-available products.
Which is not information that customers require in their day-to-day work anyways.
As a user or as a developer, it is information about the current, existing products that you need most.
And as both I've always found that to be readily available whenever I needed it.Frankly, no.
The company is just very often secretive for no good reason.
The unreleased products part isn't as clear-cut as you make it, because (a) Apple makes many products where the developer community could definitely benefit from a lot more information before the release, and (b) Apple does share such information with hand-picked outside developers before a release (folks from the companies that they bring into their announcement events, to advertise games under development for the iPhone and such).
Granted, the unreleased product examples aren't the best ones, because they're examples where you can easily argue either way.
But there are other examples where Apple is excessively secretive about existing products for no good reason that I can discern.
Here are two that I've personally encountered:

I bought an Apple Airport Extreme because Apple said that it would support their upcoming Time Machine feature with an external USB hard disk.
In the end, it never did, which is really bad; but what's worse is that Apple simply dodged user questions about it for months.
Apple simply won't respond to questions from Aperture users about when (or whether) RAW support will be added for specific camera models.

	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889444</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889896</id>
	<title>You missed Option 4</title>
	<author>JustNiz</author>
	<datestamp>1264434480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>People really are very shallow and most Apple product owners fall for the marketing hype that showing off an I-something is a way of making themselves appear more 'cool'.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>People really are very shallow and most Apple product owners fall for the marketing hype that showing off an I-something is a way of making themselves appear more 'cool' .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>People really are very shallow and most Apple product owners fall for the marketing hype that showing off an I-something is a way of making themselves appear more 'cool'.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889672</id>
	<title>Re:I'm off-duty</title>
	<author>LikwidCirkel</author>
	<datestamp>1264433760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>going to art school != being creative</htmltext>
<tokenext>going to art school ! = being creative</tokentext>
<sentencetext>going to art school != being creative</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889380</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889542</id>
	<title>It's not so much about "free thinking"</title>
	<author>dushkin</author>
	<datestamp>1264433220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>More like about "screw the BS, here's a quality product."</p><p>While I do admire a lot of FOSS projects (for instance Firefox, Adium, Python) I also find that a lot of them just don't stack up to Apple in terms of features.</p><p>For instance from the perspective of a graphic designer. OS X has probably the best font smoothing I've seen on any screen. I cringe when I have to use Windows at work. X11 doesn't compare either.</p><p>What if I bring a new fancy printer to my ad agency office (or whatever workplace that uses macs)? I know I don't have to go machine by machine and install fancy drivers - because they're all there. I never once had to install any printer drivers on any OS X system. (There's probably an exception if we're talking about highly specialized printers, but I have no experience with those)</p><p>Even as a "standard" user. I know my digital camera can just hook up to the computer with "that cable" and I can download pictures to "that program" and do fancy stuff with them with a drag and drop interface or even make pretty websites mom can visit with this iWeb thing. I don't like iWeb, but I've seen a lot of people using it and all they know is some word processing.</p><p>Even the more advanced users have something for them. Just last night I quickly created a python script to take text from the command line arguments, string them together and put them in title caps. I made that into a service using automator (call it via shell script) and used System Preferences to bind it to Ctrl-Shift-T. So now whenever I select text and do that keystroke, I get text in title caps.</p><p>Speaking of this Automator thing, I wish I could use it at work. I have an excel report I have to prepare on a daily basis for several clients. I made a script at home that I can drag a file on to and it attaches that file to an email, types my standard greeting, puts the correct addresses and puts the date in the subject line. I end up doing that manually at work simply because Outlook/Excel suck at this stuff.</p><p>Actually, if my corp's ERP system ran on a Mac, I'd probably bring my laptop... Or maybe I'll virtualize it?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>More like about " screw the BS , here 's a quality product .
" While I do admire a lot of FOSS projects ( for instance Firefox , Adium , Python ) I also find that a lot of them just do n't stack up to Apple in terms of features.For instance from the perspective of a graphic designer .
OS X has probably the best font smoothing I 've seen on any screen .
I cringe when I have to use Windows at work .
X11 does n't compare either.What if I bring a new fancy printer to my ad agency office ( or whatever workplace that uses macs ) ?
I know I do n't have to go machine by machine and install fancy drivers - because they 're all there .
I never once had to install any printer drivers on any OS X system .
( There 's probably an exception if we 're talking about highly specialized printers , but I have no experience with those ) Even as a " standard " user .
I know my digital camera can just hook up to the computer with " that cable " and I can download pictures to " that program " and do fancy stuff with them with a drag and drop interface or even make pretty websites mom can visit with this iWeb thing .
I do n't like iWeb , but I 've seen a lot of people using it and all they know is some word processing.Even the more advanced users have something for them .
Just last night I quickly created a python script to take text from the command line arguments , string them together and put them in title caps .
I made that into a service using automator ( call it via shell script ) and used System Preferences to bind it to Ctrl-Shift-T. So now whenever I select text and do that keystroke , I get text in title caps.Speaking of this Automator thing , I wish I could use it at work .
I have an excel report I have to prepare on a daily basis for several clients .
I made a script at home that I can drag a file on to and it attaches that file to an email , types my standard greeting , puts the correct addresses and puts the date in the subject line .
I end up doing that manually at work simply because Outlook/Excel suck at this stuff.Actually , if my corp 's ERP system ran on a Mac , I 'd probably bring my laptop... Or maybe I 'll virtualize it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>More like about "screw the BS, here's a quality product.
"While I do admire a lot of FOSS projects (for instance Firefox, Adium, Python) I also find that a lot of them just don't stack up to Apple in terms of features.For instance from the perspective of a graphic designer.
OS X has probably the best font smoothing I've seen on any screen.
I cringe when I have to use Windows at work.
X11 doesn't compare either.What if I bring a new fancy printer to my ad agency office (or whatever workplace that uses macs)?
I know I don't have to go machine by machine and install fancy drivers - because they're all there.
I never once had to install any printer drivers on any OS X system.
(There's probably an exception if we're talking about highly specialized printers, but I have no experience with those)Even as a "standard" user.
I know my digital camera can just hook up to the computer with "that cable" and I can download pictures to "that program" and do fancy stuff with them with a drag and drop interface or even make pretty websites mom can visit with this iWeb thing.
I don't like iWeb, but I've seen a lot of people using it and all they know is some word processing.Even the more advanced users have something for them.
Just last night I quickly created a python script to take text from the command line arguments, string them together and put them in title caps.
I made that into a service using automator (call it via shell script) and used System Preferences to bind it to Ctrl-Shift-T. So now whenever I select text and do that keystroke, I get text in title caps.Speaking of this Automator thing, I wish I could use it at work.
I have an excel report I have to prepare on a daily basis for several clients.
I made a script at home that I can drag a file on to and it attaches that file to an email, types my standard greeting, puts the correct addresses and puts the date in the subject line.
I end up doing that manually at work simply because Outlook/Excel suck at this stuff.Actually, if my corp's ERP system ran on a Mac, I'd probably bring my laptop... Or maybe I'll virtualize it?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30913656</id>
	<title>Re:I'm off-duty</title>
	<author>ScrewMaster</author>
	<datestamp>1264527840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I don't want to start a conspiracy theory or anything, but I have a cousin who only turned bender AFTER he bought an iphone and mac book.</p><p>Coincidence or causation? Has anyone checked the iphone source code for back-doors?</p></div><p>I don't know about that, but I do know that Applesoft BASIC had a POKE statement, so there's some precedent here.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't want to start a conspiracy theory or anything , but I have a cousin who only turned bender AFTER he bought an iphone and mac book.Coincidence or causation ?
Has anyone checked the iphone source code for back-doors ? I do n't know about that , but I do know that Applesoft BASIC had a POKE statement , so there 's some precedent here .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't want to start a conspiracy theory or anything, but I have a cousin who only turned bender AFTER he bought an iphone and mac book.Coincidence or causation?
Has anyone checked the iphone source code for back-doors?I don't know about that, but I do know that Applesoft BASIC had a POKE statement, so there's some precedent here.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889528</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30892344</id>
	<title>Homophobia</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264442940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Having filtered out all the standard "Apple =&gt; groupthink", "Windows crashes", "Get a life" etc posts in this discussion the most noticeable theme that stands out is the juvenile homophobia of a reasonable fraction of the readership here. Macs are for gay people? Come on, grow up.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Having filtered out all the standard " Apple = &gt; groupthink " , " Windows crashes " , " Get a life " etc posts in this discussion the most noticeable theme that stands out is the juvenile homophobia of a reasonable fraction of the readership here .
Macs are for gay people ?
Come on , grow up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Having filtered out all the standard "Apple =&gt; groupthink", "Windows crashes", "Get a life" etc posts in this discussion the most noticeable theme that stands out is the juvenile homophobia of a reasonable fraction of the readership here.
Macs are for gay people?
Come on, grow up.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891722</id>
	<title>'coolness' and fanboyism biggest negatives</title>
	<author>BemoanAndMoan</author>
	<datestamp>1264440720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I switched to Mac from PC because I grew tired of Windows enforcing its dull, witless paradigms on me, but there are many things I actually miss about Windows/hate in Mac culture:</p><ul>
<li> With Windows, I could quickly find solutions to problems via forums, where most responses to Mac issues include countless "I refuse to acknowledge your criticism of my Apple product" or more often "but it's shiny" responses<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... most often you have to reply multiple times with "yes, it is shiny, but I would really like it to do this<nobr> <wbr></nobr>..." before finally giving up and living with the issue (example, I don't need to see my desktop when working in Photoshop<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... wtf would I want to see unrelated content of any kind???<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... but too bad live with it)</li>
<li> Mac has some serious/conflicting usability issues (come on, who builds both a three-control key keyboard and a single-button mouse?) like having the apple key (core to most actions) only on the left side of the keyboard ('suck on it, lefty!' seems to be the message)<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... but heaven forbid you ever suggest this in public</li>
<li> Apple's no-competition-when-playing-in-our-house philosophy (message: Apple, your iPhone email app sucks big time; no marking 'all read', no 'send only' accounts, no<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.... you get the idea) hints of an arrogance and hubris that is counter-apple-culture</li>
<li> The intellectual vacuum that exists in fanboyism causes the same sort of negative progress in the Mac arena as the self-entitlement that Windows brought to its own products.  If you can't question God, how can you evolve?</li>
</ul><p>Anyway, at least it *is* shiny.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I switched to Mac from PC because I grew tired of Windows enforcing its dull , witless paradigms on me , but there are many things I actually miss about Windows/hate in Mac culture : With Windows , I could quickly find solutions to problems via forums , where most responses to Mac issues include countless " I refuse to acknowledge your criticism of my Apple product " or more often " but it 's shiny " responses ... most often you have to reply multiple times with " yes , it is shiny , but I would really like it to do this ... " before finally giving up and living with the issue ( example , I do n't need to see my desktop when working in Photoshop ... wtf would I want to see unrelated content of any kind ? ? ?
... but too bad live with it ) Mac has some serious/conflicting usability issues ( come on , who builds both a three-control key keyboard and a single-button mouse ?
) like having the apple key ( core to most actions ) only on the left side of the keyboard ( 'suck on it , lefty !
' seems to be the message ) ... but heaven forbid you ever suggest this in public Apple 's no-competition-when-playing-in-our-house philosophy ( message : Apple , your iPhone email app sucks big time ; no marking 'all read ' , no 'send only ' accounts , no .... you get the idea ) hints of an arrogance and hubris that is counter-apple-culture The intellectual vacuum that exists in fanboyism causes the same sort of negative progress in the Mac arena as the self-entitlement that Windows brought to its own products .
If you ca n't question God , how can you evolve ?
Anyway , at least it * is * shiny .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I switched to Mac from PC because I grew tired of Windows enforcing its dull, witless paradigms on me, but there are many things I actually miss about Windows/hate in Mac culture:
 With Windows, I could quickly find solutions to problems via forums, where most responses to Mac issues include countless "I refuse to acknowledge your criticism of my Apple product" or more often "but it's shiny" responses ... most often you have to reply multiple times with "yes, it is shiny, but I would really like it to do this ..." before finally giving up and living with the issue (example, I don't need to see my desktop when working in Photoshop ... wtf would I want to see unrelated content of any kind???
... but too bad live with it)
 Mac has some serious/conflicting usability issues (come on, who builds both a three-control key keyboard and a single-button mouse?
) like having the apple key (core to most actions) only on the left side of the keyboard ('suck on it, lefty!
' seems to be the message) ... but heaven forbid you ever suggest this in public
 Apple's no-competition-when-playing-in-our-house philosophy (message: Apple, your iPhone email app sucks big time; no marking 'all read', no 'send only' accounts, no .... you get the idea) hints of an arrogance and hubris that is counter-apple-culture
 The intellectual vacuum that exists in fanboyism causes the same sort of negative progress in the Mac arena as the self-entitlement that Windows brought to its own products.
If you can't question God, how can you evolve?
Anyway, at least it *is* shiny.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30892408</id>
	<title>Re:I'm off-duty</title>
	<author>Damn The Torpedoes</author>
	<datestamp>1264443120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You're missing the point, Alarindris. Or maybe you're just making a completely unrelated one?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You 're missing the point , Alarindris .
Or maybe you 're just making a completely unrelated one ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You're missing the point, Alarindris.
Or maybe you're just making a completely unrelated one?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889498</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889804</id>
	<title>Re:Option 4</title>
	<author>Tim C</author>
	<datestamp>1264434120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Exactly what I was going to say. In my experience, most "ordinary" people want their computers to work, and preferably to look pretty. Macs would seem to deliver on both counts.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Exactly what I was going to say .
In my experience , most " ordinary " people want their computers to work , and preferably to look pretty .
Macs would seem to deliver on both counts .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Exactly what I was going to say.
In my experience, most "ordinary" people want their computers to work, and preferably to look pretty.
Macs would seem to deliver on both counts.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889408</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889680</id>
	<title>Re:I'm off-duty</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264433760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Actually, there is some correlation between creativity and homosexuality; you'll find a larger percentage of gays in art school than studying any other discipline</p></div></blockquote><p>

I took some art courses working on an undergrad Fine Arts program at 2 different colleges and I didn't see an unusually high number of gay students. I honestly don't know what you're talking about. I suspect you're peddling bullshit stereotypes you picked up from watching some lousy TV sitcoms.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , there is some correlation between creativity and homosexuality ; you 'll find a larger percentage of gays in art school than studying any other discipline I took some art courses working on an undergrad Fine Arts program at 2 different colleges and I did n't see an unusually high number of gay students .
I honestly do n't know what you 're talking about .
I suspect you 're peddling bullshit stereotypes you picked up from watching some lousy TV sitcoms .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, there is some correlation between creativity and homosexuality; you'll find a larger percentage of gays in art school than studying any other discipline

I took some art courses working on an undergrad Fine Arts program at 2 different colleges and I didn't see an unusually high number of gay students.
I honestly don't know what you're talking about.
I suspect you're peddling bullshit stereotypes you picked up from watching some lousy TV sitcoms.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889380</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889326</id>
	<title>Nice Troll</title>
	<author>Nerdfest</author>
	<datestamp>1264432380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>the open source and free software movements haven't produced anything remotely as useful as Mac OS X and the iPhone</p></div><p>Many users of Android, Linux, and many other open source products might have some serious disagreements with that statement.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>the open source and free software movements have n't produced anything remotely as useful as Mac OS X and the iPhoneMany users of Android , Linux , and many other open source products might have some serious disagreements with that statement .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the open source and free software movements haven't produced anything remotely as useful as Mac OS X and the iPhoneMany users of Android, Linux, and many other open source products might have some serious disagreements with that statement.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889658</id>
	<title>Re:Nice Troll</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264433640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The main problem linux (not the kernel, but the whole package) is that its display model (X) is way outdated... MacOS on the other hand has Quartz, which is superior in terms of design and performance.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The main problem linux ( not the kernel , but the whole package ) is that its display model ( X ) is way outdated... MacOS on the other hand has Quartz , which is superior in terms of design and performance .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The main problem linux (not the kernel, but the whole package) is that its display model (X) is way outdated... MacOS on the other hand has Quartz, which is superior in terms of design and performance.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889326</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889528</id>
	<title>Re:I'm off-duty</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264433160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't want to start a conspiracy theory or anything, but I have a cousin who only turned bender AFTER he bought an iphone and mac book.</p><p>Coincidence or causation? Has anyone checked the iphone source code for back-doors?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't want to start a conspiracy theory or anything , but I have a cousin who only turned bender AFTER he bought an iphone and mac book.Coincidence or causation ?
Has anyone checked the iphone source code for back-doors ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't want to start a conspiracy theory or anything, but I have a cousin who only turned bender AFTER he bought an iphone and mac book.Coincidence or causation?
Has anyone checked the iphone source code for back-doors?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889380</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890246</id>
	<title>What closed culture?</title>
	<author>itsdapead</author>
	<datestamp>1264435920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sorry. Are we talking about the same Macs that run a POSIX-compliant OS of which large chunks (although certainly not all) are open source, talk standard internet protocols, come bundled with a full-featured SDK as standard with full documentation available online? The ones which, using Fink or MacPorts, can run most of the "big name" FOSS projects?

</p><p>The iPhone, OTOH, is clearly far more "closed". So closed that the smallest developers can, for a paltry registration fee, develop apps and have them distributed via Apple's store. Yes - Apple have to approve things, but in return you get access to a high-profile sales channel. In other news, I can't just walk into WalMart or Amazon HQ and demand that they carry my product.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sorry .
Are we talking about the same Macs that run a POSIX-compliant OS of which large chunks ( although certainly not all ) are open source , talk standard internet protocols , come bundled with a full-featured SDK as standard with full documentation available online ?
The ones which , using Fink or MacPorts , can run most of the " big name " FOSS projects ?
The iPhone , OTOH , is clearly far more " closed " .
So closed that the smallest developers can , for a paltry registration fee , develop apps and have them distributed via Apple 's store .
Yes - Apple have to approve things , but in return you get access to a high-profile sales channel .
In other news , I ca n't just walk into WalMart or Amazon HQ and demand that they carry my product .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sorry.
Are we talking about the same Macs that run a POSIX-compliant OS of which large chunks (although certainly not all) are open source, talk standard internet protocols, come bundled with a full-featured SDK as standard with full documentation available online?
The ones which, using Fink or MacPorts, can run most of the "big name" FOSS projects?
The iPhone, OTOH, is clearly far more "closed".
So closed that the smallest developers can, for a paltry registration fee, develop apps and have them distributed via Apple's store.
Yes - Apple have to approve things, but in return you get access to a high-profile sales channel.
In other news, I can't just walk into WalMart or Amazon HQ and demand that they carry my product.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889888</id>
	<title>Re:Not sure in USA but in Spain...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264434480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Mac users are bought</p></div><p>They sell Mac users in Spain?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Mac users are boughtThey sell Mac users in Spain ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Mac users are boughtThey sell Mac users in Spain?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889256</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889332</id>
	<title>status of shiny white thingys</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264432440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Seriously though, my college aged daughter says the PC we sent off to school with is not good enough. She \_needs\_ an Mac. When asked why she can't say specifically why a Mac would be a better choice other than "everyone" has one. It's the way the product has been marketed - as a tool for the elite or more discriminating user. Translation, status symbol.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Seriously though , my college aged daughter says the PC we sent off to school with is not good enough .
She \ _needs \ _ an Mac .
When asked why she ca n't say specifically why a Mac would be a better choice other than " everyone " has one .
It 's the way the product has been marketed - as a tool for the elite or more discriminating user .
Translation , status symbol .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seriously though, my college aged daughter says the PC we sent off to school with is not good enough.
She \_needs\_ an Mac.
When asked why she can't say specifically why a Mac would be a better choice other than "everyone" has one.
It's the way the product has been marketed - as a tool for the elite or more discriminating user.
Translation, status symbol.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30915382</id>
	<title>Poor example</title>
	<author>Stan Vassilev</author>
	<datestamp>1264596240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Apple's hardware turns out to be more 'open' than the company intended -- Jobs originally wanted to keep third-party apps off the iPhone, for example.</p></div><p>This is a poor example. It has been Apple's policy forever to not acknowledge their intent before they are ready to present it. While Jobs scorned people for suggesting video iPod, he's been working on iPod and deals with movie companies. While he pushed Safari as the "iPhone platform", his team has been working on the iPhone SDK and documentation. While Jobs openly mocked the Kindle, he's already been working on the Apple tablet for over an year.</p><p>If one can't see past these basics of marketing at Apple, I wonder why would I trust the rest of the analysis in this article<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:P</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Apple 's hardware turns out to be more 'open ' than the company intended -- Jobs originally wanted to keep third-party apps off the iPhone , for example.This is a poor example .
It has been Apple 's policy forever to not acknowledge their intent before they are ready to present it .
While Jobs scorned people for suggesting video iPod , he 's been working on iPod and deals with movie companies .
While he pushed Safari as the " iPhone platform " , his team has been working on the iPhone SDK and documentation .
While Jobs openly mocked the Kindle , he 's already been working on the Apple tablet for over an year.If one ca n't see past these basics of marketing at Apple , I wonder why would I trust the rest of the analysis in this article : P</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Apple's hardware turns out to be more 'open' than the company intended -- Jobs originally wanted to keep third-party apps off the iPhone, for example.This is a poor example.
It has been Apple's policy forever to not acknowledge their intent before they are ready to present it.
While Jobs scorned people for suggesting video iPod, he's been working on iPod and deals with movie companies.
While he pushed Safari as the "iPhone platform", his team has been working on the iPhone SDK and documentation.
While Jobs openly mocked the Kindle, he's already been working on the Apple tablet for over an year.If one can't see past these basics of marketing at Apple, I wonder why would I trust the rest of the analysis in this article :P
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890900</id>
	<title>Re:Lesson: Apple marketing i working!</title>
	<author>lawpoop</author>
	<datestamp>1264438140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Funny, I think Apple has never produced anything remotely as useful as the open source software movement, in particular given that probably the majority of the code Apple ships with OS X is derived from other people's open source projects to begin with.</p></div><p>Apple did popularize the first GUI desktop (I know they didn't invent it).  And isn't the BSD kernel they based OSX on actually based on the Unix system developed privately in Bell Labs?<br> <br>What I'm saying is that all too often people claim that "Free software has never done anything, it's proprietary software that does all the innovation!" or vice-versa. The reality seems to be a tight intertwining and iterative feedback process, as far as I can tell.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Funny , I think Apple has never produced anything remotely as useful as the open source software movement , in particular given that probably the majority of the code Apple ships with OS X is derived from other people 's open source projects to begin with.Apple did popularize the first GUI desktop ( I know they did n't invent it ) .
And is n't the BSD kernel they based OSX on actually based on the Unix system developed privately in Bell Labs ?
What I 'm saying is that all too often people claim that " Free software has never done anything , it 's proprietary software that does all the innovation !
" or vice-versa .
The reality seems to be a tight intertwining and iterative feedback process , as far as I can tell .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Funny, I think Apple has never produced anything remotely as useful as the open source software movement, in particular given that probably the majority of the code Apple ships with OS X is derived from other people's open source projects to begin with.Apple did popularize the first GUI desktop (I know they didn't invent it).
And isn't the BSD kernel they based OSX on actually based on the Unix system developed privately in Bell Labs?
What I'm saying is that all too often people claim that "Free software has never done anything, it's proprietary software that does all the innovation!
" or vice-versa.
The reality seems to be a tight intertwining and iterative feedback process, as far as I can tell.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889362</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891268</id>
	<title>Re:I'm off-duty</title>
	<author>drjzzz</author>
	<datestamp>1264439400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>she wanted her MacBook because of its coolness factor, not just what it can do.  That, and she hates Windows.  With that being said, it does suit her needs nicely.</p></div><p>The "coolness factor" is a societal shorthand for more rational, if verbose, reasons: e.g. "what it can do", "suit[ing] her needs", inadequate alternative (Windows), etc.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>she wanted her MacBook because of its coolness factor , not just what it can do .
That , and she hates Windows .
With that being said , it does suit her needs nicely.The " coolness factor " is a societal shorthand for more rational , if verbose , reasons : e.g .
" what it can do " , " suit [ ing ] her needs " , inadequate alternative ( Windows ) , etc .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>she wanted her MacBook because of its coolness factor, not just what it can do.
That, and she hates Windows.
With that being said, it does suit her needs nicely.The "coolness factor" is a societal shorthand for more rational, if verbose, reasons: e.g.
"what it can do", "suit[ing] her needs", inadequate alternative (Windows), etc.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890056</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889382</id>
	<title>It's number 3</title>
	<author>Medieval\_Gnome</author>
	<datestamp>1264432620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>From my perspective, getting an Apple laptop is the easiest way to get a nice, portable laptop which runs a Unix system (which, with MacPorts, I can get all the unixy goodness) AND to make sure that the hardware is guaranteed to work.  I don't need to worry about whether the new kernel broke support for ndiswrapper, I don't need to worry about the regressions in hardware support that have hit my Linuxy friends, and I have a GUI that gets as close as I've seen to the DWIM pattern.</p><p>And I have a scriptable GUI.  Say what you will about its syntax, AppleScript allows some wonderful scripting possibilities.  And you can call out to a shell script, so it's also powerful<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>From my perspective , getting an Apple laptop is the easiest way to get a nice , portable laptop which runs a Unix system ( which , with MacPorts , I can get all the unixy goodness ) AND to make sure that the hardware is guaranteed to work .
I do n't need to worry about whether the new kernel broke support for ndiswrapper , I do n't need to worry about the regressions in hardware support that have hit my Linuxy friends , and I have a GUI that gets as close as I 've seen to the DWIM pattern.And I have a scriptable GUI .
Say what you will about its syntax , AppleScript allows some wonderful scripting possibilities .
And you can call out to a shell script , so it 's also powerful : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From my perspective, getting an Apple laptop is the easiest way to get a nice, portable laptop which runs a Unix system (which, with MacPorts, I can get all the unixy goodness) AND to make sure that the hardware is guaranteed to work.
I don't need to worry about whether the new kernel broke support for ndiswrapper, I don't need to worry about the regressions in hardware support that have hit my Linuxy friends, and I have a GUI that gets as close as I've seen to the DWIM pattern.And I have a scriptable GUI.
Say what you will about its syntax, AppleScript allows some wonderful scripting possibilities.
And you can call out to a shell script, so it's also powerful :)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891138</id>
	<title>Pull your head out of your ass</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264439040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What??? A big-ticket company like Apple is getting ready to release a major product, and the grip is that they're being too secretive? Get a life.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What ? ? ?
A big-ticket company like Apple is getting ready to release a major product , and the grip is that they 're being too secretive ?
Get a life .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What???
A big-ticket company like Apple is getting ready to release a major product, and the grip is that they're being too secretive?
Get a life.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30893824</id>
	<title>Re:Subjectivity presented as fact</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264449120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>First off, iLife is written by Apple. The quote you have above is about "programs *people* are inspired to write for the Mac OS X operating system," not, "programs Apple has written for the Mac OS X operating system."</p><p>Secondly, just because you claim that the Mac apps above are not as good as the other apps you list, doesn't prove anything, either. There are objective measures that could be taken over a large sample of users, such as ability to complete certain tasks, time to complete certain tasks, etc. But since you haven't actually done that, there's no way to tell if any of those Mac apps are better or worse than the non-Mac apps you discuss. And even if they were, it would be irrelevant as I point out above since the quote was about 3rd party apps.</p><p>Finally, as the former owner of a company which sold Mac and Windows software, I certainly experienced much more crappy software on Windows than on the Mac. (Yes, this is also anecdotal. I'm not saying it's representative, but it's what I experienced.) I used to post new releases of my software to the various news and download sites like Version Tracker, etc. The volume of new Windows apps coming on to the market each day was staggering. And they seemed to fall into 3 general categories: 1) Apps that did what they appeared to do, and probably did it fairly well. (Apps like Photoshop, Word, etc.) 2) Apps that did something other than what they appeared to do. (Things like cursors that are actually spyware) 3) Apps that were complete crap</p><p>Category 2 was probably the largest, followed by category 3. On the Mac, you get almost nothing in category 2, and very little in category 3, because if your app isn't useful, nobody will buy it. But on Windows, the market is large enough that even a fraction of a percent of the buyers is big enough to sustain sales.</p><p>At least, that was my personal experience.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>First off , iLife is written by Apple .
The quote you have above is about " programs * people * are inspired to write for the Mac OS X operating system , " not , " programs Apple has written for the Mac OS X operating system .
" Secondly , just because you claim that the Mac apps above are not as good as the other apps you list , does n't prove anything , either .
There are objective measures that could be taken over a large sample of users , such as ability to complete certain tasks , time to complete certain tasks , etc .
But since you have n't actually done that , there 's no way to tell if any of those Mac apps are better or worse than the non-Mac apps you discuss .
And even if they were , it would be irrelevant as I point out above since the quote was about 3rd party apps.Finally , as the former owner of a company which sold Mac and Windows software , I certainly experienced much more crappy software on Windows than on the Mac .
( Yes , this is also anecdotal .
I 'm not saying it 's representative , but it 's what I experienced .
) I used to post new releases of my software to the various news and download sites like Version Tracker , etc .
The volume of new Windows apps coming on to the market each day was staggering .
And they seemed to fall into 3 general categories : 1 ) Apps that did what they appeared to do , and probably did it fairly well .
( Apps like Photoshop , Word , etc .
) 2 ) Apps that did something other than what they appeared to do .
( Things like cursors that are actually spyware ) 3 ) Apps that were complete crapCategory 2 was probably the largest , followed by category 3 .
On the Mac , you get almost nothing in category 2 , and very little in category 3 , because if your app is n't useful , nobody will buy it .
But on Windows , the market is large enough that even a fraction of a percent of the buyers is big enough to sustain sales.At least , that was my personal experience .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>First off, iLife is written by Apple.
The quote you have above is about "programs *people* are inspired to write for the Mac OS X operating system," not, "programs Apple has written for the Mac OS X operating system.
"Secondly, just because you claim that the Mac apps above are not as good as the other apps you list, doesn't prove anything, either.
There are objective measures that could be taken over a large sample of users, such as ability to complete certain tasks, time to complete certain tasks, etc.
But since you haven't actually done that, there's no way to tell if any of those Mac apps are better or worse than the non-Mac apps you discuss.
And even if they were, it would be irrelevant as I point out above since the quote was about 3rd party apps.Finally, as the former owner of a company which sold Mac and Windows software, I certainly experienced much more crappy software on Windows than on the Mac.
(Yes, this is also anecdotal.
I'm not saying it's representative, but it's what I experienced.
) I used to post new releases of my software to the various news and download sites like Version Tracker, etc.
The volume of new Windows apps coming on to the market each day was staggering.
And they seemed to fall into 3 general categories: 1) Apps that did what they appeared to do, and probably did it fairly well.
(Apps like Photoshop, Word, etc.
) 2) Apps that did something other than what they appeared to do.
(Things like cursors that are actually spyware) 3) Apps that were complete crapCategory 2 was probably the largest, followed by category 3.
On the Mac, you get almost nothing in category 2, and very little in category 3, because if your app isn't useful, nobody will buy it.
But on Windows, the market is large enough that even a fraction of a percent of the buyers is big enough to sustain sales.At least, that was my personal experience.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889454</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891084</id>
	<title>Would you buy a $750 purse?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264438860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ask a woman that paid more than $750 for a purse why she bought it.  It is amazing that many of the same reasons to justify that purse are also used by many people use to justify why they bought a MAC.<br>On the flip side, take an exact replica of that $750 purse without the brand name written on it or a purse that is functionally equivalent in all ways (weight, size, quality, softness, color, stitching) and sell it for $20.   Ask that woman for an opinion on it and why she did not buy it.</p><p>There are valid measurable reasons to buy a MAC, there is also a hidden unmeasurable amount of personal coolness that many people are trying to get as well that comes with buying something more expensive or something they think will make them cool or stand out.  If Air Force 1's or Oakley sun glasses, sold for $12 a pair, they would not be "cool", at an inflated price of $100-200 and limited distribution, coolness can be had.  To be fair, its not just these products though, it is vacation destinations, restaurants, diamond rings, cars, and many more.  Not everyone finds these things to be cool.  My first impression of someone that talks about their pair of Oakleys, AF 1's, a $1000 purse or even to some extent some people with a MAC is someone making an attempt to be cool which I view as funny but I humor them, "wow, that's nice" and then I hear of reasons why they bought it and most of the reasons are trying to avoid having to say "Because I wanted every one to know I paid a lot for it to try to stand out above the others as someone that is doing well, is trendy, and can afford it".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ask a woman that paid more than $ 750 for a purse why she bought it .
It is amazing that many of the same reasons to justify that purse are also used by many people use to justify why they bought a MAC.On the flip side , take an exact replica of that $ 750 purse without the brand name written on it or a purse that is functionally equivalent in all ways ( weight , size , quality , softness , color , stitching ) and sell it for $ 20 .
Ask that woman for an opinion on it and why she did not buy it.There are valid measurable reasons to buy a MAC , there is also a hidden unmeasurable amount of personal coolness that many people are trying to get as well that comes with buying something more expensive or something they think will make them cool or stand out .
If Air Force 1 's or Oakley sun glasses , sold for $ 12 a pair , they would not be " cool " , at an inflated price of $ 100-200 and limited distribution , coolness can be had .
To be fair , its not just these products though , it is vacation destinations , restaurants , diamond rings , cars , and many more .
Not everyone finds these things to be cool .
My first impression of someone that talks about their pair of Oakleys , AF 1 's , a $ 1000 purse or even to some extent some people with a MAC is someone making an attempt to be cool which I view as funny but I humor them , " wow , that 's nice " and then I hear of reasons why they bought it and most of the reasons are trying to avoid having to say " Because I wanted every one to know I paid a lot for it to try to stand out above the others as someone that is doing well , is trendy , and can afford it " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ask a woman that paid more than $750 for a purse why she bought it.
It is amazing that many of the same reasons to justify that purse are also used by many people use to justify why they bought a MAC.On the flip side, take an exact replica of that $750 purse without the brand name written on it or a purse that is functionally equivalent in all ways (weight, size, quality, softness, color, stitching) and sell it for $20.
Ask that woman for an opinion on it and why she did not buy it.There are valid measurable reasons to buy a MAC, there is also a hidden unmeasurable amount of personal coolness that many people are trying to get as well that comes with buying something more expensive or something they think will make them cool or stand out.
If Air Force 1's or Oakley sun glasses, sold for $12 a pair, they would not be "cool", at an inflated price of $100-200 and limited distribution, coolness can be had.
To be fair, its not just these products though, it is vacation destinations, restaurants, diamond rings, cars, and many more.
Not everyone finds these things to be cool.
My first impression of someone that talks about their pair of Oakleys, AF 1's, a $1000 purse or even to some extent some people with a MAC is someone making an attempt to be cool which I view as funny but I humor them, "wow, that's nice" and then I hear of reasons why they bought it and most of the reasons are trying to avoid having to say "Because I wanted every one to know I paid a lot for it to try to stand out above the others as someone that is doing well, is trendy, and can afford it".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891784</id>
	<title>Why Mac?  Two Words:</title>
	<author>lymond01</author>
	<datestamp>1264440900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Better Marketing.</p><p>When you think of Apple, you think innovation, design, creativity, simplicity, shininess.</p><p>When you think of Microsoft, you think business, viruses, blue screen of death, gaming.</p><p>You might think otherwise, but then you probably don't own a Mac. (Neither do I, but I watch enough TV and know enough Mac and Windows users that the above are essential truths.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Better Marketing.When you think of Apple , you think innovation , design , creativity , simplicity , shininess.When you think of Microsoft , you think business , viruses , blue screen of death , gaming.You might think otherwise , but then you probably do n't own a Mac .
( Neither do I , but I watch enough TV and know enough Mac and Windows users that the above are essential truths .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Better Marketing.When you think of Apple, you think innovation, design, creativity, simplicity, shininess.When you think of Microsoft, you think business, viruses, blue screen of death, gaming.You might think otherwise, but then you probably don't own a Mac.
(Neither do I, but I watch enough TV and know enough Mac and Windows users that the above are essential truths.
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30893138</id>
	<title>Re:I guess Apple did all that themselves...</title>
	<author>frogzilla</author>
	<datestamp>1264446180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"All spelling and grammar errors are intentional. Grammar Nazis' need entertainment."</p><p>Head spinning...  Brain failing... fingers convulsing over keyboard...</p><p>Thanks for that!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" All spelling and grammar errors are intentional .
Grammar Nazis ' need entertainment .
" Head spinning... Brain failing... fingers convulsing over keyboard...Thanks for that !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"All spelling and grammar errors are intentional.
Grammar Nazis' need entertainment.
"Head spinning...  Brain failing... fingers convulsing over keyboard...Thanks for that!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889768</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30895532</id>
	<title>Re:I'm off-duty</title>
	<author>Lemmy Caution</author>
	<datestamp>1264413120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>3D animation schools do not produce artists. They produce people who know how to use 3D animation software.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>3D animation schools do not produce artists .
They produce people who know how to use 3D animation software .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>3D animation schools do not produce artists.
They produce people who know how to use 3D animation software.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891072</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30895402</id>
	<title>Re:I'm off-duty</title>
	<author>Risen888</author>
	<datestamp>1264412640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>You don't buy a computer because of its culture...</i></p><p>Well of course I don't, and I'd assume you don't. That doesn't change the fact that millions of people do. Unless of course you're seriously going to tell me that you think all those damn hipsters at my coffee shop really sat down and did some comparative analysis and decided that a Mac would "serve their purposes better."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You do n't buy a computer because of its culture...Well of course I do n't , and I 'd assume you do n't .
That does n't change the fact that millions of people do .
Unless of course you 're seriously going to tell me that you think all those damn hipsters at my coffee shop really sat down and did some comparative analysis and decided that a Mac would " serve their purposes better .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You don't buy a computer because of its culture...Well of course I don't, and I'd assume you don't.
That doesn't change the fact that millions of people do.
Unless of course you're seriously going to tell me that you think all those damn hipsters at my coffee shop really sat down and did some comparative analysis and decided that a Mac would "serve their purposes better.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889380</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30897160</id>
	<title>Re:I'm off-duty</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264419540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; Actually, there is some correlation between creativity and homosexuality; you'll find a larger percentage of gays in art school than studying any other discipline</p><p>What a load of crap. Standard stereotype bullshit gleaned from crappy mainstream media and sitcoms.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; Actually , there is some correlation between creativity and homosexuality ; you 'll find a larger percentage of gays in art school than studying any other disciplineWhat a load of crap .
Standard stereotype bullshit gleaned from crappy mainstream media and sitcoms .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; Actually, there is some correlation between creativity and homosexuality; you'll find a larger percentage of gays in art school than studying any other disciplineWhat a load of crap.
Standard stereotype bullshit gleaned from crappy mainstream media and sitcoms.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889380</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889502</id>
	<title>Simple reason for being tight lipped</title>
	<author>MistrBlank</author>
	<datestamp>1264433040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It gets them press.   The tighter they keep it, the more everyone buzzes over the next product.  Every tech site on the web could burst out with their "predictions" but until Apple announces it, it isn't golden.  And the end result is weeks and weeks of people talking and spreading the word.</p><p>I went to visit my wife's family two states away this weekend and they all couldn't wait to talk to me about the coming apple tablet this week because they hadn't seen me since Christmas and know I love Apple.  I'd say Apple's plan is working.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It gets them press .
The tighter they keep it , the more everyone buzzes over the next product .
Every tech site on the web could burst out with their " predictions " but until Apple announces it , it is n't golden .
And the end result is weeks and weeks of people talking and spreading the word.I went to visit my wife 's family two states away this weekend and they all could n't wait to talk to me about the coming apple tablet this week because they had n't seen me since Christmas and know I love Apple .
I 'd say Apple 's plan is working .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It gets them press.
The tighter they keep it, the more everyone buzzes over the next product.
Every tech site on the web could burst out with their "predictions" but until Apple announces it, it isn't golden.
And the end result is weeks and weeks of people talking and spreading the word.I went to visit my wife's family two states away this weekend and they all couldn't wait to talk to me about the coming apple tablet this week because they hadn't seen me since Christmas and know I love Apple.
I'd say Apple's plan is working.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30894494</id>
	<title>Pre-announcing a product is "open"?</title>
	<author>Swift2001</author>
	<datestamp>1264452120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Name a company that announces an upcoming product? When you can find one, please find one that isn't vaporware. Apple goes through rigorous work before they even launch the product, having to get the product through the famous Steve filter. Reportedly, this is the umpteenth Apple tablet since at least 2003, and Steve has rejected each one.</p><p>Notice, these are rumors, which can't be confirmed. Now, when you're a bunch of engineers working on a new product, you get walled off from the world, like the Mac, like the iMac, etc., and nobody knows anything until the release day. Of course, rumors leak out -- but they're so few that there's a thriving business making them up. Now, how many press releases and ads have you seen about the new launch this Wednesday? Nada. Well, one. "Come see our new creation." Probably a leak or two to the Wall Street Journal. I think.</p><p>How would the world be enriched by the next tech object being designed in public? I don't think it would at all. The process of design is boring. The idiotic information leeches would still be gossiping about it all the time, spreading rumors to prove idiot's thesis a or b. It would be a reality show, and you know those are anything but. They're just "don't pay the writers" shows. The design would be the product of political compromise and consensus. Let Obama tell you how well that works.</p><p>Openness, meaning the ability of the user to access any information he wants while using his information appliance, sure. Meaning the ability to compile code, to get free software, etc.? Yeah. Meaning the ability to boot other OSes? Sure. Meaning, sitting in on the meetings where Steve criticizes and belittles the bad designs? I don't think anyone would want to be there if they weren't an engineer.</p><p>Jobs is a very gifted man, after all. A genius. Look at his track record.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Name a company that announces an upcoming product ?
When you can find one , please find one that is n't vaporware .
Apple goes through rigorous work before they even launch the product , having to get the product through the famous Steve filter .
Reportedly , this is the umpteenth Apple tablet since at least 2003 , and Steve has rejected each one.Notice , these are rumors , which ca n't be confirmed .
Now , when you 're a bunch of engineers working on a new product , you get walled off from the world , like the Mac , like the iMac , etc. , and nobody knows anything until the release day .
Of course , rumors leak out -- but they 're so few that there 's a thriving business making them up .
Now , how many press releases and ads have you seen about the new launch this Wednesday ?
Nada. Well , one .
" Come see our new creation .
" Probably a leak or two to the Wall Street Journal .
I think.How would the world be enriched by the next tech object being designed in public ?
I do n't think it would at all .
The process of design is boring .
The idiotic information leeches would still be gossiping about it all the time , spreading rumors to prove idiot 's thesis a or b. It would be a reality show , and you know those are anything but .
They 're just " do n't pay the writers " shows .
The design would be the product of political compromise and consensus .
Let Obama tell you how well that works.Openness , meaning the ability of the user to access any information he wants while using his information appliance , sure .
Meaning the ability to compile code , to get free software , etc. ?
Yeah. Meaning the ability to boot other OSes ?
Sure. Meaning , sitting in on the meetings where Steve criticizes and belittles the bad designs ?
I do n't think anyone would want to be there if they were n't an engineer.Jobs is a very gifted man , after all .
A genius .
Look at his track record .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Name a company that announces an upcoming product?
When you can find one, please find one that isn't vaporware.
Apple goes through rigorous work before they even launch the product, having to get the product through the famous Steve filter.
Reportedly, this is the umpteenth Apple tablet since at least 2003, and Steve has rejected each one.Notice, these are rumors, which can't be confirmed.
Now, when you're a bunch of engineers working on a new product, you get walled off from the world, like the Mac, like the iMac, etc., and nobody knows anything until the release day.
Of course, rumors leak out -- but they're so few that there's a thriving business making them up.
Now, how many press releases and ads have you seen about the new launch this Wednesday?
Nada. Well, one.
"Come see our new creation.
" Probably a leak or two to the Wall Street Journal.
I think.How would the world be enriched by the next tech object being designed in public?
I don't think it would at all.
The process of design is boring.
The idiotic information leeches would still be gossiping about it all the time, spreading rumors to prove idiot's thesis a or b. It would be a reality show, and you know those are anything but.
They're just "don't pay the writers" shows.
The design would be the product of political compromise and consensus.
Let Obama tell you how well that works.Openness, meaning the ability of the user to access any information he wants while using his information appliance, sure.
Meaning the ability to compile code, to get free software, etc.?
Yeah. Meaning the ability to boot other OSes?
Sure. Meaning, sitting in on the meetings where Steve criticizes and belittles the bad designs?
I don't think anyone would want to be there if they weren't an engineer.Jobs is a very gifted man, after all.
A genius.
Look at his track record.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30895146</id>
	<title>Re:Not sure in USA but in Spain...</title>
	<author>shmlco</author>
	<datestamp>1264411560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"They put commodity parts..."</p><p>Yeah. Because Apple doesn't tend to use higher quality caps and fans and other components than HP or Dell. Apple doesn't use Intel's high-end processors. Apple doesn't use custom formed LiPo batteries and customized power controllers. Apple doesn't design their own ASICs. Apple doesn't use custom glass trackpads or create innovative connectors (Magsafe) for use in their designs.</p><p>And Apple doesn't create, maintain, and run it's own OS.</p><p>Oh. Wait. They do.</p><p>"... into slick aluminum casings."</p><p>They are, aren't they. (grin)</p><p>And combined with the above, that's better than 90\% of the other manufacturers who shove actual commodity parts into cheap plastic cases and stuff Windows Home Edition on the hard drive....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" They put commodity parts... " Yeah .
Because Apple does n't tend to use higher quality caps and fans and other components than HP or Dell .
Apple does n't use Intel 's high-end processors .
Apple does n't use custom formed LiPo batteries and customized power controllers .
Apple does n't design their own ASICs .
Apple does n't use custom glass trackpads or create innovative connectors ( Magsafe ) for use in their designs.And Apple does n't create , maintain , and run it 's own OS.Oh .
Wait. They do. " .. .
into slick aluminum casings .
" They are , are n't they .
( grin ) And combined with the above , that 's better than 90 \ % of the other manufacturers who shove actual commodity parts into cheap plastic cases and stuff Windows Home Edition on the hard drive... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"They put commodity parts..."Yeah.
Because Apple doesn't tend to use higher quality caps and fans and other components than HP or Dell.
Apple doesn't use Intel's high-end processors.
Apple doesn't use custom formed LiPo batteries and customized power controllers.
Apple doesn't design their own ASICs.
Apple doesn't use custom glass trackpads or create innovative connectors (Magsafe) for use in their designs.And Apple doesn't create, maintain, and run it's own OS.Oh.
Wait. They do."...
into slick aluminum casings.
"They are, aren't they.
(grin)And combined with the above, that's better than 90\% of the other manufacturers who shove actual commodity parts into cheap plastic cases and stuff Windows Home Edition on the hard drive....</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891344</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889266</id>
	<title>Incorrect premise</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264432080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>I would argue that most Apple fanboys (the real hardcore ones anyway) only THINK they're "free-thinking." They're original and free-thinking in the same way that hippies thought they were original and free-thinking in the 60's--by acting, dressing, and thinking like every other hippie. Real free-thinkers don't start out with an set ideology, and they certainly don't have a cult leader or product line that they worship.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I would argue that most Apple fanboys ( the real hardcore ones anyway ) only THINK they 're " free-thinking .
" They 're original and free-thinking in the same way that hippies thought they were original and free-thinking in the 60 's--by acting , dressing , and thinking like every other hippie .
Real free-thinkers do n't start out with an set ideology , and they certainly do n't have a cult leader or product line that they worship .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I would argue that most Apple fanboys (the real hardcore ones anyway) only THINK they're "free-thinking.
" They're original and free-thinking in the same way that hippies thought they were original and free-thinking in the 60's--by acting, dressing, and thinking like every other hippie.
Real free-thinkers don't start out with an set ideology, and they certainly don't have a cult leader or product line that they worship.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889290</id>
	<title>What Works...</title>
	<author>BoRegardless</author>
	<datestamp>1264432200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Eventually wins out in spite of competitive statements and advertising.</p><p>If it does NOT work, then the excuses start.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Eventually wins out in spite of competitive statements and advertising.If it does NOT work , then the excuses start .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Eventually wins out in spite of competitive statements and advertising.If it does NOT work, then the excuses start.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890306</id>
	<title>Re:wrong assumptions</title>
	<author>David Jao</author>
	<datestamp>1264436160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> <b>Does</b> Apple have a "philosophy of information sharing" and if so, what is it?</p><p>The company is secretive about upcoming, not-yet-available products. Which is not information that customers require in their day-to-day work anyways. As a user or as a developer, it is information about the <b>current, existing</b> products that you need most. And as both I've always found that to be readily available whenever I needed it.</p></div><p>To add to your comments, I would like to point out that Apple is not even particularly secretive about unreleased products. The Apple tablet hasn't even been released yet, and already there is saturation coverage in the media. The same pattern has held for all their product releases in recent memory.
</p><p>
The whole article should be marked -1: Troll. Linux can compete just fine on technical merits, and the last thing we need is another uncompetitive OS monopoly using non-technical methods to enforce market dominance, which is what we'll get if Apple "wins".</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Does Apple have a " philosophy of information sharing " and if so , what is it ? The company is secretive about upcoming , not-yet-available products .
Which is not information that customers require in their day-to-day work anyways .
As a user or as a developer , it is information about the current , existing products that you need most .
And as both I 've always found that to be readily available whenever I needed it.To add to your comments , I would like to point out that Apple is not even particularly secretive about unreleased products .
The Apple tablet has n't even been released yet , and already there is saturation coverage in the media .
The same pattern has held for all their product releases in recent memory .
The whole article should be marked -1 : Troll .
Linux can compete just fine on technical merits , and the last thing we need is another uncompetitive OS monopoly using non-technical methods to enforce market dominance , which is what we 'll get if Apple " wins " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Does Apple have a "philosophy of information sharing" and if so, what is it?The company is secretive about upcoming, not-yet-available products.
Which is not information that customers require in their day-to-day work anyways.
As a user or as a developer, it is information about the current, existing products that you need most.
And as both I've always found that to be readily available whenever I needed it.To add to your comments, I would like to point out that Apple is not even particularly secretive about unreleased products.
The Apple tablet hasn't even been released yet, and already there is saturation coverage in the media.
The same pattern has held for all their product releases in recent memory.
The whole article should be marked -1: Troll.
Linux can compete just fine on technical merits, and the last thing we need is another uncompetitive OS monopoly using non-technical methods to enforce market dominance, which is what we'll get if Apple "wins".
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889444</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890014</id>
	<title>Re:Not sure in USA but in Spain...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264434960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Mac users are bought</p></div><p>How much does a Mac user go for these days?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Mac users are boughtHow much does a Mac user go for these days ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Mac users are boughtHow much does a Mac user go for these days?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889256</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891200</id>
	<title>Re:Not sure in USA but in Spain...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264439220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Really, is that what it is? It isn't that some people know the value of their dollar, want to use it the best way for themselves and enjoy it?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Really , is that what it is ?
It is n't that some people know the value of their dollar , want to use it the best way for themselves and enjoy it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Really, is that what it is?
It isn't that some people know the value of their dollar, want to use it the best way for themselves and enjoy it?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889256</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30892034</id>
	<title>Re:Subjectivity presented as fact</title>
	<author>ChuckG</author>
	<datestamp>1264441860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Now I'll admit I'm a Mac fanboy (in a good sense) and an M$ hater (in a bad sense) but this comment really clicks with me.</p><p>I've found iTunes frustrating to use and I've found movement of data between iTunes, GarageBand and iDVD obtuse when first learning it. In one application the files are in one place in another application they are in another kind of place and you have to go dig through menus to import the files. Once you've learned it, it works but it is far from intuitive. I think that Apple software has been skating on the edge of unfriendly lately altho there are certainly startlingly innovative interfaces being created by them.</p><p>I've been a programmer for 40 years and I'm f*ing tired of continuously battling computers. That's why I switched to Macs a while ago at home. When I'm doing my stuff at home, I don't want to have to worry about some bleeding registry or parameters buried in some<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/etc file that I can't find or read. But when I'm at work, I don't want to have to dig through a hierarchy of menus, dialogs and "Advanced" buttons to find out where to change something. When configuring system software on an M$ machine I don't know whether to laugh at the incompetence of the creators or cry in my frustration. On a Mac it is marginally better but still convoluted. Since I don't have to do it so often on a Mac, it doesn't hurt as much.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Now I 'll admit I 'm a Mac fanboy ( in a good sense ) and an M $ hater ( in a bad sense ) but this comment really clicks with me.I 've found iTunes frustrating to use and I 've found movement of data between iTunes , GarageBand and iDVD obtuse when first learning it .
In one application the files are in one place in another application they are in another kind of place and you have to go dig through menus to import the files .
Once you 've learned it , it works but it is far from intuitive .
I think that Apple software has been skating on the edge of unfriendly lately altho there are certainly startlingly innovative interfaces being created by them.I 've been a programmer for 40 years and I 'm f * ing tired of continuously battling computers .
That 's why I switched to Macs a while ago at home .
When I 'm doing my stuff at home , I do n't want to have to worry about some bleeding registry or parameters buried in some /etc file that I ca n't find or read .
But when I 'm at work , I do n't want to have to dig through a hierarchy of menus , dialogs and " Advanced " buttons to find out where to change something .
When configuring system software on an M $ machine I do n't know whether to laugh at the incompetence of the creators or cry in my frustration .
On a Mac it is marginally better but still convoluted .
Since I do n't have to do it so often on a Mac , it does n't hurt as much .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now I'll admit I'm a Mac fanboy (in a good sense) and an M$ hater (in a bad sense) but this comment really clicks with me.I've found iTunes frustrating to use and I've found movement of data between iTunes, GarageBand and iDVD obtuse when first learning it.
In one application the files are in one place in another application they are in another kind of place and you have to go dig through menus to import the files.
Once you've learned it, it works but it is far from intuitive.
I think that Apple software has been skating on the edge of unfriendly lately altho there are certainly startlingly innovative interfaces being created by them.I've been a programmer for 40 years and I'm f*ing tired of continuously battling computers.
That's why I switched to Macs a while ago at home.
When I'm doing my stuff at home, I don't want to have to worry about some bleeding registry or parameters buried in some /etc file that I can't find or read.
But when I'm at work, I don't want to have to dig through a hierarchy of menus, dialogs and "Advanced" buttons to find out where to change something.
When configuring system software on an M$ machine I don't know whether to laugh at the incompetence of the creators or cry in my frustration.
On a Mac it is marginally better but still convoluted.
Since I don't have to do it so often on a Mac, it doesn't hurt as much.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889454</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30892420</id>
	<title>Re:I'm off-duty</title>
	<author>Damn The Torpedoes</author>
	<datestamp>1264443180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well said!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well said !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well said!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889680</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889728</id>
	<title>Easy</title>
	<author>cpct0</author>
	<datestamp>1264433940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>1 - If they were all open about their efforts on a day-to-day basis, the other companies would simply copy them, make a 90\% "good enough" version just before them and then Apple would simply lose their creative edge.<br>2 - They have marketing campaigns to make us WANT a new product. Meaning gaining momentum until the product actually ships.<br>3 - All companies are doing that. Only because Apple is successful in making campaigns doesn't mean the other companies aren't doing it themselves. -- and if it was more profitable in advertising in advance, they'd certainly do it. Like they did for many Mac OS X releases. And yes, the latest Google Phone was also tight lipped<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... the latest Palm was tight lipped<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... and the developer in his basement developing the latest revolution in whatever he is doing is also (usually) tight lipped about his project.</p><p>I mean, it's business management 101.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>1 - If they were all open about their efforts on a day-to-day basis , the other companies would simply copy them , make a 90 \ % " good enough " version just before them and then Apple would simply lose their creative edge.2 - They have marketing campaigns to make us WANT a new product .
Meaning gaining momentum until the product actually ships.3 - All companies are doing that .
Only because Apple is successful in making campaigns does n't mean the other companies are n't doing it themselves .
-- and if it was more profitable in advertising in advance , they 'd certainly do it .
Like they did for many Mac OS X releases .
And yes , the latest Google Phone was also tight lipped ... the latest Palm was tight lipped ... and the developer in his basement developing the latest revolution in whatever he is doing is also ( usually ) tight lipped about his project.I mean , it 's business management 101 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>1 - If they were all open about their efforts on a day-to-day basis, the other companies would simply copy them, make a 90\% "good enough" version just before them and then Apple would simply lose their creative edge.2 - They have marketing campaigns to make us WANT a new product.
Meaning gaining momentum until the product actually ships.3 - All companies are doing that.
Only because Apple is successful in making campaigns doesn't mean the other companies aren't doing it themselves.
-- and if it was more profitable in advertising in advance, they'd certainly do it.
Like they did for many Mac OS X releases.
And yes, the latest Google Phone was also tight lipped ... the latest Palm was tight lipped ... and the developer in his basement developing the latest revolution in whatever he is doing is also (usually) tight lipped about his project.I mean, it's business management 101.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30894222</id>
	<title>Free thinking on Apple? Not really</title>
	<author>Kitkoan</author>
	<datestamp>1264451040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I've asked a few people I know who use a Mac and it's not that the Apple one was a better choice for them, its that they think Apple products are the only ones who can do anything. I've had some tell me that Macs are more exprensive because they use the fastest parts with RAM having the fastest speed rating and you can't get RAM as fast or faster on anything but a Mac, and how Mac CPU's are the fastest with the biggest cache and nothing like these could ever been seen for at least 6 months later on a PC. Had another Mac user watch a homemade video on YouTube.com and pointed out that because it was using a camera and had to cut frames it could only have been done on a Mac since they have some video editing software on them and it was just impossible to do that from Windows. Other tell me the impossible like Macs aren't ever out-dated even after 10 years, no program bugs (was hard to tell the one musician friend of mine when his entire Mac wiped itself of a years worth of work was because of a Snow Leopard bug <a href="http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?threadID=2142272" title="apple.com" rel="nofollow">http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?threadID=2142272</a> [apple.com] and no buying another couple hundred dollar attachment isnt a solution to a software glitch), there are no malware on a Mac like trojan (http://www.intego.com/news/ism0901.asp) that just impossible because its a Mac. And they refuse to see any other option, hell one screamed at me when I compared prices and hardware from Alienware and Apple and how the prices were cheaper on the Alienware and they parts were better then the Mac's. Amazing the power of a good marketing campaign. On a side note though, does anyone know if PC from I'm a Mac I'm a PC have any legal meaning or is it just a nod of the hat to those old Our Product vs Brand X? where Brand X has no legal weight and can be made to look bad on purpose? Because while I know they are suggesting and implying Windows, but since they aren't exactly saying Windows then in the eyes of the law I'm pretty sure it's not considered to be Windows, and the rare time they mention that Windows has X problem I've noticed that the Mac is very quiet and never says Macs don't suffer those problems too since that would be false advertising.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've asked a few people I know who use a Mac and it 's not that the Apple one was a better choice for them , its that they think Apple products are the only ones who can do anything .
I 've had some tell me that Macs are more exprensive because they use the fastest parts with RAM having the fastest speed rating and you ca n't get RAM as fast or faster on anything but a Mac , and how Mac CPU 's are the fastest with the biggest cache and nothing like these could ever been seen for at least 6 months later on a PC .
Had another Mac user watch a homemade video on YouTube.com and pointed out that because it was using a camera and had to cut frames it could only have been done on a Mac since they have some video editing software on them and it was just impossible to do that from Windows .
Other tell me the impossible like Macs are n't ever out-dated even after 10 years , no program bugs ( was hard to tell the one musician friend of mine when his entire Mac wiped itself of a years worth of work was because of a Snow Leopard bug http : //discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa ? threadID = 2142272 [ apple.com ] and no buying another couple hundred dollar attachment isnt a solution to a software glitch ) , there are no malware on a Mac like trojan ( http : //www.intego.com/news/ism0901.asp ) that just impossible because its a Mac .
And they refuse to see any other option , hell one screamed at me when I compared prices and hardware from Alienware and Apple and how the prices were cheaper on the Alienware and they parts were better then the Mac 's .
Amazing the power of a good marketing campaign .
On a side note though , does anyone know if PC from I 'm a Mac I 'm a PC have any legal meaning or is it just a nod of the hat to those old Our Product vs Brand X ?
where Brand X has no legal weight and can be made to look bad on purpose ?
Because while I know they are suggesting and implying Windows , but since they are n't exactly saying Windows then in the eyes of the law I 'm pretty sure it 's not considered to be Windows , and the rare time they mention that Windows has X problem I 've noticed that the Mac is very quiet and never says Macs do n't suffer those problems too since that would be false advertising .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've asked a few people I know who use a Mac and it's not that the Apple one was a better choice for them, its that they think Apple products are the only ones who can do anything.
I've had some tell me that Macs are more exprensive because they use the fastest parts with RAM having the fastest speed rating and you can't get RAM as fast or faster on anything but a Mac, and how Mac CPU's are the fastest with the biggest cache and nothing like these could ever been seen for at least 6 months later on a PC.
Had another Mac user watch a homemade video on YouTube.com and pointed out that because it was using a camera and had to cut frames it could only have been done on a Mac since they have some video editing software on them and it was just impossible to do that from Windows.
Other tell me the impossible like Macs aren't ever out-dated even after 10 years, no program bugs (was hard to tell the one musician friend of mine when his entire Mac wiped itself of a years worth of work was because of a Snow Leopard bug http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?threadID=2142272 [apple.com] and no buying another couple hundred dollar attachment isnt a solution to a software glitch), there are no malware on a Mac like trojan (http://www.intego.com/news/ism0901.asp) that just impossible because its a Mac.
And they refuse to see any other option, hell one screamed at me when I compared prices and hardware from Alienware and Apple and how the prices were cheaper on the Alienware and they parts were better then the Mac's.
Amazing the power of a good marketing campaign.
On a side note though, does anyone know if PC from I'm a Mac I'm a PC have any legal meaning or is it just a nod of the hat to those old Our Product vs Brand X?
where Brand X has no legal weight and can be made to look bad on purpose?
Because while I know they are suggesting and implying Windows, but since they aren't exactly saying Windows then in the eyes of the law I'm pretty sure it's not considered to be Windows, and the rare time they mention that Windows has X problem I've noticed that the Mac is very quiet and never says Macs don't suffer those problems too since that would be false advertising.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891862</id>
	<title>Here's why.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264441200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Seriously - here's the deal...the OS stays out of the users way allowing them to think of nothing else but the task at hand. That's why creatives love it.</p><p>There is simply less thinking about how to get the OS to do things that need to be done. The UI is designed to be as unobtrusive as possible. Now Apple has certainly been less strict about this than in the Classic days but still more so than Windows and Linux.</p><p>You don't have to be a creative to appreciate that either. I code with a Mac and prefer it for the same reasons. Plus it gives me the unix foundation I prefer at the same time.</p><p>I don't feel smarter having to set up text files to get an ssh server going -  I know I can do that. It just takes less of my time not to have to. I like having all my apps look and behave the same way. It helps to keep me focused on my work instead of distracting my brain in order to build muscle memory for UI du jour for every app.</p><p>Also, there's the obvious. Creatives love beautiful things and Mac hardware is beautiful. There is nothing beautiful, nor wrong, about a run-of-the-mill Dell laptop. Your environment contributes a lot to your mindset.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Seriously - here 's the deal...the OS stays out of the users way allowing them to think of nothing else but the task at hand .
That 's why creatives love it.There is simply less thinking about how to get the OS to do things that need to be done .
The UI is designed to be as unobtrusive as possible .
Now Apple has certainly been less strict about this than in the Classic days but still more so than Windows and Linux.You do n't have to be a creative to appreciate that either .
I code with a Mac and prefer it for the same reasons .
Plus it gives me the unix foundation I prefer at the same time.I do n't feel smarter having to set up text files to get an ssh server going - I know I can do that .
It just takes less of my time not to have to .
I like having all my apps look and behave the same way .
It helps to keep me focused on my work instead of distracting my brain in order to build muscle memory for UI du jour for every app.Also , there 's the obvious .
Creatives love beautiful things and Mac hardware is beautiful .
There is nothing beautiful , nor wrong , about a run-of-the-mill Dell laptop .
Your environment contributes a lot to your mindset .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seriously - here's the deal...the OS stays out of the users way allowing them to think of nothing else but the task at hand.
That's why creatives love it.There is simply less thinking about how to get the OS to do things that need to be done.
The UI is designed to be as unobtrusive as possible.
Now Apple has certainly been less strict about this than in the Classic days but still more so than Windows and Linux.You don't have to be a creative to appreciate that either.
I code with a Mac and prefer it for the same reasons.
Plus it gives me the unix foundation I prefer at the same time.I don't feel smarter having to set up text files to get an ssh server going -  I know I can do that.
It just takes less of my time not to have to.
I like having all my apps look and behave the same way.
It helps to keep me focused on my work instead of distracting my brain in order to build muscle memory for UI du jour for every app.Also, there's the obvious.
Creatives love beautiful things and Mac hardware is beautiful.
There is nothing beautiful, nor wrong, about a run-of-the-mill Dell laptop.
Your environment contributes a lot to your mindset.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30895270</id>
	<title>how come?</title>
	<author>roc97007</author>
	<datestamp>1264412160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
&gt; How can a company whose philosophy of information sharing is so at odds with that of most of its customers be so successful?
</p><p>
Well, because not every computer user is a computer geek.  Some think of computers as an appliance to get a particular job done, and don't want to know what goes on inside any more than they want to know how their television works.
</p><p>
I'm not a particular fan of Apple, but this should be self-evident, at least to non-geeks.  Apple sells appliances (at a substantial markup) to get creative stuff done, just as one buys an easel to paint or a Maytag to wash clothes.  If the creative stuff you want to do is to build a washing machine from scratch or gut one and upgrade it, then you're probably not going to appreciate this.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; How can a company whose philosophy of information sharing is so at odds with that of most of its customers be so successful ?
Well , because not every computer user is a computer geek .
Some think of computers as an appliance to get a particular job done , and do n't want to know what goes on inside any more than they want to know how their television works .
I 'm not a particular fan of Apple , but this should be self-evident , at least to non-geeks .
Apple sells appliances ( at a substantial markup ) to get creative stuff done , just as one buys an easel to paint or a Maytag to wash clothes .
If the creative stuff you want to do is to build a washing machine from scratch or gut one and upgrade it , then you 're probably not going to appreciate this .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
&gt; How can a company whose philosophy of information sharing is so at odds with that of most of its customers be so successful?
Well, because not every computer user is a computer geek.
Some think of computers as an appliance to get a particular job done, and don't want to know what goes on inside any more than they want to know how their television works.
I'm not a particular fan of Apple, but this should be self-evident, at least to non-geeks.
Apple sells appliances (at a substantial markup) to get creative stuff done, just as one buys an easel to paint or a Maytag to wash clothes.
If the creative stuff you want to do is to build a washing machine from scratch or gut one and upgrade it, then you're probably not going to appreciate this.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891536</id>
	<title>Re:Apple sells hardware</title>
	<author>Archangel Michael</author>
	<datestamp>1264440180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually, you're not only wrong, you're only 1/2 right.</p><p>Apple is an EXPERIENCE company. They control the WHOLE experience. They control it via making sure the Software runs on the hardware, and runs well on the hardware, and the hardware does what the software needs it to do.</p><p>This is different from Microsoft, which tries to be all things to all people on all hardware. This is different from Linux as well, for the same reason.</p><p>People who think that Apple is HW (or SW) only company that happens to sell SW (or HW) is entirely wrong simply because they don't realize the truth. iPods weren't the first or most feature rich or least expensive MP3 player. It was the one that simply (key word) did one thing well, play music. Yes, you can get a better featured, lessor expensive MP3 player and you're missing the point. It also didn't hurt Apple that iPod was "cool" as well.</p><p>I'm probably not getting a iPhone, I currently have a blackberry, and will probably end up with an Android at some point. However, every time I see a iPhone it does everything my BB does, only it makes it look "easier" than fumbling with a ball and typing on a tiny keyboard. I have yet to see Android up close and personal, however it if can't come close to what I see from Apple, I will indeed get an iPhone.</p><p>And it won't matter how many "apps" or how FOSSy the Android is, if it gets in the way of me using it.  I want the experience.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , you 're not only wrong , you 're only 1/2 right.Apple is an EXPERIENCE company .
They control the WHOLE experience .
They control it via making sure the Software runs on the hardware , and runs well on the hardware , and the hardware does what the software needs it to do.This is different from Microsoft , which tries to be all things to all people on all hardware .
This is different from Linux as well , for the same reason.People who think that Apple is HW ( or SW ) only company that happens to sell SW ( or HW ) is entirely wrong simply because they do n't realize the truth .
iPods were n't the first or most feature rich or least expensive MP3 player .
It was the one that simply ( key word ) did one thing well , play music .
Yes , you can get a better featured , lessor expensive MP3 player and you 're missing the point .
It also did n't hurt Apple that iPod was " cool " as well.I 'm probably not getting a iPhone , I currently have a blackberry , and will probably end up with an Android at some point .
However , every time I see a iPhone it does everything my BB does , only it makes it look " easier " than fumbling with a ball and typing on a tiny keyboard .
I have yet to see Android up close and personal , however it if ca n't come close to what I see from Apple , I will indeed get an iPhone.And it wo n't matter how many " apps " or how FOSSy the Android is , if it gets in the way of me using it .
I want the experience .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, you're not only wrong, you're only 1/2 right.Apple is an EXPERIENCE company.
They control the WHOLE experience.
They control it via making sure the Software runs on the hardware, and runs well on the hardware, and the hardware does what the software needs it to do.This is different from Microsoft, which tries to be all things to all people on all hardware.
This is different from Linux as well, for the same reason.People who think that Apple is HW (or SW) only company that happens to sell SW (or HW) is entirely wrong simply because they don't realize the truth.
iPods weren't the first or most feature rich or least expensive MP3 player.
It was the one that simply (key word) did one thing well, play music.
Yes, you can get a better featured, lessor expensive MP3 player and you're missing the point.
It also didn't hurt Apple that iPod was "cool" as well.I'm probably not getting a iPhone, I currently have a blackberry, and will probably end up with an Android at some point.
However, every time I see a iPhone it does everything my BB does, only it makes it look "easier" than fumbling with a ball and typing on a tiny keyboard.
I have yet to see Android up close and personal, however it if can't come close to what I see from Apple, I will indeed get an iPhone.And it won't matter how many "apps" or how FOSSy the Android is, if it gets in the way of me using it.
I want the experience.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889436</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889390</id>
	<title>"Creatives Types"</title>
	<author>Eravau</author>
	<datestamp>1264432620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Just because someone is "free-thinking" and creative in making art, graphics design, music and so on... doesn't mean they are programmers or anyone who would want to hack their computer. Their computer, and Macs specifically, make it easy for them to be creative in their area of focus without having to worry about which dll conflicts with which other one... whether the right glibc is compiled for their favorite software tool... etc. It's nice because it doesn't require one to "be creative" with the computer just to "be creative" in the area one actually \_wants\_ to be creative with. At the same time, OS X has made it possible to be "more creative" with the computer if you want too.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Just because someone is " free-thinking " and creative in making art , graphics design , music and so on... does n't mean they are programmers or anyone who would want to hack their computer .
Their computer , and Macs specifically , make it easy for them to be creative in their area of focus without having to worry about which dll conflicts with which other one... whether the right glibc is compiled for their favorite software tool... etc. It 's nice because it does n't require one to " be creative " with the computer just to " be creative " in the area one actually \ _wants \ _ to be creative with .
At the same time , OS X has made it possible to be " more creative " with the computer if you want too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just because someone is "free-thinking" and creative in making art, graphics design, music and so on... doesn't mean they are programmers or anyone who would want to hack their computer.
Their computer, and Macs specifically, make it easy for them to be creative in their area of focus without having to worry about which dll conflicts with which other one... whether the right glibc is compiled for their favorite software tool... etc. It's nice because it doesn't require one to "be creative" with the computer just to "be creative" in the area one actually \_wants\_ to be creative with.
At the same time, OS X has made it possible to be "more creative" with the computer if you want too.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30893908</id>
	<title>creative, yet technologically challenged</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264449600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Yet millions of designers, musicians, and other creative professionals love their Apple products, and the Apple brand is almost synonymous with free-thinking creativity"<br>Designers? Musicians? most of them are of course creative and thus focused on their creations. To the outside world they may seem to be technologically challenged. Apple provides them with solutions ready to use. The creative types are happy to pay extra premium price to the Apple. We, mere uncreative mortals would go rather for a PC, download a pirated app and save a couple of bucks in the process.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Yet millions of designers , musicians , and other creative professionals love their Apple products , and the Apple brand is almost synonymous with free-thinking creativity " Designers ?
Musicians ? most of them are of course creative and thus focused on their creations .
To the outside world they may seem to be technologically challenged .
Apple provides them with solutions ready to use .
The creative types are happy to pay extra premium price to the Apple .
We , mere uncreative mortals would go rather for a PC , download a pirated app and save a couple of bucks in the process .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Yet millions of designers, musicians, and other creative professionals love their Apple products, and the Apple brand is almost synonymous with free-thinking creativity"Designers?
Musicians? most of them are of course creative and thus focused on their creations.
To the outside world they may seem to be technologically challenged.
Apple provides them with solutions ready to use.
The creative types are happy to pay extra premium price to the Apple.
We, mere uncreative mortals would go rather for a PC, download a pirated app and save a couple of bucks in the process.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891430</id>
	<title>Re:Not sure in USA but in Spain...</title>
	<author>ucblockhead</author>
	<datestamp>1264439880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Really?  I got a Mac because Cygwin sucks and so does Gnome.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Really ?
I got a Mac because Cygwin sucks and so does Gnome .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Really?
I got a Mac because Cygwin sucks and so does Gnome.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889256</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30892068</id>
	<title>Re:Subjectivity presented as fact</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264441980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Dude, WTF are you talking about.</p><p>- iPhoto isn't a mess, it's very easy to use actually, I can't even give any arguments for that because your argument doesn't give any either.<br>- Compared to other DAWs Garageband does exactly what it should, give people with limited knowledge of audio engineering the possibility to use some of the most interesting aspects of professional DAWs like Logic or Ableton. It's actually very intuitive too, I use Logic myself and have used Ableton and ProTools, and Garageband beats them all by far at intuitiveness. Which is kind of logical considering it's a beginner's app.<br>- iTunes isn't perfect, no, but it's still ten times better than WMP...<br>- You don't make slideshows in iMovie, that's where Keynote is for... Only two weeks ago I edited and produced a little 'home made' movie for a presentation I had to make and there isn't more to it than just grabbing your frames and dropping them in the right order in the upper panel, then inserting some transitions from the right panel, and changing the color and that sort of thing by clicking on the buttons that say color and that sort of thing in the middle of the screen. If you can't figure that out than you definitely can't figure out Linux stuff.</p><p>SERIOUSLY, PEOPLE: APPLE FANBOYS ARE ANNOYING, BUT SLASHDOT LINUX FANBOYS BASHING A COMPANY THAT'S NOT CATERING TO THEM IS ANNOYING^100... Apple products are great products for the average user, I'd even say the best available. They are actually as easy to use yet powerful as Apple claims. If you can't live with the fact that Apple isn't open then go jump in front of a train because you're not going to change it, and most people couldn't care less. You have Linux, they have OSX, everyone happy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Dude , WTF are you talking about.- iPhoto is n't a mess , it 's very easy to use actually , I ca n't even give any arguments for that because your argument does n't give any either.- Compared to other DAWs Garageband does exactly what it should , give people with limited knowledge of audio engineering the possibility to use some of the most interesting aspects of professional DAWs like Logic or Ableton .
It 's actually very intuitive too , I use Logic myself and have used Ableton and ProTools , and Garageband beats them all by far at intuitiveness .
Which is kind of logical considering it 's a beginner 's app.- iTunes is n't perfect , no , but it 's still ten times better than WMP...- You do n't make slideshows in iMovie , that 's where Keynote is for... Only two weeks ago I edited and produced a little 'home made ' movie for a presentation I had to make and there is n't more to it than just grabbing your frames and dropping them in the right order in the upper panel , then inserting some transitions from the right panel , and changing the color and that sort of thing by clicking on the buttons that say color and that sort of thing in the middle of the screen .
If you ca n't figure that out than you definitely ca n't figure out Linux stuff.SERIOUSLY , PEOPLE : APPLE FANBOYS ARE ANNOYING , BUT SLASHDOT LINUX FANBOYS BASHING A COMPANY THAT 'S NOT CATERING TO THEM IS ANNOYING ^ 100... Apple products are great products for the average user , I 'd even say the best available .
They are actually as easy to use yet powerful as Apple claims .
If you ca n't live with the fact that Apple is n't open then go jump in front of a train because you 're not going to change it , and most people could n't care less .
You have Linux , they have OSX , everyone happy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dude, WTF are you talking about.- iPhoto isn't a mess, it's very easy to use actually, I can't even give any arguments for that because your argument doesn't give any either.- Compared to other DAWs Garageband does exactly what it should, give people with limited knowledge of audio engineering the possibility to use some of the most interesting aspects of professional DAWs like Logic or Ableton.
It's actually very intuitive too, I use Logic myself and have used Ableton and ProTools, and Garageband beats them all by far at intuitiveness.
Which is kind of logical considering it's a beginner's app.- iTunes isn't perfect, no, but it's still ten times better than WMP...- You don't make slideshows in iMovie, that's where Keynote is for... Only two weeks ago I edited and produced a little 'home made' movie for a presentation I had to make and there isn't more to it than just grabbing your frames and dropping them in the right order in the upper panel, then inserting some transitions from the right panel, and changing the color and that sort of thing by clicking on the buttons that say color and that sort of thing in the middle of the screen.
If you can't figure that out than you definitely can't figure out Linux stuff.SERIOUSLY, PEOPLE: APPLE FANBOYS ARE ANNOYING, BUT SLASHDOT LINUX FANBOYS BASHING A COMPANY THAT'S NOT CATERING TO THEM IS ANNOYING^100... Apple products are great products for the average user, I'd even say the best available.
They are actually as easy to use yet powerful as Apple claims.
If you can't live with the fact that Apple isn't open then go jump in front of a train because you're not going to change it, and most people couldn't care less.
You have Linux, they have OSX, everyone happy.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889454</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889406</id>
	<title>Designed to stay out of your way</title>
	<author>mikael\_j</author>
	<datestamp>1264432680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My personal opinion is that the main reason a lot of creative (both "artsy" types and developers) like Apple's products is because the user interface and the physical products are designed to, as they say, Just work. This includes staying out of your way and letting you get to work but also to not pull the "Microsoft approach" to user friendliness by renaming things to make them "easier". There's a reason the market for customization of the look and feel of OS X is a lot smaller than the market for similar products for Windows.</p><p>Of course, there are several reasons why this works for Apple, a couple of these are partially because they have full control over the hardware and operating system which allows for tight integration and coupled with this are the development tools and the user interface guidelines. Another influence which I think is major is that third party developers know that Apple's customers generally expect software to behave in a certain way, something which isn't true to the same extent with Windows and other *nix systems. An example of this would be drag and drop, if a Windows application fails to handle drag and drop properly most people just dismiss the error message, restart the app and think nothing of it, after all, drag and drop is generally hit or miss with Windows apps, if an app for OS X failed to handle drag and drop properly most likely users would complain and consider it a screwup on the developer's part.</p><p>So part of the reason is the centralized control from Apple and part of the reason is that users have come to expect little to no user interface issues which forces Apple to make good development tools and developers to put in extra effort to make sure things work.</p><p>/Mikael</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My personal opinion is that the main reason a lot of creative ( both " artsy " types and developers ) like Apple 's products is because the user interface and the physical products are designed to , as they say , Just work .
This includes staying out of your way and letting you get to work but also to not pull the " Microsoft approach " to user friendliness by renaming things to make them " easier " .
There 's a reason the market for customization of the look and feel of OS X is a lot smaller than the market for similar products for Windows.Of course , there are several reasons why this works for Apple , a couple of these are partially because they have full control over the hardware and operating system which allows for tight integration and coupled with this are the development tools and the user interface guidelines .
Another influence which I think is major is that third party developers know that Apple 's customers generally expect software to behave in a certain way , something which is n't true to the same extent with Windows and other * nix systems .
An example of this would be drag and drop , if a Windows application fails to handle drag and drop properly most people just dismiss the error message , restart the app and think nothing of it , after all , drag and drop is generally hit or miss with Windows apps , if an app for OS X failed to handle drag and drop properly most likely users would complain and consider it a screwup on the developer 's part.So part of the reason is the centralized control from Apple and part of the reason is that users have come to expect little to no user interface issues which forces Apple to make good development tools and developers to put in extra effort to make sure things work./Mikael</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My personal opinion is that the main reason a lot of creative (both "artsy" types and developers) like Apple's products is because the user interface and the physical products are designed to, as they say, Just work.
This includes staying out of your way and letting you get to work but also to not pull the "Microsoft approach" to user friendliness by renaming things to make them "easier".
There's a reason the market for customization of the look and feel of OS X is a lot smaller than the market for similar products for Windows.Of course, there are several reasons why this works for Apple, a couple of these are partially because they have full control over the hardware and operating system which allows for tight integration and coupled with this are the development tools and the user interface guidelines.
Another influence which I think is major is that third party developers know that Apple's customers generally expect software to behave in a certain way, something which isn't true to the same extent with Windows and other *nix systems.
An example of this would be drag and drop, if a Windows application fails to handle drag and drop properly most people just dismiss the error message, restart the app and think nothing of it, after all, drag and drop is generally hit or miss with Windows apps, if an app for OS X failed to handle drag and drop properly most likely users would complain and consider it a screwup on the developer's part.So part of the reason is the centralized control from Apple and part of the reason is that users have come to expect little to no user interface issues which forces Apple to make good development tools and developers to put in extra effort to make sure things work./Mikael</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890428</id>
	<title>They're artists, not philosophers</title>
	<author>bluefoxlucid</author>
	<datestamp>1264436580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>These aren't foaming-at-the-mouth RMS students.  They're artists.  They make music, or pictures.  They produce a product; they don't stand around going "My mind must be FREEEEEEE and I need to produce music to save the world!"  It's a hobby, that sometimes turns into a profitable career, with profit motive.</htmltext>
<tokenext>These are n't foaming-at-the-mouth RMS students .
They 're artists .
They make music , or pictures .
They produce a product ; they do n't stand around going " My mind must be FREEEEEEE and I need to produce music to save the world !
" It 's a hobby , that sometimes turns into a profitable career , with profit motive .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>These aren't foaming-at-the-mouth RMS students.
They're artists.
They make music, or pictures.
They produce a product; they don't stand around going "My mind must be FREEEEEEE and I need to produce music to save the world!
"  It's a hobby, that sometimes turns into a profitable career, with profit motive.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889282</id>
	<title>I guess Apple did all that themselves...</title>
	<author>Mark19960</author>
	<datestamp>1264432200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"customers are pragmatic about quality, and the open source and free software movements haven't produced anything remotely as useful as Mac OS X and the iPhone."</p><p>No.. they just created what runs on the them, that's all..<br>Meh.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" customers are pragmatic about quality , and the open source and free software movements have n't produced anything remotely as useful as Mac OS X and the iPhone. " No. .
they just created what runs on the them , that 's all..Meh .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"customers are pragmatic about quality, and the open source and free software movements haven't produced anything remotely as useful as Mac OS X and the iPhone."No..
they just created what runs on the them, that's all..Meh.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889498</id>
	<title>Re:I'm off-duty</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264433040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Just because you are in art school doesn't mean you're creative or a good artist.  I'd bet money that there is the same percentage of shitty gay artists as straight ones in a given school.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Just because you are in art school does n't mean you 're creative or a good artist .
I 'd bet money that there is the same percentage of shitty gay artists as straight ones in a given school .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just because you are in art school doesn't mean you're creative or a good artist.
I'd bet money that there is the same percentage of shitty gay artists as straight ones in a given school.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889380</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30895540</id>
	<title>The Bullshit of PC technical equivalence</title>
	<author>gig</author>
	<datestamp>1264413180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Inherent in these kinds of stupid arguments against the Mac is the false idea that the PC, whether it's running Windows or Linux, is technically equivalent to the Mac for creative people. It is not. Even if Linux is "more free", we cannot use it. Richard Stallman is on The Setup right now rocking a 9-inch Yeelong that is not at all suitable for music or video production. I respect what he has done for computer science, but he doesn't make audio tools.</p><p>All you have to do to setup a music studio on a Mac is run a few installers and plug some gear together. It takes less than a half hour to be up and running making music. Virtual instruments and effects plug into the system, digital audio workstations plug into the system, audio and MIDI hardware plugs into the system, and the system manages it all. The Mac knows all the music gear and just recognizes it when you plug it in. I often run 2 full digital audio workstations and 2 separate audio interfaces and they all just work together seamlessly, including working with all of my virtual instruments and effects, including working at very high sample rates and with perfect timing. There is no other platform that offers anything like this.</p><p>For years I worked at a studio complex with dozens of studios. Most of the studios had Macs in them, but some had PC's in them. There was an I-T consultant who worked with the PC guys, and they paid him well, and they were still always having problems. The Mac users just made music.</p><p>So you can whine on about software freedom or whatever philosophy you hew to, but it doesn't impress me compared to the freedom to make music, the freedom from technical problems and technical hurdles, the freedom to participate in digital art without having to take a computer science degree. If you can make a better system for music and video producers, then make it, or STFU already. Pretending like you are offering an equivalent technical system that is somehow more free is disingenuous. You are not. Windows and Linux can barely do consumer audio.</p><p>Me, I actually can code, but I spend my time coding HTML5 to share my work, I spend my time coding AppleScript to create reusable creative workflows with various Mac apps passing grunt work around between them so I don't have to do anything but actually create new stuff. But the idea that a musician should have to learn to code to make music is outrageously offensive. What if you couldn't do computer science if you didn't play a musical instrument? It's offensive.</p><p>There's just nothing worse than a nerd pushing their tech on you like a cat offering a mouse. If you think a Mac and a PC are the same at all, then you don't understand the Mac. It's not at all the same. The PC and Mac are not technically equivalent. The only thing they have in common is they are both computers. So is a car and a PC these days, they are both computers. Would you like it if I told you to do your coding on a fucking Ford dashboard, because then you'll have the "freedom to travel" while you code? It makes no sense.</p><p>What's worse is to hear this from open source advocates who know full well that the core operating system of the Mac is open source. The "open source Mac" is the Mac. The parts that need to be open source are open source. The Mac talks to the Internet like BSD, it is a great network citizen. It does not create botnets, it does not infringe on the freedom of Linux users to have a virus-free Internet. You coming down my pipe and telling me what I should run is bullshit. I have absolutely no interest in telling you not to use Linux. But I also have absolutely no interest in pretending Linux is suitable for music production.</p><p>Finally, what's ignored in this article is that the Mac is ridiculously standardized. Apple WebKit is HTML5 and 100/100 on Acid3, ISO MPEG-4 is standardized QuickTime, even though Apple could have pushed proprietary QuickTime down our throats with iTunes Store. The Mac is a full Unix, including Apache2, PHP, Python, Perl, and much more. USB, Gigabit Ethernet, FireWire, Displ</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Inherent in these kinds of stupid arguments against the Mac is the false idea that the PC , whether it 's running Windows or Linux , is technically equivalent to the Mac for creative people .
It is not .
Even if Linux is " more free " , we can not use it .
Richard Stallman is on The Setup right now rocking a 9-inch Yeelong that is not at all suitable for music or video production .
I respect what he has done for computer science , but he does n't make audio tools.All you have to do to setup a music studio on a Mac is run a few installers and plug some gear together .
It takes less than a half hour to be up and running making music .
Virtual instruments and effects plug into the system , digital audio workstations plug into the system , audio and MIDI hardware plugs into the system , and the system manages it all .
The Mac knows all the music gear and just recognizes it when you plug it in .
I often run 2 full digital audio workstations and 2 separate audio interfaces and they all just work together seamlessly , including working with all of my virtual instruments and effects , including working at very high sample rates and with perfect timing .
There is no other platform that offers anything like this.For years I worked at a studio complex with dozens of studios .
Most of the studios had Macs in them , but some had PC 's in them .
There was an I-T consultant who worked with the PC guys , and they paid him well , and they were still always having problems .
The Mac users just made music.So you can whine on about software freedom or whatever philosophy you hew to , but it does n't impress me compared to the freedom to make music , the freedom from technical problems and technical hurdles , the freedom to participate in digital art without having to take a computer science degree .
If you can make a better system for music and video producers , then make it , or STFU already .
Pretending like you are offering an equivalent technical system that is somehow more free is disingenuous .
You are not .
Windows and Linux can barely do consumer audio.Me , I actually can code , but I spend my time coding HTML5 to share my work , I spend my time coding AppleScript to create reusable creative workflows with various Mac apps passing grunt work around between them so I do n't have to do anything but actually create new stuff .
But the idea that a musician should have to learn to code to make music is outrageously offensive .
What if you could n't do computer science if you did n't play a musical instrument ?
It 's offensive.There 's just nothing worse than a nerd pushing their tech on you like a cat offering a mouse .
If you think a Mac and a PC are the same at all , then you do n't understand the Mac .
It 's not at all the same .
The PC and Mac are not technically equivalent .
The only thing they have in common is they are both computers .
So is a car and a PC these days , they are both computers .
Would you like it if I told you to do your coding on a fucking Ford dashboard , because then you 'll have the " freedom to travel " while you code ?
It makes no sense.What 's worse is to hear this from open source advocates who know full well that the core operating system of the Mac is open source .
The " open source Mac " is the Mac .
The parts that need to be open source are open source .
The Mac talks to the Internet like BSD , it is a great network citizen .
It does not create botnets , it does not infringe on the freedom of Linux users to have a virus-free Internet .
You coming down my pipe and telling me what I should run is bullshit .
I have absolutely no interest in telling you not to use Linux .
But I also have absolutely no interest in pretending Linux is suitable for music production.Finally , what 's ignored in this article is that the Mac is ridiculously standardized .
Apple WebKit is HTML5 and 100/100 on Acid3 , ISO MPEG-4 is standardized QuickTime , even though Apple could have pushed proprietary QuickTime down our throats with iTunes Store .
The Mac is a full Unix , including Apache2 , PHP , Python , Perl , and much more .
USB , Gigabit Ethernet , FireWire , Displ</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Inherent in these kinds of stupid arguments against the Mac is the false idea that the PC, whether it's running Windows or Linux, is technically equivalent to the Mac for creative people.
It is not.
Even if Linux is "more free", we cannot use it.
Richard Stallman is on The Setup right now rocking a 9-inch Yeelong that is not at all suitable for music or video production.
I respect what he has done for computer science, but he doesn't make audio tools.All you have to do to setup a music studio on a Mac is run a few installers and plug some gear together.
It takes less than a half hour to be up and running making music.
Virtual instruments and effects plug into the system, digital audio workstations plug into the system, audio and MIDI hardware plugs into the system, and the system manages it all.
The Mac knows all the music gear and just recognizes it when you plug it in.
I often run 2 full digital audio workstations and 2 separate audio interfaces and they all just work together seamlessly, including working with all of my virtual instruments and effects, including working at very high sample rates and with perfect timing.
There is no other platform that offers anything like this.For years I worked at a studio complex with dozens of studios.
Most of the studios had Macs in them, but some had PC's in them.
There was an I-T consultant who worked with the PC guys, and they paid him well, and they were still always having problems.
The Mac users just made music.So you can whine on about software freedom or whatever philosophy you hew to, but it doesn't impress me compared to the freedom to make music, the freedom from technical problems and technical hurdles, the freedom to participate in digital art without having to take a computer science degree.
If you can make a better system for music and video producers, then make it, or STFU already.
Pretending like you are offering an equivalent technical system that is somehow more free is disingenuous.
You are not.
Windows and Linux can barely do consumer audio.Me, I actually can code, but I spend my time coding HTML5 to share my work, I spend my time coding AppleScript to create reusable creative workflows with various Mac apps passing grunt work around between them so I don't have to do anything but actually create new stuff.
But the idea that a musician should have to learn to code to make music is outrageously offensive.
What if you couldn't do computer science if you didn't play a musical instrument?
It's offensive.There's just nothing worse than a nerd pushing their tech on you like a cat offering a mouse.
If you think a Mac and a PC are the same at all, then you don't understand the Mac.
It's not at all the same.
The PC and Mac are not technically equivalent.
The only thing they have in common is they are both computers.
So is a car and a PC these days, they are both computers.
Would you like it if I told you to do your coding on a fucking Ford dashboard, because then you'll have the "freedom to travel" while you code?
It makes no sense.What's worse is to hear this from open source advocates who know full well that the core operating system of the Mac is open source.
The "open source Mac" is the Mac.
The parts that need to be open source are open source.
The Mac talks to the Internet like BSD, it is a great network citizen.
It does not create botnets, it does not infringe on the freedom of Linux users to have a virus-free Internet.
You coming down my pipe and telling me what I should run is bullshit.
I have absolutely no interest in telling you not to use Linux.
But I also have absolutely no interest in pretending Linux is suitable for music production.Finally, what's ignored in this article is that the Mac is ridiculously standardized.
Apple WebKit is HTML5 and 100/100 on Acid3, ISO MPEG-4 is standardized QuickTime, even though Apple could have pushed proprietary QuickTime down our throats with iTunes Store.
The Mac is a full Unix, including Apache2, PHP, Python, Perl, and much more.
USB, Gigabit Ethernet, FireWire, Displ</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30898596</id>
	<title>Re:Not sure in USA but in Spain...</title>
	<author>mdwh2</author>
	<datestamp>1264426740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Microsoft "create, maintain, and run it's own OS." - do they get a cookie too?</p><p>Apple sell PCs these days. They might use expensive high end parts, but you can get that with other PCs too, if you want.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Microsoft " create , maintain , and run it 's own OS .
" - do they get a cookie too ? Apple sell PCs these days .
They might use expensive high end parts , but you can get that with other PCs too , if you want .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Microsoft "create, maintain, and run it's own OS.
" - do they get a cookie too?Apple sell PCs these days.
They might use expensive high end parts, but you can get that with other PCs too, if you want.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30895146</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30893924</id>
	<title>Re:Subjectivity presented as fact</title>
	<author>Tom</author>
	<datestamp>1264449660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>So can anyone give an example of what he's talking about?</p></div><p>Quicksilver beats Kapatult (it's Linux copycat) in every aspect.<br>TextMate eats every other text editor I've ever used for lunch. And I've used a <b>lot</b> of text editors, because 90\% of them suck.<br>OmniOutliner and OmniGraffle are among the only tools in their respective segments that make the task actually easier than doing it manually on paper would.<br>Scrivener makes you twice as productive in writing (the actual book-writing task, not letters and stuff) as MS word allows.<br>And finally Unity 3D is a games engine (now also available for windos) that has no equivalent, and beats Unreal or anything from id in regards of usability hands down <b>and</b> tied behind its back.</p><p>There are a lot more examples. If you want to insist on the Apple stuff, take iWork, not iLife. Pages rips Word a new one, maybe not in the feature list but in the usability. And Numbers is what spreadsheets would have evolved to 10 years ago if they hadn't stagnated due to the Excel lock-in. Again, maybe Excel has 100 additional features that a whooping 20 people world-wide use, but in presentation, useability and the features that actually matter, like being able to have two tables next to each other, Numbers shows us that Excel is 20 year old crap.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>So can anyone give an example of what he 's talking about ? Quicksilver beats Kapatult ( it 's Linux copycat ) in every aspect.TextMate eats every other text editor I 've ever used for lunch .
And I 've used a lot of text editors , because 90 \ % of them suck.OmniOutliner and OmniGraffle are among the only tools in their respective segments that make the task actually easier than doing it manually on paper would.Scrivener makes you twice as productive in writing ( the actual book-writing task , not letters and stuff ) as MS word allows.And finally Unity 3D is a games engine ( now also available for windos ) that has no equivalent , and beats Unreal or anything from id in regards of usability hands down and tied behind its back.There are a lot more examples .
If you want to insist on the Apple stuff , take iWork , not iLife .
Pages rips Word a new one , maybe not in the feature list but in the usability .
And Numbers is what spreadsheets would have evolved to 10 years ago if they had n't stagnated due to the Excel lock-in .
Again , maybe Excel has 100 additional features that a whooping 20 people world-wide use , but in presentation , useability and the features that actually matter , like being able to have two tables next to each other , Numbers shows us that Excel is 20 year old crap .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So can anyone give an example of what he's talking about?Quicksilver beats Kapatult (it's Linux copycat) in every aspect.TextMate eats every other text editor I've ever used for lunch.
And I've used a lot of text editors, because 90\% of them suck.OmniOutliner and OmniGraffle are among the only tools in their respective segments that make the task actually easier than doing it manually on paper would.Scrivener makes you twice as productive in writing (the actual book-writing task, not letters and stuff) as MS word allows.And finally Unity 3D is a games engine (now also available for windos) that has no equivalent, and beats Unreal or anything from id in regards of usability hands down and tied behind its back.There are a lot more examples.
If you want to insist on the Apple stuff, take iWork, not iLife.
Pages rips Word a new one, maybe not in the feature list but in the usability.
And Numbers is what spreadsheets would have evolved to 10 years ago if they hadn't stagnated due to the Excel lock-in.
Again, maybe Excel has 100 additional features that a whooping 20 people world-wide use, but in presentation, useability and the features that actually matter, like being able to have two tables next to each other, Numbers shows us that Excel is 20 year old crap.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889454</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891616</id>
	<title>Re:Lesson: Apple marketing i working!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264440360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I just had a terrible thought.  We could modify the GPL a little to demand that all FOSS and derivatives live by the GPL -and- if they are used in a commercial product that a statement must be included on said product advertising and packaging to enlighten the customer that what they are about to "buy" is largely available for free or community contribution.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I just had a terrible thought .
We could modify the GPL a little to demand that all FOSS and derivatives live by the GPL -and- if they are used in a commercial product that a statement must be included on said product advertising and packaging to enlighten the customer that what they are about to " buy " is largely available for free or community contribution .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I just had a terrible thought.
We could modify the GPL a little to demand that all FOSS and derivatives live by the GPL -and- if they are used in a commercial product that a statement must be included on said product advertising and packaging to enlighten the customer that what they are about to "buy" is largely available for free or community contribution.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889362</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30897424</id>
	<title>Re:It's not designed by committee</title>
	<author>roman\_mir</author>
	<datestamp>1264421220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>You know the old saying, <b>which is true</b>, as well as witty; that a camel is a horse that was designed by a committee.</p></div><p> - can you please enlighten us, what part of that statement is true as you said?  That a horse was designed?  That a camel was designed?  That a camel is 'worse' than a horse?  Is camel worse than a horse for the environment it lives in?</p><p>So that old saying, is it truly true?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>You know the old saying , which is true , as well as witty ; that a camel is a horse that was designed by a committee .
- can you please enlighten us , what part of that statement is true as you said ?
That a horse was designed ?
That a camel was designed ?
That a camel is 'worse ' than a horse ?
Is camel worse than a horse for the environment it lives in ? So that old saying , is it truly true ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You know the old saying, which is true, as well as witty; that a camel is a horse that was designed by a committee.
- can you please enlighten us, what part of that statement is true as you said?
That a horse was designed?
That a camel was designed?
That a camel is 'worse' than a horse?
Is camel worse than a horse for the environment it lives in?So that old saying, is it truly true?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889790</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890314</id>
	<title>Re:I'm off-duty</title>
	<author>Bakkster</author>
	<datestamp>1264436160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>You don't buy a computer because of its culture, you buy it because it serves you purposes better than other brands. For a long time, Apple made the only computers that you could do art on; the Mac was graphic when DOS was text-only.</p></div><p>I'd say it's more because if you're an artistic person, you don't want to fuck around with the technicals that don't relate with what you do.  You want to buy a computer that works to your specifications out of the box, because that's more time for artsy stuff.  Macs fit that bill pretty well, so of course it's a good thing for the 'technical' side (Apple engineering) to be as closed as possible, letting the artists who use the product actually use it, rather than customizing or working out compatibility issues.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>You do n't buy a computer because of its culture , you buy it because it serves you purposes better than other brands .
For a long time , Apple made the only computers that you could do art on ; the Mac was graphic when DOS was text-only.I 'd say it 's more because if you 're an artistic person , you do n't want to fuck around with the technicals that do n't relate with what you do .
You want to buy a computer that works to your specifications out of the box , because that 's more time for artsy stuff .
Macs fit that bill pretty well , so of course it 's a good thing for the 'technical ' side ( Apple engineering ) to be as closed as possible , letting the artists who use the product actually use it , rather than customizing or working out compatibility issues .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You don't buy a computer because of its culture, you buy it because it serves you purposes better than other brands.
For a long time, Apple made the only computers that you could do art on; the Mac was graphic when DOS was text-only.I'd say it's more because if you're an artistic person, you don't want to fuck around with the technicals that don't relate with what you do.
You want to buy a computer that works to your specifications out of the box, because that's more time for artsy stuff.
Macs fit that bill pretty well, so of course it's a good thing for the 'technical' side (Apple engineering) to be as closed as possible, letting the artists who use the product actually use it, rather than customizing or working out compatibility issues.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889380</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891510</id>
	<title>Re:Not sure in USA but in Spain...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264440060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I hate being lumped in with a group of smug assholes just because of my car choice.<br>

<br>--<br>

<br>2002 Enzo Ferrari Drivers Club<br> <br> <br> <br>

Sorry but there is a lot of cost in form, and exclusivity (aka profit margins) in Apple products. So you get people buying them as a status symbol.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I hate being lumped in with a group of smug assholes just because of my car choice .
-- 2002 Enzo Ferrari Drivers Club Sorry but there is a lot of cost in form , and exclusivity ( aka profit margins ) in Apple products .
So you get people buying them as a status symbol .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I hate being lumped in with a group of smug assholes just because of my car choice.
--

2002 Enzo Ferrari Drivers Club   

Sorry but there is a lot of cost in form, and exclusivity (aka profit margins) in Apple products.
So you get people buying them as a status symbol.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890432</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889814</id>
	<title>Re:Why surprised.</title>
	<author>LWATCDR</author>
	<datestamp>1264434180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Can a CPU which is hardware be Free Open Source Software?<br>And actually there are some FOSS MIPS and other CPU cores that are available and do run Linux.<br>These are FOSS because they are files you use to program PLDs. At that point hardware and software start to get fuzzy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Can a CPU which is hardware be Free Open Source Software ? And actually there are some FOSS MIPS and other CPU cores that are available and do run Linux.These are FOSS because they are files you use to program PLDs .
At that point hardware and software start to get fuzzy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can a CPU which is hardware be Free Open Source Software?And actually there are some FOSS MIPS and other CPU cores that are available and do run Linux.These are FOSS because they are files you use to program PLDs.
At that point hardware and software start to get fuzzy.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889292</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30893396</id>
	<title>Re:I'm off-duty</title>
	<author>CrackedButter</author>
	<datestamp>1264447260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>There is no correlation. How simple minded are you? Just accept that gays are everywhere and they will be harder to coral when the revolution begins than you think!</htmltext>
<tokenext>There is no correlation .
How simple minded are you ?
Just accept that gays are everywhere and they will be harder to coral when the revolution begins than you think !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is no correlation.
How simple minded are you?
Just accept that gays are everywhere and they will be harder to coral when the revolution begins than you think!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889380</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889690</id>
	<title>Re:Why surprised.</title>
	<author>QuantumRiff</author>
	<datestamp>1264433820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It also runs on ARM cpu's, which are not nearly as closed.  Keep in mind that both Intel and AMD are very dedicated to giving out as many specs and features as they can document, so that developers will write code that will run very efficeniently on them.  If only other companies, like NVidia (and well, AMD with their buying ATI) would do the same.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It also runs on ARM cpu 's , which are not nearly as closed .
Keep in mind that both Intel and AMD are very dedicated to giving out as many specs and features as they can document , so that developers will write code that will run very efficeniently on them .
If only other companies , like NVidia ( and well , AMD with their buying ATI ) would do the same .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It also runs on ARM cpu's, which are not nearly as closed.
Keep in mind that both Intel and AMD are very dedicated to giving out as many specs and features as they can document, so that developers will write code that will run very efficeniently on them.
If only other companies, like NVidia (and well, AMD with their buying ATI) would do the same.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889292</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891996</id>
	<title>Re:Fourth option...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264441680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Apple products have been successful long enough that I wouldn't consider them "trendy."</p><p>I think it's more reasonable to say that Apple's corporate culture is completely unrelated to the mindset of its customers.  Most mac users (most computer users) are not computer geeks - they don't care about FOSS, copyright, DRM, etc etc.  People buy computers because it fits their needs - can I afford it?  does it work?  is it shiny?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Apple products have been successful long enough that I would n't consider them " trendy .
" I think it 's more reasonable to say that Apple 's corporate culture is completely unrelated to the mindset of its customers .
Most mac users ( most computer users ) are not computer geeks - they do n't care about FOSS , copyright , DRM , etc etc .
People buy computers because it fits their needs - can I afford it ?
does it work ?
is it shiny ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Apple products have been successful long enough that I wouldn't consider them "trendy.
"I think it's more reasonable to say that Apple's corporate culture is completely unrelated to the mindset of its customers.
Most mac users (most computer users) are not computer geeks - they don't care about FOSS, copyright, DRM, etc etc.
People buy computers because it fits their needs - can I afford it?
does it work?
is it shiny?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889328</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891388</id>
	<title>Re:Lesson: Apple marketing i working!</title>
	<author>hitmark</author>
	<datestamp>1264439760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>mostly after a fair bit of arm-twisting.</p><p>just observe how webkit, being khtml derived, ended up as a full fork and a separate project, largely thanks to apple basically making a big code dump when it was pointed out that they had modified LGPL licensed code, rather then produce a collection of patches showing the changes going back to the khtml version they started out with.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>mostly after a fair bit of arm-twisting.just observe how webkit , being khtml derived , ended up as a full fork and a separate project , largely thanks to apple basically making a big code dump when it was pointed out that they had modified LGPL licensed code , rather then produce a collection of patches showing the changes going back to the khtml version they started out with .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>mostly after a fair bit of arm-twisting.just observe how webkit, being khtml derived, ended up as a full fork and a separate project, largely thanks to apple basically making a big code dump when it was pointed out that they had modified LGPL licensed code, rather then produce a collection of patches showing the changes going back to the khtml version they started out with.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889686</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30900396</id>
	<title>Re:Not sure in USA but in Spain...</title>
	<author>mjwx</author>
	<datestamp>1264442040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Yeah. Because Apple doesn't tend to use higher quality caps and fans and other components than HP or Dell.</p></div></blockquote><p>

Apple has a higher failure rate then Toshiba, Lenovo or Asus, lower then HP and about the same as Dell. Almost all Apple components are assembled by FoxConn, if you know anything about building your own PC you avoid FoxConn boards like the plague, go for something like Asustek or Gigabyte boards which are better manufactured. Sorry but Apple use the same off the self components as HP, Dell et al and they are assembled in that haven of competent manufacturing, China just like HP and Dell.<br> <br>

Apple leaves the decision on what cap's and copper to use to the manufacturer as they are responsible for acquiring the components. Oddly enough just like Dell except Dell will QA their laptops properly. Given the trouble Apple has with things like the 27" imac screens their QA must be asleep.</p><blockquote><div><p>Apple doesn't use Intel's high-end processors</p></div></blockquote><p>

The <a href="http://store.apple.com/au/browse/home/shop\_mac/family/macbook?mco=MTAyNTQzMzg" title="apple.com">13" macbook</a> [apple.com] has a P7570 2.26 GHz C2D and starts at A$1300, the <a href="http://www1.ap.dell.com/au/en/business/vostronb/laptop-vostro-1320/pd.aspx?refid=laptop-vostro-1320&amp;s=bsd&amp;cs=aubsd1" title="dell.com">Dell Vostro 13</a> [dell.com] has the same proc and more RAM for less then A$950. If I hit the customise button on the dell site I can go up to a P8700 (2.53 Ghz C2D) and still have a the laptop priced under the Mac with more RAM. The brilliant thing about Dell is that I can scale back the proc to a T series to save money if I don't need the power.<br> <br>

I'm sorry but Apple really do use the same internal components, the rest is aesthetic bunk. there really is no difference between a Lenovo power connector and a Apple power connector in terms of functionality but there is a world of difference between the Lenovo keyboard, trackpad and nub mouse and the Apple one button track pad (shock horror, other companies design their own input dev's as well) If you are serious about using a laptop, the Lenovo input dev's are superior to anything else. I've used Dell's, Levono's, Acer's, Asus's Toshiba's and Mac's and the only laptop I'd recommend less then a Mac is the Acer, yes Acer are that bad.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah .
Because Apple does n't tend to use higher quality caps and fans and other components than HP or Dell .
Apple has a higher failure rate then Toshiba , Lenovo or Asus , lower then HP and about the same as Dell .
Almost all Apple components are assembled by FoxConn , if you know anything about building your own PC you avoid FoxConn boards like the plague , go for something like Asustek or Gigabyte boards which are better manufactured .
Sorry but Apple use the same off the self components as HP , Dell et al and they are assembled in that haven of competent manufacturing , China just like HP and Dell .
Apple leaves the decision on what cap 's and copper to use to the manufacturer as they are responsible for acquiring the components .
Oddly enough just like Dell except Dell will QA their laptops properly .
Given the trouble Apple has with things like the 27 " imac screens their QA must be asleep.Apple does n't use Intel 's high-end processors The 13 " macbook [ apple.com ] has a P7570 2.26 GHz C2D and starts at A $ 1300 , the Dell Vostro 13 [ dell.com ] has the same proc and more RAM for less then A $ 950 .
If I hit the customise button on the dell site I can go up to a P8700 ( 2.53 Ghz C2D ) and still have a the laptop priced under the Mac with more RAM .
The brilliant thing about Dell is that I can scale back the proc to a T series to save money if I do n't need the power .
I 'm sorry but Apple really do use the same internal components , the rest is aesthetic bunk .
there really is no difference between a Lenovo power connector and a Apple power connector in terms of functionality but there is a world of difference between the Lenovo keyboard , trackpad and nub mouse and the Apple one button track pad ( shock horror , other companies design their own input dev 's as well ) If you are serious about using a laptop , the Lenovo input dev 's are superior to anything else .
I 've used Dell 's , Levono 's , Acer 's , Asus 's Toshiba 's and Mac 's and the only laptop I 'd recommend less then a Mac is the Acer , yes Acer are that bad .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah.
Because Apple doesn't tend to use higher quality caps and fans and other components than HP or Dell.
Apple has a higher failure rate then Toshiba, Lenovo or Asus, lower then HP and about the same as Dell.
Almost all Apple components are assembled by FoxConn, if you know anything about building your own PC you avoid FoxConn boards like the plague, go for something like Asustek or Gigabyte boards which are better manufactured.
Sorry but Apple use the same off the self components as HP, Dell et al and they are assembled in that haven of competent manufacturing, China just like HP and Dell.
Apple leaves the decision on what cap's and copper to use to the manufacturer as they are responsible for acquiring the components.
Oddly enough just like Dell except Dell will QA their laptops properly.
Given the trouble Apple has with things like the 27" imac screens their QA must be asleep.Apple doesn't use Intel's high-end processors

The 13" macbook [apple.com] has a P7570 2.26 GHz C2D and starts at A$1300, the Dell Vostro 13 [dell.com] has the same proc and more RAM for less then A$950.
If I hit the customise button on the dell site I can go up to a P8700 (2.53 Ghz C2D) and still have a the laptop priced under the Mac with more RAM.
The brilliant thing about Dell is that I can scale back the proc to a T series to save money if I don't need the power.
I'm sorry but Apple really do use the same internal components, the rest is aesthetic bunk.
there really is no difference between a Lenovo power connector and a Apple power connector in terms of functionality but there is a world of difference between the Lenovo keyboard, trackpad and nub mouse and the Apple one button track pad (shock horror, other companies design their own input dev's as well) If you are serious about using a laptop, the Lenovo input dev's are superior to anything else.
I've used Dell's, Levono's, Acer's, Asus's Toshiba's and Mac's and the only laptop I'd recommend less then a Mac is the Acer, yes Acer are that bad.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30895146</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891820</id>
	<title>it's fashion baby...</title>
	<author>gkai</author>
	<datestamp>1264441080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, may I suggest another possibility:</p><p>4) designers, musicians, and other creative professionals are fashion whores worse than teenage girls or snowboarders.</p><p>Blind brand loyalty of apple worshipper is in the same ballpark as those of Vuiton or Oxbow</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , may I suggest another possibility : 4 ) designers , musicians , and other creative professionals are fashion whores worse than teenage girls or snowboarders.Blind brand loyalty of apple worshipper is in the same ballpark as those of Vuiton or Oxbow</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, may I suggest another possibility:4) designers, musicians, and other creative professionals are fashion whores worse than teenage girls or snowboarders.Blind brand loyalty of apple worshipper is in the same ballpark as those of Vuiton or Oxbow</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30892576</id>
	<title>and PC users arent?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264443600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This implies that people who use PCs are single-minded drones.  Apple has harped on this for a while, not only with the superbowl ad, but when they switched to intel chips, they say "these chips used to be in dull little machines, performing dull little tasks"  which is such an insult to all the amazing things done with technology (most of it on PCs!), they didn't sequence the human genome with macs.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This implies that people who use PCs are single-minded drones .
Apple has harped on this for a while , not only with the superbowl ad , but when they switched to intel chips , they say " these chips used to be in dull little machines , performing dull little tasks " which is such an insult to all the amazing things done with technology ( most of it on PCs !
) , they did n't sequence the human genome with macs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This implies that people who use PCs are single-minded drones.
Apple has harped on this for a while, not only with the superbowl ad, but when they switched to intel chips, they say "these chips used to be in dull little machines, performing dull little tasks"  which is such an insult to all the amazing things done with technology (most of it on PCs!
), they didn't sequence the human genome with macs.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891204</id>
	<title>Re:FOSS</title>
	<author>hitmark</author>
	<datestamp>1264439220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>well the field of 3D printers seems to be a growth economy these days.</p><p>hell, have there not been a buzz about printable semiconductors for years now? And lately, printable batteries using carbon nanotubes and a ink binder of paper or cloth?</p><p>sure, it may not be up to the latest gaming pc specs, but it can still be useful, especially if they can be clustered<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>well the field of 3D printers seems to be a growth economy these days.hell , have there not been a buzz about printable semiconductors for years now ?
And lately , printable batteries using carbon nanotubes and a ink binder of paper or cloth ? sure , it may not be up to the latest gaming pc specs , but it can still be useful , especially if they can be clustered ; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>well the field of 3D printers seems to be a growth economy these days.hell, have there not been a buzz about printable semiconductors for years now?
And lately, printable batteries using carbon nanotubes and a ink binder of paper or cloth?sure, it may not be up to the latest gaming pc specs, but it can still be useful, especially if they can be clustered ;)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889316</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890812</id>
	<title>Re:status of shiny white thingys</title>
	<author>Registered Coward v2</author>
	<datestamp>1264437840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Seriously though, my college aged daughter says the PC we sent off to school with is not good enough. She \_needs\_ an Mac. When asked why she can't say specifically why a Mac would be a better choice other than "everyone" has one. It's the way the product has been marketed - as a tool for the elite or more discriminating user. Translation, status symbol.</p></div><p>Well, one advantage to the Mac I've found is things simply "just work" much more often than on a PC.  I use a MacBook at work; paid for it myself even though I also have a Dell.  With Office I have no compatibility issues; and the Mac has been much easier to use on the road than the Dell.  For example:
</p><p>At one of our partners, I am the only person from my company that can print on their network.  My Mac found their Bonjour printer and i am good to go; despite installing Bonjour on the PC's they can't seem to print.
</p><p>I was conducting a seminar when the PC used to project video decide it no longer liked talking to the projector.  So I plugged a video adapter in my Mac and it recognized the new output, re-sized the screen and we were back in business - in less than 5 minutes.
</p><p>The only thing I miss is games; and if I really wanted to play them I'd setup a bootcamp partition.  Parallels works fine for non-game apps I use that have no Mac counterpoint; Crossover works well and is another options; as is Sun's free VM.
</p><p>The Mac is not perfect; but it is a damn fine machine that works; and is priced on par with equivalent PCs;  if you get one at the educational price during the annual back to school free "iPod" sale it's even more price competitive.  There's plenty of FOSS solutions that obliviate the need to buy MS products; and if you really need Office MS sells it for around $70 at most campuses.
</p><p>I speak from experience when I say a MacBook with Neo Office meets most college student's needs; adding a VM generally will take care of the rest.  Apple's support is pretty darn good as well; I've had 3 Macs with keyboard cracks, where the cover rests on the keyboard, fixed for free even though the warranty had long expired.   Applecare's phone support is pretty darned good as well.
</p><p>Of course, there is a down side.  When I wear a bow-tie at a client meeting I get the occasional "I figured you'd use a Mac as well" when I pull out my MacBook.  Then again, I divide the world into two camps - Those who see my Marvin the Martian watch and say "Cool;" and those who simply back away frowning.  I prefer to work with the former; life's to short to waste on up-tight clients.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Seriously though , my college aged daughter says the PC we sent off to school with is not good enough .
She \ _needs \ _ an Mac .
When asked why she ca n't say specifically why a Mac would be a better choice other than " everyone " has one .
It 's the way the product has been marketed - as a tool for the elite or more discriminating user .
Translation , status symbol.Well , one advantage to the Mac I 've found is things simply " just work " much more often than on a PC .
I use a MacBook at work ; paid for it myself even though I also have a Dell .
With Office I have no compatibility issues ; and the Mac has been much easier to use on the road than the Dell .
For example : At one of our partners , I am the only person from my company that can print on their network .
My Mac found their Bonjour printer and i am good to go ; despite installing Bonjour on the PC 's they ca n't seem to print .
I was conducting a seminar when the PC used to project video decide it no longer liked talking to the projector .
So I plugged a video adapter in my Mac and it recognized the new output , re-sized the screen and we were back in business - in less than 5 minutes .
The only thing I miss is games ; and if I really wanted to play them I 'd setup a bootcamp partition .
Parallels works fine for non-game apps I use that have no Mac counterpoint ; Crossover works well and is another options ; as is Sun 's free VM .
The Mac is not perfect ; but it is a damn fine machine that works ; and is priced on par with equivalent PCs ; if you get one at the educational price during the annual back to school free " iPod " sale it 's even more price competitive .
There 's plenty of FOSS solutions that obliviate the need to buy MS products ; and if you really need Office MS sells it for around $ 70 at most campuses .
I speak from experience when I say a MacBook with Neo Office meets most college student 's needs ; adding a VM generally will take care of the rest .
Apple 's support is pretty darn good as well ; I 've had 3 Macs with keyboard cracks , where the cover rests on the keyboard , fixed for free even though the warranty had long expired .
Applecare 's phone support is pretty darned good as well .
Of course , there is a down side .
When I wear a bow-tie at a client meeting I get the occasional " I figured you 'd use a Mac as well " when I pull out my MacBook .
Then again , I divide the world into two camps - Those who see my Marvin the Martian watch and say " Cool ; " and those who simply back away frowning .
I prefer to work with the former ; life 's to short to waste on up-tight clients .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seriously though, my college aged daughter says the PC we sent off to school with is not good enough.
She \_needs\_ an Mac.
When asked why she can't say specifically why a Mac would be a better choice other than "everyone" has one.
It's the way the product has been marketed - as a tool for the elite or more discriminating user.
Translation, status symbol.Well, one advantage to the Mac I've found is things simply "just work" much more often than on a PC.
I use a MacBook at work; paid for it myself even though I also have a Dell.
With Office I have no compatibility issues; and the Mac has been much easier to use on the road than the Dell.
For example:
At one of our partners, I am the only person from my company that can print on their network.
My Mac found their Bonjour printer and i am good to go; despite installing Bonjour on the PC's they can't seem to print.
I was conducting a seminar when the PC used to project video decide it no longer liked talking to the projector.
So I plugged a video adapter in my Mac and it recognized the new output, re-sized the screen and we were back in business - in less than 5 minutes.
The only thing I miss is games; and if I really wanted to play them I'd setup a bootcamp partition.
Parallels works fine for non-game apps I use that have no Mac counterpoint; Crossover works well and is another options; as is Sun's free VM.
The Mac is not perfect; but it is a damn fine machine that works; and is priced on par with equivalent PCs;  if you get one at the educational price during the annual back to school free "iPod" sale it's even more price competitive.
There's plenty of FOSS solutions that obliviate the need to buy MS products; and if you really need Office MS sells it for around $70 at most campuses.
I speak from experience when I say a MacBook with Neo Office meets most college student's needs; adding a VM generally will take care of the rest.
Apple's support is pretty darn good as well; I've had 3 Macs with keyboard cracks, where the cover rests on the keyboard, fixed for free even though the warranty had long expired.
Applecare's phone support is pretty darned good as well.
Of course, there is a down side.
When I wear a bow-tie at a client meeting I get the occasional "I figured you'd use a Mac as well" when I pull out my MacBook.
Then again, I divide the world into two camps - Those who see my Marvin the Martian watch and say "Cool;" and those who simply back away frowning.
I prefer to work with the former; life's to short to waste on up-tight clients.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889332</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889768</id>
	<title>Re:I guess Apple did all that themselves...</title>
	<author>LWATCDR</author>
	<datestamp>1264434060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"haven't produced anything remotely as useful as Mac OS X and the iPhone."<br>I have to disagree with this one as well.<br>Linux is on more systems than OS/X everything from Supercomputers to Wifi routers to cell phones.  More of the Internet is powered by Linux Apache, MySQL, PHP, Python, and Perl.<br>Firefox is on how many system? OpenSSH? and let's not forget that OS/X is built on BSD.<br>FOSS has not built any desktop systems as useful as OS/X. Android vs iPhone is still an on going battle but I would put them as equally as useful of not as polished.<br>OS/X is a great desktop and Linux really could learn from same as the iPhone. Since both OS/X and the iPhone have been built using FOSS as their foundation I would say that it goes both ways.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" have n't produced anything remotely as useful as Mac OS X and the iPhone .
" I have to disagree with this one as well.Linux is on more systems than OS/X everything from Supercomputers to Wifi routers to cell phones .
More of the Internet is powered by Linux Apache , MySQL , PHP , Python , and Perl.Firefox is on how many system ?
OpenSSH ? and let 's not forget that OS/X is built on BSD.FOSS has not built any desktop systems as useful as OS/X .
Android vs iPhone is still an on going battle but I would put them as equally as useful of not as polished.OS/X is a great desktop and Linux really could learn from same as the iPhone .
Since both OS/X and the iPhone have been built using FOSS as their foundation I would say that it goes both ways .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"haven't produced anything remotely as useful as Mac OS X and the iPhone.
"I have to disagree with this one as well.Linux is on more systems than OS/X everything from Supercomputers to Wifi routers to cell phones.
More of the Internet is powered by Linux Apache, MySQL, PHP, Python, and Perl.Firefox is on how many system?
OpenSSH? and let's not forget that OS/X is built on BSD.FOSS has not built any desktop systems as useful as OS/X.
Android vs iPhone is still an on going battle but I would put them as equally as useful of not as polished.OS/X is a great desktop and Linux really could learn from same as the iPhone.
Since both OS/X and the iPhone have been built using FOSS as their foundation I would say that it goes both ways.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889282</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30900232</id>
	<title>Re:Not sure in USA but in Spain...</title>
	<author>NewbieProgrammerMan</author>
	<datestamp>1264440720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p><div class="quote"><p>Mac users are bought</p></div><p>Where do I get one?  Is there a code word I have to use at the Apple store?  When I get it home, will it, like, you know, do "stuff" to me?</p></div><p>Actually, I think <a href="http://www.penny-arcade.com/comic/2010/1/22/" title="penny-arcade.com"> some of them</a> [penny-arcade.com] probably would.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Mac users are boughtWhere do I get one ?
Is there a code word I have to use at the Apple store ?
When I get it home , will it , like , you know , do " stuff " to me ? Actually , I think some of them [ penny-arcade.com ] probably would .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Mac users are boughtWhere do I get one?
Is there a code word I have to use at the Apple store?
When I get it home, will it, like, you know, do "stuff" to me?Actually, I think  some of them [penny-arcade.com] probably would.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889832</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30894508</id>
	<title>Windows has Drag and Drop!?!?</title>
	<author>alcmaeon</author>
	<datestamp>1264452180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I must have always landed on the "miss" part of the hit-or-miss curve when trying drag and drop on Windows.  I was never able to get it to work, so I just assumed it wasn't a feature.</p><p>My wife was wrong, Slashdot is not a complete waste of time, I actually learned something new and useful on Slashdot today.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I must have always landed on the " miss " part of the hit-or-miss curve when trying drag and drop on Windows .
I was never able to get it to work , so I just assumed it was n't a feature.My wife was wrong , Slashdot is not a complete waste of time , I actually learned something new and useful on Slashdot today .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I must have always landed on the "miss" part of the hit-or-miss curve when trying drag and drop on Windows.
I was never able to get it to work, so I just assumed it wasn't a feature.My wife was wrong, Slashdot is not a complete waste of time, I actually learned something new and useful on Slashdot today.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889406</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889682</id>
	<title>Re:I guess Apple did all that themselves...</title>
	<author>ScrewMaster</author>
	<datestamp>1264433760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>"customers are pragmatic about quality, and the open source and free software movements haven't produced anything remotely as useful as Mac OS X and the iPhone."</p><p>No.. they just created what runs on the them, that's all..
Meh.</p></div><p>Yeah. And let's not forget that Mac OS X and the iPhone run a Unix variant under the hood. I mean, it's not like Apple didn't play off the work of others. Plus which, it's people who are "pragmatic" about quality that run Windows<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... it's people who are <i>fanatic</i> about a particular kind of quality that use Macs.
<br> <br>
Me, I just want my operating system (whatever it is) to reliably run my applications. How's that for pragmatism?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" customers are pragmatic about quality , and the open source and free software movements have n't produced anything remotely as useful as Mac OS X and the iPhone. " No. .
they just created what runs on the them , that 's all. . Meh.Yeah. And let 's not forget that Mac OS X and the iPhone run a Unix variant under the hood .
I mean , it 's not like Apple did n't play off the work of others .
Plus which , it 's people who are " pragmatic " about quality that run Windows ... it 's people who are fanatic about a particular kind of quality that use Macs .
Me , I just want my operating system ( whatever it is ) to reliably run my applications .
How 's that for pragmatism ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"customers are pragmatic about quality, and the open source and free software movements haven't produced anything remotely as useful as Mac OS X and the iPhone."No..
they just created what runs on the them, that's all..
Meh.Yeah. And let's not forget that Mac OS X and the iPhone run a Unix variant under the hood.
I mean, it's not like Apple didn't play off the work of others.
Plus which, it's people who are "pragmatic" about quality that run Windows ... it's people who are fanatic about a particular kind of quality that use Macs.
Me, I just want my operating system (whatever it is) to reliably run my applications.
How's that for pragmatism?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889282</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889700</id>
	<title>Re:status of shiny white thingys</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264433820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Translation, status symbol.</p></div><p>Maybe yes and maybe no. I'm a university professor and the increase in Apple logos I'm seeing facing me in class is going through the roof. I think it's over half in most classes now.

</p><p>I've seen group projects get screwed up because although the Mac, which is the underdog, has had to learn to be super-compatible with everything else, the same can't be said of Windows. So you may be hearing the result of the network effects of everyone having Macs and her use of a different OS being a stumbling block to working together easily. I most certainly have seen that.

</p><p>Don't chalk everything up to marketing. I switched to the Mac about 2 years ago, after 10 years of dismissing it as a pain in the ass. But since they've been on Intel, the amount of stuff you can do (easily) on them has really gone up. You can boot damn near any OS, and there is phenomenal virtual machine software so you don't even need to. Yes, this is only because Apple won't support their OS being used on off-the-shelf hardware, but I think a lot of people are just making the pragmatic decision that they don't really care.

</p><p>I'm not saying you should buy the girl another new computer--we're all pretty susceptible to trends when we're freshmen in college and trying desperately to fit in--but that there might be more to it.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Translation , status symbol.Maybe yes and maybe no .
I 'm a university professor and the increase in Apple logos I 'm seeing facing me in class is going through the roof .
I think it 's over half in most classes now .
I 've seen group projects get screwed up because although the Mac , which is the underdog , has had to learn to be super-compatible with everything else , the same ca n't be said of Windows .
So you may be hearing the result of the network effects of everyone having Macs and her use of a different OS being a stumbling block to working together easily .
I most certainly have seen that .
Do n't chalk everything up to marketing .
I switched to the Mac about 2 years ago , after 10 years of dismissing it as a pain in the ass .
But since they 've been on Intel , the amount of stuff you can do ( easily ) on them has really gone up .
You can boot damn near any OS , and there is phenomenal virtual machine software so you do n't even need to .
Yes , this is only because Apple wo n't support their OS being used on off-the-shelf hardware , but I think a lot of people are just making the pragmatic decision that they do n't really care .
I 'm not saying you should buy the girl another new computer--we 're all pretty susceptible to trends when we 're freshmen in college and trying desperately to fit in--but that there might be more to it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Translation, status symbol.Maybe yes and maybe no.
I'm a university professor and the increase in Apple logos I'm seeing facing me in class is going through the roof.
I think it's over half in most classes now.
I've seen group projects get screwed up because although the Mac, which is the underdog, has had to learn to be super-compatible with everything else, the same can't be said of Windows.
So you may be hearing the result of the network effects of everyone having Macs and her use of a different OS being a stumbling block to working together easily.
I most certainly have seen that.
Don't chalk everything up to marketing.
I switched to the Mac about 2 years ago, after 10 years of dismissing it as a pain in the ass.
But since they've been on Intel, the amount of stuff you can do (easily) on them has really gone up.
You can boot damn near any OS, and there is phenomenal virtual machine software so you don't even need to.
Yes, this is only because Apple won't support their OS being used on off-the-shelf hardware, but I think a lot of people are just making the pragmatic decision that they don't really care.
I'm not saying you should buy the girl another new computer--we're all pretty susceptible to trends when we're freshmen in college and trying desperately to fit in--but that there might be more to it.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889332</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889328</id>
	<title>Fourth option...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264432440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Apple products are trendy and artisans aren't the social outcasts and special snow flakes they think they are.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Apple products are trendy and artisans are n't the social outcasts and special snow flakes they think they are .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Apple products are trendy and artisans aren't the social outcasts and special snow flakes they think they are.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890248</id>
	<title>Re:I'm off-duty</title>
	<author>Timothy Brownawell</author>
	<datestamp>1264435920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>But the disparity TFS speaks of isn't real. You don't buy a computer because of its culture, you buy it because it serves you purposes better than other brands.</p></div><p>But for some people, their purposes include <em>social</em>, as well as technical, requirements. e.g., everyone else has a mac and they don't want to stand out, or they buy in to the whole "image" thing.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>But the disparity TFS speaks of is n't real .
You do n't buy a computer because of its culture , you buy it because it serves you purposes better than other brands.But for some people , their purposes include social , as well as technical , requirements .
e.g. , everyone else has a mac and they do n't want to stand out , or they buy in to the whole " image " thing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But the disparity TFS speaks of isn't real.
You don't buy a computer because of its culture, you buy it because it serves you purposes better than other brands.But for some people, their purposes include social, as well as technical, requirements.
e.g., everyone else has a mac and they don't want to stand out, or they buy in to the whole "image" thing.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889380</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890294</id>
	<title>`Millions of designers and musicians</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264436100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What a nonsense. Only a small percentage of the couple of million mac users are in any creative business. Most of them just use their apple as a pc.<br>Conversely, what evidence is there, apart from anecdotal, that creative (as in music, art) people mainly use macs? Anything you can do with a mac you can do with windows or linux.<br>Owning a mac does not (never has) mean that you are part of some kind of hip, creative incrowd; that is just a myth that helps apple sell computers and other stuff.<br>Apple is just a particularly overzealous American company, kind of like Tupperware. Come to think of it; their products even look a bit like tupperware.<br>Not much about OS X is original or even made by Apple. I would like to see a chart of OS-X innards, in green and red, with parts made by Apple in red and all of the open source stuff they use but give so very little back to, in green.</p><p>Green:<br>* The FreeBSD kernel<br>* The MACH microkernel<br>* The GNU C libraries and gcc compiler<br>* Almost all of the unix tools<br>* The networking stack<br>* Most of the drivers<br>* numerous background daemons, like ntpd, ssh,<br>* The konquerer engine on  which safari is based<br>* The CUPS printing system, although they bought that company and proceeded to do next to no development on it. In the network I administrate, the only computers giving real trouble with the linux CUPS server are the macs. OS X clients don't even support cups classes.<br>* many other subsystems<br>* firefox, openoffice and numerous other free software titles have been ported to OS X and cocoa.<br>*</p><p>Red:<br>* The nextstep environment on which cocoa is based (although that is just bought and only further developed by apple and therefor should be made grey or pink or something)<br>* the display server<br>* coreAudio<br>* iLife</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What a nonsense .
Only a small percentage of the couple of million mac users are in any creative business .
Most of them just use their apple as a pc.Conversely , what evidence is there , apart from anecdotal , that creative ( as in music , art ) people mainly use macs ?
Anything you can do with a mac you can do with windows or linux.Owning a mac does not ( never has ) mean that you are part of some kind of hip , creative incrowd ; that is just a myth that helps apple sell computers and other stuff.Apple is just a particularly overzealous American company , kind of like Tupperware .
Come to think of it ; their products even look a bit like tupperware.Not much about OS X is original or even made by Apple .
I would like to see a chart of OS-X innards , in green and red , with parts made by Apple in red and all of the open source stuff they use but give so very little back to , in green.Green : * The FreeBSD kernel * The MACH microkernel * The GNU C libraries and gcc compiler * Almost all of the unix tools * The networking stack * Most of the drivers * numerous background daemons , like ntpd , ssh , * The konquerer engine on which safari is based * The CUPS printing system , although they bought that company and proceeded to do next to no development on it .
In the network I administrate , the only computers giving real trouble with the linux CUPS server are the macs .
OS X clients do n't even support cups classes .
* many other subsystems * firefox , openoffice and numerous other free software titles have been ported to OS X and cocoa .
* Red : * The nextstep environment on which cocoa is based ( although that is just bought and only further developed by apple and therefor should be made grey or pink or something ) * the display server * coreAudio * iLife</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What a nonsense.
Only a small percentage of the couple of million mac users are in any creative business.
Most of them just use their apple as a pc.Conversely, what evidence is there, apart from anecdotal, that creative (as in music, art) people mainly use macs?
Anything you can do with a mac you can do with windows or linux.Owning a mac does not (never has) mean that you are part of some kind of hip, creative incrowd; that is just a myth that helps apple sell computers and other stuff.Apple is just a particularly overzealous American company, kind of like Tupperware.
Come to think of it; their products even look a bit like tupperware.Not much about OS X is original or even made by Apple.
I would like to see a chart of OS-X innards, in green and red, with parts made by Apple in red and all of the open source stuff they use but give so very little back to, in green.Green:* The FreeBSD kernel* The MACH microkernel* The GNU C libraries and gcc compiler* Almost all of the unix tools* The networking stack* Most of the drivers* numerous background daemons, like ntpd, ssh,* The konquerer engine on  which safari is based* The CUPS printing system, although they bought that company and proceeded to do next to no development on it.
In the network I administrate, the only computers giving real trouble with the linux CUPS server are the macs.
OS X clients don't even support cups classes.
* many other subsystems* firefox, openoffice and numerous other free software titles have been ported to OS X and cocoa.
*Red:* The nextstep environment on which cocoa is based (although that is just bought and only further developed by apple and therefor should be made grey or pink or something)* the display server* coreAudio* iLife</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890118</id>
	<title>Re:FOSS</title>
	<author>BitZtream</author>
	<datestamp>1264435320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There are multiple, yes, we know, and they suck compared to what the iPhone offers by most peoples version of the story.</p><p>You know, those OSS phones are just taking over the world aren't they.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There are multiple , yes , we know , and they suck compared to what the iPhone offers by most peoples version of the story.You know , those OSS phones are just taking over the world are n't they .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are multiple, yes, we know, and they suck compared to what the iPhone offers by most peoples version of the story.You know, those OSS phones are just taking over the world aren't they.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889316</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889916</id>
	<title>Re:I'm off-duty</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264434540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Just because you are in art school doesn't mean you're creative or a good artist.</p></div><p>Nope, just means you're a fag.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Just because you are in art school does n't mean you 're creative or a good artist.Nope , just means you 're a fag .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just because you are in art school doesn't mean you're creative or a good artist.Nope, just means you're a fag.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889498</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889384</id>
	<title>Useful?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264432620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"customers are pragmatic about quality, and the open source and free software movements haven't produced anything remotely as useful as Mac OS X and the iPhone."<br>Funny thing is Mac OS X is based on Open BSD. I guess OS X isn't useful then.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" customers are pragmatic about quality , and the open source and free software movements have n't produced anything remotely as useful as Mac OS X and the iPhone .
" Funny thing is Mac OS X is based on Open BSD .
I guess OS X is n't useful then .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"customers are pragmatic about quality, and the open source and free software movements haven't produced anything remotely as useful as Mac OS X and the iPhone.
"Funny thing is Mac OS X is based on Open BSD.
I guess OS X isn't useful then.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890382</id>
	<title>Re:FOSS</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264436400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Who cares if 99\% of a poison is vitamins?</p><p>All of the F/OSS in the world is meaningless if it's crippled.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Who cares if 99 \ % of a poison is vitamins ? All of the F/OSS in the world is meaningless if it 's crippled .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Who cares if 99\% of a poison is vitamins?All of the F/OSS in the world is meaningless if it's crippled.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889412</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30892426</id>
	<title>Bullocks, all three</title>
	<author>SlashDread</author>
	<datestamp>1264443180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The simple reason is that art centric programmes have always been the focus of Macs. Adobe Illustrator as flagship and many many more have originated there, and the Mac hardware has traditionally supported that better. Sure you can buy great Win/adobe stations ATM, but for a long time Mac was King of DTP and A/V.<br>Most of its advantages have shrunken, but they havent gone completely away, and why would art people change?<br>Well they do, but slowly.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The simple reason is that art centric programmes have always been the focus of Macs .
Adobe Illustrator as flagship and many many more have originated there , and the Mac hardware has traditionally supported that better .
Sure you can buy great Win/adobe stations ATM , but for a long time Mac was King of DTP and A/V.Most of its advantages have shrunken , but they havent gone completely away , and why would art people change ? Well they do , but slowly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The simple reason is that art centric programmes have always been the focus of Macs.
Adobe Illustrator as flagship and many many more have originated there, and the Mac hardware has traditionally supported that better.
Sure you can buy great Win/adobe stations ATM, but for a long time Mac was King of DTP and A/V.Most of its advantages have shrunken, but they havent gone completely away, and why would art people change?Well they do, but slowly.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889790</id>
	<title>It's not designed by committee</title>
	<author>NtroP</author>
	<datestamp>1264434120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm as much a fan of open-source as the next guy and I've contributed to some projects and asked for features, etc. However, I find that the whole "designed by committee" that *many* open source apps have reduces the overall quality. Those OSS apps that truly shine generally have either a strong leader or a single author. You know the old saying, which is true, as well as witty; that a camel is a horse that was designed by a committee.</p><p>As far as openness goes, Apple doesn't announce vaporware like most other companies do. This means when they announce something, they are going to sell it. Usually their products have taken old ideas and looked at them from a different angle opting for being very good at a few things rather than poor and many things. Let's face it, Cmdr Tacos' famous assessment of the original iPod is a classic example of how "the masses" would design a similar product. If Apple would release an "alpha" product to "test the waters" like so many other companies do, the iPod (and iPhone, for that matter) would have died at birth or would be so hideously deformed that it would be unrecognizable.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm as much a fan of open-source as the next guy and I 've contributed to some projects and asked for features , etc .
However , I find that the whole " designed by committee " that * many * open source apps have reduces the overall quality .
Those OSS apps that truly shine generally have either a strong leader or a single author .
You know the old saying , which is true , as well as witty ; that a camel is a horse that was designed by a committee.As far as openness goes , Apple does n't announce vaporware like most other companies do .
This means when they announce something , they are going to sell it .
Usually their products have taken old ideas and looked at them from a different angle opting for being very good at a few things rather than poor and many things .
Let 's face it , Cmdr Tacos ' famous assessment of the original iPod is a classic example of how " the masses " would design a similar product .
If Apple would release an " alpha " product to " test the waters " like so many other companies do , the iPod ( and iPhone , for that matter ) would have died at birth or would be so hideously deformed that it would be unrecognizable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm as much a fan of open-source as the next guy and I've contributed to some projects and asked for features, etc.
However, I find that the whole "designed by committee" that *many* open source apps have reduces the overall quality.
Those OSS apps that truly shine generally have either a strong leader or a single author.
You know the old saying, which is true, as well as witty; that a camel is a horse that was designed by a committee.As far as openness goes, Apple doesn't announce vaporware like most other companies do.
This means when they announce something, they are going to sell it.
Usually their products have taken old ideas and looked at them from a different angle opting for being very good at a few things rather than poor and many things.
Let's face it, Cmdr Tacos' famous assessment of the original iPod is a classic example of how "the masses" would design a similar product.
If Apple would release an "alpha" product to "test the waters" like so many other companies do, the iPod (and iPhone, for that matter) would have died at birth or would be so hideously deformed that it would be unrecognizable.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30900226</id>
	<title>It's all about balance and perception</title>
	<author>ALeader71</author>
	<datestamp>1264440660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Openess is a fine thing, but let's not forget the tyrany of the mob.  No Open Source project is a free-for-all.  Apple was never billed as a open source company.  Never.  Darwin had as much to do with OSX as a stripped down car does with it's fully outfitted luxury brother.</p><p>Apple's modus operandi is providing tools and a platform that allows createive and not-so-creative types to perform tasks that 90\% of users want to accomplish.  Apple made the P.C. into a toaster.  A very nice toaster.  If you want total control of the OS, I recommend the <a href="http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/" title="linuxfromscratch.org" rel="nofollow">Linux-From-Scratch project.</a> [linuxfromscratch.org] </p><p>
Ubuntu would probably not satisfy the true *nix/mage anyway.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Openess is a fine thing , but let 's not forget the tyrany of the mob .
No Open Source project is a free-for-all .
Apple was never billed as a open source company .
Never. Darwin had as much to do with OSX as a stripped down car does with it 's fully outfitted luxury brother.Apple 's modus operandi is providing tools and a platform that allows createive and not-so-creative types to perform tasks that 90 \ % of users want to accomplish .
Apple made the P.C .
into a toaster .
A very nice toaster .
If you want total control of the OS , I recommend the Linux-From-Scratch project .
[ linuxfromscratch.org ] Ubuntu would probably not satisfy the true * nix/mage anyway .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Openess is a fine thing, but let's not forget the tyrany of the mob.
No Open Source project is a free-for-all.
Apple was never billed as a open source company.
Never.  Darwin had as much to do with OSX as a stripped down car does with it's fully outfitted luxury brother.Apple's modus operandi is providing tools and a platform that allows createive and not-so-creative types to perform tasks that 90\% of users want to accomplish.
Apple made the P.C.
into a toaster.
A very nice toaster.
If you want total control of the OS, I recommend the Linux-From-Scratch project.
[linuxfromscratch.org] 
Ubuntu would probably not satisfy the true *nix/mage anyway.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30895584</id>
	<title>Re:I'm off-duty</title>
	<author>sexconker</author>
	<datestamp>1264413360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Has anyone checked the iphone source code for back-doors?</p></div><p>Has anyone checked your "cousin"'s backdoor?<br>I bet yes!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Has anyone checked the iphone source code for back-doors ? Has anyone checked your " cousin " 's backdoor ? I bet yes !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Has anyone checked the iphone source code for back-doors?Has anyone checked your "cousin"'s backdoor?I bet yes!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889528</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30894010</id>
	<title>Uber Troll post:</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264450140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Only fags and jews use apple.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Only fags and jews use apple .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Only fags and jews use apple.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889376</id>
	<title>Anything! Remotely!</title>
	<author>GnuPooh</author>
	<datestamp>1264432620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why do this Apple fan boys always have to oversell their point.  Exaggeration is the best way to destroy your credibility.  I could have been fine with "free software movements haven't produced products as compelling as...".  That would have been a fine strong statement and something most people could accept, but no.  This person had to add "anything" and "remotely".  So lame.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why do this Apple fan boys always have to oversell their point .
Exaggeration is the best way to destroy your credibility .
I could have been fine with " free software movements have n't produced products as compelling as... " .
That would have been a fine strong statement and something most people could accept , but no .
This person had to add " anything " and " remotely " .
So lame .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why do this Apple fan boys always have to oversell their point.
Exaggeration is the best way to destroy your credibility.
I could have been fine with "free software movements haven't produced products as compelling as...".
That would have been a fine strong statement and something most people could accept, but no.
This person had to add "anything" and "remotely".
So lame.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890820</id>
	<title>Re:Not sure in USA but in Spain...</title>
	<author>Low Ranked Craig</author>
	<datestamp>1264437900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In any group there are always a certain percentage of people that are insecure and need the approval of others.  I'm going to go out on a limb here and assume that you've never used a Mac in any substantial manner.  I'm a long time Windows user.  After living with Vista for 16 months and not wanting to pay the premium to "downgrade" to XP for a new machine, I said fuck it and bought a Mac, and I discovered I really like it.  I used to enjoy building a system, configuring the OS and tinkering with it, but not any more.  I just want a system that I can use to get work done, and that doesn't get in my way.  I don't give two shits what anyone thinks about the computer I use, and I don't care* what you use either.  If it works for you, that's great.</p><p>In my personal experience the guy with the top end XPS laptop can be as much of an insecure douch bag as a guy with a 17" MBP, but in general most people that I encounter (PC or Mac) are not defined by their computer or their phone.  Are you sure you're not seeing what you want to see as opposed to what is?</p><p>* Unless you expect me to support you, then get what I tell you or call the Geek Squad.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In any group there are always a certain percentage of people that are insecure and need the approval of others .
I 'm going to go out on a limb here and assume that you 've never used a Mac in any substantial manner .
I 'm a long time Windows user .
After living with Vista for 16 months and not wanting to pay the premium to " downgrade " to XP for a new machine , I said fuck it and bought a Mac , and I discovered I really like it .
I used to enjoy building a system , configuring the OS and tinkering with it , but not any more .
I just want a system that I can use to get work done , and that does n't get in my way .
I do n't give two shits what anyone thinks about the computer I use , and I do n't care * what you use either .
If it works for you , that 's great.In my personal experience the guy with the top end XPS laptop can be as much of an insecure douch bag as a guy with a 17 " MBP , but in general most people that I encounter ( PC or Mac ) are not defined by their computer or their phone .
Are you sure you 're not seeing what you want to see as opposed to what is ?
* Unless you expect me to support you , then get what I tell you or call the Geek Squad .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In any group there are always a certain percentage of people that are insecure and need the approval of others.
I'm going to go out on a limb here and assume that you've never used a Mac in any substantial manner.
I'm a long time Windows user.
After living with Vista for 16 months and not wanting to pay the premium to "downgrade" to XP for a new machine, I said fuck it and bought a Mac, and I discovered I really like it.
I used to enjoy building a system, configuring the OS and tinkering with it, but not any more.
I just want a system that I can use to get work done, and that doesn't get in my way.
I don't give two shits what anyone thinks about the computer I use, and I don't care* what you use either.
If it works for you, that's great.In my personal experience the guy with the top end XPS laptop can be as much of an insecure douch bag as a guy with a 17" MBP, but in general most people that I encounter (PC or Mac) are not defined by their computer or their phone.
Are you sure you're not seeing what you want to see as opposed to what is?
* Unless you expect me to support you, then get what I tell you or call the Geek Squad.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889256</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30913666</id>
	<title>Re:I'm off-duty</title>
	<author>ScrewMaster</author>
	<datestamp>1264527900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>it does suit her needs nicely.</p></div><p>No, it suits her prejudices nicely. And that's enough for most people.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>it does suit her needs nicely.No , it suits her prejudices nicely .
And that 's enough for most people .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>it does suit her needs nicely.No, it suits her prejudices nicely.
And that's enough for most people.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890056</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30892938</id>
	<title>Where my money goes -</title>
	<author>Darth Snowshoe</author>
	<datestamp>1264445220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I bought a mac initially because I didn't want to support MS any longer, and buying more iterations of their OS and products is supporting them, by definition.    They're a force for stagnation - stagnation just allows them to continue printing money basically, they have no incentive to take risks or rethink an OS and a set of office applications that has long ago made most of them rich.  They have no real motivation to make anything better. Noone over there even cares that I'm not having any luck finding printer drivers or unlocking software from some "virtual locker" I bought from them six months back.


Apple has really gone out of their way to make things work in their OS, to make things work better, to experiment with new form factors for devices, with new UIs etc.  Take a look at the blase, apathetic way Steve Ballmer presented his me-too tablet device at CES, and compare that with what Steve Jobs will be doing wednesday afternoon.  One of them really believes, and is excited that,  technology can be transformative and can make society better, the other can barely enunciate what he is up there doing.


So why does this qualify me a being some kind of shallow hipster, exactly?</htmltext>
<tokenext>I bought a mac initially because I did n't want to support MS any longer , and buying more iterations of their OS and products is supporting them , by definition .
They 're a force for stagnation - stagnation just allows them to continue printing money basically , they have no incentive to take risks or rethink an OS and a set of office applications that has long ago made most of them rich .
They have no real motivation to make anything better .
Noone over there even cares that I 'm not having any luck finding printer drivers or unlocking software from some " virtual locker " I bought from them six months back .
Apple has really gone out of their way to make things work in their OS , to make things work better , to experiment with new form factors for devices , with new UIs etc .
Take a look at the blase , apathetic way Steve Ballmer presented his me-too tablet device at CES , and compare that with what Steve Jobs will be doing wednesday afternoon .
One of them really believes , and is excited that , technology can be transformative and can make society better , the other can barely enunciate what he is up there doing .
So why does this qualify me a being some kind of shallow hipster , exactly ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I bought a mac initially because I didn't want to support MS any longer, and buying more iterations of their OS and products is supporting them, by definition.
They're a force for stagnation - stagnation just allows them to continue printing money basically, they have no incentive to take risks or rethink an OS and a set of office applications that has long ago made most of them rich.
They have no real motivation to make anything better.
Noone over there even cares that I'm not having any luck finding printer drivers or unlocking software from some "virtual locker" I bought from them six months back.
Apple has really gone out of their way to make things work in their OS, to make things work better, to experiment with new form factors for devices, with new UIs etc.
Take a look at the blase, apathetic way Steve Ballmer presented his me-too tablet device at CES, and compare that with what Steve Jobs will be doing wednesday afternoon.
One of them really believes, and is excited that,  technology can be transformative and can make society better, the other can barely enunciate what he is up there doing.
So why does this qualify me a being some kind of shallow hipster, exactly?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891078</id>
	<title>Most mac users i know don't 'do' computers</title>
	<author>ThirdPrize</author>
	<datestamp>1264438860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They are the sort who want something simple that they can switch on, browse the net, without any trouble.  May use windows at work but thats a bit tooo complicated.  Someone told em Macs were good so they got one.  Plesantly suprised you can surf the web and listen to music at the same time.</p><p>I maintain that Macs do the minimum amount of work that a computer should do very well.  Anything more than that and you are stuck (or downloading random bits of shareware).  The finder (10.4) just looked like it was designed on feedback from non tech users.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They are the sort who want something simple that they can switch on , browse the net , without any trouble .
May use windows at work but thats a bit tooo complicated .
Someone told em Macs were good so they got one .
Plesantly suprised you can surf the web and listen to music at the same time.I maintain that Macs do the minimum amount of work that a computer should do very well .
Anything more than that and you are stuck ( or downloading random bits of shareware ) .
The finder ( 10.4 ) just looked like it was designed on feedback from non tech users .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They are the sort who want something simple that they can switch on, browse the net, without any trouble.
May use windows at work but thats a bit tooo complicated.
Someone told em Macs were good so they got one.
Plesantly suprised you can surf the web and listen to music at the same time.I maintain that Macs do the minimum amount of work that a computer should do very well.
Anything more than that and you are stuck (or downloading random bits of shareware).
The finder (10.4) just looked like it was designed on feedback from non tech users.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30894370</id>
	<title>Re:status of shiny white thingys</title>
	<author>nine-times</author>
	<datestamp>1264451640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I switched to the Mac about 2 years ago, after 10 years of dismissing it as a pain in the ass.</p></div><p>Well it was a pain in the ass 12 years ago.  I know that lots of long-time Apple loyalists will claim that OS9 was terrific, but it was really buggy and finicky.  The security was terrible, you had to manually fiddle with your virtual memory depending on which application you were using, and you had to delete your application preferences all the time because they were constantly getting corrupted.
</p><p>When OSX first came out, it showed a lot of potential, but wasn't very usable.  It wasn't until 10.2 (late 2002) that OSX started to show some maturity.  It wasn't until they switched over to Intel processors (2006) that people really started to become happy with performance.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I switched to the Mac about 2 years ago , after 10 years of dismissing it as a pain in the ass.Well it was a pain in the ass 12 years ago .
I know that lots of long-time Apple loyalists will claim that OS9 was terrific , but it was really buggy and finicky .
The security was terrible , you had to manually fiddle with your virtual memory depending on which application you were using , and you had to delete your application preferences all the time because they were constantly getting corrupted .
When OSX first came out , it showed a lot of potential , but was n't very usable .
It was n't until 10.2 ( late 2002 ) that OSX started to show some maturity .
It was n't until they switched over to Intel processors ( 2006 ) that people really started to become happy with performance .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I switched to the Mac about 2 years ago, after 10 years of dismissing it as a pain in the ass.Well it was a pain in the ass 12 years ago.
I know that lots of long-time Apple loyalists will claim that OS9 was terrific, but it was really buggy and finicky.
The security was terrible, you had to manually fiddle with your virtual memory depending on which application you were using, and you had to delete your application preferences all the time because they were constantly getting corrupted.
When OSX first came out, it showed a lot of potential, but wasn't very usable.
It wasn't until 10.2 (late 2002) that OSX started to show some maturity.
It wasn't until they switched over to Intel processors (2006) that people really started to become happy with performance.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889700</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30894810</id>
	<title>Option 4</title>
	<author>jackspenn</author>
	<datestamp>1264410240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>4).  They advertise a lot.</htmltext>
<tokenext>4 ) .
They advertise a lot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>4).
They advertise a lot.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889668</id>
	<title>It's all explained pretty well by Adam Curtis</title>
	<author>Datamonstar</author>
	<datestamp>1264433760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>in <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3dA89CBBOC0" title="youtube.com"> Century of The Self. </a> [youtube.com] This is an amazing documentary that makes me question the motives of everyone trying to sell me something. I only started watching it two days ago and Apple was one of the first companies on my mind and now here's a news article practically about the same thing.</htmltext>
<tokenext>in Century of The Self .
[ youtube.com ] This is an amazing documentary that makes me question the motives of everyone trying to sell me something .
I only started watching it two days ago and Apple was one of the first companies on my mind and now here 's a news article practically about the same thing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>in  Century of The Self.
[youtube.com] This is an amazing documentary that makes me question the motives of everyone trying to sell me something.
I only started watching it two days ago and Apple was one of the first companies on my mind and now here's a news article practically about the same thing.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30895074</id>
	<title>Re:I'm off-duty</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264411200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's not really a stereotype, while I don't have hard data, ask anyone in an ART SCHOOL and they will almost always tell you the men are disproportionally gay.  An art class in a school that's not focused on art is different.  And it's not like "gay people tend to be more into the arts" is exactly a demeaning stereotype anyway...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's not really a stereotype , while I do n't have hard data , ask anyone in an ART SCHOOL and they will almost always tell you the men are disproportionally gay .
An art class in a school that 's not focused on art is different .
And it 's not like " gay people tend to be more into the arts " is exactly a demeaning stereotype anyway.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's not really a stereotype, while I don't have hard data, ask anyone in an ART SCHOOL and they will almost always tell you the men are disproportionally gay.
An art class in a school that's not focused on art is different.
And it's not like "gay people tend to be more into the arts" is exactly a demeaning stereotype anyway...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889680</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889292</id>
	<title>Why surprised.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264432260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>FOSS is built on top of a closed ecosystem: I'm not aware of many Intel or AMD cpus being FOSS.</htmltext>
<tokenext>FOSS is built on top of a closed ecosystem : I 'm not aware of many Intel or AMD cpus being FOSS .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>FOSS is built on top of a closed ecosystem: I'm not aware of many Intel or AMD cpus being FOSS.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30901078</id>
	<title>I'll Take Door Number One, Monte...</title>
	<author>MacDaffy</author>
	<datestamp>1264536540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Apple used to leak like a sieve. We employees used to read MacWeek to find out what the agenda for new projects were. There's a reason you can date PC laptops within six months of the release of Apple ones and I think we can guess why that is.</p><p>The engine of Apple's economic success is innovation. Unfortunately, there are companies sitting on pins-and-needles waiting for that next idea so it can be copied and capitalized upon. Secrecy maximizes Apple's advantage when their products come to market. That's not an opinion; it's an observable phenomenon--Stock Price Pre-Jobs vs. Stock-Price Post-Jobs.</p><p>And part of that success is keeping their mouth's shut until it's time.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Apple used to leak like a sieve .
We employees used to read MacWeek to find out what the agenda for new projects were .
There 's a reason you can date PC laptops within six months of the release of Apple ones and I think we can guess why that is.The engine of Apple 's economic success is innovation .
Unfortunately , there are companies sitting on pins-and-needles waiting for that next idea so it can be copied and capitalized upon .
Secrecy maximizes Apple 's advantage when their products come to market .
That 's not an opinion ; it 's an observable phenomenon--Stock Price Pre-Jobs vs. Stock-Price Post-Jobs.And part of that success is keeping their mouth 's shut until it 's time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Apple used to leak like a sieve.
We employees used to read MacWeek to find out what the agenda for new projects were.
There's a reason you can date PC laptops within six months of the release of Apple ones and I think we can guess why that is.The engine of Apple's economic success is innovation.
Unfortunately, there are companies sitting on pins-and-needles waiting for that next idea so it can be copied and capitalized upon.
Secrecy maximizes Apple's advantage when their products come to market.
That's not an opinion; it's an observable phenomenon--Stock Price Pre-Jobs vs. Stock-Price Post-Jobs.And part of that success is keeping their mouth's shut until it's time.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889424</id>
	<title>Apple the computer for the rest of us...</title>
	<author>daveb1</author>
	<datestamp>1264432740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Whatever happened to "Apple the computer for the rest of us..."</htmltext>
<tokenext>Whatever happened to " Apple the computer for the rest of us... "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Whatever happened to "Apple the computer for the rest of us..."</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890910</id>
	<title>Re:Lesson: Apple marketing i working!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264438200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>"we're all different".</i></p><p>I'm not!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" we 're all different " .I 'm not !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"we're all different".I'm not!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889362</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889408</id>
	<title>Option 4</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264432680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>4)  Slashdot readers and contributors are on the geeky, bleeding edge and do not represent 90\% of the population, most of whom could not care less about 'openness'.</p><p>Eric</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>4 ) Slashdot readers and contributors are on the geeky , bleeding edge and do not represent 90 \ % of the population , most of whom could not care less about 'openness'.Eric</tokentext>
<sentencetext>4)  Slashdot readers and contributors are on the geeky, bleeding edge and do not represent 90\% of the population, most of whom could not care less about 'openness'.Eric</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30894998</id>
	<title>Re:I'm off-duty</title>
	<author>jackspenn</author>
	<datestamp>1264410840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If you want to take a dip in the gay pool</p></div><p>
ummmm, I'll pass, but thanks for asking.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you want to take a dip in the gay pool ummmm , I 'll pass , but thanks for asking .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you want to take a dip in the gay pool
ummmm, I'll pass, but thanks for asking.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889756</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30892158</id>
	<title>Re:I'm off-duty</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1264442280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Maybe it was just my school; I majored in art. Someone above said "perhaps there are simply more openly gay people in the arts", and that may indeed be the case.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe it was just my school ; I majored in art .
Someone above said " perhaps there are simply more openly gay people in the arts " , and that may indeed be the case .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe it was just my school; I majored in art.
Someone above said "perhaps there are simply more openly gay people in the arts", and that may indeed be the case.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889680</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30896796</id>
	<title>Re:Not sure in USA but in Spain...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264417800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>On the same note, I wish there were more of the "I prefer it to any other" type people like you, and less of the "it IS better than any other" crowd. The world would be a much more tolerable place for the rest of us<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>On the same note , I wish there were more of the " I prefer it to any other " type people like you , and less of the " it IS better than any other " crowd .
The world would be a much more tolerable place for the rest of us ; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>On the same note, I wish there were more of the "I prefer it to any other" type people like you, and less of the "it IS better than any other" crowd.
The world would be a much more tolerable place for the rest of us ;)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890432</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889914</id>
	<title>Re:Nice Troll</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264434540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Non-technical types don't enjoy looking beyond what they can touch and feel, i.e. desktop computing, smart phones, and marketing. The fact that the internet *runs* on open source would be a total surprise to them. The fact that linux dominates the embedded market would be a total surprise to them. Even if they were educated about the critical role of open source, they'd probably go home thinking "then why haven't I seen it on TV?"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Non-technical types do n't enjoy looking beyond what they can touch and feel , i.e .
desktop computing , smart phones , and marketing .
The fact that the internet * runs * on open source would be a total surprise to them .
The fact that linux dominates the embedded market would be a total surprise to them .
Even if they were educated about the critical role of open source , they 'd probably go home thinking " then why have n't I seen it on TV ?
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Non-technical types don't enjoy looking beyond what they can touch and feel, i.e.
desktop computing, smart phones, and marketing.
The fact that the internet *runs* on open source would be a total surprise to them.
The fact that linux dominates the embedded market would be a total surprise to them.
Even if they were educated about the critical role of open source, they'd probably go home thinking "then why haven't I seen it on TV?
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889326</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890412</id>
	<title>I don't need to know the process...</title>
	<author>Cogneato</author>
	<datestamp>1264436520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>to enjoy the results.</p><p>As a designer, I can appreciate the results of other creative people without needing to know exactly how they got there. As I think about the other things in my life: art, music, furniture, car, food... in all of those cases I take the time to seek out people that have worked hard to develop their own creative processes to make something that I consider wonderful. In the vast majority of those case, I have never asked "how was this created," but instead simply accept that it was and that it adds to my life in a positive way. This very much mirrors how I would hope people would see what I create... so I think it make perfect sense for creative-types to enjoy the work of other creative-types without even considering the process.</p><p>Of course, that is not to say those that revel in the process shouldn't enjoy the things that they do... just don't mistake your way of experiencing the world with that of someone else.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>to enjoy the results.As a designer , I can appreciate the results of other creative people without needing to know exactly how they got there .
As I think about the other things in my life : art , music , furniture , car , food... in all of those cases I take the time to seek out people that have worked hard to develop their own creative processes to make something that I consider wonderful .
In the vast majority of those case , I have never asked " how was this created , " but instead simply accept that it was and that it adds to my life in a positive way .
This very much mirrors how I would hope people would see what I create... so I think it make perfect sense for creative-types to enjoy the work of other creative-types without even considering the process.Of course , that is not to say those that revel in the process should n't enjoy the things that they do... just do n't mistake your way of experiencing the world with that of someone else .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>to enjoy the results.As a designer, I can appreciate the results of other creative people without needing to know exactly how they got there.
As I think about the other things in my life: art, music, furniture, car, food... in all of those cases I take the time to seek out people that have worked hard to develop their own creative processes to make something that I consider wonderful.
In the vast majority of those case, I have never asked "how was this created," but instead simply accept that it was and that it adds to my life in a positive way.
This very much mirrors how I would hope people would see what I create... so I think it make perfect sense for creative-types to enjoy the work of other creative-types without even considering the process.Of course, that is not to say those that revel in the process shouldn't enjoy the things that they do... just don't mistake your way of experiencing the world with that of someone else.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30895976</id>
	<title>Re:Not sure in USA but in Spain...</title>
	<author>debus</author>
	<datestamp>1264414980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>And combined with the above, that's better than 90\% of the other manufacturers who shove actual commodity parts into cheap plastic cases and stuff Windows Home Edition on the hard drive....</p></div><p>If they would only just install windows home edition and leave it at that...  They have to install all of that trialware/nagware for "free" and then not give you the windows media to put a clean install on your machine.  I just love that about Windows PC's.

I have a couple thinkpads and hate all the junk lenovo puts on them.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>And combined with the above , that 's better than 90 \ % of the other manufacturers who shove actual commodity parts into cheap plastic cases and stuff Windows Home Edition on the hard drive....If they would only just install windows home edition and leave it at that... They have to install all of that trialware/nagware for " free " and then not give you the windows media to put a clean install on your machine .
I just love that about Windows PC 's .
I have a couple thinkpads and hate all the junk lenovo puts on them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And combined with the above, that's better than 90\% of the other manufacturers who shove actual commodity parts into cheap plastic cases and stuff Windows Home Edition on the hard drive....If they would only just install windows home edition and leave it at that...  They have to install all of that trialware/nagware for "free" and then not give you the windows media to put a clean install on your machine.
I just love that about Windows PC's.
I have a couple thinkpads and hate all the junk lenovo puts on them.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30895146</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30892010</id>
	<title>Re:Not sure in USA but in Spain...</title>
	<author>Mashdar</author>
	<datestamp>1264441740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>My girlfriend has a Mac because it is easy to use. She figured it out. (Except now she needs WinXP for law exam software)
Her parents have a Mac because it is "easy to use". They still cannot use it.<br> <br>

My coworker has a Mac because it is shiny and cool, and he is clueless about computers, and he has money to blow.<br> <br>

I'm not saying everyone who owns a Mac is like my coworker, but I would venture to guess that anyone excited about a non-tactile-keyboard-bearing (read: awful mistake), as-yet-unannounced "tablet" falls not to far from him. It is more about being "hip" than about being able to do anything (ie actually typing over 30 words/s).<br> <br>

There are certainly people who buy a nice car because it handles well, but most of them are just trying to display their status.</htmltext>
<tokenext>My girlfriend has a Mac because it is easy to use .
She figured it out .
( Except now she needs WinXP for law exam software ) Her parents have a Mac because it is " easy to use " .
They still can not use it .
My coworker has a Mac because it is shiny and cool , and he is clueless about computers , and he has money to blow .
I 'm not saying everyone who owns a Mac is like my coworker , but I would venture to guess that anyone excited about a non-tactile-keyboard-bearing ( read : awful mistake ) , as-yet-unannounced " tablet " falls not to far from him .
It is more about being " hip " than about being able to do anything ( ie actually typing over 30 words/s ) .
There are certainly people who buy a nice car because it handles well , but most of them are just trying to display their status .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My girlfriend has a Mac because it is easy to use.
She figured it out.
(Except now she needs WinXP for law exam software)
Her parents have a Mac because it is "easy to use".
They still cannot use it.
My coworker has a Mac because it is shiny and cool, and he is clueless about computers, and he has money to blow.
I'm not saying everyone who owns a Mac is like my coworker, but I would venture to guess that anyone excited about a non-tactile-keyboard-bearing (read: awful mistake), as-yet-unannounced "tablet" falls not to far from him.
It is more about being "hip" than about being able to do anything (ie actually typing over 30 words/s).
There are certainly people who buy a nice car because it handles well, but most of them are just trying to display their status.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890432</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889972</id>
	<title>Apple stuff just works</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264434780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm a long-time Linux user and even occasional contributor, and most of the development work I do for <a href="http://www.hercules-390.org/" title="hercules-390.org">Hercules</a> [hercules-390.org] is on Linux. My primary desktop and laptop run OS X, though, for one simple reason: they're tools, not toys. I need them to just work when I sit down in front of them to get things done. I find I spend far too much time getting a Linux desktop to that point.</p><p>I tell people I'm a Mac user because I'm a Unix geek. OS X, unlike Linux, is a system you can give to your computer-illiterate inlaws and have it be solid and reliable, and not have to spend hours on the phone playing tech support. Being Unix-based, it's far more secure and stable than Windows, too.</p><p>So what if it's closed source? It just works, and that matters to me far more.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm a long-time Linux user and even occasional contributor , and most of the development work I do for Hercules [ hercules-390.org ] is on Linux .
My primary desktop and laptop run OS X , though , for one simple reason : they 're tools , not toys .
I need them to just work when I sit down in front of them to get things done .
I find I spend far too much time getting a Linux desktop to that point.I tell people I 'm a Mac user because I 'm a Unix geek .
OS X , unlike Linux , is a system you can give to your computer-illiterate inlaws and have it be solid and reliable , and not have to spend hours on the phone playing tech support .
Being Unix-based , it 's far more secure and stable than Windows , too.So what if it 's closed source ?
It just works , and that matters to me far more .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm a long-time Linux user and even occasional contributor, and most of the development work I do for Hercules [hercules-390.org] is on Linux.
My primary desktop and laptop run OS X, though, for one simple reason: they're tools, not toys.
I need them to just work when I sit down in front of them to get things done.
I find I spend far too much time getting a Linux desktop to that point.I tell people I'm a Mac user because I'm a Unix geek.
OS X, unlike Linux, is a system you can give to your computer-illiterate inlaws and have it be solid and reliable, and not have to spend hours on the phone playing tech support.
Being Unix-based, it's far more secure and stable than Windows, too.So what if it's closed source?
It just works, and that matters to me far more.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889508</id>
	<title>Confusing two groups as one</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264433040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The "free thinking" group, artists, musicians, and the like are using the best tools available for their endeavor.  It's not about free-thinking.  That's like saying an artist is closed minded because his paint brush was made by south-east asian slaves.  The "fan boy cult" group, geeks and the like, are not necessary the same set of people.  No contradiction here people, move along.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The " free thinking " group , artists , musicians , and the like are using the best tools available for their endeavor .
It 's not about free-thinking .
That 's like saying an artist is closed minded because his paint brush was made by south-east asian slaves .
The " fan boy cult " group , geeks and the like , are not necessary the same set of people .
No contradiction here people , move along .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The "free thinking" group, artists, musicians, and the like are using the best tools available for their endeavor.
It's not about free-thinking.
That's like saying an artist is closed minded because his paint brush was made by south-east asian slaves.
The "fan boy cult" group, geeks and the like, are not necessary the same set of people.
No contradiction here people, move along.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30895960</id>
	<title>Re:Subjectivity presented as fact</title>
	<author>deathbird</author>
	<datestamp>1264414860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>God yes. Obnoxious as the culture and branding around Macs may be, the reason I avoid using them is because OSX in unintuitive. Now, I found Windows 3.1 intuitive, and I had an awkward time transitioning to the Windows 95-style interface, but I made it. But short of web browsing, nothing I've ever done on a Mac has been easy. Quite frankly, it's always been borderline incomprehensible. On Windows I'm a go-to guy. In Linux with KDE or GNOME or IceWM I'm proficient. MintLinux with GNOME, Compiz and six desktops is a cinch.
Maybe OSX is only meant for those right-brainers.</htmltext>
<tokenext>God yes .
Obnoxious as the culture and branding around Macs may be , the reason I avoid using them is because OSX in unintuitive .
Now , I found Windows 3.1 intuitive , and I had an awkward time transitioning to the Windows 95-style interface , but I made it .
But short of web browsing , nothing I 've ever done on a Mac has been easy .
Quite frankly , it 's always been borderline incomprehensible .
On Windows I 'm a go-to guy .
In Linux with KDE or GNOME or IceWM I 'm proficient .
MintLinux with GNOME , Compiz and six desktops is a cinch .
Maybe OSX is only meant for those right-brainers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>God yes.
Obnoxious as the culture and branding around Macs may be, the reason I avoid using them is because OSX in unintuitive.
Now, I found Windows 3.1 intuitive, and I had an awkward time transitioning to the Windows 95-style interface, but I made it.
But short of web browsing, nothing I've ever done on a Mac has been easy.
Quite frankly, it's always been borderline incomprehensible.
On Windows I'm a go-to guy.
In Linux with KDE or GNOME or IceWM I'm proficient.
MintLinux with GNOME, Compiz and six desktops is a cinch.
Maybe OSX is only meant for those right-brainers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889454</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889930</id>
	<title>Iron</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264434600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt;&gt; "open source and free software movements haven't produced anything remotely as useful as Mac OS X and the iPhone"</p><p>If you cant use KDE, and its softwares for problems of "usability", you can put your brain in a JAR.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; &gt; " open source and free software movements have n't produced anything remotely as useful as Mac OS X and the iPhone " If you cant use KDE , and its softwares for problems of " usability " , you can put your brain in a JAR .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt;&gt; "open source and free software movements haven't produced anything remotely as useful as Mac OS X and the iPhone"If you cant use KDE, and its softwares for problems of "usability", you can put your brain in a JAR.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889608</id>
	<title>Re:Not sure in USA but in Spain...</title>
	<author>Drethon</author>
	<datestamp>1264433460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>I want to buy a mac because I'm a geek and have never used MacOS.  Then again I've never used it because I'd rather pay off my house...</htmltext>
<tokenext>I want to buy a mac because I 'm a geek and have never used MacOS .
Then again I 've never used it because I 'd rather pay off my house.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I want to buy a mac because I'm a geek and have never used MacOS.
Then again I've never used it because I'd rather pay off my house...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889256</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30900856</id>
	<title>Re:Subjectivity presented as fact</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264447200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Adium vs. Pidgin<br>Quicksilver vs. i dunno, launchy, perhaps gnome-do<br>Growl vs. Snarl/linux implementations (though these have been improving)</p><p>I'm sure you can find counter examples, but this is probably what the author was thinking</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Adium vs. PidginQuicksilver vs. i dunno , launchy , perhaps gnome-doGrowl vs. Snarl/linux implementations ( though these have been improving ) I 'm sure you can find counter examples , but this is probably what the author was thinking</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Adium vs. PidginQuicksilver vs. i dunno, launchy, perhaps gnome-doGrowl vs. Snarl/linux implementations (though these have been improving)I'm sure you can find counter examples, but this is probably what the author was thinking</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889454</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889596</id>
	<title>Are Apple products that useful?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264433400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I mean the Iphone is entertaining, but is it really that useful?  And what's with all the articles that talk about tablets becoming the next big boom.  Is there something other than industry hopes that is so?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I mean the Iphone is entertaining , but is it really that useful ?
And what 's with all the articles that talk about tablets becoming the next big boom .
Is there something other than industry hopes that is so ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I mean the Iphone is entertaining, but is it really that useful?
And what's with all the articles that talk about tablets becoming the next big boom.
Is there something other than industry hopes that is so?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30899570</id>
	<title>Re:It's not rocket science, really.</title>
	<author>indiechild</author>
	<datestamp>1264434540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You had me until you said that Apple computers cost 2-3x. Where did you get those figures from?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You had me until you said that Apple computers cost 2-3x .
Where did you get those figures from ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You had me until you said that Apple computers cost 2-3x.
Where did you get those figures from?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30893560</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30922668</id>
	<title>Not rocket science, just wanton snobbery...</title>
	<author>Uberbah</author>
	<datestamp>1264624920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...from you, Dr. Phil.</p><p><i>Apple users embrace the "free-thinking" mantra because that's the image Apple's served up.</i>'</p><p>Or because Apple made an effort to get into media editing back in the 80's and 90's?  Or because they put a lot of work into photo, video and music editing apps that they bundle with their computer?  Or because Apple embraces open source networking standards with a UNIX operating system?</p><p>Nah, it must just be the marketing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...from you , Dr. Phil.Apple users embrace the " free-thinking " mantra because that 's the image Apple 's served up .
'Or because Apple made an effort to get into media editing back in the 80 's and 90 's ?
Or because they put a lot of work into photo , video and music editing apps that they bundle with their computer ?
Or because Apple embraces open source networking standards with a UNIX operating system ? Nah , it must just be the marketing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...from you, Dr. Phil.Apple users embrace the "free-thinking" mantra because that's the image Apple's served up.
'Or because Apple made an effort to get into media editing back in the 80's and 90's?
Or because they put a lot of work into photo, video and music editing apps that they bundle with their computer?
Or because Apple embraces open source networking standards with a UNIX operating system?Nah, it must just be the marketing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30893560</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890112</id>
	<title>Re:Not sure in USA but in Spain...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264435320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm Spanish and a Mac user since 2003 and I never thought that having a expensive computer (whatever the brand) makes you better at nothing. And I don't know a single mac user who thinks in that way.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm Spanish and a Mac user since 2003 and I never thought that having a expensive computer ( whatever the brand ) makes you better at nothing .
And I do n't know a single mac user who thinks in that way .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm Spanish and a Mac user since 2003 and I never thought that having a expensive computer (whatever the brand) makes you better at nothing.
And I don't know a single mac user who thinks in that way.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889256</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30893900</id>
	<title>Re:I'm off-duty</title>
	<author>Kitkoan</author>
	<datestamp>1264449540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Has anyone checked the iphone source code for back-doors?</p></div><p>You mean this one?
<a href="http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2327808,00.asp" title="pcmag.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2327808,00.asp</a> [pcmag.com]</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Has anyone checked the iphone source code for back-doors ? You mean this one ?
http : //www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2327808,00.asp [ pcmag.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Has anyone checked the iphone source code for back-doors?You mean this one?
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2327808,00.asp [pcmag.com]
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889528</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889832</id>
	<title>Re:Not sure in USA but in Spain...</title>
	<author>jason.sweet</author>
	<datestamp>1264434300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Mac users are bought</p></div><p>Where do I get one?  Is there a code word I have to use at the Apple store?  When I get it home, will it, like, you know, do "stuff" to me?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Mac users are boughtWhere do I get one ?
Is there a code word I have to use at the Apple store ?
When I get it home , will it , like , you know , do " stuff " to me ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Mac users are boughtWhere do I get one?
Is there a code word I have to use at the Apple store?
When I get it home, will it, like, you know, do "stuff" to me?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889256</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889432</id>
	<title>OS/FS has produced N900</title>
	<author>madsen</author>
	<datestamp>1264432800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you love your iPhoney there is nothing that I can say that will change you're mind, it's the stockholm syndrome. I was close to getting one myself, but then Nokia released the N900 which, without having open hardware, is as a very open phone. After this I won't get a new phone unless I can open a terminal, do some apt-get'ting and ssh into it!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you love your iPhoney there is nothing that I can say that will change you 're mind , it 's the stockholm syndrome .
I was close to getting one myself , but then Nokia released the N900 which , without having open hardware , is as a very open phone .
After this I wo n't get a new phone unless I can open a terminal , do some apt-get'ting and ssh into it !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you love your iPhoney there is nothing that I can say that will change you're mind, it's the stockholm syndrome.
I was close to getting one myself, but then Nokia released the N900 which, without having open hardware, is as a very open phone.
After this I won't get a new phone unless I can open a terminal, do some apt-get'ting and ssh into it!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30896452</id>
	<title>Re:Subjectivity presented as fact</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264416540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think it's safe to say that you just don't grok the Mac.</p><p>The examples you choose are poster-child apps for what makes the make great and intuitive, and they all work the same way:</p><p>By assuming that the user isn't stupid, and quite capable of applying basic real-world interaction techniques learned as a toddler ("if I want something over there, I grab it and put it there, and it will most likely stay put") to the computing experience.</p><p>The onus is on the developer to make the application understandable to the non-technically-inclined user of average intelligence - i.e. the guy capable of applying above principle, and playing around on that basis.</p><p>iPhoto and iTunes work nearly identically, and iPhoto follow most of the same conventions - a media pool with drag-and-drop-created projects/albums/playlists which are just differently filtered collections of material from the media pool.</p><p>GarageBand is BY FAR the most straightforward music creation tool on the market. There is NO other *production* app (not "toy") that allows for as short a path between the musical idea and putting it down as is the norm for GarageBand.</p><p>Also, Apple includes a tremendously helpful (and completely unexpected for Windows users) "Help" menu in all their apps, that tends to come with genuinely useful introductory videos.</p><p>It's rather ironic that the only app you actually get, iDVD, is the only one that DOES assume that its users are stupid, and actually gives them the feeling of being limited by a "wizard", the same way the befuddled masses are belittled on Windows on a daily basis.</p><p>Not that the other apps aren't limited (necessarily so - Final Cut Pro has a rather different learning curve from the thirty seconds it takes to figure out iMovie); it's just that they're so good at letting you feel like you're actually doing the work, which is equivalent to actually letting you do the work.</p><p>Windows wizards are the answer to a convoluted, confused, developer- and bullet-point-centric mess that makes the average human feel completely helpless. Apple's solution is to clean up the fucking mess and give people things that they will actually WANT to do.</p><p>I doubt that they'll fix iDVD, btw - optical media are already dead as we speak. iMovie has that YouTube upload menu item...<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think it 's safe to say that you just do n't grok the Mac.The examples you choose are poster-child apps for what makes the make great and intuitive , and they all work the same way : By assuming that the user is n't stupid , and quite capable of applying basic real-world interaction techniques learned as a toddler ( " if I want something over there , I grab it and put it there , and it will most likely stay put " ) to the computing experience.The onus is on the developer to make the application understandable to the non-technically-inclined user of average intelligence - i.e .
the guy capable of applying above principle , and playing around on that basis.iPhoto and iTunes work nearly identically , and iPhoto follow most of the same conventions - a media pool with drag-and-drop-created projects/albums/playlists which are just differently filtered collections of material from the media pool.GarageBand is BY FAR the most straightforward music creation tool on the market .
There is NO other * production * app ( not " toy " ) that allows for as short a path between the musical idea and putting it down as is the norm for GarageBand.Also , Apple includes a tremendously helpful ( and completely unexpected for Windows users ) " Help " menu in all their apps , that tends to come with genuinely useful introductory videos.It 's rather ironic that the only app you actually get , iDVD , is the only one that DOES assume that its users are stupid , and actually gives them the feeling of being limited by a " wizard " , the same way the befuddled masses are belittled on Windows on a daily basis.Not that the other apps are n't limited ( necessarily so - Final Cut Pro has a rather different learning curve from the thirty seconds it takes to figure out iMovie ) ; it 's just that they 're so good at letting you feel like you 're actually doing the work , which is equivalent to actually letting you do the work.Windows wizards are the answer to a convoluted , confused , developer- and bullet-point-centric mess that makes the average human feel completely helpless .
Apple 's solution is to clean up the fucking mess and give people things that they will actually WANT to do.I doubt that they 'll fix iDVD , btw - optical media are already dead as we speak .
iMovie has that YouTube upload menu item... : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think it's safe to say that you just don't grok the Mac.The examples you choose are poster-child apps for what makes the make great and intuitive, and they all work the same way:By assuming that the user isn't stupid, and quite capable of applying basic real-world interaction techniques learned as a toddler ("if I want something over there, I grab it and put it there, and it will most likely stay put") to the computing experience.The onus is on the developer to make the application understandable to the non-technically-inclined user of average intelligence - i.e.
the guy capable of applying above principle, and playing around on that basis.iPhoto and iTunes work nearly identically, and iPhoto follow most of the same conventions - a media pool with drag-and-drop-created projects/albums/playlists which are just differently filtered collections of material from the media pool.GarageBand is BY FAR the most straightforward music creation tool on the market.
There is NO other *production* app (not "toy") that allows for as short a path between the musical idea and putting it down as is the norm for GarageBand.Also, Apple includes a tremendously helpful (and completely unexpected for Windows users) "Help" menu in all their apps, that tends to come with genuinely useful introductory videos.It's rather ironic that the only app you actually get, iDVD, is the only one that DOES assume that its users are stupid, and actually gives them the feeling of being limited by a "wizard", the same way the befuddled masses are belittled on Windows on a daily basis.Not that the other apps aren't limited (necessarily so - Final Cut Pro has a rather different learning curve from the thirty seconds it takes to figure out iMovie); it's just that they're so good at letting you feel like you're actually doing the work, which is equivalent to actually letting you do the work.Windows wizards are the answer to a convoluted, confused, developer- and bullet-point-centric mess that makes the average human feel completely helpless.
Apple's solution is to clean up the fucking mess and give people things that they will actually WANT to do.I doubt that they'll fix iDVD, btw - optical media are already dead as we speak.
iMovie has that YouTube upload menu item... :)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889454</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890572</id>
	<title>datapoint</title>
	<author>Outland Traveller</author>
	<datestamp>1264437060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have an Apple laptop (more like, portable workstation) and I bought it after numerous computer-generations of all kinds of PC laptops, some quite expensive and focused on gaming/performance. I've had it for a year now and I can say that it is the *only* laptop I've ever owned where I've been completely satisfied with the build and service quality. Having a top-flight desktop with an uncompromising unix shell is quite nice too. For gaming I dual boot.</p><p>BTW, for a more mainstream data point, the Apple laptops swept Consumer Reports "most recommended buy" in multiple categories recently.</p><p>Despite being from a "closed" company, it gives me a platform that lets me natively run Linux, Windows, and MacOSX. It offers more choices. Development tools are much easier to come by as well.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have an Apple laptop ( more like , portable workstation ) and I bought it after numerous computer-generations of all kinds of PC laptops , some quite expensive and focused on gaming/performance .
I 've had it for a year now and I can say that it is the * only * laptop I 've ever owned where I 've been completely satisfied with the build and service quality .
Having a top-flight desktop with an uncompromising unix shell is quite nice too .
For gaming I dual boot.BTW , for a more mainstream data point , the Apple laptops swept Consumer Reports " most recommended buy " in multiple categories recently.Despite being from a " closed " company , it gives me a platform that lets me natively run Linux , Windows , and MacOSX .
It offers more choices .
Development tools are much easier to come by as well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have an Apple laptop (more like, portable workstation) and I bought it after numerous computer-generations of all kinds of PC laptops, some quite expensive and focused on gaming/performance.
I've had it for a year now and I can say that it is the *only* laptop I've ever owned where I've been completely satisfied with the build and service quality.
Having a top-flight desktop with an uncompromising unix shell is quite nice too.
For gaming I dual boot.BTW, for a more mainstream data point, the Apple laptops swept Consumer Reports "most recommended buy" in multiple categories recently.Despite being from a "closed" company, it gives me a platform that lets me natively run Linux, Windows, and MacOSX.
It offers more choices.
Development tools are much easier to come by as well.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889256</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890056</id>
	<title>Re:I'm off-duty</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264435140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>That depends on the "you" doing the buying.  My daughter is in college, and although she doesn't like to admit it, she wanted her MacBook because of its coolness factor, not just what it can do.  That, and she hates Windows.  With that being said, it does suit her needs nicely.</htmltext>
<tokenext>That depends on the " you " doing the buying .
My daughter is in college , and although she does n't like to admit it , she wanted her MacBook because of its coolness factor , not just what it can do .
That , and she hates Windows .
With that being said , it does suit her needs nicely .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That depends on the "you" doing the buying.
My daughter is in college, and although she doesn't like to admit it, she wanted her MacBook because of its coolness factor, not just what it can do.
That, and she hates Windows.
With that being said, it does suit her needs nicely.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889380</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30894646</id>
	<title>Re:Subjectivity presented as fact</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264452900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"  - iPhoto is a confusing mess compared to Picasa"</p><p>Say whut? And I even pay for picasaweb.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" - iPhoto is a confusing mess compared to Picasa " Say whut ?
And I even pay for picasaweb .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"  - iPhoto is a confusing mess compared to Picasa"Say whut?
And I even pay for picasaweb.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889454</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30894126</id>
	<title>Re:I guess Apple did all that themselves...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264450680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Several points off your credibility for repeatedly calling OS X "OS/X."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Several points off your credibility for repeatedly calling OS X " OS/X .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Several points off your credibility for repeatedly calling OS X "OS/X.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889768</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889466</id>
	<title>Missing the point</title>
	<author>lyinhart</author>
	<datestamp>1264432920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The real reason that Apple is so closed-off is because they want to stay unique, or at least appear to be unique. Jobs probably fears that Apple will become just another "beige box" maker just like the company was becoming when he first returned to it. It's a decent strategy. It protects them against copy cats so by the time the competition brings out similar products, Apple's already gained a stranglehold on the market. It also gets a good buzz going about what the "next big thing" from Apple is. Contrast that with Microsoft, who prefer to be ubiquitous.<br> <br>

Of course, Apple's strategy has its caveats. Just ask its suppliers, who have to keep their lips sealed or lose their accounts...</htmltext>
<tokenext>The real reason that Apple is so closed-off is because they want to stay unique , or at least appear to be unique .
Jobs probably fears that Apple will become just another " beige box " maker just like the company was becoming when he first returned to it .
It 's a decent strategy .
It protects them against copy cats so by the time the competition brings out similar products , Apple 's already gained a stranglehold on the market .
It also gets a good buzz going about what the " next big thing " from Apple is .
Contrast that with Microsoft , who prefer to be ubiquitous .
Of course , Apple 's strategy has its caveats .
Just ask its suppliers , who have to keep their lips sealed or lose their accounts.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The real reason that Apple is so closed-off is because they want to stay unique, or at least appear to be unique.
Jobs probably fears that Apple will become just another "beige box" maker just like the company was becoming when he first returned to it.
It's a decent strategy.
It protects them against copy cats so by the time the competition brings out similar products, Apple's already gained a stranglehold on the market.
It also gets a good buzz going about what the "next big thing" from Apple is.
Contrast that with Microsoft, who prefer to be ubiquitous.
Of course, Apple's strategy has its caveats.
Just ask its suppliers, who have to keep their lips sealed or lose their accounts...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30896074</id>
	<title>Re:It's number 3</title>
	<author>Skuld-Chan</author>
	<datestamp>1264415280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But thats the thing - Apple breaks dependencies on patches all the time - just ask anyone in the printing industry (or a developer). When I worked for Adobe almost every single major patch they broke something major or minor in the printing engine, and they never tested our stuff (despite being their biggest 3rd party developer) before hand. Conversly - Microsoft did actually (test our stuff). In fact they were rather insane about it - they would send in bugs on Vista about versions we hadn't worked on or supported in 8 years (not kidding either - told one guy it was ok if Acrobat 4 [98-99] didn't run as expected on Vista-32)</p><p>Apple stuff doesn't just work - if you are using these machines for production you do need to test patches just like any other platform!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But thats the thing - Apple breaks dependencies on patches all the time - just ask anyone in the printing industry ( or a developer ) .
When I worked for Adobe almost every single major patch they broke something major or minor in the printing engine , and they never tested our stuff ( despite being their biggest 3rd party developer ) before hand .
Conversly - Microsoft did actually ( test our stuff ) .
In fact they were rather insane about it - they would send in bugs on Vista about versions we had n't worked on or supported in 8 years ( not kidding either - told one guy it was ok if Acrobat 4 [ 98-99 ] did n't run as expected on Vista-32 ) Apple stuff does n't just work - if you are using these machines for production you do need to test patches just like any other platform !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But thats the thing - Apple breaks dependencies on patches all the time - just ask anyone in the printing industry (or a developer).
When I worked for Adobe almost every single major patch they broke something major or minor in the printing engine, and they never tested our stuff (despite being their biggest 3rd party developer) before hand.
Conversly - Microsoft did actually (test our stuff).
In fact they were rather insane about it - they would send in bugs on Vista about versions we hadn't worked on or supported in 8 years (not kidding either - told one guy it was ok if Acrobat 4 [98-99] didn't run as expected on Vista-32)Apple stuff doesn't just work - if you are using these machines for production you do need to test patches just like any other platform!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889382</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30892854</id>
	<title>Re:Err, what?</title>
	<author>dzfoo</author>
	<datestamp>1264444800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No, the Mac OS X based on NeXTStep's technology, which is in itself based on the CMU Mach micro-kernel with a sprinkle of Berkley UNIX (BSD).  It does contain parts of FreeBSD and NetBSD in its userland sub-systems, but to say that it is <i>based</i> on it is an exaggeration.<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mac\_OS\_X#History" title="wikipedia.org">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mac\_OS\_X#History</a> [wikipedia.org]</p><p>But more to the point, the genius of Mac OS X is not in its discreet parts, but in the final product, which admittedly is a combination of various technologies, some of them FOSS.  The high quality of these combinations, and the attention to detail in the interaction of each part and the user experience is what the article alludes to when it says that FOSS has failed to produce something of comparable quality.</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; -dZ.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No , the Mac OS X based on NeXTStep 's technology , which is in itself based on the CMU Mach micro-kernel with a sprinkle of Berkley UNIX ( BSD ) .
It does contain parts of FreeBSD and NetBSD in its userland sub-systems , but to say that it is based on it is an exaggeration .
        http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mac \ _OS \ _X # History [ wikipedia.org ] But more to the point , the genius of Mac OS X is not in its discreet parts , but in the final product , which admittedly is a combination of various technologies , some of them FOSS .
The high quality of these combinations , and the attention to detail in the interaction of each part and the user experience is what the article alludes to when it says that FOSS has failed to produce something of comparable quality .
        -dZ .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, the Mac OS X based on NeXTStep's technology, which is in itself based on the CMU Mach micro-kernel with a sprinkle of Berkley UNIX (BSD).
It does contain parts of FreeBSD and NetBSD in its userland sub-systems, but to say that it is based on it is an exaggeration.
        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mac\_OS\_X#History [wikipedia.org]But more to the point, the genius of Mac OS X is not in its discreet parts, but in the final product, which admittedly is a combination of various technologies, some of them FOSS.
The high quality of these combinations, and the attention to detail in the interaction of each part and the user experience is what the article alludes to when it says that FOSS has failed to produce something of comparable quality.
        -dZ.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889396</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891088</id>
	<title>Re:Not sure in USA but in Spain...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264438860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Mac users are bought by those that want to distinguish themselves from the rest in terms of money or social class, more in the lines of "I can afford an Mac and you are a poor blue collar bastard"</p></div><p>Sorry, I don't get that. Who do you say is buying Mac users?</p><p>Anyways, I'm a Mac user at home. At work I'm a Windows user, and a<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET developer. I don't particularly disllike Windows; for application developing purposes I would choose Visual Studio over XCode and day of the week.</p><p>When it comes to web development (not<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET) and general usability, however, I love my Mac. I love it because - mostly - it just works.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Mac users are bought by those that want to distinguish themselves from the rest in terms of money or social class , more in the lines of " I can afford an Mac and you are a poor blue collar bastard " Sorry , I do n't get that .
Who do you say is buying Mac users ? Anyways , I 'm a Mac user at home .
At work I 'm a Windows user , and a .NET developer .
I do n't particularly disllike Windows ; for application developing purposes I would choose Visual Studio over XCode and day of the week.When it comes to web development ( not .NET ) and general usability , however , I love my Mac .
I love it because - mostly - it just works .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Mac users are bought by those that want to distinguish themselves from the rest in terms of money or social class, more in the lines of "I can afford an Mac and you are a poor blue collar bastard"Sorry, I don't get that.
Who do you say is buying Mac users?Anyways, I'm a Mac user at home.
At work I'm a Windows user, and a .NET developer.
I don't particularly disllike Windows; for application developing purposes I would choose Visual Studio over XCode and day of the week.When it comes to web development (not .NET) and general usability, however, I love my Mac.
I love it because - mostly - it just works.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889256</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889824</id>
	<title>What the..!?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264434240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Get this shit off my slashdot. Apple idiots only believe they're free thinkers. Really they're just uneducated about computers or douchebags.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Get this shit off my slashdot .
Apple idiots only believe they 're free thinkers .
Really they 're just uneducated about computers or douchebags .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Get this shit off my slashdot.
Apple idiots only believe they're free thinkers.
Really they're just uneducated about computers or douchebags.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889228</id>
	<title>I'm off-duty</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264431840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This time one of you other guys is going to have to make the "Apple=Gay" jokes.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This time one of you other guys is going to have to make the " Apple = Gay " jokes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This time one of you other guys is going to have to make the "Apple=Gay" jokes.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30896162</id>
	<title>How many comments?</title>
	<author>joh</author>
	<datestamp>1264415580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Now, really. People don't care about Apple, but they try to get that out really loud and would like to discuss it. Hmm.</p><p>The thing about Apple is that they do something that is almost unheard of in recent computer time: They think. Whatever you like or hate about Apple and Steve Jobs, but they always had a way of re-thinking things everyone takes for granted that is just appealing to people. Call it "vision", call it "a mission", but they just put the PC industry to shame. Because all this industry does is nothing than "do whatever all others do and try to do it cheaper". There is no fun in that.</p><p>It's not so much that there's something special about Apple but there's something very much unspecial about the IT industry. Computers have become boring. Really. It's 2010 and we STILL USE PCs! Even the most recent netbook and "Tablet-PC" is still a faster, smaller, cheaper IBM PC. Still a "general purpose computing device". People are sick of that. They want a tiny, shiny piece of the future and not just a 20th century office machine with a painted lid.</p><p>And I can't blame them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Now , really .
People do n't care about Apple , but they try to get that out really loud and would like to discuss it .
Hmm.The thing about Apple is that they do something that is almost unheard of in recent computer time : They think .
Whatever you like or hate about Apple and Steve Jobs , but they always had a way of re-thinking things everyone takes for granted that is just appealing to people .
Call it " vision " , call it " a mission " , but they just put the PC industry to shame .
Because all this industry does is nothing than " do whatever all others do and try to do it cheaper " .
There is no fun in that.It 's not so much that there 's something special about Apple but there 's something very much unspecial about the IT industry .
Computers have become boring .
Really. It 's 2010 and we STILL USE PCs !
Even the most recent netbook and " Tablet-PC " is still a faster , smaller , cheaper IBM PC .
Still a " general purpose computing device " .
People are sick of that .
They want a tiny , shiny piece of the future and not just a 20th century office machine with a painted lid.And I ca n't blame them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now, really.
People don't care about Apple, but they try to get that out really loud and would like to discuss it.
Hmm.The thing about Apple is that they do something that is almost unheard of in recent computer time: They think.
Whatever you like or hate about Apple and Steve Jobs, but they always had a way of re-thinking things everyone takes for granted that is just appealing to people.
Call it "vision", call it "a mission", but they just put the PC industry to shame.
Because all this industry does is nothing than "do whatever all others do and try to do it cheaper".
There is no fun in that.It's not so much that there's something special about Apple but there's something very much unspecial about the IT industry.
Computers have become boring.
Really. It's 2010 and we STILL USE PCs!
Even the most recent netbook and "Tablet-PC" is still a faster, smaller, cheaper IBM PC.
Still a "general purpose computing device".
People are sick of that.
They want a tiny, shiny piece of the future and not just a 20th century office machine with a painted lid.And I can't blame them.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30895644</id>
	<title>Re:Not sure in USA but in Spain...</title>
	<author>Risen888</author>
	<datestamp>1264413540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You know the GP referred to "some Mac users?" He was talking about you, douchebag.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You know the GP referred to " some Mac users ?
" He was talking about you , douchebag .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You know the GP referred to "some Mac users?
" He was talking about you, douchebag.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891688</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30894284</id>
	<title>Re:Option 4</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264451280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think that's true. Look at the terrific rate of adoption of "openness." Oops, not true.</p><p>The movement is very influential, though, and properly so.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think that 's true .
Look at the terrific rate of adoption of " openness .
" Oops , not true.The movement is very influential , though , and properly so .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think that's true.
Look at the terrific rate of adoption of "openness.
" Oops, not true.The movement is very influential, though, and properly so.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889408</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30895678</id>
	<title>OR 4)</title>
	<author>Latinhypercube</author>
	<datestamp>1264413720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>or 4) APPLE IS NOT OPEN, THE WHOLE OPENNESS THING BEING ADVERTISING BULLSHIT AND A COMPLETE LIE.
They are in practice far worse the MS or Sony, with proprietary formats and built in obsolescence. Pricing their good to rip off families around the US.</htmltext>
<tokenext>or 4 ) APPLE IS NOT OPEN , THE WHOLE OPENNESS THING BEING ADVERTISING BULLSHIT AND A COMPLETE LIE .
They are in practice far worse the MS or Sony , with proprietary formats and built in obsolescence .
Pricing their good to rip off families around the US .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>or 4) APPLE IS NOT OPEN, THE WHOLE OPENNESS THING BEING ADVERTISING BULLSHIT AND A COMPLETE LIE.
They are in practice far worse the MS or Sony, with proprietary formats and built in obsolescence.
Pricing their good to rip off families around the US.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889880</id>
	<title>Re:Option 4</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264434480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My brother was worried the other day about a potential catastrophic failure of his notebook(not even 6 month old yet), and I asked him to compare the issues his colleagues had with their gear, desktops laptops and other, the strange thing was that most of them were apple products. I'm really indifferent about them since I never used a mac or iphone, since they never seemed interesting, feature wise, so I ask you if you had any similar experiences</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My brother was worried the other day about a potential catastrophic failure of his notebook ( not even 6 month old yet ) , and I asked him to compare the issues his colleagues had with their gear , desktops laptops and other , the strange thing was that most of them were apple products .
I 'm really indifferent about them since I never used a mac or iphone , since they never seemed interesting , feature wise , so I ask you if you had any similar experiences</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My brother was worried the other day about a potential catastrophic failure of his notebook(not even 6 month old yet), and I asked him to compare the issues his colleagues had with their gear, desktops laptops and other, the strange thing was that most of them were apple products.
I'm really indifferent about them since I never used a mac or iphone, since they never seemed interesting, feature wise, so I ask you if you had any similar experiences</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889408</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889778</id>
	<title>Re:I guess Apple did all that themselves...</title>
	<author>benjic</author>
	<datestamp>1264434060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Exactly! As if they were standing on the shoulders of giants!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Exactly !
As if they were standing on the shoulders of giants !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Exactly!
As if they were standing on the shoulders of giants!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889282</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889378</id>
	<title>How...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264432620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>...can a company whose philosophy of information sharing is so at odds with that of most of its customers be so successful?<br> <br>Because Apple's products function primarily as a status symbol for people who have schemed enough money to be openly computer illiterate.</htmltext>
<tokenext>...can a company whose philosophy of information sharing is so at odds with that of most of its customers be so successful ?
Because Apple 's products function primarily as a status symbol for people who have schemed enough money to be openly computer illiterate .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...can a company whose philosophy of information sharing is so at odds with that of most of its customers be so successful?
Because Apple's products function primarily as a status symbol for people who have schemed enough money to be openly computer illiterate.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30899178</id>
	<title>It's all about perspective...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264430760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>OSS projects = lots of developers who each concentrate on small pieces of the system but often a lack a coherent direction of the overall system.  Result: a pile of crap made of golden bricks.  Examples: most Linux distributions with lots of very high quality components (GNU tools, gcc, vim, emacs, the kernel) but a lack of direction in the user experience (compare gnome/kde to os x or even windows).</p><p>Many closed source projects = strong direction from the top to go in a certain direction, but a lack of focus on the components.  Result: a decent system with some crappy components.  Examples: Windows generally has good/coherent overall usability, but lacks quality in some components (IE, office, any command line tool you try).</p><p>OS X = the best of both worlds.  Based on high-quality OSS components (BSD, GNU, Mach), but has the coherent direction of closed source resulting in a user experience nobody else can touch.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>OSS projects = lots of developers who each concentrate on small pieces of the system but often a lack a coherent direction of the overall system .
Result : a pile of crap made of golden bricks .
Examples : most Linux distributions with lots of very high quality components ( GNU tools , gcc , vim , emacs , the kernel ) but a lack of direction in the user experience ( compare gnome/kde to os x or even windows ) .Many closed source projects = strong direction from the top to go in a certain direction , but a lack of focus on the components .
Result : a decent system with some crappy components .
Examples : Windows generally has good/coherent overall usability , but lacks quality in some components ( IE , office , any command line tool you try ) .OS X = the best of both worlds .
Based on high-quality OSS components ( BSD , GNU , Mach ) , but has the coherent direction of closed source resulting in a user experience nobody else can touch .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>OSS projects = lots of developers who each concentrate on small pieces of the system but often a lack a coherent direction of the overall system.
Result: a pile of crap made of golden bricks.
Examples: most Linux distributions with lots of very high quality components (GNU tools, gcc, vim, emacs, the kernel) but a lack of direction in the user experience (compare gnome/kde to os x or even windows).Many closed source projects = strong direction from the top to go in a certain direction, but a lack of focus on the components.
Result: a decent system with some crappy components.
Examples: Windows generally has good/coherent overall usability, but lacks quality in some components (IE, office, any command line tool you try).OS X = the best of both worlds.
Based on high-quality OSS components (BSD, GNU, Mach), but has the coherent direction of closed source resulting in a user experience nobody else can touch.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30896460</id>
	<title>Re:I guess Apple did all that themselves...</title>
	<author>bonch</author>
	<datestamp>1264416540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>He's obviously speaking from the consumer perspective, where OS X and the iPhone are more useful than random Ubuntu version-of-the-week.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>He 's obviously speaking from the consumer perspective , where OS X and the iPhone are more useful than random Ubuntu version-of-the-week .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>He's obviously speaking from the consumer perspective, where OS X and the iPhone are more useful than random Ubuntu version-of-the-week.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889282</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891012</id>
	<title>Re:Huh?</title>
	<author>Angst Badger</author>
	<datestamp>1264438560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Or it illustrates the fact that people who gravitate to the Mac are interested in a tool they can use and, say, Linux users are interested in a toy (and I mean that in a good way- I love me my toys) they can fiddle with. Windows users (those who choose it when they don't have to for some reason), well, who can understand them?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;-)</p></div><p>Tastes, needs, and levels of knowledge differ widely, that's all. The cost of switching platforms is also high, both in terms of time and money, compared to the benefits of switching.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Or it illustrates the fact that people who gravitate to the Mac are interested in a tool they can use and , say , Linux users are interested in a toy ( and I mean that in a good way- I love me my toys ) they can fiddle with .
Windows users ( those who choose it when they do n't have to for some reason ) , well , who can understand them ?
; - ) Tastes , needs , and levels of knowledge differ widely , that 's all .
The cost of switching platforms is also high , both in terms of time and money , compared to the benefits of switching .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or it illustrates the fact that people who gravitate to the Mac are interested in a tool they can use and, say, Linux users are interested in a toy (and I mean that in a good way- I love me my toys) they can fiddle with.
Windows users (those who choose it when they don't have to for some reason), well, who can understand them?
;-)Tastes, needs, and levels of knowledge differ widely, that's all.
The cost of switching platforms is also high, both in terms of time and money, compared to the benefits of switching.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889818</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891110</id>
	<title>Re:Err, what?</title>
	<author>Servaas</author>
	<datestamp>1264438980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>This would be the Mac OS X which is based on FreeBSD?</p></div><p>Thats why everyone is using FreeBSD!! Right?! Right?! No... no its mostly the graphic shell that sits around it + the various tweaks that make it OS X and in turn so compelling to a lot of people.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This would be the Mac OS X which is based on FreeBSD ? Thats why everyone is using FreeBSD ! !
Right ? ! Right ? !
No... no its mostly the graphic shell that sits around it + the various tweaks that make it OS X and in turn so compelling to a lot of people .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This would be the Mac OS X which is based on FreeBSD?Thats why everyone is using FreeBSD!!
Right?! Right?!
No... no its mostly the graphic shell that sits around it + the various tweaks that make it OS X and in turn so compelling to a lot of people.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889396</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30911618</id>
	<title>Mac OSX</title>
	<author>twoHats</author>
	<datestamp>1264509060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Mac OSX - Really?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...REALLY?  It is crap compared to Ubuntu...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Mac OSX - Really ?
...REALLY ? It is crap compared to Ubuntu.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Mac OSX - Really?
...REALLY?  It is crap compared to Ubuntu...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889426</id>
	<title>Technology that gets out of the way</title>
	<author>bigdweeb</author>
	<datestamp>1264432740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think creative types like Macs because they know it's technology that will more or less work.  They know they can go into a store, buy one system/OS from the same vendor that was designed specifically to work together so they don't have to waste calories figuring the thing out.  It gets out of the way so they can continue being creative.  They now have the added bonus of having branded stores that they can go into if they really have a problem.</p><p>The rest of the hangers on to that culture get to be associated with creative thinkers even if they're just listening to music and surfing the web</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think creative types like Macs because they know it 's technology that will more or less work .
They know they can go into a store , buy one system/OS from the same vendor that was designed specifically to work together so they do n't have to waste calories figuring the thing out .
It gets out of the way so they can continue being creative .
They now have the added bonus of having branded stores that they can go into if they really have a problem.The rest of the hangers on to that culture get to be associated with creative thinkers even if they 're just listening to music and surfing the web</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think creative types like Macs because they know it's technology that will more or less work.
They know they can go into a store, buy one system/OS from the same vendor that was designed specifically to work together so they don't have to waste calories figuring the thing out.
It gets out of the way so they can continue being creative.
They now have the added bonus of having branded stores that they can go into if they really have a problem.The rest of the hangers on to that culture get to be associated with creative thinkers even if they're just listening to music and surfing the web</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30895132</id>
	<title>Re:Not sure in USA but in Spain...</title>
	<author>Sandbags</author>
	<datestamp>1264411440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Agreed.  We now own our first Mac laptop (a 15" pro with the 9600M GT GPU)).  It has yet to be in public and we've had it since November.  Short of going with us on an extended trip, it likely will never be seen in public.  I've owned 12 Macs, and I've never previously had a need to use it anywhere but home.  A simple cheap notebook handles mail and web access, which is now replaced by my iPhone mostly, so I sold my notebook.</p><p>I've owned Macs for a LOT of reasons, and never once was it to show off...  Our first family Mac was bought an Original Lisa used from a friend to learn hor to use a computer, and then dad quickly replaced it with a 512ke when they came out because as an accountant, my Mom could work 3 clients instead of 1 in the same amount of hours thanks to Microsoft Multiplan, the first spreadsheet application, and it was Mac only.  Our school was also apple heavy and had a lot of Macs and very few DOS Boxes, so working with electronic files was easier having a Mac.</p><p>I bought my own first Mac (an LCII) in 1992 because it was not only a HELL of a lot more powerful than any windows machine at the time, i could ADD a 486 processor to it and run Windows and a mac on the same hardware (which I did).</p><p>For a while i kept buying Macs simply to avoid the expense of replacing all my software with PC software.  Then for a while it was to avoid hassles with Antivirus.  Finally in 2001 I broke down and bought some PC parts and built my own machine, basically, to play games and beta-test software.  As i got deeper into IT support, i had to have PCs (and eventually servers) around at home a lot, so I faded away from Mac use (and OS 9 was nothing special anymore, and OS X was still new slow and buggy).  From 2004 to 2009 I didn't own one (though the family did, and i continued to use their regularly, having to know how so I could help out Dad when he had an issue, Macs are not immune to user error, and they do have hardware issues same as any other PC)</p><p>Why do I own a Mac again now?  2 reasons:  First, i can't buy a more powerful PC notebook for less that can handle 3D games that doesn't weigh 9 lbs or more and have a 2 hour battery life.  The MacBook has a 6 hour (actually realistic) battery life, weighs 5 lbs, and cost $200 less than the Toshiba or Acer i was looking at that were not as powerful.  Resason 2 is iLife!  I can't BUY PC software like this for under $1000, and even then the PC software sucks...  it does "just work".   With Parallels and Win7 running in a VM in coherence, i can play video games in a VM with better frame rates than my PC can manage with an 8800GTX and twice the RAM...  i get the best of both worlds.</p><p>Now, if i needed a box to surf, web 2.0, and send mail, no, I'd not have bought a gaming, video editing notebook, I'd have gotten some cheap 13" Acer piece of crap.  I needed power, performance, and versatility, and Apple has the lowest price on that combination in every system class.  I've got my eye on a 27" iMac as soon as they do the next component refresh (May/June) as currently i could not BUILD a better machine for that price.  (I tried, and came out with a bill of parts $200 higher, and that was including getting the OS for free.)</p><p>I work in an office of 2200 IT people, supporting over 3,000 servers (of which more than 2,000 run Windows), 15,000 internal users, and god knows how many external registered companies that use our systems (thousands).  Everyone here has a PC on their desk (some of us have as many as 3, to access some secure networks).  Within our core It group, about 400 of us that actually touch systems and servers, about 1/3rd of us own a Mac.  There are 2 people in my department that do not own an iPhone, and more than half the company is using one to hit our exchange servers.  Not ONE of these people will tell you they bought a Mac because they're cool or popular, but near every one will grab a PC bigot and sit them down in front of one to show them how POWERFUL the machine is, how flexible it is, and why it's so much better of an OS than Windows or Linux.  Then they'll politely show them dell.com and an acer machine and show them the mac is the same price or cheaper...  2 years ago when i came here, 3 guys in IT brought a Mac to work, now about 50 do, and over a hundred have one at home.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Agreed .
We now own our first Mac laptop ( a 15 " pro with the 9600M GT GPU ) ) .
It has yet to be in public and we 've had it since November .
Short of going with us on an extended trip , it likely will never be seen in public .
I 've owned 12 Macs , and I 've never previously had a need to use it anywhere but home .
A simple cheap notebook handles mail and web access , which is now replaced by my iPhone mostly , so I sold my notebook.I 've owned Macs for a LOT of reasons , and never once was it to show off... Our first family Mac was bought an Original Lisa used from a friend to learn hor to use a computer , and then dad quickly replaced it with a 512ke when they came out because as an accountant , my Mom could work 3 clients instead of 1 in the same amount of hours thanks to Microsoft Multiplan , the first spreadsheet application , and it was Mac only .
Our school was also apple heavy and had a lot of Macs and very few DOS Boxes , so working with electronic files was easier having a Mac.I bought my own first Mac ( an LCII ) in 1992 because it was not only a HELL of a lot more powerful than any windows machine at the time , i could ADD a 486 processor to it and run Windows and a mac on the same hardware ( which I did ) .For a while i kept buying Macs simply to avoid the expense of replacing all my software with PC software .
Then for a while it was to avoid hassles with Antivirus .
Finally in 2001 I broke down and bought some PC parts and built my own machine , basically , to play games and beta-test software .
As i got deeper into IT support , i had to have PCs ( and eventually servers ) around at home a lot , so I faded away from Mac use ( and OS 9 was nothing special anymore , and OS X was still new slow and buggy ) .
From 2004 to 2009 I did n't own one ( though the family did , and i continued to use their regularly , having to know how so I could help out Dad when he had an issue , Macs are not immune to user error , and they do have hardware issues same as any other PC ) Why do I own a Mac again now ?
2 reasons : First , i ca n't buy a more powerful PC notebook for less that can handle 3D games that does n't weigh 9 lbs or more and have a 2 hour battery life .
The MacBook has a 6 hour ( actually realistic ) battery life , weighs 5 lbs , and cost $ 200 less than the Toshiba or Acer i was looking at that were not as powerful .
Resason 2 is iLife !
I ca n't BUY PC software like this for under $ 1000 , and even then the PC software sucks... it does " just work " .
With Parallels and Win7 running in a VM in coherence , i can play video games in a VM with better frame rates than my PC can manage with an 8800GTX and twice the RAM... i get the best of both worlds.Now , if i needed a box to surf , web 2.0 , and send mail , no , I 'd not have bought a gaming , video editing notebook , I 'd have gotten some cheap 13 " Acer piece of crap .
I needed power , performance , and versatility , and Apple has the lowest price on that combination in every system class .
I 've got my eye on a 27 " iMac as soon as they do the next component refresh ( May/June ) as currently i could not BUILD a better machine for that price .
( I tried , and came out with a bill of parts $ 200 higher , and that was including getting the OS for free .
) I work in an office of 2200 IT people , supporting over 3,000 servers ( of which more than 2,000 run Windows ) , 15,000 internal users , and god knows how many external registered companies that use our systems ( thousands ) .
Everyone here has a PC on their desk ( some of us have as many as 3 , to access some secure networks ) .
Within our core It group , about 400 of us that actually touch systems and servers , about 1/3rd of us own a Mac .
There are 2 people in my department that do not own an iPhone , and more than half the company is using one to hit our exchange servers .
Not ONE of these people will tell you they bought a Mac because they 're cool or popular , but near every one will grab a PC bigot and sit them down in front of one to show them how POWERFUL the machine is , how flexible it is , and why it 's so much better of an OS than Windows or Linux .
Then they 'll politely show them dell.com and an acer machine and show them the mac is the same price or cheaper... 2 years ago when i came here , 3 guys in IT brought a Mac to work , now about 50 do , and over a hundred have one at home .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Agreed.
We now own our first Mac laptop (a 15" pro with the 9600M GT GPU)).
It has yet to be in public and we've had it since November.
Short of going with us on an extended trip, it likely will never be seen in public.
I've owned 12 Macs, and I've never previously had a need to use it anywhere but home.
A simple cheap notebook handles mail and web access, which is now replaced by my iPhone mostly, so I sold my notebook.I've owned Macs for a LOT of reasons, and never once was it to show off...  Our first family Mac was bought an Original Lisa used from a friend to learn hor to use a computer, and then dad quickly replaced it with a 512ke when they came out because as an accountant, my Mom could work 3 clients instead of 1 in the same amount of hours thanks to Microsoft Multiplan, the first spreadsheet application, and it was Mac only.
Our school was also apple heavy and had a lot of Macs and very few DOS Boxes, so working with electronic files was easier having a Mac.I bought my own first Mac (an LCII) in 1992 because it was not only a HELL of a lot more powerful than any windows machine at the time, i could ADD a 486 processor to it and run Windows and a mac on the same hardware (which I did).For a while i kept buying Macs simply to avoid the expense of replacing all my software with PC software.
Then for a while it was to avoid hassles with Antivirus.
Finally in 2001 I broke down and bought some PC parts and built my own machine, basically, to play games and beta-test software.
As i got deeper into IT support, i had to have PCs (and eventually servers) around at home a lot, so I faded away from Mac use (and OS 9 was nothing special anymore, and OS X was still new slow and buggy).
From 2004 to 2009 I didn't own one (though the family did, and i continued to use their regularly, having to know how so I could help out Dad when he had an issue, Macs are not immune to user error, and they do have hardware issues same as any other PC)Why do I own a Mac again now?
2 reasons:  First, i can't buy a more powerful PC notebook for less that can handle 3D games that doesn't weigh 9 lbs or more and have a 2 hour battery life.
The MacBook has a 6 hour (actually realistic) battery life, weighs 5 lbs, and cost $200 less than the Toshiba or Acer i was looking at that were not as powerful.
Resason 2 is iLife!
I can't BUY PC software like this for under $1000, and even then the PC software sucks...  it does "just work".
With Parallels and Win7 running in a VM in coherence, i can play video games in a VM with better frame rates than my PC can manage with an 8800GTX and twice the RAM...  i get the best of both worlds.Now, if i needed a box to surf, web 2.0, and send mail, no, I'd not have bought a gaming, video editing notebook, I'd have gotten some cheap 13" Acer piece of crap.
I needed power, performance, and versatility, and Apple has the lowest price on that combination in every system class.
I've got my eye on a 27" iMac as soon as they do the next component refresh (May/June) as currently i could not BUILD a better machine for that price.
(I tried, and came out with a bill of parts $200 higher, and that was including getting the OS for free.
)I work in an office of 2200 IT people, supporting over 3,000 servers (of which more than 2,000 run Windows), 15,000 internal users, and god knows how many external registered companies that use our systems (thousands).
Everyone here has a PC on their desk (some of us have as many as 3, to access some secure networks).
Within our core It group, about 400 of us that actually touch systems and servers, about 1/3rd of us own a Mac.
There are 2 people in my department that do not own an iPhone, and more than half the company is using one to hit our exchange servers.
Not ONE of these people will tell you they bought a Mac because they're cool or popular, but near every one will grab a PC bigot and sit them down in front of one to show them how POWERFUL the machine is, how flexible it is, and why it's so much better of an OS than Windows or Linux.
Then they'll politely show them dell.com and an acer machine and show them the mac is the same price or cheaper...  2 years ago when i came here, 3 guys in IT brought a Mac to work, now about 50 do, and over a hundred have one at home.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890432</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30895002</id>
	<title>open source hasn't produced anything as useful?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264410840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Except of course for gcc, gdb, most all of the other system internals in OS X, bash, zip, tar, ssh, wireless utilities, the objective C tooling.... I could ramble on and on without end..</p><p>Without open source Mac OS X as it is simply wouldn't exist.<br>You do realize that it was originally mostly open source when it was NeXTStep (re: openStep) right?<br>And that underneath it all at the lowest levels, its mostly a 'second cousin' of BSD?</p><p>Have you been suntanning in job's reality distortion field again?</p><p>Just because YOU don't know what or where the open source stuff is, doesn't mean it isn't there and wasn't needed to create the things you use.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Except of course for gcc , gdb , most all of the other system internals in OS X , bash , zip , tar , ssh , wireless utilities , the objective C tooling.... I could ramble on and on without end..Without open source Mac OS X as it is simply would n't exist.You do realize that it was originally mostly open source when it was NeXTStep ( re : openStep ) right ? And that underneath it all at the lowest levels , its mostly a 'second cousin ' of BSD ? Have you been suntanning in job 's reality distortion field again ? Just because YOU do n't know what or where the open source stuff is , does n't mean it is n't there and was n't needed to create the things you use .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Except of course for gcc, gdb, most all of the other system internals in OS X, bash, zip, tar, ssh, wireless utilities, the objective C tooling.... I could ramble on and on without end..Without open source Mac OS X as it is simply wouldn't exist.You do realize that it was originally mostly open source when it was NeXTStep (re: openStep) right?And that underneath it all at the lowest levels, its mostly a 'second cousin' of BSD?Have you been suntanning in job's reality distortion field again?Just because YOU don't know what or where the open source stuff is, doesn't mean it isn't there and wasn't needed to create the things you use.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30892906</id>
	<title>"Closed and controlled" cars</title>
	<author>toriver</author>
	<datestamp>1264445040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Do any of you have a reasonably modern car? It's been a while since you were able to do much servicing to them yourself, everything is just computers and sealed systems these days.</p><p>But people tend to buy them anyway.</p><p>As for price and all that, the difference between a Mac and an equivalent PC is not much, especially given things like magsafe power connectors, the body build etc. of a MacBook. Complaining that Apple have no computers in the low end market is like complaining that BMW does not make any cars in the Fiat 500 segment.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do any of you have a reasonably modern car ?
It 's been a while since you were able to do much servicing to them yourself , everything is just computers and sealed systems these days.But people tend to buy them anyway.As for price and all that , the difference between a Mac and an equivalent PC is not much , especially given things like magsafe power connectors , the body build etc .
of a MacBook .
Complaining that Apple have no computers in the low end market is like complaining that BMW does not make any cars in the Fiat 500 segment .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do any of you have a reasonably modern car?
It's been a while since you were able to do much servicing to them yourself, everything is just computers and sealed systems these days.But people tend to buy them anyway.As for price and all that, the difference between a Mac and an equivalent PC is not much, especially given things like magsafe power connectors, the body build etc.
of a MacBook.
Complaining that Apple have no computers in the low end market is like complaining that BMW does not make any cars in the Fiat 500 segment.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890120</id>
	<title>But they work</title>
	<author>shis-ka-bob</author>
	<datestamp>1264435320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I have two daughters in college.  One bought a Dell laptop and the other bought an MacBook.  The MacBook as been flawless and the Dell is the biggest lemon I have ever seen.  The motherboard, hard drive and graphics card were replaced under warranty.  The replacement graphics card is starting to fail (leading to multiple reboots a day).  At least compared to Dell, Apple products are reliable and easy to use.

If you compare Apple laptops with similarly configured PCs, the Apples are cost competitive. So is works better and costs the same means 'status symbol', I'm all for it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have two daughters in college .
One bought a Dell laptop and the other bought an MacBook .
The MacBook as been flawless and the Dell is the biggest lemon I have ever seen .
The motherboard , hard drive and graphics card were replaced under warranty .
The replacement graphics card is starting to fail ( leading to multiple reboots a day ) .
At least compared to Dell , Apple products are reliable and easy to use .
If you compare Apple laptops with similarly configured PCs , the Apples are cost competitive .
So is works better and costs the same means 'status symbol ' , I 'm all for it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have two daughters in college.
One bought a Dell laptop and the other bought an MacBook.
The MacBook as been flawless and the Dell is the biggest lemon I have ever seen.
The motherboard, hard drive and graphics card were replaced under warranty.
The replacement graphics card is starting to fail (leading to multiple reboots a day).
At least compared to Dell, Apple products are reliable and easy to use.
If you compare Apple laptops with similarly configured PCs, the Apples are cost competitive.
So is works better and costs the same means 'status symbol', I'm all for it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889332</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30892242</id>
	<title>Re:It's number 3</title>
	<author>geoffrobinson</author>
	<datestamp>1264442580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'll second this. I want an Unix I don't have to fiddle with which also has a good GUI. That's why I bought a Mac.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'll second this .
I want an Unix I do n't have to fiddle with which also has a good GUI .
That 's why I bought a Mac .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'll second this.
I want an Unix I don't have to fiddle with which also has a good GUI.
That's why I bought a Mac.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889382</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889806</id>
	<title>what is the second S dude?</title>
	<author>shis-ka-bob</author>
	<datestamp>1264434180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Free and Open Source SOFTWARE.  Your going to need some serious  heat to make Intel or ADM CPUs become soft.  A synchrotron can puddle silicon pretty quickly, but who uses a CPU for a monochromator?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Free and Open Source SOFTWARE .
Your going to need some serious heat to make Intel or ADM CPUs become soft .
A synchrotron can puddle silicon pretty quickly , but who uses a CPU for a monochromator ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Free and Open Source SOFTWARE.
Your going to need some serious  heat to make Intel or ADM CPUs become soft.
A synchrotron can puddle silicon pretty quickly, but who uses a CPU for a monochromator?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889292</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30892292</id>
	<title>My thoughts as a Creative Professional</title>
	<author>Damn The Torpedoes</author>
	<datestamp>1264442760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've always been into computers, and was a die-hard Windows fan until the Intel macs were released. I made the switch, and haven't looked back; HOWEVER, I didn't make the switch "to be cool (as was discussed above)," nor did I make it because windows = bad, apple = good. IMHO, they're both computer industry giants whose main interest is (ding!) PROFITS.</p><p>That being said, I'm in the "Free-thinking" business; music is what I do, it's who I am. I choose Mac, NOT because of it's affiliation with the "young, hip, etc." crowd, but because when it comes down to it, Macs are simply more stable than Windows. The MAJORITY of creative software - audio, in my case, but artwork and video as well - is run on macs. Don't get me wrong, there are plenty of great software selections on PC; however, when I walk into a studio (and this also goes for film/photo editing) chances are 9/10 times the main computer will be a mac, typically running Pro Tools (which also runs on windows). The reasoning behind this lies in the fact that Pro Tools, and pretty much every major Digital Audio Workshop (DAW) runs incredibly stable on the Mac. Pro Tools doesn't even support Windows 7 yet! The thousands of high quality plug-ins out there for purchase? They all run incredibly stable on a mac, too. Why? Because Mac has become the "creative" industry standard, an attribute largely due to its stability in the first place.</p><p>As a music professional, I take great care to make sure my data stays uncorrupted. I back up EVERYTHING multiple times, JUST in case my computer crashes/gets wiped, etc. My computer IS my office. I wouldn't be able to do what I do without one (unless I have an analog studio - anyone want to invest $30,000?). I don't need the cost-effectiveness of a PC, I need the guaranteed stability that comes with buying a mac.</p><p>On a different note: Apple's do-it-yourself recording, filming and photo editing software is big business. It remains powerful enough to produce professional art, while remaining cheap enough for practically anyone (college hipster kids included) to purchase. Tie that into a couple generations of internet users who drown themselves in media, and what do you get? A few million you-tube directors who all want macs, because it's what the professionals use, and there's a chance in hell their parents might actually buy it for them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've always been into computers , and was a die-hard Windows fan until the Intel macs were released .
I made the switch , and have n't looked back ; HOWEVER , I did n't make the switch " to be cool ( as was discussed above ) , " nor did I make it because windows = bad , apple = good .
IMHO , they 're both computer industry giants whose main interest is ( ding !
) PROFITS.That being said , I 'm in the " Free-thinking " business ; music is what I do , it 's who I am .
I choose Mac , NOT because of it 's affiliation with the " young , hip , etc .
" crowd , but because when it comes down to it , Macs are simply more stable than Windows .
The MAJORITY of creative software - audio , in my case , but artwork and video as well - is run on macs .
Do n't get me wrong , there are plenty of great software selections on PC ; however , when I walk into a studio ( and this also goes for film/photo editing ) chances are 9/10 times the main computer will be a mac , typically running Pro Tools ( which also runs on windows ) .
The reasoning behind this lies in the fact that Pro Tools , and pretty much every major Digital Audio Workshop ( DAW ) runs incredibly stable on the Mac .
Pro Tools does n't even support Windows 7 yet !
The thousands of high quality plug-ins out there for purchase ?
They all run incredibly stable on a mac , too .
Why ? Because Mac has become the " creative " industry standard , an attribute largely due to its stability in the first place.As a music professional , I take great care to make sure my data stays uncorrupted .
I back up EVERYTHING multiple times , JUST in case my computer crashes/gets wiped , etc .
My computer IS my office .
I would n't be able to do what I do without one ( unless I have an analog studio - anyone want to invest $ 30,000 ? ) .
I do n't need the cost-effectiveness of a PC , I need the guaranteed stability that comes with buying a mac.On a different note : Apple 's do-it-yourself recording , filming and photo editing software is big business .
It remains powerful enough to produce professional art , while remaining cheap enough for practically anyone ( college hipster kids included ) to purchase .
Tie that into a couple generations of internet users who drown themselves in media , and what do you get ?
A few million you-tube directors who all want macs , because it 's what the professionals use , and there 's a chance in hell their parents might actually buy it for them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've always been into computers, and was a die-hard Windows fan until the Intel macs were released.
I made the switch, and haven't looked back; HOWEVER, I didn't make the switch "to be cool (as was discussed above)," nor did I make it because windows = bad, apple = good.
IMHO, they're both computer industry giants whose main interest is (ding!
) PROFITS.That being said, I'm in the "Free-thinking" business; music is what I do, it's who I am.
I choose Mac, NOT because of it's affiliation with the "young, hip, etc.
" crowd, but because when it comes down to it, Macs are simply more stable than Windows.
The MAJORITY of creative software - audio, in my case, but artwork and video as well - is run on macs.
Don't get me wrong, there are plenty of great software selections on PC; however, when I walk into a studio (and this also goes for film/photo editing) chances are 9/10 times the main computer will be a mac, typically running Pro Tools (which also runs on windows).
The reasoning behind this lies in the fact that Pro Tools, and pretty much every major Digital Audio Workshop (DAW) runs incredibly stable on the Mac.
Pro Tools doesn't even support Windows 7 yet!
The thousands of high quality plug-ins out there for purchase?
They all run incredibly stable on a mac, too.
Why? Because Mac has become the "creative" industry standard, an attribute largely due to its stability in the first place.As a music professional, I take great care to make sure my data stays uncorrupted.
I back up EVERYTHING multiple times, JUST in case my computer crashes/gets wiped, etc.
My computer IS my office.
I wouldn't be able to do what I do without one (unless I have an analog studio - anyone want to invest $30,000?).
I don't need the cost-effectiveness of a PC, I need the guaranteed stability that comes with buying a mac.On a different note: Apple's do-it-yourself recording, filming and photo editing software is big business.
It remains powerful enough to produce professional art, while remaining cheap enough for practically anyone (college hipster kids included) to purchase.
Tie that into a couple generations of internet users who drown themselves in media, and what do you get?
A few million you-tube directors who all want macs, because it's what the professionals use, and there's a chance in hell their parents might actually buy it for them.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889958</id>
	<title>Re:I'm off-duty</title>
	<author>L4t3r4lu5</author>
	<datestamp>1264434780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Actually, there is some correlation between creativity and homosexuality; you'll find a larger percentage of gays in art school than studying any other discipline.</p></div><p>It's because they can see in more than 16 colours.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , there is some correlation between creativity and homosexuality ; you 'll find a larger percentage of gays in art school than studying any other discipline.It 's because they can see in more than 16 colours .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, there is some correlation between creativity and homosexuality; you'll find a larger percentage of gays in art school than studying any other discipline.It's because they can see in more than 16 colours.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889380</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30893706</id>
	<title>Simple, really</title>
	<author>ThatsNotPudding</author>
	<datestamp>1264448580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>People love to be told they are smarter, hipper, sexier, and ironically more independent thinkers than other people.  Sothey gladly fork over big wads of cash to this man who has raised selling sizzle from beyond an art form into damn near a religion.</htmltext>
<tokenext>People love to be told they are smarter , hipper , sexier , and ironically more independent thinkers than other people .
Sothey gladly fork over big wads of cash to this man who has raised selling sizzle from beyond an art form into damn near a religion .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>People love to be told they are smarter, hipper, sexier, and ironically more independent thinkers than other people.
Sothey gladly fork over big wads of cash to this man who has raised selling sizzle from beyond an art form into damn near a religion.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30893142</id>
	<title>On the money! False dichotomy in TFA</title>
	<author>Uksi</author>
	<datestamp>1264446180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The TFA misses the point by miles. It's a false dichotomy.</p><p>All these "free-thinkers", artists, musicians creative professionals, etc, are trying to get shit done with minimum distractions. They couldn't give two shits if the software was FOSS or written by enslaved monkeys. They are trying to accomplish a project on a deadline or write the music when feeling inspired. The last thing on their mind is the computer.</p><p>The article is basically complaining that people who just want a car from A to B are choosing numb, non-sporty Toyota Camry automatics to commute to work. Why oh why won't they choose a little sports car with a shift stick, so they could experience the joy of carving out every corner and onramp with the control of a manual transmission?</p><p>Oh yeah, those people just want to get from A to B. It must be a cult!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The TFA misses the point by miles .
It 's a false dichotomy.All these " free-thinkers " , artists , musicians creative professionals , etc , are trying to get shit done with minimum distractions .
They could n't give two shits if the software was FOSS or written by enslaved monkeys .
They are trying to accomplish a project on a deadline or write the music when feeling inspired .
The last thing on their mind is the computer.The article is basically complaining that people who just want a car from A to B are choosing numb , non-sporty Toyota Camry automatics to commute to work .
Why oh why wo n't they choose a little sports car with a shift stick , so they could experience the joy of carving out every corner and onramp with the control of a manual transmission ? Oh yeah , those people just want to get from A to B. It must be a cult !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The TFA misses the point by miles.
It's a false dichotomy.All these "free-thinkers", artists, musicians creative professionals, etc, are trying to get shit done with minimum distractions.
They couldn't give two shits if the software was FOSS or written by enslaved monkeys.
They are trying to accomplish a project on a deadline or write the music when feeling inspired.
The last thing on their mind is the computer.The article is basically complaining that people who just want a car from A to B are choosing numb, non-sporty Toyota Camry automatics to commute to work.
Why oh why won't they choose a little sports car with a shift stick, so they could experience the joy of carving out every corner and onramp with the control of a manual transmission?Oh yeah, those people just want to get from A to B. It must be a cult!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889406</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889610</id>
	<title>Unwarranted Assumptions</title>
	<author>m.ducharme</author>
	<datestamp>1264433460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Somebody has conflated the kind of "free-thinking creativity" of artists, designers, etc. with the kind of free-thinking of the open software movement. "free thinking" to an artist means the freedom to create her own vision without interference by anyone else, not freedom to collaborate on or elaborate someone else's vision. This artist's "free-thinking" often looks more like the Jobs method of top-down control than like the open-source movement's wide-distribution collaboration philosophy. Which isn't to say that artists never collaborate, of course.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Somebody has conflated the kind of " free-thinking creativity " of artists , designers , etc .
with the kind of free-thinking of the open software movement .
" free thinking " to an artist means the freedom to create her own vision without interference by anyone else , not freedom to collaborate on or elaborate someone else 's vision .
This artist 's " free-thinking " often looks more like the Jobs method of top-down control than like the open-source movement 's wide-distribution collaboration philosophy .
Which is n't to say that artists never collaborate , of course .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Somebody has conflated the kind of "free-thinking creativity" of artists, designers, etc.
with the kind of free-thinking of the open software movement.
"free thinking" to an artist means the freedom to create her own vision without interference by anyone else, not freedom to collaborate on or elaborate someone else's vision.
This artist's "free-thinking" often looks more like the Jobs method of top-down control than like the open-source movement's wide-distribution collaboration philosophy.
Which isn't to say that artists never collaborate, of course.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30896232</id>
	<title>Re:I'm off-duty</title>
	<author>bonch</author>
	<datestamp>1264415760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Actually, there is some correlation between creativity and homosexuality; you'll find a larger percentage of gays in art school than studying any other discipline.</p></div></blockquote><p>Prove it.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , there is some correlation between creativity and homosexuality ; you 'll find a larger percentage of gays in art school than studying any other discipline.Prove it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, there is some correlation between creativity and homosexuality; you'll find a larger percentage of gays in art school than studying any other discipline.Prove it.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889380</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891964</id>
	<title>no paradox at all</title>
	<author>rubycodez</author>
	<datestamp>1264441560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>so a company makes a popular product, but keeps proprietary information like 99.99\% of all other companies that make popular products.  no contradiction, nothing mysterious, and no correlation between the purpose of the product (which help some people's creativity it is said) and how it is made because it is mostly irrelevant how it is made.  Apple uses open API, and has some open source in there, which might be good enough if not ideal.  Sure, I'd rather my kid's and wife's Macs were totally open right down to circuit traces and firmware, but ah well, we didn't get that 21st century (and no flying cars)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>so a company makes a popular product , but keeps proprietary information like 99.99 \ % of all other companies that make popular products .
no contradiction , nothing mysterious , and no correlation between the purpose of the product ( which help some people 's creativity it is said ) and how it is made because it is mostly irrelevant how it is made .
Apple uses open API , and has some open source in there , which might be good enough if not ideal .
Sure , I 'd rather my kid 's and wife 's Macs were totally open right down to circuit traces and firmware , but ah well , we did n't get that 21st century ( and no flying cars )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>so a company makes a popular product, but keeps proprietary information like 99.99\% of all other companies that make popular products.
no contradiction, nothing mysterious, and no correlation between the purpose of the product (which help some people's creativity it is said) and how it is made because it is mostly irrelevant how it is made.
Apple uses open API, and has some open source in there, which might be good enough if not ideal.
Sure, I'd rather my kid's and wife's Macs were totally open right down to circuit traces and firmware, but ah well, we didn't get that 21st century (and no flying cars)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30905356</id>
	<title>Unfortunately, smug asshole does describe many</title>
	<author>meosborne</author>
	<datestamp>1264525140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Unfortunately, many mac user in my experience as accurately described as smug assholes wrt to computers. I've been guilty of creating quite a few of them by recommending Macs to friends and relatives over the years when asked advice about purchasing a computer.</p><p>It is ironic and annoying to have someone ask my advice about computers, take that advice, be very happy, and then later proceed to tell me how terrible my choice of computer (Linux) is and how much happier I'd be with a Mac. I've never met a mac user who could be convinced that I actually *prefer* Linux to a mac. They simply think I just don't know any better or am being willfully ignorant. At the very least, they think I should buy a mac just for the hardware.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Unfortunately , many mac user in my experience as accurately described as smug assholes wrt to computers .
I 've been guilty of creating quite a few of them by recommending Macs to friends and relatives over the years when asked advice about purchasing a computer.It is ironic and annoying to have someone ask my advice about computers , take that advice , be very happy , and then later proceed to tell me how terrible my choice of computer ( Linux ) is and how much happier I 'd be with a Mac .
I 've never met a mac user who could be convinced that I actually * prefer * Linux to a mac .
They simply think I just do n't know any better or am being willfully ignorant .
At the very least , they think I should buy a mac just for the hardware .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unfortunately, many mac user in my experience as accurately described as smug assholes wrt to computers.
I've been guilty of creating quite a few of them by recommending Macs to friends and relatives over the years when asked advice about purchasing a computer.It is ironic and annoying to have someone ask my advice about computers, take that advice, be very happy, and then later proceed to tell me how terrible my choice of computer (Linux) is and how much happier I'd be with a Mac.
I've never met a mac user who could be convinced that I actually *prefer* Linux to a mac.
They simply think I just don't know any better or am being willfully ignorant.
At the very least, they think I should buy a mac just for the hardware.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890432</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30897914</id>
	<title>I was fine on the Amiga, thanks</title>
	<author>mdwh2</author>
	<datestamp>1264423440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>For a long time, Apple made the only computers that you could do art on; the Mac was graphic when DOS was text-only.</i></p><p>When was that "long time" exactly?</p><p>Unfortunately it seems common of Apple fans to rewrite history as if Mac and DOS were the only platforms around. Just as these days we have people thinking the only mobile phones in the market are the Iphone and Android...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For a long time , Apple made the only computers that you could do art on ; the Mac was graphic when DOS was text-only.When was that " long time " exactly ? Unfortunately it seems common of Apple fans to rewrite history as if Mac and DOS were the only platforms around .
Just as these days we have people thinking the only mobile phones in the market are the Iphone and Android.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For a long time, Apple made the only computers that you could do art on; the Mac was graphic when DOS was text-only.When was that "long time" exactly?Unfortunately it seems common of Apple fans to rewrite history as if Mac and DOS were the only platforms around.
Just as these days we have people thinking the only mobile phones in the market are the Iphone and Android...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889380</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890414</id>
	<title>it's called marketing</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264436520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Another explanation would be that this behavior is simply in keeping with their brand archetype, the magician. Apple obviously pays close attention to the way their products are received; they've had many failures. However, unlike their competition, they have no trouble burying a bad idea quickly. Do you remember the <a href="http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,1932193,00.asp" title="pcmag.com">iPod BoomBox</a> [pcmag.com]? Do you remember the <a href="http://direct.motorola.com/hellomoto/rokr/" title="motorola.com">Motorola Rokr</a> [motorola.com]? Apple notices when their stuff isn't well received and then it's gone.</p><p>By the same token, you don't expect the magician to hang out with the audience after the show. Merlin does not pass out a Rate My Performance card. Nor does Merlin hope to see you at Comdex. Being aloof is simply part of the brand identity, and you can't do that if you let each little division have their own blog.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Another explanation would be that this behavior is simply in keeping with their brand archetype , the magician .
Apple obviously pays close attention to the way their products are received ; they 've had many failures .
However , unlike their competition , they have no trouble burying a bad idea quickly .
Do you remember the iPod BoomBox [ pcmag.com ] ?
Do you remember the Motorola Rokr [ motorola.com ] ?
Apple notices when their stuff is n't well received and then it 's gone.By the same token , you do n't expect the magician to hang out with the audience after the show .
Merlin does not pass out a Rate My Performance card .
Nor does Merlin hope to see you at Comdex .
Being aloof is simply part of the brand identity , and you ca n't do that if you let each little division have their own blog .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Another explanation would be that this behavior is simply in keeping with their brand archetype, the magician.
Apple obviously pays close attention to the way their products are received; they've had many failures.
However, unlike their competition, they have no trouble burying a bad idea quickly.
Do you remember the iPod BoomBox [pcmag.com]?
Do you remember the Motorola Rokr [motorola.com]?
Apple notices when their stuff isn't well received and then it's gone.By the same token, you don't expect the magician to hang out with the audience after the show.
Merlin does not pass out a Rate My Performance card.
Nor does Merlin hope to see you at Comdex.
Being aloof is simply part of the brand identity, and you can't do that if you let each little division have their own blog.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889514</id>
	<title>Not the software</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264433100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Open or closed software doesn't matter that is not the point. The creative works are not the software itself but what is produced using the software. So as long you can buy software that works and can export your creations freely it does not matter if the software itself is closed.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Open or closed software does n't matter that is not the point .
The creative works are not the software itself but what is produced using the software .
So as long you can buy software that works and can export your creations freely it does not matter if the software itself is closed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Open or closed software doesn't matter that is not the point.
The creative works are not the software itself but what is produced using the software.
So as long you can buy software that works and can export your creations freely it does not matter if the software itself is closed.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30895978</id>
	<title>Yea, Os didnt provide anything remotely useful.</title>
	<author>unity100</author>
	<datestamp>1264414980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>and legions of apple fans are posting their incessant apple fan posts in open source forums like phpbb, sites like postnuke, running on apache webservers and mysql databases working on linux operating systems all around the net. doing all the promotion with their incessant rambling and linking that apple couldnt do if it spent tens of times of its all existing capital<nobr> <wbr></nobr>....</p><p>yea definitely os didnt provide anything useful<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>and legions of apple fans are posting their incessant apple fan posts in open source forums like phpbb , sites like postnuke , running on apache webservers and mysql databases working on linux operating systems all around the net .
doing all the promotion with their incessant rambling and linking that apple couldnt do if it spent tens of times of its all existing capital ....yea definitely os didnt provide anything useful .. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>and legions of apple fans are posting their incessant apple fan posts in open source forums like phpbb, sites like postnuke, running on apache webservers and mysql databases working on linux operating systems all around the net.
doing all the promotion with their incessant rambling and linking that apple couldnt do if it spent tens of times of its all existing capital ....yea definitely os didnt provide anything useful ...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891358</id>
	<title>Re:I guess Apple did all that themselves...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264439640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p><div class="quote"><p>No.. they just created what runs on the them, that's all..<br>Meh.</p></div><p>Err, not entirely... OSX came primarily out of <a href="http://lowendmac.com/orchard/05/next-computer-history.html" title="lowendmac.com" rel="nofollow">NeXTStep</a> [lowendmac.com].</p></div><p>From the article you site explaining the development of NeXT and its origin in Mach: Carnegie Mellon managed to port BSD (a version of Unix developed at UC Berkeley in conjunction with Bell Labs in the 1970s) to Mach, where each part of the system functioned as a server. This structure lent itself well to an object oriented operating system, and Jobs was enthusiastic about the proposition.</p><p>Isn't BSD considered Open Source?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>No.. they just created what runs on the them , that 's all..Meh.Err , not entirely... OSX came primarily out of NeXTStep [ lowendmac.com ] .From the article you site explaining the development of NeXT and its origin in Mach : Carnegie Mellon managed to port BSD ( a version of Unix developed at UC Berkeley in conjunction with Bell Labs in the 1970s ) to Mach , where each part of the system functioned as a server .
This structure lent itself well to an object oriented operating system , and Jobs was enthusiastic about the proposition.Is n't BSD considered Open Source ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No.. they just created what runs on the them, that's all..Meh.Err, not entirely... OSX came primarily out of NeXTStep [lowendmac.com].From the article you site explaining the development of NeXT and its origin in Mach: Carnegie Mellon managed to port BSD (a version of Unix developed at UC Berkeley in conjunction with Bell Labs in the 1970s) to Mach, where each part of the system functioned as a server.
This structure lent itself well to an object oriented operating system, and Jobs was enthusiastic about the proposition.Isn't BSD considered Open Source?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889670</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30905714</id>
	<title>It's quite simple, really</title>
	<author>OSXcellent</author>
	<datestamp>1264526340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Apple is a "Master's Workshop" set up in the spirit of some of the world's great architectural firms. There is a visionary who leads and provides the Passion that allows others in their roles to feel like they're doing the Lord's work.  There are very capable lieutenants, but the vision of the master rules the day. The master knows he's beholden to the effort of his lieutenants, and makes sure they are motivated by the Passion and well-compensated for their effort.</p><p>Great things aren't made by committee, at least not in the crowdsourced sense. When you make your money providing a consistently great user experience, more is not better. Again, this goes back to the "Master's Workshop" structure. Great architecture is not made via the blended vision of 25 individuals; it was one person's vision, well-executed by a team of 25.</p><p>The reason for the one voice is also strategic. Fewer leaks = more hype.  You'll notice the clamor for the Apple Tablet started over a year ago, and none of it came from Apple. It still doesn't, and we're a day from the likely announcement of the device. Unlike some companies who announce products with world-altering features and nebulous shipping dates, Apple doesn't announce until the vision of the product is perfect - and only then on their terms.</p><p>So people can whine about Apple's closed nature if they want. The company's restricted access and the use of Apple's products by creative, free-thinking individuals have nothing to do with each other.  This is perhaps ironic in only the most cursory definition of the word. In order for them to create the products they want to create, on their schedule, this level of control is not just desirable, it's essential. Great products are visions, not zoo exhibits, regardless of how butthurt the people who don't have access to the vision feel about their roles outside the process.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Apple is a " Master 's Workshop " set up in the spirit of some of the world 's great architectural firms .
There is a visionary who leads and provides the Passion that allows others in their roles to feel like they 're doing the Lord 's work .
There are very capable lieutenants , but the vision of the master rules the day .
The master knows he 's beholden to the effort of his lieutenants , and makes sure they are motivated by the Passion and well-compensated for their effort.Great things are n't made by committee , at least not in the crowdsourced sense .
When you make your money providing a consistently great user experience , more is not better .
Again , this goes back to the " Master 's Workshop " structure .
Great architecture is not made via the blended vision of 25 individuals ; it was one person 's vision , well-executed by a team of 25.The reason for the one voice is also strategic .
Fewer leaks = more hype .
You 'll notice the clamor for the Apple Tablet started over a year ago , and none of it came from Apple .
It still does n't , and we 're a day from the likely announcement of the device .
Unlike some companies who announce products with world-altering features and nebulous shipping dates , Apple does n't announce until the vision of the product is perfect - and only then on their terms.So people can whine about Apple 's closed nature if they want .
The company 's restricted access and the use of Apple 's products by creative , free-thinking individuals have nothing to do with each other .
This is perhaps ironic in only the most cursory definition of the word .
In order for them to create the products they want to create , on their schedule , this level of control is not just desirable , it 's essential .
Great products are visions , not zoo exhibits , regardless of how butthurt the people who do n't have access to the vision feel about their roles outside the process .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Apple is a "Master's Workshop" set up in the spirit of some of the world's great architectural firms.
There is a visionary who leads and provides the Passion that allows others in their roles to feel like they're doing the Lord's work.
There are very capable lieutenants, but the vision of the master rules the day.
The master knows he's beholden to the effort of his lieutenants, and makes sure they are motivated by the Passion and well-compensated for their effort.Great things aren't made by committee, at least not in the crowdsourced sense.
When you make your money providing a consistently great user experience, more is not better.
Again, this goes back to the "Master's Workshop" structure.
Great architecture is not made via the blended vision of 25 individuals; it was one person's vision, well-executed by a team of 25.The reason for the one voice is also strategic.
Fewer leaks = more hype.
You'll notice the clamor for the Apple Tablet started over a year ago, and none of it came from Apple.
It still doesn't, and we're a day from the likely announcement of the device.
Unlike some companies who announce products with world-altering features and nebulous shipping dates, Apple doesn't announce until the vision of the product is perfect - and only then on their terms.So people can whine about Apple's closed nature if they want.
The company's restricted access and the use of Apple's products by creative, free-thinking individuals have nothing to do with each other.
This is perhaps ironic in only the most cursory definition of the word.
In order for them to create the products they want to create, on their schedule, this level of control is not just desirable, it's essential.
Great products are visions, not zoo exhibits, regardless of how butthurt the people who don't have access to the vision feel about their roles outside the process.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890318</id>
	<title>No Para-Docs</title>
	<author>pubwvj</author>
	<datestamp>1264436160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is only confusing to the PC Windoze drones.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is only confusing to the PC Windoze drones .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is only confusing to the PC Windoze drones.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30900062</id>
	<title>What paradox</title>
	<author>mjwx</author>
	<datestamp>1264438860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>I cant make the association between free thinking and Apple.<br> <br>

Everyone I know who bought Apple did so because of the marketing, the artist "says" it is better but is completely unable to quantify it beyond "but everyone says Mac is better". Most Mac do not understand computers particularly well, thus they turn to an OS that limits what they can do. We call Apple a cult for a reason. I really cant see Mac users being "free thinking" about tech, especially as one of Mac's biggest selling points is that it Just Works(TM) meaning that you arent meant to think about using your computer..<br> <br>

I know a few designers having done tech support for a Marketing company before (so glad I'm out of that gig now) and the most talented designers can do everything they can do on a Mac in Windows, unfortunately the reverse isn't true due to the limitations of the Mac OS, it's not hacker friendly and was never meant to be.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I cant make the association between free thinking and Apple .
Everyone I know who bought Apple did so because of the marketing , the artist " says " it is better but is completely unable to quantify it beyond " but everyone says Mac is better " .
Most Mac do not understand computers particularly well , thus they turn to an OS that limits what they can do .
We call Apple a cult for a reason .
I really cant see Mac users being " free thinking " about tech , especially as one of Mac 's biggest selling points is that it Just Works ( TM ) meaning that you arent meant to think about using your computer. . I know a few designers having done tech support for a Marketing company before ( so glad I 'm out of that gig now ) and the most talented designers can do everything they can do on a Mac in Windows , unfortunately the reverse is n't true due to the limitations of the Mac OS , it 's not hacker friendly and was never meant to be .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I cant make the association between free thinking and Apple.
Everyone I know who bought Apple did so because of the marketing, the artist "says" it is better but is completely unable to quantify it beyond "but everyone says Mac is better".
Most Mac do not understand computers particularly well, thus they turn to an OS that limits what they can do.
We call Apple a cult for a reason.
I really cant see Mac users being "free thinking" about tech, especially as one of Mac's biggest selling points is that it Just Works(TM) meaning that you arent meant to think about using your computer.. 

I know a few designers having done tech support for a Marketing company before (so glad I'm out of that gig now) and the most talented designers can do everything they can do on a Mac in Windows, unfortunately the reverse isn't true due to the limitations of the Mac OS, it's not hacker friendly and was never meant to be.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889528</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889564</id>
	<title>Reminds me of a B-School Case study</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264433280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Presumably, Apple wants the device to be part of the larger ecosystem it&rsquo;s building around digital content&mdash;music, movies, TV shows, apps, and soon books and magazines,..</p></div><p>In the cap class - Strategy - we had a case study about Apple. This was 2004 and the iPod was in full swing. Anyway, the case study by Harvard, no less, was pretty much damning about the PC industry's commodity status, and especially about Apple's over priced commodity hardware and an operating system that was "perceived" to be better than Windows. </p><p>I argued the point of something like what Apple is doing now and their work station and computers would keep a high end niche business. The professor asked rhetorically, "In the PC industry?"</p><p>Before I could elaborate, this fan girl started to light in to the professor about how "superior" Mac OS was and blah blah blah and when she was forced to us it over Windows, that's when she discovered how superior it was.</p><p>The professor then said, "So, you had to be forced to use Apple's products." and continued to spank the fangirl f over the fact that Apple cannot continue to be a viable company in the PC industry.  </p><p>I wanted to say that is correct BUT they will make their PCs part of an entertainment and computing product family that will be integrated<nobr> <wbr></nobr>....basically what Apple is doing now - only Apple did it much better than I could even have imagined.</p><p>I'm an Apple business fanboy. I don't use their products but I sure do admire their business sense.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Presumably , Apple wants the device to be part of the larger ecosystem it    s building around digital content    music , movies , TV shows , apps , and soon books and magazines,..In the cap class - Strategy - we had a case study about Apple .
This was 2004 and the iPod was in full swing .
Anyway , the case study by Harvard , no less , was pretty much damning about the PC industry 's commodity status , and especially about Apple 's over priced commodity hardware and an operating system that was " perceived " to be better than Windows .
I argued the point of something like what Apple is doing now and their work station and computers would keep a high end niche business .
The professor asked rhetorically , " In the PC industry ?
" Before I could elaborate , this fan girl started to light in to the professor about how " superior " Mac OS was and blah blah blah and when she was forced to us it over Windows , that 's when she discovered how superior it was.The professor then said , " So , you had to be forced to use Apple 's products .
" and continued to spank the fangirl f over the fact that Apple can not continue to be a viable company in the PC industry .
I wanted to say that is correct BUT they will make their PCs part of an entertainment and computing product family that will be integrated ....basically what Apple is doing now - only Apple did it much better than I could even have imagined.I 'm an Apple business fanboy .
I do n't use their products but I sure do admire their business sense .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Presumably, Apple wants the device to be part of the larger ecosystem it’s building around digital content—music, movies, TV shows, apps, and soon books and magazines,..In the cap class - Strategy - we had a case study about Apple.
This was 2004 and the iPod was in full swing.
Anyway, the case study by Harvard, no less, was pretty much damning about the PC industry's commodity status, and especially about Apple's over priced commodity hardware and an operating system that was "perceived" to be better than Windows.
I argued the point of something like what Apple is doing now and their work station and computers would keep a high end niche business.
The professor asked rhetorically, "In the PC industry?
"Before I could elaborate, this fan girl started to light in to the professor about how "superior" Mac OS was and blah blah blah and when she was forced to us it over Windows, that's when she discovered how superior it was.The professor then said, "So, you had to be forced to use Apple's products.
" and continued to spank the fangirl f over the fact that Apple cannot continue to be a viable company in the PC industry.
I wanted to say that is correct BUT they will make their PCs part of an entertainment and computing product family that will be integrated ....basically what Apple is doing now - only Apple did it much better than I could even have imagined.I'm an Apple business fanboy.
I don't use their products but I sure do admire their business sense.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30898908</id>
	<title>Re:I'm off-duty</title>
	<author>MidnightBrewer</author>
	<datestamp>1264428660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I agree. Also, I think the post itself starts with a fallacious argument: why would artists care about Apple's closed culture? They're not open source programmers, they're artists.  Many artists themselves are secretive perfectionists, so actually, I think they're more likely to relate to Steve than be turned off by him. Artists are also notoriously opposed to feeling like they're just a cog in a mindless machine, AKA the Windows, beige-box culture.</p><p>Linux might have something of a wild, anachronistic appeal, but again, unless you're an artist who equivocates configuring and tweaking packages and drivers to be some masochistic sort of performance art, you're not going to bother with it unless you can turn it on and start creating. To my knowledge, there are no artist-specific Linux distros yet available, and with the exception of a few user-friendlier ones, they are by and large still more programmer or office-work oriented than creative.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I agree .
Also , I think the post itself starts with a fallacious argument : why would artists care about Apple 's closed culture ?
They 're not open source programmers , they 're artists .
Many artists themselves are secretive perfectionists , so actually , I think they 're more likely to relate to Steve than be turned off by him .
Artists are also notoriously opposed to feeling like they 're just a cog in a mindless machine , AKA the Windows , beige-box culture.Linux might have something of a wild , anachronistic appeal , but again , unless you 're an artist who equivocates configuring and tweaking packages and drivers to be some masochistic sort of performance art , you 're not going to bother with it unless you can turn it on and start creating .
To my knowledge , there are no artist-specific Linux distros yet available , and with the exception of a few user-friendlier ones , they are by and large still more programmer or office-work oriented than creative .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I agree.
Also, I think the post itself starts with a fallacious argument: why would artists care about Apple's closed culture?
They're not open source programmers, they're artists.
Many artists themselves are secretive perfectionists, so actually, I think they're more likely to relate to Steve than be turned off by him.
Artists are also notoriously opposed to feeling like they're just a cog in a mindless machine, AKA the Windows, beige-box culture.Linux might have something of a wild, anachronistic appeal, but again, unless you're an artist who equivocates configuring and tweaking packages and drivers to be some masochistic sort of performance art, you're not going to bother with it unless you can turn it on and start creating.
To my knowledge, there are no artist-specific Linux distros yet available, and with the exception of a few user-friendlier ones, they are by and large still more programmer or office-work oriented than creative.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890314</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889982</id>
	<title>My experience</title>
	<author>bustamelon</author>
	<datestamp>1264434840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I have been an IT support person, a programmer, and a creative professional (digital design as well as audio production/recording), and used both Macs and PCs for all three, and while I may be biased because I have never actually owned a Mac, I really don't think any of the usual arguments for Macs hold water any longer.  The hardware is now (as another few posters mentioned) essentially the same as a typical PC (Intel/x86/64 arch), the software is interchangable (by that I mean you can install OSX or Linux or Windows on either machine).

The idea that Macs "just work" is preposterous to me, because I have never, ever seen a Mac "just work".  Nor have I ever seen Linux "just work" (except for a few simple distros like Ubuntu, where it makes all the decisions for you).  And of course it would be foolish to argue that Windows "just works."

For me, the choice is still Windows when it comes to professional work (Linux would be a better choice if all the same software apps were available).  I have been working on a home recording with a band, where the work is being done on a Mac using ProTools, and every single session there is some kind of stupid technical issue that takes up precious time.  At home on my PC, I don't have the same kind of trouble, at least not to the same degree or with the same consistency.

What it comes down to is what User Interface you're more comfortable with.  Both are equally capable of performing the same tasks.  But one is about 1/3 the price and does not require that you go to one specific store to get replacement parts.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have been an IT support person , a programmer , and a creative professional ( digital design as well as audio production/recording ) , and used both Macs and PCs for all three , and while I may be biased because I have never actually owned a Mac , I really do n't think any of the usual arguments for Macs hold water any longer .
The hardware is now ( as another few posters mentioned ) essentially the same as a typical PC ( Intel/x86/64 arch ) , the software is interchangable ( by that I mean you can install OSX or Linux or Windows on either machine ) .
The idea that Macs " just work " is preposterous to me , because I have never , ever seen a Mac " just work " .
Nor have I ever seen Linux " just work " ( except for a few simple distros like Ubuntu , where it makes all the decisions for you ) .
And of course it would be foolish to argue that Windows " just works .
" For me , the choice is still Windows when it comes to professional work ( Linux would be a better choice if all the same software apps were available ) .
I have been working on a home recording with a band , where the work is being done on a Mac using ProTools , and every single session there is some kind of stupid technical issue that takes up precious time .
At home on my PC , I do n't have the same kind of trouble , at least not to the same degree or with the same consistency .
What it comes down to is what User Interface you 're more comfortable with .
Both are equally capable of performing the same tasks .
But one is about 1/3 the price and does not require that you go to one specific store to get replacement parts .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have been an IT support person, a programmer, and a creative professional (digital design as well as audio production/recording), and used both Macs and PCs for all three, and while I may be biased because I have never actually owned a Mac, I really don't think any of the usual arguments for Macs hold water any longer.
The hardware is now (as another few posters mentioned) essentially the same as a typical PC (Intel/x86/64 arch), the software is interchangable (by that I mean you can install OSX or Linux or Windows on either machine).
The idea that Macs "just work" is preposterous to me, because I have never, ever seen a Mac "just work".
Nor have I ever seen Linux "just work" (except for a few simple distros like Ubuntu, where it makes all the decisions for you).
And of course it would be foolish to argue that Windows "just works.
"

For me, the choice is still Windows when it comes to professional work (Linux would be a better choice if all the same software apps were available).
I have been working on a home recording with a band, where the work is being done on a Mac using ProTools, and every single session there is some kind of stupid technical issue that takes up precious time.
At home on my PC, I don't have the same kind of trouble, at least not to the same degree or with the same consistency.
What it comes down to is what User Interface you're more comfortable with.
Both are equally capable of performing the same tasks.
But one is about 1/3 the price and does not require that you go to one specific store to get replacement parts.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890870</id>
	<title>Poor deluded fools</title>
	<author>ewe2</author>
	<datestamp>1264438080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>you cannot hope to defeat the Reality Distortion Field!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>you can not hope to defeat the Reality Distortion Field !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>you cannot hope to defeat the Reality Distortion Field!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30895426</id>
	<title>Re:Not sure in USA but in Spain...</title>
	<author>Beyond\_GoodandEvil</author>
	<datestamp>1264412760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>I really hate being lumped in with a group of smug assholes just because of my laptop choice.</i> <br>I totally know how you feel. I drive a BMW not because I am an asshat, but b/c I wanted a car with a manual transmission that had some pep. Then everybody thought since I drive a BMW, I must be a prick. Fortunately, pricks now prefer to drive Audis, so in time some other computer will attract the fancy of smug assholes and no one will think any less of your Mac ownership.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I really hate being lumped in with a group of smug assholes just because of my laptop choice .
I totally know how you feel .
I drive a BMW not because I am an asshat , but b/c I wanted a car with a manual transmission that had some pep .
Then everybody thought since I drive a BMW , I must be a prick .
Fortunately , pricks now prefer to drive Audis , so in time some other computer will attract the fancy of smug assholes and no one will think any less of your Mac ownership .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I really hate being lumped in with a group of smug assholes just because of my laptop choice.
I totally know how you feel.
I drive a BMW not because I am an asshat, but b/c I wanted a car with a manual transmission that had some pep.
Then everybody thought since I drive a BMW, I must be a prick.
Fortunately, pricks now prefer to drive Audis, so in time some other computer will attract the fancy of smug assholes and no one will think any less of your Mac ownership.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890432</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30893890</id>
	<title>Re:FOSS</title>
	<author>treitter</author>
	<datestamp>1264449480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>There are. And one of the most open (and up-streamed) is <a href="http://maemo.org/development/sources/" title="maemo.org" rel="nofollow">Maemo 5</a> [maemo.org] (used on the <a href="http://maemo.nokia.com/n900/" title="nokia.com" rel="nofollow">Nokia N900</a> [nokia.com]).

(Disclaimer: I worked on part of it)</htmltext>
<tokenext>There are .
And one of the most open ( and up-streamed ) is Maemo 5 [ maemo.org ] ( used on the Nokia N900 [ nokia.com ] ) .
( Disclaimer : I worked on part of it )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are.
And one of the most open (and up-streamed) is Maemo 5 [maemo.org] (used on the Nokia N900 [nokia.com]).
(Disclaimer: I worked on part of it)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889316</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30901762</id>
	<title>Re:It's not rocket science, really.</title>
	<author>Vitriol+Angst</author>
	<datestamp>1264502520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How do I say this WITHOUT looking like and Apple fan boy?</p><p>The "marketing" of Apple has only been in the last few years, anything but cringe-worthy, and I think "apple fans" would agree.</p><p>Apple didn't TELL me that they allow me to be creative. I've been creative all my life. I started with 'attempting' to assemble on of the first computers that came from Tandy/Radio-shack, and with a few thousand wires, I got an LED to light up. Never got the series of them to do anything meaningful.</p><p>I used an AMIGA for video editing in the early days -- we were a beta test site.</p><p>I used DOS -- BEFORE I used a Mac. And then I had to endure lectures on how a "GUI will never give you the power and control of a command-line." I think everybody who told me that has forgotten saying it.</p><p>&gt;&gt; Now, Apple is the EVIL FASCIST DICTATOR, and because my Mac is shiny, and they put a lot of adds showing creative people like myself getting laid -- I'm all into it. I'll assume you are an intelligent person without reading much into your psychoanalysis of a stereo-type based upon a few people who need extra medication on some blog.  So can you believe me when "I tell you why I like my Macintosh computers?" I even have 3 or 4 PCS I've built from scratch...</p><p>The CUSTOMER of the Apple computer is the person who BOUGHT THE MAC. Now, you might think as you sit in front of your Windows PC (or whatever), that this is obviously true of all computers. We have Windows XP at the office. Why? Cost savings. We save so much paying $50 a head a month for Exchange, and then bundling Microsoft products for huge costs savings, even while we pay for machines like my MacBook Pro, regardless of whether it gets the software. The CUSTOMER, of the Windows Machine, is our computer support and security -- NOT anyone using them.</p><p>I mean, if it were about money, you'd hire a few LINUX geeks, set up an email system and network for MOSTLY consulting fees, and never restart the box. Even on a Mac Server, you can have unlimited email, calendars and users for a few grand without monthly fees.</p><p>But hey, who would get the job of constantly patching and locking things down? My service request allows someone to install an application because there is no security once you "TRY" an app and it goes rogue. Windows 7 MIGHT make things better -- but it MIGHT be too good.</p><p>&gt;&gt; Look at the cell phone market; most of the Smart Phones the ACTUAL customer is the Cell Phone Provider. With the Google Android and the FREE phones that they are supporting, the CUSTOMER is the people buying add space and your information on the phone in your hand.</p><p>&gt;&gt; When Steve Jobs negotiated with AT&amp;T -- he was fighting for the CUSTOMER of his phone to be able to use the actual features on the phone. He lost some battles with things like Tethering. He can't allow the jail-breaking because of contracts with AT&amp;T. Now, of course, a cynical person may say that's what Jobs wants us to think. That anti-DRM message about music was garbage. Until, of course, we got unlocked music on iTunes.</p><p>This isn't just for some "ideal" since we all distrust that. Jobs knows his customer; we want to USE all those features on that phone. I still have a RAZR and I've yet to use anything more advanced than the camera and a few text messages. I can program and build a video kiosk -- but I'll be damned if I'm going to bother learning the in's and outs of some gadget that was designed by a toaster repair man.</p><p>The Google Phone will eventually get all sorts of viruses, and their market will splinter, as they move to support the next cool device to add on to the Open Source phone.</p><p>&gt;&gt; Anyway -- I much prefer the new Apple that doesn't say much until they ship a product that actually works -- vs. the endless vaporware and hype of "me too" Microsoft, as they TELL YOU how dang smart and creative you are on their ads just for using their product. I don't think that convinces a smart guy like you any more than it does me.</p><p>I've got over 300 applicatio</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How do I say this WITHOUT looking like and Apple fan boy ? The " marketing " of Apple has only been in the last few years , anything but cringe-worthy , and I think " apple fans " would agree.Apple did n't TELL me that they allow me to be creative .
I 've been creative all my life .
I started with 'attempting ' to assemble on of the first computers that came from Tandy/Radio-shack , and with a few thousand wires , I got an LED to light up .
Never got the series of them to do anything meaningful.I used an AMIGA for video editing in the early days -- we were a beta test site.I used DOS -- BEFORE I used a Mac .
And then I had to endure lectures on how a " GUI will never give you the power and control of a command-line .
" I think everybody who told me that has forgotten saying it. &gt; &gt; Now , Apple is the EVIL FASCIST DICTATOR , and because my Mac is shiny , and they put a lot of adds showing creative people like myself getting laid -- I 'm all into it .
I 'll assume you are an intelligent person without reading much into your psychoanalysis of a stereo-type based upon a few people who need extra medication on some blog .
So can you believe me when " I tell you why I like my Macintosh computers ?
" I even have 3 or 4 PCS I 've built from scratch...The CUSTOMER of the Apple computer is the person who BOUGHT THE MAC .
Now , you might think as you sit in front of your Windows PC ( or whatever ) , that this is obviously true of all computers .
We have Windows XP at the office .
Why ? Cost savings .
We save so much paying $ 50 a head a month for Exchange , and then bundling Microsoft products for huge costs savings , even while we pay for machines like my MacBook Pro , regardless of whether it gets the software .
The CUSTOMER , of the Windows Machine , is our computer support and security -- NOT anyone using them.I mean , if it were about money , you 'd hire a few LINUX geeks , set up an email system and network for MOSTLY consulting fees , and never restart the box .
Even on a Mac Server , you can have unlimited email , calendars and users for a few grand without monthly fees.But hey , who would get the job of constantly patching and locking things down ?
My service request allows someone to install an application because there is no security once you " TRY " an app and it goes rogue .
Windows 7 MIGHT make things better -- but it MIGHT be too good. &gt; &gt; Look at the cell phone market ; most of the Smart Phones the ACTUAL customer is the Cell Phone Provider .
With the Google Android and the FREE phones that they are supporting , the CUSTOMER is the people buying add space and your information on the phone in your hand. &gt; &gt; When Steve Jobs negotiated with AT&amp;T -- he was fighting for the CUSTOMER of his phone to be able to use the actual features on the phone .
He lost some battles with things like Tethering .
He ca n't allow the jail-breaking because of contracts with AT&amp;T .
Now , of course , a cynical person may say that 's what Jobs wants us to think .
That anti-DRM message about music was garbage .
Until , of course , we got unlocked music on iTunes.This is n't just for some " ideal " since we all distrust that .
Jobs knows his customer ; we want to USE all those features on that phone .
I still have a RAZR and I 've yet to use anything more advanced than the camera and a few text messages .
I can program and build a video kiosk -- but I 'll be damned if I 'm going to bother learning the in 's and outs of some gadget that was designed by a toaster repair man.The Google Phone will eventually get all sorts of viruses , and their market will splinter , as they move to support the next cool device to add on to the Open Source phone. &gt; &gt; Anyway -- I much prefer the new Apple that does n't say much until they ship a product that actually works -- vs. the endless vaporware and hype of " me too " Microsoft , as they TELL YOU how dang smart and creative you are on their ads just for using their product .
I do n't think that convinces a smart guy like you any more than it does me.I 've got over 300 applicatio</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How do I say this WITHOUT looking like and Apple fan boy?The "marketing" of Apple has only been in the last few years, anything but cringe-worthy, and I think "apple fans" would agree.Apple didn't TELL me that they allow me to be creative.
I've been creative all my life.
I started with 'attempting' to assemble on of the first computers that came from Tandy/Radio-shack, and with a few thousand wires, I got an LED to light up.
Never got the series of them to do anything meaningful.I used an AMIGA for video editing in the early days -- we were a beta test site.I used DOS -- BEFORE I used a Mac.
And then I had to endure lectures on how a "GUI will never give you the power and control of a command-line.
" I think everybody who told me that has forgotten saying it.&gt;&gt; Now, Apple is the EVIL FASCIST DICTATOR, and because my Mac is shiny, and they put a lot of adds showing creative people like myself getting laid -- I'm all into it.
I'll assume you are an intelligent person without reading much into your psychoanalysis of a stereo-type based upon a few people who need extra medication on some blog.
So can you believe me when "I tell you why I like my Macintosh computers?
" I even have 3 or 4 PCS I've built from scratch...The CUSTOMER of the Apple computer is the person who BOUGHT THE MAC.
Now, you might think as you sit in front of your Windows PC (or whatever), that this is obviously true of all computers.
We have Windows XP at the office.
Why? Cost savings.
We save so much paying $50 a head a month for Exchange, and then bundling Microsoft products for huge costs savings, even while we pay for machines like my MacBook Pro, regardless of whether it gets the software.
The CUSTOMER, of the Windows Machine, is our computer support and security -- NOT anyone using them.I mean, if it were about money, you'd hire a few LINUX geeks, set up an email system and network for MOSTLY consulting fees, and never restart the box.
Even on a Mac Server, you can have unlimited email, calendars and users for a few grand without monthly fees.But hey, who would get the job of constantly patching and locking things down?
My service request allows someone to install an application because there is no security once you "TRY" an app and it goes rogue.
Windows 7 MIGHT make things better -- but it MIGHT be too good.&gt;&gt; Look at the cell phone market; most of the Smart Phones the ACTUAL customer is the Cell Phone Provider.
With the Google Android and the FREE phones that they are supporting, the CUSTOMER is the people buying add space and your information on the phone in your hand.&gt;&gt; When Steve Jobs negotiated with AT&amp;T -- he was fighting for the CUSTOMER of his phone to be able to use the actual features on the phone.
He lost some battles with things like Tethering.
He can't allow the jail-breaking because of contracts with AT&amp;T.
Now, of course, a cynical person may say that's what Jobs wants us to think.
That anti-DRM message about music was garbage.
Until, of course, we got unlocked music on iTunes.This isn't just for some "ideal" since we all distrust that.
Jobs knows his customer; we want to USE all those features on that phone.
I still have a RAZR and I've yet to use anything more advanced than the camera and a few text messages.
I can program and build a video kiosk -- but I'll be damned if I'm going to bother learning the in's and outs of some gadget that was designed by a toaster repair man.The Google Phone will eventually get all sorts of viruses, and their market will splinter, as they move to support the next cool device to add on to the Open Source phone.&gt;&gt; Anyway -- I much prefer the new Apple that doesn't say much until they ship a product that actually works -- vs. the endless vaporware and hype of "me too" Microsoft, as they TELL YOU how dang smart and creative you are on their ads just for using their product.
I don't think that convinces a smart guy like you any more than it does me.I've got over 300 applicatio</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30893560</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30892308</id>
	<title>#3 - Quality</title>
	<author>stewbacca</author>
	<datestamp>1264442820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>For MOST people, it is about the quality of the end product. Apple is consistently atop the quality and usability rankings since, well, forever. I've been a happy customer since the 90s.</p><p>As much as this article is a troll for Open Source and bait for the fanboys, it is pretty close on #3. Open source just isn't good enough to justify the lack of cost.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For MOST people , it is about the quality of the end product .
Apple is consistently atop the quality and usability rankings since , well , forever .
I 've been a happy customer since the 90s.As much as this article is a troll for Open Source and bait for the fanboys , it is pretty close on # 3 .
Open source just is n't good enough to justify the lack of cost .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For MOST people, it is about the quality of the end product.
Apple is consistently atop the quality and usability rankings since, well, forever.
I've been a happy customer since the 90s.As much as this article is a troll for Open Source and bait for the fanboys, it is pretty close on #3.
Open source just isn't good enough to justify the lack of cost.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889686</id>
	<title>Re:Lesson: Apple marketing i working!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264433760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr></p><div class="quote"><p>...in particular given that probably the majority of the code Apple ships with OS X is derived from other people's open source projects to begin with.</p></div><p>
I love how you say that they've done this with an undertone of contempt when, in reality, doing this is a big part the open source movement's philosophy. Not to mention that Apple has given back an enormous amount to the open source community.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>...in particular given that probably the majority of the code Apple ships with OS X is derived from other people 's open source projects to begin with .
I love how you say that they 've done this with an undertone of contempt when , in reality , doing this is a big part the open source movement 's philosophy .
Not to mention that Apple has given back an enormous amount to the open source community .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> ...in particular given that probably the majority of the code Apple ships with OS X is derived from other people's open source projects to begin with.
I love how you say that they've done this with an undertone of contempt when, in reality, doing this is a big part the open source movement's philosophy.
Not to mention that Apple has given back an enormous amount to the open source community.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889362</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889704</id>
	<title>Re:Lesson: Apple marketing i working!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264433820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Repeat after me, Mac users: "we're all different".</i></p><p>Just like every other Mac user.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Repeat after me , Mac users : " we 're all different " .Just like every other Mac user .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Repeat after me, Mac users: "we're all different".Just like every other Mac user.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889362</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30896534</id>
	<title>Re:Not sure in USA but in Spain...</title>
	<author>cromar</author>
	<datestamp>1264416840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Hell, I thought the new MacMini was a great deal at $550 with educational discount... add to that a $180 22" display and you have a very capable, affordable system.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hell , I thought the new MacMini was a great deal at $ 550 with educational discount... add to that a $ 180 22 " display and you have a very capable , affordable system .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hell, I thought the new MacMini was a great deal at $550 with educational discount... add to that a $180 22" display and you have a very capable, affordable system.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890432</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890298</id>
	<title>The Slashdot Paradox...</title>
	<author>TheVelvetFlamebait</author>
	<datestamp>1264436100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Free thinking people dictating what others should think.</p><p>Liking closed culture has <b>absolutely nothing</b> to do with free thought or lack thereof. A free thought here or there might confirm this.</p><p>If, however, there was a mythical culture of people who instantly start desiring an Apple product as soon as its announced, without any thought or effort put into assessing whether they would actually enjoy the product, that would be a different matter...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Free thinking people dictating what others should think.Liking closed culture has absolutely nothing to do with free thought or lack thereof .
A free thought here or there might confirm this.If , however , there was a mythical culture of people who instantly start desiring an Apple product as soon as its announced , without any thought or effort put into assessing whether they would actually enjoy the product , that would be a different matter.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Free thinking people dictating what others should think.Liking closed culture has absolutely nothing to do with free thought or lack thereof.
A free thought here or there might confirm this.If, however, there was a mythical culture of people who instantly start desiring an Apple product as soon as its announced, without any thought or effort put into assessing whether they would actually enjoy the product, that would be a different matter...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30898642</id>
	<title>Re:Not sure in USA but in Spain...</title>
	<author>mdwh2</author>
	<datestamp>1264426980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's wrong to criticise someone for using a Mac, just as it's tiring when people do it for any other story on Slashdot, such as Linux or Amiga.</p><p>But you only have to look at this thread to see the large amount of mud-slinging at anyone who dares to use Windows, or non-Apple PCs. And then check out the attitude towards any phone that isn't an almighty Iphone - they don't even get news coverage here most the time.</p><p>Have we had a story on any tablet computers? And how many will we get if Apple releases its vaporware?</p><p>Indeed, this article itself is a perfect example - a complete non-story, and we'd never get it for any other company, but it's allowed because it's Apple. Appledot - stuff that doesn't matter, rumours for Apple fans.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's wrong to criticise someone for using a Mac , just as it 's tiring when people do it for any other story on Slashdot , such as Linux or Amiga.But you only have to look at this thread to see the large amount of mud-slinging at anyone who dares to use Windows , or non-Apple PCs .
And then check out the attitude towards any phone that is n't an almighty Iphone - they do n't even get news coverage here most the time.Have we had a story on any tablet computers ?
And how many will we get if Apple releases its vaporware ? Indeed , this article itself is a perfect example - a complete non-story , and we 'd never get it for any other company , but it 's allowed because it 's Apple .
Appledot - stuff that does n't matter , rumours for Apple fans .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's wrong to criticise someone for using a Mac, just as it's tiring when people do it for any other story on Slashdot, such as Linux or Amiga.But you only have to look at this thread to see the large amount of mud-slinging at anyone who dares to use Windows, or non-Apple PCs.
And then check out the attitude towards any phone that isn't an almighty Iphone - they don't even get news coverage here most the time.Have we had a story on any tablet computers?
And how many will we get if Apple releases its vaporware?Indeed, this article itself is a perfect example - a complete non-story, and we'd never get it for any other company, but it's allowed because it's Apple.
Appledot - stuff that doesn't matter, rumours for Apple fans.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891688</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889362</id>
	<title>Lesson: Apple marketing i working!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264432560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>and the Apple brand is almost synonymous with free-thinking creativity</i></p><p>Yes, just like cigarettes make you healthy and slim, alcohol makes you attractive to the opposite sex, junk food makes you popular, and Nikes turn you into a long distance runner, weight lifter, and all-around bad-boy.  Branding is great, isn't it?  Of course, it has nothing to do with reality.</p><p>Repeat after me, Mac users: "we're all different".</p><p><i>Related to #1: customers are pragmatic about quality, and the open source and free software movements haven't produced anything remotely as useful as Mac OS X and the iPhone.</i></p><p>Funny, I think Apple has never produced anything remotely as useful as the open source software movement, in particular given that probably the majority of the code Apple ships with OS X is derived from other people's open source projects to begin with.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>and the Apple brand is almost synonymous with free-thinking creativityYes , just like cigarettes make you healthy and slim , alcohol makes you attractive to the opposite sex , junk food makes you popular , and Nikes turn you into a long distance runner , weight lifter , and all-around bad-boy .
Branding is great , is n't it ?
Of course , it has nothing to do with reality.Repeat after me , Mac users : " we 're all different " .Related to # 1 : customers are pragmatic about quality , and the open source and free software movements have n't produced anything remotely as useful as Mac OS X and the iPhone.Funny , I think Apple has never produced anything remotely as useful as the open source software movement , in particular given that probably the majority of the code Apple ships with OS X is derived from other people 's open source projects to begin with .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>and the Apple brand is almost synonymous with free-thinking creativityYes, just like cigarettes make you healthy and slim, alcohol makes you attractive to the opposite sex, junk food makes you popular, and Nikes turn you into a long distance runner, weight lifter, and all-around bad-boy.
Branding is great, isn't it?
Of course, it has nothing to do with reality.Repeat after me, Mac users: "we're all different".Related to #1: customers are pragmatic about quality, and the open source and free software movements haven't produced anything remotely as useful as Mac OS X and the iPhone.Funny, I think Apple has never produced anything remotely as useful as the open source software movement, in particular given that probably the majority of the code Apple ships with OS X is derived from other people's open source projects to begin with.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890808</id>
	<title>Re:Not sure in USA but in Spain...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264437840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>Mac users are bought by those that want to distinguish themselves from the rest in terms of money or social class, more in the lines of "I can afford an Mac and you are a poor blue collar bastard"
</i>
<br>
<br>
Not in my experience.  Macs are bought around here by people who throw their little hipster hearts into dressing like they have absolutely no money, except for their shiny new macs, and of course the $3,000 a month apartments that they claim they can afford on their salary as an unpaid indie record label intern (no, of course their parents don't help them, they're edgy bohemians).  Or maybe living in Brooklyn has made me bitter.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Mac users are bought by those that want to distinguish themselves from the rest in terms of money or social class , more in the lines of " I can afford an Mac and you are a poor blue collar bastard " Not in my experience .
Macs are bought around here by people who throw their little hipster hearts into dressing like they have absolutely no money , except for their shiny new macs , and of course the $ 3,000 a month apartments that they claim they can afford on their salary as an unpaid indie record label intern ( no , of course their parents do n't help them , they 're edgy bohemians ) .
Or maybe living in Brooklyn has made me bitter .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Mac users are bought by those that want to distinguish themselves from the rest in terms of money or social class, more in the lines of "I can afford an Mac and you are a poor blue collar bastard"



Not in my experience.
Macs are bought around here by people who throw their little hipster hearts into dressing like they have absolutely no money, except for their shiny new macs, and of course the $3,000 a month apartments that they claim they can afford on their salary as an unpaid indie record label intern (no, of course their parents don't help them, they're edgy bohemians).
Or maybe living in Brooklyn has made me bitter.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889256</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30898404</id>
	<title>Re:Lesson: Apple marketing i working!</title>
	<author>knappe duivel</author>
	<datestamp>1264425720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Repeat after me, Mac users: "we're all different".</p></div><p>I'm not.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Repeat after me , Mac users : " we 're all different " .I 'm not .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Repeat after me, Mac users: "we're all different".I'm not.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889362</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889826</id>
	<title>Re:status of shiny white thingys</title>
	<author>xactuary</author>
	<datestamp>1264434240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Having a trojan horse on your daughter's PC while she's studying The Illiad could actually be helpful in understanding some of the concepts.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Having a trojan horse on your daughter 's PC while she 's studying The Illiad could actually be helpful in understanding some of the concepts .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Having a trojan horse on your daughter's PC while she's studying The Illiad could actually be helpful in understanding some of the concepts.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889332</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891324</id>
	<title>Re:Not sure in USA but in Spain...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264439580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p><div class="quote"><p>Mac users are bought by those that want to distinguish themselves from the rest in terms of money or social class, more in the lines of "I can afford an Mac and you are a poor blue collar bastard"</p></div><p> <b>I</b> really can't stand this. This line of thinking comes up at least once per Apple article anywhere on the internet, and it's always taken as truth for some reason. <b>I own a mac</b> that has been used in public all of once, in an airport. <b>I own it</b> because <b>I prefer it</b> to any other laptop and was ok with spending the extra cash. It has nothing to do with showing off or demonstrating <b>my superiority</b>. <b>I know</b> plenty of other people who own macs and would agree. <b>I</b>'m sure some people do buy them with that intention, and <b>I</b> wouldn't mind people saying so except that every time they do it's always referring to "mac users" instead of "some mac users". <b>I</b> really hate being lumped in with a group of smug assholes just because of <b>my laptop</b> choice.</p></div><p>You are the other kind of mac user - a self obsessed asshole</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Mac users are bought by those that want to distinguish themselves from the rest in terms of money or social class , more in the lines of " I can afford an Mac and you are a poor blue collar bastard " I really ca n't stand this .
This line of thinking comes up at least once per Apple article anywhere on the internet , and it 's always taken as truth for some reason .
I own a mac that has been used in public all of once , in an airport .
I own it because I prefer it to any other laptop and was ok with spending the extra cash .
It has nothing to do with showing off or demonstrating my superiority .
I know plenty of other people who own macs and would agree .
I 'm sure some people do buy them with that intention , and I would n't mind people saying so except that every time they do it 's always referring to " mac users " instead of " some mac users " .
I really hate being lumped in with a group of smug assholes just because of my laptop choice.You are the other kind of mac user - a self obsessed asshole</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Mac users are bought by those that want to distinguish themselves from the rest in terms of money or social class, more in the lines of "I can afford an Mac and you are a poor blue collar bastard" I really can't stand this.
This line of thinking comes up at least once per Apple article anywhere on the internet, and it's always taken as truth for some reason.
I own a mac that has been used in public all of once, in an airport.
I own it because I prefer it to any other laptop and was ok with spending the extra cash.
It has nothing to do with showing off or demonstrating my superiority.
I know plenty of other people who own macs and would agree.
I'm sure some people do buy them with that intention, and I wouldn't mind people saying so except that every time they do it's always referring to "mac users" instead of "some mac users".
I really hate being lumped in with a group of smug assholes just because of my laptop choice.You are the other kind of mac user - a self obsessed asshole
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890432</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30896866</id>
	<title>keep third-party apps off the iPhone</title>
	<author>SideshowBob</author>
	<datestamp>1264418100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't know why it's become an accepted truism that Apple wanted to keep 3rd party developers off the iPhone. There is just no way that the SDK, iTunes, the App Store, and all that infrastructure weren't planned way, way in advance of them becoming available to the public.</p><p>The fact that weblets were being pushed as an alternative just indicates that the 3rd party developer story wasn't ready to go when the iPhone itself was.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't know why it 's become an accepted truism that Apple wanted to keep 3rd party developers off the iPhone .
There is just no way that the SDK , iTunes , the App Store , and all that infrastructure were n't planned way , way in advance of them becoming available to the public.The fact that weblets were being pushed as an alternative just indicates that the 3rd party developer story was n't ready to go when the iPhone itself was .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't know why it's become an accepted truism that Apple wanted to keep 3rd party developers off the iPhone.
There is just no way that the SDK, iTunes, the App Store, and all that infrastructure weren't planned way, way in advance of them becoming available to the public.The fact that weblets were being pushed as an alternative just indicates that the 3rd party developer story wasn't ready to go when the iPhone itself was.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889794</id>
	<title>Isn't Apple still mostly American... ?</title>
	<author>Antiocheian</author>
	<datestamp>1264434120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...contrary to other multinational and highly outsourced IT companies ?</p><p>Wouldn't that explain why Apple fan news (eg. Slashdot) come mainly from the US ?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...contrary to other multinational and highly outsourced IT companies ? Would n't that explain why Apple fan news ( eg .
Slashdot ) come mainly from the US ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...contrary to other multinational and highly outsourced IT companies ?Wouldn't that explain why Apple fan news (eg.
Slashdot) come mainly from the US ?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30899102</id>
	<title>Re:Not sure in USA but in Spain...</title>
	<author>Arthur Grumbine</author>
	<datestamp>1264430040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>As I read your post I'm really not sure whether some Apple version of <a href="http://rationalwiki.com/wiki/Poe's\_Law" title="rationalwiki.com">Poe's Law</a> [rationalwiki.com] best describes any attempt to assess the nature of your post(parody vs true believer). You could have just as easily been modded funny, like <a href="http://apple.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1523368&amp;cid=30889712" title="slashdot.org">this earlier post</a> [slashdot.org].</htmltext>
<tokenext>As I read your post I 'm really not sure whether some Apple version of Poe 's Law [ rationalwiki.com ] best describes any attempt to assess the nature of your post ( parody vs true believer ) .
You could have just as easily been modded funny , like this earlier post [ slashdot.org ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As I read your post I'm really not sure whether some Apple version of Poe's Law [rationalwiki.com] best describes any attempt to assess the nature of your post(parody vs true believer).
You could have just as easily been modded funny, like this earlier post [slashdot.org].</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891688</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30913584</id>
	<title>Re:FOSS</title>
	<author>ScrewMaster</author>
	<datestamp>1264527000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>"the open source and free software movements haven't produced anything remotely as useful as<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... the iPhone"</p><p>I'm not sure whether this is due to the difficulty getting make and gcc to construct things out of plastic, metal and semi-conductors - or a lack of configure options...</p></div><p>Insightful you may be, but that was one of the most <i>entertaining</i> posts I've come across lately. Certainly some others missed the humor entirely, as did the mods.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" the open source and free software movements have n't produced anything remotely as useful as ... the iPhone " I 'm not sure whether this is due to the difficulty getting make and gcc to construct things out of plastic , metal and semi-conductors - or a lack of configure options...Insightful you may be , but that was one of the most entertaining posts I 've come across lately .
Certainly some others missed the humor entirely , as did the mods .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"the open source and free software movements haven't produced anything remotely as useful as ... the iPhone"I'm not sure whether this is due to the difficulty getting make and gcc to construct things out of plastic, metal and semi-conductors - or a lack of configure options...Insightful you may be, but that was one of the most entertaining posts I've come across lately.
Certainly some others missed the humor entirely, as did the mods.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889316</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889436</id>
	<title>Apple sells hardware</title>
	<author>dwheeler</author>
	<datestamp>1264432800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext> Apple is primarily a *hardware* company - it sells Macs and iPhones, which are physical devices.  Yes, it has to write software to make that hardware useful, but the software is intentionally not sold separately... you can only get the software by getting the hardware.  So comparing Apple to software organizations misses the point... they're not really doing the same thing.  Also, there's a lot of OSS inside the Mac (e.g., much of FreeBSD), so even if you look at the software, it's not either/or.
<p>
The statement "haven't produced anything remotely as useful" is also nonsense.  Let's see, how about the Internet, including TCP/IP and DNS?  Web servers? As far as end-user products, Android phones (including Droid) and the XO are certainly useful. OSS has produced lots of useful things.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Apple is primarily a * hardware * company - it sells Macs and iPhones , which are physical devices .
Yes , it has to write software to make that hardware useful , but the software is intentionally not sold separately... you can only get the software by getting the hardware .
So comparing Apple to software organizations misses the point... they 're not really doing the same thing .
Also , there 's a lot of OSS inside the Mac ( e.g. , much of FreeBSD ) , so even if you look at the software , it 's not either/or .
The statement " have n't produced anything remotely as useful " is also nonsense .
Let 's see , how about the Internet , including TCP/IP and DNS ?
Web servers ?
As far as end-user products , Android phones ( including Droid ) and the XO are certainly useful .
OSS has produced lots of useful things .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Apple is primarily a *hardware* company - it sells Macs and iPhones, which are physical devices.
Yes, it has to write software to make that hardware useful, but the software is intentionally not sold separately... you can only get the software by getting the hardware.
So comparing Apple to software organizations misses the point... they're not really doing the same thing.
Also, there's a lot of OSS inside the Mac (e.g., much of FreeBSD), so even if you look at the software, it's not either/or.
The statement "haven't produced anything remotely as useful" is also nonsense.
Let's see, how about the Internet, including TCP/IP and DNS?
Web servers?
As far as end-user products, Android phones (including Droid) and the XO are certainly useful.
OSS has produced lots of useful things.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889484</id>
	<title>There is no Paradox only flawed reasoning</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264432980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Many creatives think exactly like Steve Jobs. The end product looks less like genius if you show the incremental process. Most "designers, musicians, and creative professionals" don't go around showing off half finished work, they hide what they have until it is done so they can get the maximum "wow" effect by revealing a finished project that comes to seemingly come out of nowhere.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Many creatives think exactly like Steve Jobs .
The end product looks less like genius if you show the incremental process .
Most " designers , musicians , and creative professionals " do n't go around showing off half finished work , they hide what they have until it is done so they can get the maximum " wow " effect by revealing a finished project that comes to seemingly come out of nowhere .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Many creatives think exactly like Steve Jobs.
The end product looks less like genius if you show the incremental process.
Most "designers, musicians, and creative professionals" don't go around showing off half finished work, they hide what they have until it is done so they can get the maximum "wow" effect by revealing a finished project that comes to seemingly come out of nowhere.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30893850</id>
	<title>Re:wrong assumptions</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264449300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The company is secretive about upcoming, not-yet-available products. Which is not information that customers require in their day-to-day work anyways. As a user or as a developer, it is information about the <b>current, existing</b> products that you need most. And as both I've always found that to be readily available whenever I needed it.</p></div><p>Really?  Have you done development for the iPhone?  Tried any Cocoa programming?  Apple's documentation is terrible.  I used to think MSDN was bad, but Apple takes worthless to a whole new level.</p><p>Oh, and did you forget that when the iPhone came out they put an NDA on every developer so they couldn't post to discussion forums about it?  Yeah, that screams open.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The company is secretive about upcoming , not-yet-available products .
Which is not information that customers require in their day-to-day work anyways .
As a user or as a developer , it is information about the current , existing products that you need most .
And as both I 've always found that to be readily available whenever I needed it.Really ?
Have you done development for the iPhone ?
Tried any Cocoa programming ?
Apple 's documentation is terrible .
I used to think MSDN was bad , but Apple takes worthless to a whole new level.Oh , and did you forget that when the iPhone came out they put an NDA on every developer so they could n't post to discussion forums about it ?
Yeah , that screams open .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The company is secretive about upcoming, not-yet-available products.
Which is not information that customers require in their day-to-day work anyways.
As a user or as a developer, it is information about the current, existing products that you need most.
And as both I've always found that to be readily available whenever I needed it.Really?
Have you done development for the iPhone?
Tried any Cocoa programming?
Apple's documentation is terrible.
I used to think MSDN was bad, but Apple takes worthless to a whole new level.Oh, and did you forget that when the iPhone came out they put an NDA on every developer so they couldn't post to discussion forums about it?
Yeah, that screams open.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889444</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889638</id>
	<title>Re:I'm off-duty</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264433580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Or perhaps there are simply more <i>openly</i> gay people in the arts?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Or perhaps there are simply more openly gay people in the arts ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or perhaps there are simply more openly gay people in the arts?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889380</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890922</id>
	<title>Nothing as useful?</title>
	<author>ghetto2ivy</author>
	<datestamp>1264438260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Related to #1: customers are pragmatic about quality, and the open source and free software movements haven't produced anything remotely as useful as Mac OS X and the iPhone.</p></div></blockquote><p>

Try building OS X and the iPhone  without BSD. And Apache, MySQL, and Linux haven't been as useful as the iPhone or OSX at all...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Related to # 1 : customers are pragmatic about quality , and the open source and free software movements have n't produced anything remotely as useful as Mac OS X and the iPhone .
Try building OS X and the iPhone without BSD .
And Apache , MySQL , and Linux have n't been as useful as the iPhone or OSX at all.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Related to #1: customers are pragmatic about quality, and the open source and free software movements haven't produced anything remotely as useful as Mac OS X and the iPhone.
Try building OS X and the iPhone  without BSD.
And Apache, MySQL, and Linux haven't been as useful as the iPhone or OSX at all...
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30894480</id>
	<title>Huh?</title>
	<author>uvajed\_ekil</author>
	<datestamp>1264452060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yeah, it sucks that I can't get all of my work done on this cheap computer because it is running linux instead of OS X (nevermind all the folks who use Windows - I'm sure nothing of use is ever done with those solitaire machines, since they don't run OS X). But at least I'm not bothered by lots of phone calls, emails, and other communications sent by people bugging me to get a real OS so I can get work done, since my useless phone runs Android rather than being an iphone. And now that I've mentioned iphones, I feel even more need to get one today, since the only network they are available for is so much more reliable and useful than mine, even though I've never had a problem with T-Mobile.<br>
Man, talk about flamebait. How did that even get posted? Must have been done on an iphone or Mac.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , it sucks that I ca n't get all of my work done on this cheap computer because it is running linux instead of OS X ( nevermind all the folks who use Windows - I 'm sure nothing of use is ever done with those solitaire machines , since they do n't run OS X ) .
But at least I 'm not bothered by lots of phone calls , emails , and other communications sent by people bugging me to get a real OS so I can get work done , since my useless phone runs Android rather than being an iphone .
And now that I 've mentioned iphones , I feel even more need to get one today , since the only network they are available for is so much more reliable and useful than mine , even though I 've never had a problem with T-Mobile .
Man , talk about flamebait .
How did that even get posted ?
Must have been done on an iphone or Mac .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, it sucks that I can't get all of my work done on this cheap computer because it is running linux instead of OS X (nevermind all the folks who use Windows - I'm sure nothing of use is ever done with those solitaire machines, since they don't run OS X).
But at least I'm not bothered by lots of phone calls, emails, and other communications sent by people bugging me to get a real OS so I can get work done, since my useless phone runs Android rather than being an iphone.
And now that I've mentioned iphones, I feel even more need to get one today, since the only network they are available for is so much more reliable and useful than mine, even though I've never had a problem with T-Mobile.
Man, talk about flamebait.
How did that even get posted?
Must have been done on an iphone or Mac.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30893846</id>
	<title>Ridiculous premise</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264449300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Is anyone really confused about the difference between closed/secret development and closed/proprietary products?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is anyone really confused about the difference between closed/secret development and closed/proprietary products ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is anyone really confused about the difference between closed/secret development and closed/proprietary products?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890024</id>
	<title>Re:Fourth option...</title>
	<author>nyctopterus</author>
	<datestamp>1264435020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Artists use macs because the design of the UI is the nicest thing out there. Windows, Gnome and KDE look amateurish by comparison. For most people that's fine, the UI looks good enough. However, for most people who really care about design, good enough won't cut it. All this talk about being different, or open, or whatever is horseshit. Macs have the most carefully and attractively designed UI, that's it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Artists use macs because the design of the UI is the nicest thing out there .
Windows , Gnome and KDE look amateurish by comparison .
For most people that 's fine , the UI looks good enough .
However , for most people who really care about design , good enough wo n't cut it .
All this talk about being different , or open , or whatever is horseshit .
Macs have the most carefully and attractively designed UI , that 's it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Artists use macs because the design of the UI is the nicest thing out there.
Windows, Gnome and KDE look amateurish by comparison.
For most people that's fine, the UI looks good enough.
However, for most people who really care about design, good enough won't cut it.
All this talk about being different, or open, or whatever is horseshit.
Macs have the most carefully and attractively designed UI, that's it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889328</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889712</id>
	<title>Re:Not sure in USA but in Spain...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264433880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Elitist really? You are simply jealous and I'll bet that you can't even comprehend the refinement and engineering that goes into Apple's devices, but then again, it is so hard for those so far away from the apex of technology to understand such things.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Elitist really ?
You are simply jealous and I 'll bet that you ca n't even comprehend the refinement and engineering that goes into Apple 's devices , but then again , it is so hard for those so far away from the apex of technology to understand such things .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Elitist really?
You are simply jealous and I'll bet that you can't even comprehend the refinement and engineering that goes into Apple's devices, but then again, it is so hard for those so far away from the apex of technology to understand such things.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889256</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30896516</id>
	<title>Re:Subjectivity presented as fact</title>
	<author>bonch</author>
	<datestamp>1264416780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Quite the claim! Yet there are no examples.</p></div></blockquote><p>Colloquy, Transmission, Delicious Library, Transmit, Coda, NetNewsWire, Unison, and on and on.  If you had trouble using iLife, I don't know what to say, since those are probably the easiest apps on the system.</p><p>Even as a developer, you can see the different when looking at the APIs.  There are still 16-bit leftovers in Win32.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Quite the claim !
Yet there are no examples.Colloquy , Transmission , Delicious Library , Transmit , Coda , NetNewsWire , Unison , and on and on .
If you had trouble using iLife , I do n't know what to say , since those are probably the easiest apps on the system.Even as a developer , you can see the different when looking at the APIs .
There are still 16-bit leftovers in Win32 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Quite the claim!
Yet there are no examples.Colloquy, Transmission, Delicious Library, Transmit, Coda, NetNewsWire, Unison, and on and on.
If you had trouble using iLife, I don't know what to say, since those are probably the easiest apps on the system.Even as a developer, you can see the different when looking at the APIs.
There are still 16-bit leftovers in Win32.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889454</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889868</id>
	<title>Re:Why surprised.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264434420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You're right!  And look who creates FOSS... humans!  And is the human genome open-source?  I think not!  Open source is a lie!</htmltext>
<tokenext>You 're right !
And look who creates FOSS... humans ! And is the human genome open-source ?
I think not !
Open source is a lie !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You're right!
And look who creates FOSS... humans!  And is the human genome open-source?
I think not!
Open source is a lie!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889292</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30892340</id>
	<title>We see a lot of that on campus</title>
	<author>Sycraft-fu</author>
	<datestamp>1264442940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Macs are shiny and thus status symbols and thus people want them. One of our student workers is a law student. Now being a law student you are pretty much required to have a laptop, they don't officially mandate it, but they might as well. You type an amazing amount of stuff on your computer, and all tests are taken using test software on the computer, and they don't have enough to go around. Ok well for writing, you need Office (that's the only format they accept) so no problem either way. However the test software is Windows ONLY. They note that and warn people of that. You'd think then that everyone would have Windows laptops. Wrong, tons of Mac users and they are chronically having problems. They have to go buy a copy or Windows from the bookstore so they can run the software in bootcamp (it won't run in a VM). They then have problems setting it up, and sometimes the test software acts up and of course the software maker won't support it since they don't support Macs.</p><p>All in all, a Windows laptop is what you want for this law school. It is just what they support, what they are set up to deal with. You would think that would be what people would buy, since it is a tool for their degree, much like people get TI calculators in the math program because that is what they are set up to deal with. No, they get Macs only because they are a status symbol. They are harder to work with in this context, but people get them anyhow because they want the shiny computer, not because there's a real need.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Macs are shiny and thus status symbols and thus people want them .
One of our student workers is a law student .
Now being a law student you are pretty much required to have a laptop , they do n't officially mandate it , but they might as well .
You type an amazing amount of stuff on your computer , and all tests are taken using test software on the computer , and they do n't have enough to go around .
Ok well for writing , you need Office ( that 's the only format they accept ) so no problem either way .
However the test software is Windows ONLY .
They note that and warn people of that .
You 'd think then that everyone would have Windows laptops .
Wrong , tons of Mac users and they are chronically having problems .
They have to go buy a copy or Windows from the bookstore so they can run the software in bootcamp ( it wo n't run in a VM ) .
They then have problems setting it up , and sometimes the test software acts up and of course the software maker wo n't support it since they do n't support Macs.All in all , a Windows laptop is what you want for this law school .
It is just what they support , what they are set up to deal with .
You would think that would be what people would buy , since it is a tool for their degree , much like people get TI calculators in the math program because that is what they are set up to deal with .
No , they get Macs only because they are a status symbol .
They are harder to work with in this context , but people get them anyhow because they want the shiny computer , not because there 's a real need .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Macs are shiny and thus status symbols and thus people want them.
One of our student workers is a law student.
Now being a law student you are pretty much required to have a laptop, they don't officially mandate it, but they might as well.
You type an amazing amount of stuff on your computer, and all tests are taken using test software on the computer, and they don't have enough to go around.
Ok well for writing, you need Office (that's the only format they accept) so no problem either way.
However the test software is Windows ONLY.
They note that and warn people of that.
You'd think then that everyone would have Windows laptops.
Wrong, tons of Mac users and they are chronically having problems.
They have to go buy a copy or Windows from the bookstore so they can run the software in bootcamp (it won't run in a VM).
They then have problems setting it up, and sometimes the test software acts up and of course the software maker won't support it since they don't support Macs.All in all, a Windows laptop is what you want for this law school.
It is just what they support, what they are set up to deal with.
You would think that would be what people would buy, since it is a tool for their degree, much like people get TI calculators in the math program because that is what they are set up to deal with.
No, they get Macs only because they are a status symbol.
They are harder to work with in this context, but people get them anyhow because they want the shiny computer, not because there's a real need.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889332</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890090</id>
	<title>Re:Apple sells hardware</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264435200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Let's see, how about the Internet, including TCP/IP and DNS</i></p><p>I am not sure what world you live in.  But when the 'internet' started hitting main stream computers Apple was still farting around with AppleTalk.  Apple/IBM/MS all had to be dragged kicking and screaming into the internet.  MS did this first cheapest (no more 50 dollar add ons or 2000 dollar TCP stacks).  No more crazy apps to install just so I can get on the internet.  It just worked.  The Mac I had at the time was a finicky beast that would lockup on the drop of a hat if someone unplugged their network cable.  Didnt get a decent browser until MS wrote one for them.</p><p>TCP and DNS is the realm of SGI/Sun/IBM/DEC/HP *THESE* guys set the pace on what the internet is today not Apple.  Even then it was just dudes in research centers and colleges hacking away on 50k machines to get them to do cool things.</p><p>I give Apple props for being a slick marketing company.  Their hardware is at least as good as the other hardware on the market.  But they have for years sold cool.  They sell it well.  Their latest gimick is the itablet or whatever it will be called.  Do you REALLY think all that hype is because it is the best thing out there?  No Apple is the mast at building hype.  They have a decent sized group whose job it is.</p><p>For some reason Apple makes me think of this movie.<br><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fight\_Club\_(film)" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fight\_Club\_(film)</a> [wikipedia.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Let 's see , how about the Internet , including TCP/IP and DNSI am not sure what world you live in .
But when the 'internet ' started hitting main stream computers Apple was still farting around with AppleTalk .
Apple/IBM/MS all had to be dragged kicking and screaming into the internet .
MS did this first cheapest ( no more 50 dollar add ons or 2000 dollar TCP stacks ) .
No more crazy apps to install just so I can get on the internet .
It just worked .
The Mac I had at the time was a finicky beast that would lockup on the drop of a hat if someone unplugged their network cable .
Didnt get a decent browser until MS wrote one for them.TCP and DNS is the realm of SGI/Sun/IBM/DEC/HP * THESE * guys set the pace on what the internet is today not Apple .
Even then it was just dudes in research centers and colleges hacking away on 50k machines to get them to do cool things.I give Apple props for being a slick marketing company .
Their hardware is at least as good as the other hardware on the market .
But they have for years sold cool .
They sell it well .
Their latest gimick is the itablet or whatever it will be called .
Do you REALLY think all that hype is because it is the best thing out there ?
No Apple is the mast at building hype .
They have a decent sized group whose job it is.For some reason Apple makes me think of this movie.http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fight \ _Club \ _ ( film ) [ wikipedia.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Let's see, how about the Internet, including TCP/IP and DNSI am not sure what world you live in.
But when the 'internet' started hitting main stream computers Apple was still farting around with AppleTalk.
Apple/IBM/MS all had to be dragged kicking and screaming into the internet.
MS did this first cheapest (no more 50 dollar add ons or 2000 dollar TCP stacks).
No more crazy apps to install just so I can get on the internet.
It just worked.
The Mac I had at the time was a finicky beast that would lockup on the drop of a hat if someone unplugged their network cable.
Didnt get a decent browser until MS wrote one for them.TCP and DNS is the realm of SGI/Sun/IBM/DEC/HP *THESE* guys set the pace on what the internet is today not Apple.
Even then it was just dudes in research centers and colleges hacking away on 50k machines to get them to do cool things.I give Apple props for being a slick marketing company.
Their hardware is at least as good as the other hardware on the market.
But they have for years sold cool.
They sell it well.
Their latest gimick is the itablet or whatever it will be called.
Do you REALLY think all that hype is because it is the best thing out there?
No Apple is the mast at building hype.
They have a decent sized group whose job it is.For some reason Apple makes me think of this movie.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fight\_Club\_(film) [wikipedia.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889436</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30892210</id>
	<title>Re:It is product's quality, stupid</title>
	<author>slim</author>
	<datestamp>1264442460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>BTW, nowadays Windows seems to suck much less and so newer generations have much less hostility towards Microsoft &mdash; despite their remaining just as closed and anti-competitive as they were before.</p></div><p>Both Mac and Windows suck much less than they used to.</p><p>I'm convinced that Linux was instrumental in pushing MS and Apple to improve. Linux showed geeks that there was nothing inherent about the x86 platform that meant you had to put up without pre-emptive multitasking, memory protection, dynamic reconfiguration (changing IP without a reboot!). These OS features even had tangible benefits in GUI world -- dragging a window while a movie played in it! Playing two movies at once! They'd show these things off to their Windows using friends, who would be impressed. That must have scared Microsoft. I'm sure that led to Windows 95, and the improvements made thereafter.</p><p>Windows had pre-emptive multitasking for years, while Apple stubbornly stuck with cooperative multitasking. There *were* errant Mac programs. There *were* Mac viruses. And if one program screwed up, it would take the whole system with it. My personal bete noir was Hypercard - forever killing the system, possibly due to malware.</p><p>Apple were pretty much forced to replace their kernel, by the fact that Windows (of all things) was beating them on stability and performance.</p><p>Linux never caught up in terms of desktop sheen and newbie-friendliness. But nonetheless, both Mac and Windows were forced to improve massively, by the threat of Linux's technical superiority at certain points in history.</p><p>Even if the year of the Linux desktop never comes, I can thank it for pushing Windows (which I have to use at work) towards a tolerable state.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>BTW , nowadays Windows seems to suck much less and so newer generations have much less hostility towards Microsoft    despite their remaining just as closed and anti-competitive as they were before.Both Mac and Windows suck much less than they used to.I 'm convinced that Linux was instrumental in pushing MS and Apple to improve .
Linux showed geeks that there was nothing inherent about the x86 platform that meant you had to put up without pre-emptive multitasking , memory protection , dynamic reconfiguration ( changing IP without a reboot ! ) .
These OS features even had tangible benefits in GUI world -- dragging a window while a movie played in it !
Playing two movies at once !
They 'd show these things off to their Windows using friends , who would be impressed .
That must have scared Microsoft .
I 'm sure that led to Windows 95 , and the improvements made thereafter.Windows had pre-emptive multitasking for years , while Apple stubbornly stuck with cooperative multitasking .
There * were * errant Mac programs .
There * were * Mac viruses .
And if one program screwed up , it would take the whole system with it .
My personal bete noir was Hypercard - forever killing the system , possibly due to malware.Apple were pretty much forced to replace their kernel , by the fact that Windows ( of all things ) was beating them on stability and performance.Linux never caught up in terms of desktop sheen and newbie-friendliness .
But nonetheless , both Mac and Windows were forced to improve massively , by the threat of Linux 's technical superiority at certain points in history.Even if the year of the Linux desktop never comes , I can thank it for pushing Windows ( which I have to use at work ) towards a tolerable state .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>BTW, nowadays Windows seems to suck much less and so newer generations have much less hostility towards Microsoft — despite their remaining just as closed and anti-competitive as they were before.Both Mac and Windows suck much less than they used to.I'm convinced that Linux was instrumental in pushing MS and Apple to improve.
Linux showed geeks that there was nothing inherent about the x86 platform that meant you had to put up without pre-emptive multitasking, memory protection, dynamic reconfiguration (changing IP without a reboot!).
These OS features even had tangible benefits in GUI world -- dragging a window while a movie played in it!
Playing two movies at once!
They'd show these things off to their Windows using friends, who would be impressed.
That must have scared Microsoft.
I'm sure that led to Windows 95, and the improvements made thereafter.Windows had pre-emptive multitasking for years, while Apple stubbornly stuck with cooperative multitasking.
There *were* errant Mac programs.
There *were* Mac viruses.
And if one program screwed up, it would take the whole system with it.
My personal bete noir was Hypercard - forever killing the system, possibly due to malware.Apple were pretty much forced to replace their kernel, by the fact that Windows (of all things) was beating them on stability and performance.Linux never caught up in terms of desktop sheen and newbie-friendliness.
But nonetheless, both Mac and Windows were forced to improve massively, by the threat of Linux's technical superiority at certain points in history.Even if the year of the Linux desktop never comes, I can thank it for pushing Windows (which I have to use at work) towards a tolerable state.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889516</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891112</id>
	<title>Re:Not sure in USA but in Spain...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264438980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I own a mac that has been used in public all of once, in an airport.</p></div><p>I would assume you were in the airport Starbucks, then?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I own a mac that has been used in public all of once , in an airport.I would assume you were in the airport Starbucks , then ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I own a mac that has been used in public all of once, in an airport.I would assume you were in the airport Starbucks, then?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890432</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889800</id>
	<title>Who looks at  SRC anyway?</title>
	<author>zaq1xsw2cde9</author>
	<datestamp>1264434120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I don't own any Apple products personally,but certainly you guys are smart enough to see the appeal.  Apple's stuff just works and allows people who don't care about how the backend works to do whatever they want to do.  The kind of person who uses Apple products is never going to compile their own source or futz with making something work.  Openness does them no good, at least not in any direct sense.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't own any Apple products personally,but certainly you guys are smart enough to see the appeal .
Apple 's stuff just works and allows people who do n't care about how the backend works to do whatever they want to do .
The kind of person who uses Apple products is never going to compile their own source or futz with making something work .
Openness does them no good , at least not in any direct sense .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't own any Apple products personally,but certainly you guys are smart enough to see the appeal.
Apple's stuff just works and allows people who don't care about how the backend works to do whatever they want to do.
The kind of person who uses Apple products is never going to compile their own source or futz with making something work.
Openness does them no good, at least not in any direct sense.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30895750</id>
	<title>Apple + Linux</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264413960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I love Apple too.  If I could afford a MacBook and get that fanless bottom, LED screen, and sexy (though a bit tired and toyish) look cool in Airports, I would do it.  But, I wish I could get one without the MacOS tax.  I would rebuild it with Ubuntu, so having to buy MacOS is a drag.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I love Apple too .
If I could afford a MacBook and get that fanless bottom , LED screen , and sexy ( though a bit tired and toyish ) look cool in Airports , I would do it .
But , I wish I could get one without the MacOS tax .
I would rebuild it with Ubuntu , so having to buy MacOS is a drag .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I love Apple too.
If I could afford a MacBook and get that fanless bottom, LED screen, and sexy (though a bit tired and toyish) look cool in Airports, I would do it.
But, I wish I could get one without the MacOS tax.
I would rebuild it with Ubuntu, so having to buy MacOS is a drag.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30893252</id>
	<title>Re:Not sure in USA but in Spain...</title>
	<author>Wyatt Earp</author>
	<datestamp>1264446660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I use a Mac because I work on computers.</p><p>Ten years ago today I was working in a place that was 70\% Mac and 30\% Win 95/98/NT 4. A good 80\% of my work was on the PCs and we were backlogged like mad. So I kept with Apple because I liked having something I didn't have to work on all the time.</p><p>Today I'm in a joint that is 100\% Apple, in the last three weeks we've had one computer go down for repairs (my work station Mac Pro with a bad ATI video card) and I still buy Apple computers because I continue to like not having to repair my computer.</p><p>Not cause I'm hip or want to seem cool, because in my 17 years experience working with computers Macs work better.</p><p>But I don't and won't live in NYC, so my experiences might be different.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I use a Mac because I work on computers.Ten years ago today I was working in a place that was 70 \ % Mac and 30 \ % Win 95/98/NT 4 .
A good 80 \ % of my work was on the PCs and we were backlogged like mad .
So I kept with Apple because I liked having something I did n't have to work on all the time.Today I 'm in a joint that is 100 \ % Apple , in the last three weeks we 've had one computer go down for repairs ( my work station Mac Pro with a bad ATI video card ) and I still buy Apple computers because I continue to like not having to repair my computer.Not cause I 'm hip or want to seem cool , because in my 17 years experience working with computers Macs work better.But I do n't and wo n't live in NYC , so my experiences might be different .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I use a Mac because I work on computers.Ten years ago today I was working in a place that was 70\% Mac and 30\% Win 95/98/NT 4.
A good 80\% of my work was on the PCs and we were backlogged like mad.
So I kept with Apple because I liked having something I didn't have to work on all the time.Today I'm in a joint that is 100\% Apple, in the last three weeks we've had one computer go down for repairs (my work station Mac Pro with a bad ATI video card) and I still buy Apple computers because I continue to like not having to repair my computer.Not cause I'm hip or want to seem cool, because in my 17 years experience working with computers Macs work better.But I don't and won't live in NYC, so my experiences might be different.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890808</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889654</id>
	<title>Re:Not sure in USA but in Spain...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264433640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Or maybe some people actually like using Mac OS X. Go back to your football and your toros, idiot.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Or maybe some people actually like using Mac OS X. Go back to your football and your toros , idiot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or maybe some people actually like using Mac OS X. Go back to your football and your toros, idiot.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889256</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30895620</id>
	<title>Re:I'm off-duty</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264413480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I don't want to start a conspiracy theory or anything, but I have a cousin who only turned bender AFTER he bought an iphone and mac book.</p><p>Coincidence or causation? Has anyone checked the iphone source code for back-doors?</p></div><p>I'm sure your cousin has!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't want to start a conspiracy theory or anything , but I have a cousin who only turned bender AFTER he bought an iphone and mac book.Coincidence or causation ?
Has anyone checked the iphone source code for back-doors ? I 'm sure your cousin has !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't want to start a conspiracy theory or anything, but I have a cousin who only turned bender AFTER he bought an iphone and mac book.Coincidence or causation?
Has anyone checked the iphone source code for back-doors?I'm sure your cousin has!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889528</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889850</id>
	<title>Re:status of shiny white thingys</title>
	<author>LWATCDR</author>
	<datestamp>1264434360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually the fact that everyone at her college has one can make it a better choice.  The more people that use a system the bigger the local experience base and the easier it is to get help.  If she is not a CS student going with what the majority of people at her school are using can be a real benefit to a system.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually the fact that everyone at her college has one can make it a better choice .
The more people that use a system the bigger the local experience base and the easier it is to get help .
If she is not a CS student going with what the majority of people at her school are using can be a real benefit to a system .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually the fact that everyone at her college has one can make it a better choice.
The more people that use a system the bigger the local experience base and the easier it is to get help.
If she is not a CS student going with what the majority of people at her school are using can be a real benefit to a system.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889332</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889396</id>
	<title>Err, what?</title>
	<author>garg0yle</author>
	<datestamp>1264432620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"the open source and free software movements haven't produced anything remotely as useful as Mac OS X"</p><p>This would be the Mac OS X which is based on FreeBSD?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" the open source and free software movements have n't produced anything remotely as useful as Mac OS X " This would be the Mac OS X which is based on FreeBSD ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"the open source and free software movements haven't produced anything remotely as useful as Mac OS X"This would be the Mac OS X which is based on FreeBSD?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30892102</id>
	<title>consumer fanaticism</title>
	<author>amoeba1911</author>
	<datestamp>1264442100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What makes Apple a success is that Apple fully exploits consumer fanaticism. They have a large number of fanatic followers who will worship every word that comes out of Steve's mouth.
</p><p>
At this point it doesn't even matter if the product is good or not, as long as it has the Apple logo, the fanatics will swear by it. It doesn't matter if the product has battery flaws, headphone plug incompatibility, catches on fire randomly, isn't up to par with the latest technology, isn't compatible with established industry standards, has draconian end user license agreements. It's not about any the product anymore.
</p><p>
It's turned into a religion. Trying to convince someone Apple products have flaws like any other product is like talking to a creationist: it's made by Apple and Apple is the greatest because Apple says Apple is the greatest and Apple's word can not be wrong because Apple said it and since Apple is the greatest Apple can't be wrong about Apple being the greatest.
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What makes Apple a success is that Apple fully exploits consumer fanaticism .
They have a large number of fanatic followers who will worship every word that comes out of Steve 's mouth .
At this point it does n't even matter if the product is good or not , as long as it has the Apple logo , the fanatics will swear by it .
It does n't matter if the product has battery flaws , headphone plug incompatibility , catches on fire randomly , is n't up to par with the latest technology , is n't compatible with established industry standards , has draconian end user license agreements .
It 's not about any the product anymore .
It 's turned into a religion .
Trying to convince someone Apple products have flaws like any other product is like talking to a creationist : it 's made by Apple and Apple is the greatest because Apple says Apple is the greatest and Apple 's word can not be wrong because Apple said it and since Apple is the greatest Apple ca n't be wrong about Apple being the greatest .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What makes Apple a success is that Apple fully exploits consumer fanaticism.
They have a large number of fanatic followers who will worship every word that comes out of Steve's mouth.
At this point it doesn't even matter if the product is good or not, as long as it has the Apple logo, the fanatics will swear by it.
It doesn't matter if the product has battery flaws, headphone plug incompatibility, catches on fire randomly, isn't up to par with the latest technology, isn't compatible with established industry standards, has draconian end user license agreements.
It's not about any the product anymore.
It's turned into a religion.
Trying to convince someone Apple products have flaws like any other product is like talking to a creationist: it's made by Apple and Apple is the greatest because Apple says Apple is the greatest and Apple's word can not be wrong because Apple said it and since Apple is the greatest Apple can't be wrong about Apple being the greatest.
</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30893938</id>
	<title>Re:Subjectivity presented as fact</title>
	<author>TheoCryst</author>
	<datestamp>1264449720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The quote itself is referencing third-party apps.  Try comparing <a href="http://adium.im/" title="adium.im" rel="nofollow">Adium</a> [adium.im] to <a href="http://www.pidgin.im/" title="pidgin.im" rel="nofollow">Pidgin</a> [pidgin.im], or <a href="http://macromates.com/" title="macromates.com" rel="nofollow">TextMate</a> [macromates.com] to pretty much any other GUI text editor, or <a href="http://www.apple.com/iwork/" title="apple.com" rel="nofollow">iWork</a> [apple.com] to <a href="http://www.openoffice.org/" title="openoffice.org" rel="nofollow">OpenOffice</a> [openoffice.org] (not really a third-party app, but you get the picture).  As a general rule of thumb, apps written for the Mac are better thought-out visually, are more consistent both with themselves and with the rest of the system, and often manage to do this without sacrificing power or features.</p><p>Hell, even Microsoft is susceptible to this: just look at their <a href="http://gizmodo.com/5427512/official-bing-app-hits-the-iphone" title="gizmodo.com" rel="nofollow">Bing iPhone app</a> [gizmodo.com], and compare it to their own <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows\_Live\_Search\_Mobile" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">WinMo equivalent</a> [wikipedia.org].  It's like night and day.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The quote itself is referencing third-party apps .
Try comparing Adium [ adium.im ] to Pidgin [ pidgin.im ] , or TextMate [ macromates.com ] to pretty much any other GUI text editor , or iWork [ apple.com ] to OpenOffice [ openoffice.org ] ( not really a third-party app , but you get the picture ) .
As a general rule of thumb , apps written for the Mac are better thought-out visually , are more consistent both with themselves and with the rest of the system , and often manage to do this without sacrificing power or features.Hell , even Microsoft is susceptible to this : just look at their Bing iPhone app [ gizmodo.com ] , and compare it to their own WinMo equivalent [ wikipedia.org ] .
It 's like night and day .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The quote itself is referencing third-party apps.
Try comparing Adium [adium.im] to Pidgin [pidgin.im], or TextMate [macromates.com] to pretty much any other GUI text editor, or iWork [apple.com] to OpenOffice [openoffice.org] (not really a third-party app, but you get the picture).
As a general rule of thumb, apps written for the Mac are better thought-out visually, are more consistent both with themselves and with the rest of the system, and often manage to do this without sacrificing power or features.Hell, even Microsoft is susceptible to this: just look at their Bing iPhone app [gizmodo.com], and compare it to their own WinMo equivalent [wikipedia.org].
It's like night and day.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889454</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30893248</id>
	<title>Re:I guess Apple did all that themselves...</title>
	<author>Dr. Spork</author>
	<datestamp>1264446660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>In terms of actual developer work, how much do you think went into NeXTStep as a proportion of the total work which culminated with Snow Leopard? I would guess it's about 2\%. Even if it's a bit more, it's totally nuts to see OSX as NeXTStep with some polish applied. It's even more nuts to see OSX as BSD that Apple found in the nineties and polished up a bit. That's not true of even Darwin anymore.</htmltext>
<tokenext>In terms of actual developer work , how much do you think went into NeXTStep as a proportion of the total work which culminated with Snow Leopard ?
I would guess it 's about 2 \ % .
Even if it 's a bit more , it 's totally nuts to see OSX as NeXTStep with some polish applied .
It 's even more nuts to see OSX as BSD that Apple found in the nineties and polished up a bit .
That 's not true of even Darwin anymore .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In terms of actual developer work, how much do you think went into NeXTStep as a proportion of the total work which culminated with Snow Leopard?
I would guess it's about 2\%.
Even if it's a bit more, it's totally nuts to see OSX as NeXTStep with some polish applied.
It's even more nuts to see OSX as BSD that Apple found in the nineties and polished up a bit.
That's not true of even Darwin anymore.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889670</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30913774</id>
	<title>infosec</title>
	<author>GregNorc</author>
	<datestamp>1264529100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As much as I loved my macbook, it couldn't do basic tasks I need to do as an information security professional.</p><p>No promiscuous mode. Tools like wireshark, aircrack, fakeap, etc all didn't work properly due to issues with closed source wireless drivers.</p><p>There were two things keeping me on OSX for a while: iTunes and Photoshop.</p><p>Well, CS3 now runs in Wine, which left iTunes. I used to like iTunes as a music player, but lately I only keep it around to sync my iPod - <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Songbird\_software" title="wikipedia.org">songbird</a> [wikipedia.org] has gotten quite mature.</p><p>I after years of having utter disdain for "smartphones" I caved in and bought an iPhone. Initially I loved it, but little things like the inability to say, listen to last.fm in the background while tooling around in iCal really is starting to grate on me. I already do most of my day to day college work on a netbook, and when I graduate and can afford a new laptop and my phone contract ends, I will probably be sporting a Thinkpad and some sort of android phone.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As much as I loved my macbook , it could n't do basic tasks I need to do as an information security professional.No promiscuous mode .
Tools like wireshark , aircrack , fakeap , etc all did n't work properly due to issues with closed source wireless drivers.There were two things keeping me on OSX for a while : iTunes and Photoshop.Well , CS3 now runs in Wine , which left iTunes .
I used to like iTunes as a music player , but lately I only keep it around to sync my iPod - songbird [ wikipedia.org ] has gotten quite mature.I after years of having utter disdain for " smartphones " I caved in and bought an iPhone .
Initially I loved it , but little things like the inability to say , listen to last.fm in the background while tooling around in iCal really is starting to grate on me .
I already do most of my day to day college work on a netbook , and when I graduate and can afford a new laptop and my phone contract ends , I will probably be sporting a Thinkpad and some sort of android phone .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As much as I loved my macbook, it couldn't do basic tasks I need to do as an information security professional.No promiscuous mode.
Tools like wireshark, aircrack, fakeap, etc all didn't work properly due to issues with closed source wireless drivers.There were two things keeping me on OSX for a while: iTunes and Photoshop.Well, CS3 now runs in Wine, which left iTunes.
I used to like iTunes as a music player, but lately I only keep it around to sync my iPod - songbird [wikipedia.org] has gotten quite mature.I after years of having utter disdain for "smartphones" I caved in and bought an iPhone.
Initially I loved it, but little things like the inability to say, listen to last.fm in the background while tooling around in iCal really is starting to grate on me.
I already do most of my day to day college work on a netbook, and when I graduate and can afford a new laptop and my phone contract ends, I will probably be sporting a Thinkpad and some sort of android phone.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890582</id>
	<title>Re:I'm off-duty</title>
	<author>Low Ranked Craig</author>
	<datestamp>1264437120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>read my sig...</htmltext>
<tokenext>read my sig.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>read my sig...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889380</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891796</id>
	<title>Re:Designed to stay out of your way</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264441020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've never understood the "it just works" claims about Apple.  I've usually found that (coming from a Windows &amp; Linux background) it \_doesn't\_ just work as expected.  This is particularly true when dealing with third-party hardware or software (cd-writer upgrade, Excel, Labview, adding wifi, etc) or trying to upgrade older Macs (eg. upgrade a G3 from OS9 to OSX).  Maybe - to you - these fall under the heading of "that's why Apple tries to have a closed system", since I'm using third party software or trying to do something that Steve Jobs didn't personally approve.  To me, it's a flaw - somehow Windows and Linux have managed to work with a large community of hardware and software developers, and make it work, yet Apple claims being incompatible is a selling point.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've never understood the " it just works " claims about Apple .
I 've usually found that ( coming from a Windows &amp; Linux background ) it \ _does n't \ _ just work as expected .
This is particularly true when dealing with third-party hardware or software ( cd-writer upgrade , Excel , Labview , adding wifi , etc ) or trying to upgrade older Macs ( eg .
upgrade a G3 from OS9 to OSX ) .
Maybe - to you - these fall under the heading of " that 's why Apple tries to have a closed system " , since I 'm using third party software or trying to do something that Steve Jobs did n't personally approve .
To me , it 's a flaw - somehow Windows and Linux have managed to work with a large community of hardware and software developers , and make it work , yet Apple claims being incompatible is a selling point .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've never understood the "it just works" claims about Apple.
I've usually found that (coming from a Windows &amp; Linux background) it \_doesn't\_ just work as expected.
This is particularly true when dealing with third-party hardware or software (cd-writer upgrade, Excel, Labview, adding wifi, etc) or trying to upgrade older Macs (eg.
upgrade a G3 from OS9 to OSX).
Maybe - to you - these fall under the heading of "that's why Apple tries to have a closed system", since I'm using third party software or trying to do something that Steve Jobs didn't personally approve.
To me, it's a flaw - somehow Windows and Linux have managed to work with a large community of hardware and software developers, and make it work, yet Apple claims being incompatible is a selling point.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889406</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890082</id>
	<title>Re:I guess Apple did all that themselves...</title>
	<author>BitZtream</author>
	<datestamp>1264435200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, some portions of OS X are derived from OSS.  The GNU userland that almost no mac users use, and portions of the extremely heavily modified userland and base libraries and a few services such as printing.</p><p>The majority of OSX is not derived from OSS, contrary to what you'd like to think, the parts that are have had massive changes to bring them to what they are.</p><p>Its rather silly to make such retardedly out of context comments considering that the OSS you speak of is almost all a rip off of someone elses idea.  They aren't really using unique OSS software with one exception I can think of, so pretending that Apple is standing on the shoulders of OSS is retarded unless you want to claim that OSS Unix like OSes are standing on the shoulders of Bell labs.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , some portions of OS X are derived from OSS .
The GNU userland that almost no mac users use , and portions of the extremely heavily modified userland and base libraries and a few services such as printing.The majority of OSX is not derived from OSS , contrary to what you 'd like to think , the parts that are have had massive changes to bring them to what they are.Its rather silly to make such retardedly out of context comments considering that the OSS you speak of is almost all a rip off of someone elses idea .
They are n't really using unique OSS software with one exception I can think of , so pretending that Apple is standing on the shoulders of OSS is retarded unless you want to claim that OSS Unix like OSes are standing on the shoulders of Bell labs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, some portions of OS X are derived from OSS.
The GNU userland that almost no mac users use, and portions of the extremely heavily modified userland and base libraries and a few services such as printing.The majority of OSX is not derived from OSS, contrary to what you'd like to think, the parts that are have had massive changes to bring them to what they are.Its rather silly to make such retardedly out of context comments considering that the OSS you speak of is almost all a rip off of someone elses idea.
They aren't really using unique OSS software with one exception I can think of, so pretending that Apple is standing on the shoulders of OSS is retarded unless you want to claim that OSS Unix like OSes are standing on the shoulders of Bell labs.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889282</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891966</id>
	<title>Re:Steve Jobs Fanboy Worship Alert...</title>
	<author>hitmark</author>
	<datestamp>1264441560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>woz created the actuall apple computer. And next was full of ex-apple people, it was not a jobs-only project. As for the choice of next over beos, that was mostly a case of price, in that the low bid won.</p><p>as for where the success came from? how about the willingness to give the middle finger to backwards compatiblity? Thats btw the exact same reason that linux do not have a set in stone ABI for drivers, so that the devs are free to basically toss a subsystem out and start over if they find it to be less work (or bigger long term benefit) then attempting to patch the existing sticks and ducttape construction/mess.</p><p>osx basically ran os9 software in a vm for the longest time (and may still do). Funny enough, windows 7 do the same thing with anything from windows xp or earlier, iirc. And the dos window on NT based windows was a dos emulator. Hell, much of the stability and security issues that windows was plagued with over the years was coming from all the special cases coded in to keep legacy software still running. Iirc, said dos emulator holds a special case for sim city, as the game would make use of memory allocations that it had recently freed up, a behavior that should really produce a error message, but one that earlier dos, thanks to a bug, allowed.</p><p>heck, IE6 is still important in many corporate environments largely thanks to its ability to run corp-custom processed that IE7 or IE8 cant really handle as they behave in a more web standard way.</p><p>even IBM mainframes played the compatibility card, making use of a virtual bytecode that have no history in actual hardware. Or how about the insides of a modern X86 cpu? the code is preprocessed by a extra layer that breaks the X86 code into cpu-internal "microcode" before the actual processing begins.</p><p>the modern computing world is running on so many layers of redirection, i am continually surprised that things work more often then they break.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>woz created the actuall apple computer .
And next was full of ex-apple people , it was not a jobs-only project .
As for the choice of next over beos , that was mostly a case of price , in that the low bid won.as for where the success came from ?
how about the willingness to give the middle finger to backwards compatiblity ?
Thats btw the exact same reason that linux do not have a set in stone ABI for drivers , so that the devs are free to basically toss a subsystem out and start over if they find it to be less work ( or bigger long term benefit ) then attempting to patch the existing sticks and ducttape construction/mess.osx basically ran os9 software in a vm for the longest time ( and may still do ) .
Funny enough , windows 7 do the same thing with anything from windows xp or earlier , iirc .
And the dos window on NT based windows was a dos emulator .
Hell , much of the stability and security issues that windows was plagued with over the years was coming from all the special cases coded in to keep legacy software still running .
Iirc , said dos emulator holds a special case for sim city , as the game would make use of memory allocations that it had recently freed up , a behavior that should really produce a error message , but one that earlier dos , thanks to a bug , allowed.heck , IE6 is still important in many corporate environments largely thanks to its ability to run corp-custom processed that IE7 or IE8 cant really handle as they behave in a more web standard way.even IBM mainframes played the compatibility card , making use of a virtual bytecode that have no history in actual hardware .
Or how about the insides of a modern X86 cpu ?
the code is preprocessed by a extra layer that breaks the X86 code into cpu-internal " microcode " before the actual processing begins.the modern computing world is running on so many layers of redirection , i am continually surprised that things work more often then they break .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>woz created the actuall apple computer.
And next was full of ex-apple people, it was not a jobs-only project.
As for the choice of next over beos, that was mostly a case of price, in that the low bid won.as for where the success came from?
how about the willingness to give the middle finger to backwards compatiblity?
Thats btw the exact same reason that linux do not have a set in stone ABI for drivers, so that the devs are free to basically toss a subsystem out and start over if they find it to be less work (or bigger long term benefit) then attempting to patch the existing sticks and ducttape construction/mess.osx basically ran os9 software in a vm for the longest time (and may still do).
Funny enough, windows 7 do the same thing with anything from windows xp or earlier, iirc.
And the dos window on NT based windows was a dos emulator.
Hell, much of the stability and security issues that windows was plagued with over the years was coming from all the special cases coded in to keep legacy software still running.
Iirc, said dos emulator holds a special case for sim city, as the game would make use of memory allocations that it had recently freed up, a behavior that should really produce a error message, but one that earlier dos, thanks to a bug, allowed.heck, IE6 is still important in many corporate environments largely thanks to its ability to run corp-custom processed that IE7 or IE8 cant really handle as they behave in a more web standard way.even IBM mainframes played the compatibility card, making use of a virtual bytecode that have no history in actual hardware.
Or how about the insides of a modern X86 cpu?
the code is preprocessed by a extra layer that breaks the X86 code into cpu-internal "microcode" before the actual processing begins.the modern computing world is running on so many layers of redirection, i am continually surprised that things work more often then they break.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889494</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30895842</id>
	<title>It's always the same</title>
	<author>obarthelemy</author>
	<datestamp>1264414380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>with new regime (like Apple now) or regime changes: at the beginning, you get very good guys (like Jobs obviously is). THen after a while, fast or slow, it starts to deteriorate, because of hubris, lack of motivation, greed, changing circumstances that make yesterday's good strategy bad...</p><p>Apple are bringing 2 things to consumer electronics:<br>- sexy design (put a Macbook next to a Dell... you've got the point)<br>- ease of use (try and use an iPhone, then a WinMob phone)<br>- plus an understanding that computing is no longer the preserve of Knowledge Workers, but their kids, parents, and other relatives... which is funny because they coined the phrase.</p><p>They are NOT bringing<br>- features (Apple stuff doesn't do anything you can't do with windows. it only requires a lot less tinkering)<br>- performance (same hardware, no faster OS)<br>- quality (really, it's not better or worse than similarly-price wintel stuff... better than el-cheapo stuff, of course)<br>- openness (they manage to be even worse than MS)</p><p>The issue is, it's very dependent on design, especially since Apple never creates a market, they barge in as late comers, to take advantage that early suppliers couldn't design nor market their way out of a 2-inch puddle. When someone else finally wakes up to the importance of design and ease of use, things will get hairy. Hopefully they'll have enough people locked in to iTunes and AppStore by then.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>with new regime ( like Apple now ) or regime changes : at the beginning , you get very good guys ( like Jobs obviously is ) .
THen after a while , fast or slow , it starts to deteriorate , because of hubris , lack of motivation , greed , changing circumstances that make yesterday 's good strategy bad...Apple are bringing 2 things to consumer electronics : - sexy design ( put a Macbook next to a Dell... you 've got the point ) - ease of use ( try and use an iPhone , then a WinMob phone ) - plus an understanding that computing is no longer the preserve of Knowledge Workers , but their kids , parents , and other relatives... which is funny because they coined the phrase.They are NOT bringing- features ( Apple stuff does n't do anything you ca n't do with windows .
it only requires a lot less tinkering ) - performance ( same hardware , no faster OS ) - quality ( really , it 's not better or worse than similarly-price wintel stuff... better than el-cheapo stuff , of course ) - openness ( they manage to be even worse than MS ) The issue is , it 's very dependent on design , especially since Apple never creates a market , they barge in as late comers , to take advantage that early suppliers could n't design nor market their way out of a 2-inch puddle .
When someone else finally wakes up to the importance of design and ease of use , things will get hairy .
Hopefully they 'll have enough people locked in to iTunes and AppStore by then .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>with new regime (like Apple now) or regime changes: at the beginning, you get very good guys (like Jobs obviously is).
THen after a while, fast or slow, it starts to deteriorate, because of hubris, lack of motivation, greed, changing circumstances that make yesterday's good strategy bad...Apple are bringing 2 things to consumer electronics:- sexy design (put a Macbook next to a Dell... you've got the point)- ease of use (try and use an iPhone, then a WinMob phone)- plus an understanding that computing is no longer the preserve of Knowledge Workers, but their kids, parents, and other relatives... which is funny because they coined the phrase.They are NOT bringing- features (Apple stuff doesn't do anything you can't do with windows.
it only requires a lot less tinkering)- performance (same hardware, no faster OS)- quality (really, it's not better or worse than similarly-price wintel stuff... better than el-cheapo stuff, of course)- openness (they manage to be even worse than MS)The issue is, it's very dependent on design, especially since Apple never creates a market, they barge in as late comers, to take advantage that early suppliers couldn't design nor market their way out of a 2-inch puddle.
When someone else finally wakes up to the importance of design and ease of use, things will get hairy.
Hopefully they'll have enough people locked in to iTunes and AppStore by then.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30894426</id>
	<title>Re:I'm off-duty</title>
	<author>gyrogeerloose</author>
	<datestamp>1264451880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I took some art courses working on an undergrad Fine Arts program at 2 different colleges and I didn't see an unusually high number of gay students.</p></div><p>Yeah, I was an art major too--in graphic design, no less, a profession that has a reputation for having a high percentage of gays--and while there were a few men who swung the other way, most of us were straight. In fact, with the large female-male disparity, us guys would frequently talk among ourselves about that period being the only time in our lives that we had a reasonable chance to get a date on a regular basis.</p><p>On the other hand, one of our projects was doing posters for the theater department. While I'm reluctant to make a broad generalization, it certainly appeared that there was a much higher gay-to-straight ratio in that area than in the fine arts.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I took some art courses working on an undergrad Fine Arts program at 2 different colleges and I did n't see an unusually high number of gay students.Yeah , I was an art major too--in graphic design , no less , a profession that has a reputation for having a high percentage of gays--and while there were a few men who swung the other way , most of us were straight .
In fact , with the large female-male disparity , us guys would frequently talk among ourselves about that period being the only time in our lives that we had a reasonable chance to get a date on a regular basis.On the other hand , one of our projects was doing posters for the theater department .
While I 'm reluctant to make a broad generalization , it certainly appeared that there was a much higher gay-to-straight ratio in that area than in the fine arts .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I took some art courses working on an undergrad Fine Arts program at 2 different colleges and I didn't see an unusually high number of gay students.Yeah, I was an art major too--in graphic design, no less, a profession that has a reputation for having a high percentage of gays--and while there were a few men who swung the other way, most of us were straight.
In fact, with the large female-male disparity, us guys would frequently talk among ourselves about that period being the only time in our lives that we had a reasonable chance to get a date on a regular basis.On the other hand, one of our projects was doing posters for the theater department.
While I'm reluctant to make a broad generalization, it certainly appeared that there was a much higher gay-to-straight ratio in that area than in the fine arts.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889680</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889516</id>
	<title>It is product's quality, stupid</title>
	<author>mi</author>
	<datestamp>1264433100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Apple's products are well designed and work. That, apparently, is the key to their popularity.

</p><p>On contrast, Microsoft's offerings were crappy &mdash; and <em>that fact</em>, rather than their being "closed" or anti-competitive, is why we hated them and the company.

</p><p>BTW, nowadays Windows seems to suck much less and so newer generations have much hostility towards Microsoft &mdash; despite their remaining just as closed and anti-competitive as they were before.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Apple 's products are well designed and work .
That , apparently , is the key to their popularity .
On contrast , Microsoft 's offerings were crappy    and that fact , rather than their being " closed " or anti-competitive , is why we hated them and the company .
BTW , nowadays Windows seems to suck much less and so newer generations have much hostility towards Microsoft    despite their remaining just as closed and anti-competitive as they were before .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Apple's products are well designed and work.
That, apparently, is the key to their popularity.
On contrast, Microsoft's offerings were crappy — and that fact, rather than their being "closed" or anti-competitive, is why we hated them and the company.
BTW, nowadays Windows seems to suck much less and so newer generations have much hostility towards Microsoft — despite their remaining just as closed and anti-competitive as they were before.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30892144</id>
	<title>That says more about your daughter...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264442220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...Than anything else. I can't help but notice how so many people here on this website make such broad, sweeping generalizations about Mac users, and are modded 'Insightful'. How so many people here on this site act as though they know everything.</p><p>If I was as smart or as important as posters here make themselves out to be, my time would be spent running a successful BUSINESS, not posting on Slashdot.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...Than anything else .
I ca n't help but notice how so many people here on this website make such broad , sweeping generalizations about Mac users , and are modded 'Insightful' .
How so many people here on this site act as though they know everything.If I was as smart or as important as posters here make themselves out to be , my time would be spent running a successful BUSINESS , not posting on Slashdot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...Than anything else.
I can't help but notice how so many people here on this website make such broad, sweeping generalizations about Mac users, and are modded 'Insightful'.
How so many people here on this site act as though they know everything.If I was as smart or as important as posters here make themselves out to be, my time would be spent running a successful BUSINESS, not posting on Slashdot.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889332</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890280</id>
	<title>philosophy of information</title>
	<author>viralMeme</author>
	<datestamp>1264436040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>"<i>The secrecy surrounding the expected Apple tablet computer is only the latest example of the company's famously closed and controlling culture<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.. How can a company whose philosophy of information sharing is so at odds with that of most of its customers be so successful?</i>"<br> <br>

The only people bitching about Apple are a certain company in Redmond who Apple won't let 'innovate on the iPod. That is Apple uses its own FairPlay instead of the 'industry standard' Windows Media DRM (ha haa haaa). Apples main crime being making money out of online music without paying the Microsoft tax.</htmltext>
<tokenext>" The secrecy surrounding the expected Apple tablet computer is only the latest example of the company 's famously closed and controlling culture .. How can a company whose philosophy of information sharing is so at odds with that of most of its customers be so successful ?
" The only people bitching about Apple are a certain company in Redmond who Apple wo n't let 'innovate on the iPod .
That is Apple uses its own FairPlay instead of the 'industry standard ' Windows Media DRM ( ha haa haaa ) .
Apples main crime being making money out of online music without paying the Microsoft tax .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"The secrecy surrounding the expected Apple tablet computer is only the latest example of the company's famously closed and controlling culture .. How can a company whose philosophy of information sharing is so at odds with that of most of its customers be so successful?
" 

The only people bitching about Apple are a certain company in Redmond who Apple won't let 'innovate on the iPod.
That is Apple uses its own FairPlay instead of the 'industry standard' Windows Media DRM (ha haa haaa).
Apples main crime being making money out of online music without paying the Microsoft tax.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30896250</id>
	<title>It's just a tool</title>
	<author>Mr. Foogle</author>
	<datestamp>1264415820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Yet millions of designers, musicians, and other creative professionals love their Apple products,</i></p><p>Look - the guy fixing your jet motor cares about his tools and he buys the best he can, because they enable him to get his job done quickly, with pleasure, and a minimum of fuss.   He doesn't care about the company that produced them, much, as long as the tools are the right ones for the job.</p><p>Likewise millions of designers, musicians, and IT guys.   A Mac is a means to an end, not the end.  It's just a <b>tool</b>.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yet millions of designers , musicians , and other creative professionals love their Apple products,Look - the guy fixing your jet motor cares about his tools and he buys the best he can , because they enable him to get his job done quickly , with pleasure , and a minimum of fuss .
He does n't care about the company that produced them , much , as long as the tools are the right ones for the job.Likewise millions of designers , musicians , and IT guys .
A Mac is a means to an end , not the end .
It 's just a tool .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yet millions of designers, musicians, and other creative professionals love their Apple products,Look - the guy fixing your jet motor cares about his tools and he buys the best he can, because they enable him to get his job done quickly, with pleasure, and a minimum of fuss.
He doesn't care about the company that produced them, much, as long as the tools are the right ones for the job.Likewise millions of designers, musicians, and IT guys.
A Mac is a means to an end, not the end.
It's just a tool.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30902414</id>
	<title>Re:Not sure in USA but in Spain...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264510740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p><div class="quote"><p>I really hate being lumped in with a group of smug assholes just because of my laptop choice.</p></div><p>Let them scrabble around together at the bottom [...] They're just trying to drag you down to their level</p></div><p>Why isn't parent modded funny?  Am I the only one seeing the ironic dissonance between the two posts?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I really hate being lumped in with a group of smug assholes just because of my laptop choice.Let them scrabble around together at the bottom [ ... ] They 're just trying to drag you down to their levelWhy is n't parent modded funny ?
Am I the only one seeing the ironic dissonance between the two posts ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I really hate being lumped in with a group of smug assholes just because of my laptop choice.Let them scrabble around together at the bottom [...] They're just trying to drag you down to their levelWhy isn't parent modded funny?
Am I the only one seeing the ironic dissonance between the two posts?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891688</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890146</id>
	<title>Re:It's number 3</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264435440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I love this site.  Pretty sane most of the time, but when it comes to Apple... it's like they were tea partiers talking about Obama.</p><p>So I bought a computer that just works, the OS stays out of my way, and I can get things done with it.  A tool.  A means to an end.  Yeah, it's an Apple.</p><p>For this, I get tagged "cultist" and excoriated because I don't think that *every* computer need be an end in itself.</p><p>Meanwhile, every other computer in the house (yes, MY house, I'm not a basement dweller) runs Linux because I need them to function as more-or-less purpose-built machines, not a general computer.  And I run Gentoo, so don't go accusing me of being scared of difficult things or politics.  (Yeah, the Mac is triple-boot.)</p><p>But then I have an MSI Wind U210 netbook which I cannot get wireless to function reliably (the Ralink 3090 only got a staging driver in 2.6.32), TuxOnIce works half the time, suspend-to-RAM tends to reboot the machine on wake, Ubuntu simply hates it, and Netbook Remix has no idea what to do with it because it's a non-Atom netbook.  I got it so I could do some hacking here and there, on travel, when I have a minute... and it has yet to be useful for that since it will die when I close the lid.</p><p>Not every car I own has to be a rice mobile.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I love this site .
Pretty sane most of the time , but when it comes to Apple... it 's like they were tea partiers talking about Obama.So I bought a computer that just works , the OS stays out of my way , and I can get things done with it .
A tool .
A means to an end .
Yeah , it 's an Apple.For this , I get tagged " cultist " and excoriated because I do n't think that * every * computer need be an end in itself.Meanwhile , every other computer in the house ( yes , MY house , I 'm not a basement dweller ) runs Linux because I need them to function as more-or-less purpose-built machines , not a general computer .
And I run Gentoo , so do n't go accusing me of being scared of difficult things or politics .
( Yeah , the Mac is triple-boot .
) But then I have an MSI Wind U210 netbook which I can not get wireless to function reliably ( the Ralink 3090 only got a staging driver in 2.6.32 ) , TuxOnIce works half the time , suspend-to-RAM tends to reboot the machine on wake , Ubuntu simply hates it , and Netbook Remix has no idea what to do with it because it 's a non-Atom netbook .
I got it so I could do some hacking here and there , on travel , when I have a minute... and it has yet to be useful for that since it will die when I close the lid.Not every car I own has to be a rice mobile .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I love this site.
Pretty sane most of the time, but when it comes to Apple... it's like they were tea partiers talking about Obama.So I bought a computer that just works, the OS stays out of my way, and I can get things done with it.
A tool.
A means to an end.
Yeah, it's an Apple.For this, I get tagged "cultist" and excoriated because I don't think that *every* computer need be an end in itself.Meanwhile, every other computer in the house (yes, MY house, I'm not a basement dweller) runs Linux because I need them to function as more-or-less purpose-built machines, not a general computer.
And I run Gentoo, so don't go accusing me of being scared of difficult things or politics.
(Yeah, the Mac is triple-boot.
)But then I have an MSI Wind U210 netbook which I cannot get wireless to function reliably (the Ralink 3090 only got a staging driver in 2.6.32), TuxOnIce works half the time, suspend-to-RAM tends to reboot the machine on wake, Ubuntu simply hates it, and Netbook Remix has no idea what to do with it because it's a non-Atom netbook.
I got it so I could do some hacking here and there, on travel, when I have a minute... and it has yet to be useful for that since it will die when I close the lid.Not every car I own has to be a rice mobile.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889382</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890172</id>
	<title>Why should irony be surprising?</title>
	<author>hey!</author>
	<datestamp>1264435560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As engineers, we ought to know that sometimes we want things that are contradictory. We'd like this airplane to be strong, but it also  must be light.  You can't have unlimited quantities of both.</p><p>The same goes with creativity. We <em>say</em> we want originality, but that's not really what we are looking for most of the time. What we want is something <em>derivative enough</em> to be certain to work but <em>original enough</em> to be an improvement. Any idiot can be "original".  Just take whatever is being done and do it a different way.  The problem is that most different ways aren't better.</p><p>That's why "creativity" can't be treated as a "core organizational value".  It's not something you can pursue in any meaningful way.   What really distinguishes "creative" organizations is that they have greater insight into their problem domains.</p><p>Apple's most admired products each embody an insight about what the users they are after want to do.  The iPod was not the first portable digital music player, nor has it ever been the best going by specs.  The user interfaces on the iPods have been well designed and have featured innovations like multi-touch, but the <em>killer</em> feature isn't a feature at all. It's how the iPod, iTunes and iTunes store work together to make managing your media convenient.</p><p>That said, nobody can be all things to all people.   I <em>hate</em> the iTunes search interface to the iTunes store, because I don't use it the way Apple's target users do. I don't watch TV and don't care about being part of popular culture.  I'm more interested in finding oddball, eccentric stuff.  If Google ever opened a music store, that'd be for me; YouTube is more what I'm looking for.   The iTunes store wants to steer me to the latest episode of whatever TV show is the rage, and discourages me from finding what <em>I</em> want.</p><p>But it doesn't matter because catering to the oddball whims of very eccentric people isn't the business model for iTunes.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As engineers , we ought to know that sometimes we want things that are contradictory .
We 'd like this airplane to be strong , but it also must be light .
You ca n't have unlimited quantities of both.The same goes with creativity .
We say we want originality , but that 's not really what we are looking for most of the time .
What we want is something derivative enough to be certain to work but original enough to be an improvement .
Any idiot can be " original " .
Just take whatever is being done and do it a different way .
The problem is that most different ways are n't better.That 's why " creativity " ca n't be treated as a " core organizational value " .
It 's not something you can pursue in any meaningful way .
What really distinguishes " creative " organizations is that they have greater insight into their problem domains.Apple 's most admired products each embody an insight about what the users they are after want to do .
The iPod was not the first portable digital music player , nor has it ever been the best going by specs .
The user interfaces on the iPods have been well designed and have featured innovations like multi-touch , but the killer feature is n't a feature at all .
It 's how the iPod , iTunes and iTunes store work together to make managing your media convenient.That said , nobody can be all things to all people .
I hate the iTunes search interface to the iTunes store , because I do n't use it the way Apple 's target users do .
I do n't watch TV and do n't care about being part of popular culture .
I 'm more interested in finding oddball , eccentric stuff .
If Google ever opened a music store , that 'd be for me ; YouTube is more what I 'm looking for .
The iTunes store wants to steer me to the latest episode of whatever TV show is the rage , and discourages me from finding what I want.But it does n't matter because catering to the oddball whims of very eccentric people is n't the business model for iTunes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As engineers, we ought to know that sometimes we want things that are contradictory.
We'd like this airplane to be strong, but it also  must be light.
You can't have unlimited quantities of both.The same goes with creativity.
We say we want originality, but that's not really what we are looking for most of the time.
What we want is something derivative enough to be certain to work but original enough to be an improvement.
Any idiot can be "original".
Just take whatever is being done and do it a different way.
The problem is that most different ways aren't better.That's why "creativity" can't be treated as a "core organizational value".
It's not something you can pursue in any meaningful way.
What really distinguishes "creative" organizations is that they have greater insight into their problem domains.Apple's most admired products each embody an insight about what the users they are after want to do.
The iPod was not the first portable digital music player, nor has it ever been the best going by specs.
The user interfaces on the iPods have been well designed and have featured innovations like multi-touch, but the killer feature isn't a feature at all.
It's how the iPod, iTunes and iTunes store work together to make managing your media convenient.That said, nobody can be all things to all people.
I hate the iTunes search interface to the iTunes store, because I don't use it the way Apple's target users do.
I don't watch TV and don't care about being part of popular culture.
I'm more interested in finding oddball, eccentric stuff.
If Google ever opened a music store, that'd be for me; YouTube is more what I'm looking for.
The iTunes store wants to steer me to the latest episode of whatever TV show is the rage, and discourages me from finding what I want.But it doesn't matter because catering to the oddball whims of very eccentric people isn't the business model for iTunes.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30893616</id>
	<title>Re:Designed to stay out of your way</title>
	<author>Culture20</author>
	<datestamp>1264448040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I have never run into a Windows application where drag and drop does not work.</p></div><p>I know what you're getting at, but for completeness, try drag and drop with Wordpad.  Dumbest ^&amp;*@@$ implementation of Drag and Drop ever, and it's still broken.  When I drag a txt file into any other text editor, it Opens the File.  With Wordpad, the same action Creates a Link to the file on the local computer.  WTF?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have never run into a Windows application where drag and drop does not work.I know what you 're getting at , but for completeness , try drag and drop with Wordpad .
Dumbest ^ &amp; * @ @ $ implementation of Drag and Drop ever , and it 's still broken .
When I drag a txt file into any other text editor , it Opens the File .
With Wordpad , the same action Creates a Link to the file on the local computer .
WTF ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have never run into a Windows application where drag and drop does not work.I know what you're getting at, but for completeness, try drag and drop with Wordpad.
Dumbest ^&amp;*@@$ implementation of Drag and Drop ever, and it's still broken.
When I drag a txt file into any other text editor, it Opens the File.
With Wordpad, the same action Creates a Link to the file on the local computer.
WTF?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890312</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30892410</id>
	<title>Re:Not sure in USA but in Spain...</title>
	<author>Gr8Apes</author>
	<datestamp>1264443120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think it's funny. I bought a Mac Powerbook 5 years ago because it met the needs for what I wanted. It was lighter than anything comparable and did what i needed it for. I quickly grew to like it a lot. The main reason at the time? Sleep/hibernate actually worked reliably. That was it.</p><p>I then experimented with some other features included with the OS such as photos and videos. I then noticed I spent no time dealing with the OS or application bizarreness, and realized I was starting to use it for everything I normally do in my personal life. I bought a MacBook Pro as it was comparable in price when spec'd out against a comparable Dell or Compaq. (Yes, it really was in fact $200 less for the same basic hardware - CPU/Hard Drive/RAM/Video/Screen Resolution)</p><p>I then decided to look at how it would work out with development, and within a couple of days realized that it was far superior, primarily because of the reliability and speed. I'd reboot maybe once every 2-3 months, a darn sight better than my work windows machine, which I then replaced with Linux. The main issue with the linux box I found is I had to spend too much time dealing with OS/application issues. And thus the promotion of the MBP to my full work/development machine. I now spend 99\% of my time dealing with what I need to spend time on vs dealing with OS/App issues or rebooting. (Bringing up an entire system that runs 4GB plus across multiple components takes a significant portion of your time if you have to reboot once a day a more often, which I found was the case with Windows.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think it 's funny .
I bought a Mac Powerbook 5 years ago because it met the needs for what I wanted .
It was lighter than anything comparable and did what i needed it for .
I quickly grew to like it a lot .
The main reason at the time ?
Sleep/hibernate actually worked reliably .
That was it.I then experimented with some other features included with the OS such as photos and videos .
I then noticed I spent no time dealing with the OS or application bizarreness , and realized I was starting to use it for everything I normally do in my personal life .
I bought a MacBook Pro as it was comparable in price when spec 'd out against a comparable Dell or Compaq .
( Yes , it really was in fact $ 200 less for the same basic hardware - CPU/Hard Drive/RAM/Video/Screen Resolution ) I then decided to look at how it would work out with development , and within a couple of days realized that it was far superior , primarily because of the reliability and speed .
I 'd reboot maybe once every 2-3 months , a darn sight better than my work windows machine , which I then replaced with Linux .
The main issue with the linux box I found is I had to spend too much time dealing with OS/application issues .
And thus the promotion of the MBP to my full work/development machine .
I now spend 99 \ % of my time dealing with what I need to spend time on vs dealing with OS/App issues or rebooting .
( Bringing up an entire system that runs 4GB plus across multiple components takes a significant portion of your time if you have to reboot once a day a more often , which I found was the case with Windows .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think it's funny.
I bought a Mac Powerbook 5 years ago because it met the needs for what I wanted.
It was lighter than anything comparable and did what i needed it for.
I quickly grew to like it a lot.
The main reason at the time?
Sleep/hibernate actually worked reliably.
That was it.I then experimented with some other features included with the OS such as photos and videos.
I then noticed I spent no time dealing with the OS or application bizarreness, and realized I was starting to use it for everything I normally do in my personal life.
I bought a MacBook Pro as it was comparable in price when spec'd out against a comparable Dell or Compaq.
(Yes, it really was in fact $200 less for the same basic hardware - CPU/Hard Drive/RAM/Video/Screen Resolution)I then decided to look at how it would work out with development, and within a couple of days realized that it was far superior, primarily because of the reliability and speed.
I'd reboot maybe once every 2-3 months, a darn sight better than my work windows machine, which I then replaced with Linux.
The main issue with the linux box I found is I had to spend too much time dealing with OS/application issues.
And thus the promotion of the MBP to my full work/development machine.
I now spend 99\% of my time dealing with what I need to spend time on vs dealing with OS/App issues or rebooting.
(Bringing up an entire system that runs 4GB plus across multiple components takes a significant portion of your time if you have to reboot once a day a more often, which I found was the case with Windows.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890432</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891072</id>
	<title>Re:I'm off-duty</title>
	<author>artemis67</author>
	<datestamp>1264438800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I used to do tech support in a 3D animation school, and can verify that about 90\% of the "artists" there were wannabe's. Maybe 10\% had enough talent to make decent money at it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I used to do tech support in a 3D animation school , and can verify that about 90 \ % of the " artists " there were wannabe 's .
Maybe 10 \ % had enough talent to make decent money at it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I used to do tech support in a 3D animation school, and can verify that about 90\% of the "artists" there were wannabe's.
Maybe 10\% had enough talent to make decent money at it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889498</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890432</id>
	<title>Re:Not sure in USA but in Spain...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264436580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Mac users are bought by those that want to distinguish themselves from the rest in terms of money or social class, more in the lines of "I can afford an Mac and you are a poor blue collar bastard"</p></div><p>I really can't stand this. This line of thinking comes up at least once per Apple article anywhere on the internet, and it's always taken as truth for some reason. I own a mac that has been used in public all of once, in an airport. I own it because I prefer it to any other laptop and was ok with spending the extra cash. It has nothing to do with showing off or demonstrating my superiority. I know plenty of other people who own macs and would agree. I'm sure some people do buy them with that intention, and I wouldn't mind people saying so except that every time they do it's always referring to "mac users" instead of "some mac users". I really hate being lumped in with a group of smug assholes just because of my laptop choice.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Mac users are bought by those that want to distinguish themselves from the rest in terms of money or social class , more in the lines of " I can afford an Mac and you are a poor blue collar bastard " I really ca n't stand this .
This line of thinking comes up at least once per Apple article anywhere on the internet , and it 's always taken as truth for some reason .
I own a mac that has been used in public all of once , in an airport .
I own it because I prefer it to any other laptop and was ok with spending the extra cash .
It has nothing to do with showing off or demonstrating my superiority .
I know plenty of other people who own macs and would agree .
I 'm sure some people do buy them with that intention , and I would n't mind people saying so except that every time they do it 's always referring to " mac users " instead of " some mac users " .
I really hate being lumped in with a group of smug assholes just because of my laptop choice .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Mac users are bought by those that want to distinguish themselves from the rest in terms of money or social class, more in the lines of "I can afford an Mac and you are a poor blue collar bastard"I really can't stand this.
This line of thinking comes up at least once per Apple article anywhere on the internet, and it's always taken as truth for some reason.
I own a mac that has been used in public all of once, in an airport.
I own it because I prefer it to any other laptop and was ok with spending the extra cash.
It has nothing to do with showing off or demonstrating my superiority.
I know plenty of other people who own macs and would agree.
I'm sure some people do buy them with that intention, and I wouldn't mind people saying so except that every time they do it's always referring to "mac users" instead of "some mac users".
I really hate being lumped in with a group of smug assholes just because of my laptop choice.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889256</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30897012</id>
	<title>Re:Not sure in USA but in Spain...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264418760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I wouldn't mind people saying so except that every time they do it's always referring to "mac users" instead of "some mac users"</p></div><p>On the same note, I wish there were more of the "I prefer it to any other" type people like you, and less of the "it IS better than any other" crowd. The world would be a much more tolerable place for the rest of us<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)<br>Interestingly, the generalization you pointed out turns many would-be converts off Macs. As an IT friend of mine once commented "I actually quite like Macs, I just hate the people that use them.". It's a bummer, but that's the general sentiment.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I would n't mind people saying so except that every time they do it 's always referring to " mac users " instead of " some mac users " On the same note , I wish there were more of the " I prefer it to any other " type people like you , and less of the " it IS better than any other " crowd .
The world would be a much more tolerable place for the rest of us ; ) Interestingly , the generalization you pointed out turns many would-be converts off Macs .
As an IT friend of mine once commented " I actually quite like Macs , I just hate the people that use them. " .
It 's a bummer , but that 's the general sentiment .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wouldn't mind people saying so except that every time they do it's always referring to "mac users" instead of "some mac users"On the same note, I wish there were more of the "I prefer it to any other" type people like you, and less of the "it IS better than any other" crowd.
The world would be a much more tolerable place for the rest of us ;)Interestingly, the generalization you pointed out turns many would-be converts off Macs.
As an IT friend of mine once commented "I actually quite like Macs, I just hate the people that use them.".
It's a bummer, but that's the general sentiment.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890432</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30894750</id>
	<title>Re:I'm off-duty</title>
	<author>BasilBrush</author>
	<datestamp>1264410060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>My daughter is in college, and although she doesn't like to admit it, she wanted her MacBook because of its coolness factor, not just what it can do.</p></div></blockquote><p>In other words, you think she wants it for the coolness factor, but she says you're wrong. Which says something about your perception, not her reasons.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>My daughter is in college , and although she does n't like to admit it , she wanted her MacBook because of its coolness factor , not just what it can do.In other words , you think she wants it for the coolness factor , but she says you 're wrong .
Which says something about your perception , not her reasons .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My daughter is in college, and although she doesn't like to admit it, she wanted her MacBook because of its coolness factor, not just what it can do.In other words, you think she wants it for the coolness factor, but she says you're wrong.
Which says something about your perception, not her reasons.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890056</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889478</id>
	<title>How about good industrial design?</title>
	<author>Xenious</author>
	<datestamp>1264432920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They don't neglect to build visually stunning and usable objects.  Yes the secrecy gets annoying, but on the flip side finding out about some new product and then finding out it will launch in two years is pretty annoying as well.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They do n't neglect to build visually stunning and usable objects .
Yes the secrecy gets annoying , but on the flip side finding out about some new product and then finding out it will launch in two years is pretty annoying as well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They don't neglect to build visually stunning and usable objects.
Yes the secrecy gets annoying, but on the flip side finding out about some new product and then finding out it will launch in two years is pretty annoying as well.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890336</id>
	<title>Re:Unwarranted Assumptions</title>
	<author>nyctopterus</author>
	<datestamp>1264436280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You're right. If you look at large-scale collaborations between "creatives", such as film making, they are often strictly hierarchical--and often tyrannical--enterprises.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You 're right .
If you look at large-scale collaborations between " creatives " , such as film making , they are often strictly hierarchical--and often tyrannical--enterprises .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You're right.
If you look at large-scale collaborations between "creatives", such as film making, they are often strictly hierarchical--and often tyrannical--enterprises.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889610</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891688</id>
	<title>Re:Not sure in USA but in Spain...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264440660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Don't take the bait. You bought what was right for you and were willing to pay for it. What you are hearing from them is jealousy, sour grapes or some other mental disorder. Let them scrabble around together at the bottom, congratulating themselves on how little they spent for their cheap plastic boxes. It obviously works for them. They think everything should be free or cheap, that they're somehow owed it. Great! There's a market there and Dell, Gateway &amp; MS, et al are there to fill it. That's what they want, that's what they deserve, that's what they're happy with. Why they feel so strongly about our preferences and why they feel the need to attack us so vehemently is a question they probably don't want an answer to. Be true to yourself. Don't be ashamed that you can distinguish, prefer and afford quality. They're just trying to drag you down to their level, thinking it will somehow validate them and make them better. They are wrong.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't take the bait .
You bought what was right for you and were willing to pay for it .
What you are hearing from them is jealousy , sour grapes or some other mental disorder .
Let them scrabble around together at the bottom , congratulating themselves on how little they spent for their cheap plastic boxes .
It obviously works for them .
They think everything should be free or cheap , that they 're somehow owed it .
Great ! There 's a market there and Dell , Gateway &amp; MS , et al are there to fill it .
That 's what they want , that 's what they deserve , that 's what they 're happy with .
Why they feel so strongly about our preferences and why they feel the need to attack us so vehemently is a question they probably do n't want an answer to .
Be true to yourself .
Do n't be ashamed that you can distinguish , prefer and afford quality .
They 're just trying to drag you down to their level , thinking it will somehow validate them and make them better .
They are wrong .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't take the bait.
You bought what was right for you and were willing to pay for it.
What you are hearing from them is jealousy, sour grapes or some other mental disorder.
Let them scrabble around together at the bottom, congratulating themselves on how little they spent for their cheap plastic boxes.
It obviously works for them.
They think everything should be free or cheap, that they're somehow owed it.
Great! There's a market there and Dell, Gateway &amp; MS, et al are there to fill it.
That's what they want, that's what they deserve, that's what they're happy with.
Why they feel so strongly about our preferences and why they feel the need to attack us so vehemently is a question they probably don't want an answer to.
Be true to yourself.
Don't be ashamed that you can distinguish, prefer and afford quality.
They're just trying to drag you down to their level, thinking it will somehow validate them and make them better.
They are wrong.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890432</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30892760</id>
	<title>simple</title>
	<author>jollyreaper</author>
	<datestamp>1264444320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>PC represents rough and tumble, for the person who loves freedom and flexibility and is willing to compromise on fit and polish to get there. Linux is taking that to an even more extreme end. Mac represents surrendering your freedom to someone who has better taste than you. The thought of that gets my nose out of joint. Be that as it may, there's not that many places where I think Apple made seriously wrong calls on design and UI, and this is coming from a PC guy. I still think iTunes is sent to us from the dev.null and don't understand how people think it's intuitive or easy -- I find it annoying.</p><p>I think for most users, Apple truly represents less headache. Sure, there's very slick marketing but that job is made easier by having a product that people really, really like.</p><p>I do think what we see in Apple right now is the result of enlightened tyranny, someone you may not like but find difficulty arguing with because he's usually right. The question remains what will happen once he's gone -- will it turn into an arbitrary tyranny or will the power structure balkanize? That's the stage they were at when Jobs came back, the engineers were as smart then as they are now, it's just that they couldn't get anything done because management had formed into a circular firing squad. Nobody had the authority to crack heads and tell them to stop shooting.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>PC represents rough and tumble , for the person who loves freedom and flexibility and is willing to compromise on fit and polish to get there .
Linux is taking that to an even more extreme end .
Mac represents surrendering your freedom to someone who has better taste than you .
The thought of that gets my nose out of joint .
Be that as it may , there 's not that many places where I think Apple made seriously wrong calls on design and UI , and this is coming from a PC guy .
I still think iTunes is sent to us from the dev.null and do n't understand how people think it 's intuitive or easy -- I find it annoying.I think for most users , Apple truly represents less headache .
Sure , there 's very slick marketing but that job is made easier by having a product that people really , really like.I do think what we see in Apple right now is the result of enlightened tyranny , someone you may not like but find difficulty arguing with because he 's usually right .
The question remains what will happen once he 's gone -- will it turn into an arbitrary tyranny or will the power structure balkanize ?
That 's the stage they were at when Jobs came back , the engineers were as smart then as they are now , it 's just that they could n't get anything done because management had formed into a circular firing squad .
Nobody had the authority to crack heads and tell them to stop shooting .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>PC represents rough and tumble, for the person who loves freedom and flexibility and is willing to compromise on fit and polish to get there.
Linux is taking that to an even more extreme end.
Mac represents surrendering your freedom to someone who has better taste than you.
The thought of that gets my nose out of joint.
Be that as it may, there's not that many places where I think Apple made seriously wrong calls on design and UI, and this is coming from a PC guy.
I still think iTunes is sent to us from the dev.null and don't understand how people think it's intuitive or easy -- I find it annoying.I think for most users, Apple truly represents less headache.
Sure, there's very slick marketing but that job is made easier by having a product that people really, really like.I do think what we see in Apple right now is the result of enlightened tyranny, someone you may not like but find difficulty arguing with because he's usually right.
The question remains what will happen once he's gone -- will it turn into an arbitrary tyranny or will the power structure balkanize?
That's the stage they were at when Jobs came back, the engineers were as smart then as they are now, it's just that they couldn't get anything done because management had formed into a circular firing squad.
Nobody had the authority to crack heads and tell them to stop shooting.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30892118</id>
	<title>Re:I'm off-duty</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1264442160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Just because you are in art school doesn't mean you're creative or a good artist.</i></p><p>That's true, just as just because you're in engineering school doesn't mean you'll be a good engineer. Offtopic here, but I wonder if I'd have been modded "troll" had the moderator known that I'm in fact straight and did in fact study art? It turns out I'd have been better off studying engineering, but I didn't study for the money, I studied it because I love art.</p><p>A large proportion of artists who are studied in history were gay; a far larger proportion than in the general population. That doesn't mean all artists are gay, and pointing out a fact isn't trolling.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just because you are in art school does n't mean you 're creative or a good artist.That 's true , just as just because you 're in engineering school does n't mean you 'll be a good engineer .
Offtopic here , but I wonder if I 'd have been modded " troll " had the moderator known that I 'm in fact straight and did in fact study art ?
It turns out I 'd have been better off studying engineering , but I did n't study for the money , I studied it because I love art.A large proportion of artists who are studied in history were gay ; a far larger proportion than in the general population .
That does n't mean all artists are gay , and pointing out a fact is n't trolling .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just because you are in art school doesn't mean you're creative or a good artist.That's true, just as just because you're in engineering school doesn't mean you'll be a good engineer.
Offtopic here, but I wonder if I'd have been modded "troll" had the moderator known that I'm in fact straight and did in fact study art?
It turns out I'd have been better off studying engineering, but I didn't study for the money, I studied it because I love art.A large proportion of artists who are studied in history were gay; a far larger proportion than in the general population.
That doesn't mean all artists are gay, and pointing out a fact isn't trolling.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889498</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30893196</id>
	<title>Re:Not sure in USA but in Spain...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264446480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Do you live in Spain?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do you live in Spain ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do you live in Spain?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890432</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891334</id>
	<title>Re:I'm off-duty</title>
	<author>MrHanky</author>
	<datestamp>1264439640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wrong. Artistic people generally care <i>a lot</i> about technicalities, and guess what? Apple has exemplary colour management (not necessarily correct colours out of the box), which Linux just doesn't have. It's got a lot of fairly decent audio software that works well on Apple's limited range of laptops. Buying Windows is more of a risk (some times it works, some times it doesn't), and Linux is great if you have the time and knowledge to tailor-make your system to your needs. Some artists actually do that, most don't.</p><p>Oh, and the Mac is something of a standard for graphical work. Some people feel it's easier to collaborate with others when they use the same system, just like some people think using Microsoft Office is absolutely necessary in the real world. It isn't, but it can save you from a lot of problems.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wrong .
Artistic people generally care a lot about technicalities , and guess what ?
Apple has exemplary colour management ( not necessarily correct colours out of the box ) , which Linux just does n't have .
It 's got a lot of fairly decent audio software that works well on Apple 's limited range of laptops .
Buying Windows is more of a risk ( some times it works , some times it does n't ) , and Linux is great if you have the time and knowledge to tailor-make your system to your needs .
Some artists actually do that , most do n't.Oh , and the Mac is something of a standard for graphical work .
Some people feel it 's easier to collaborate with others when they use the same system , just like some people think using Microsoft Office is absolutely necessary in the real world .
It is n't , but it can save you from a lot of problems .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wrong.
Artistic people generally care a lot about technicalities, and guess what?
Apple has exemplary colour management (not necessarily correct colours out of the box), which Linux just doesn't have.
It's got a lot of fairly decent audio software that works well on Apple's limited range of laptops.
Buying Windows is more of a risk (some times it works, some times it doesn't), and Linux is great if you have the time and knowledge to tailor-make your system to your needs.
Some artists actually do that, most don't.Oh, and the Mac is something of a standard for graphical work.
Some people feel it's easier to collaborate with others when they use the same system, just like some people think using Microsoft Office is absolutely necessary in the real world.
It isn't, but it can save you from a lot of problems.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890314</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889950</id>
	<title>The truth is...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264434720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Windows will always be more secure than Mac OSX.  Those patches and updates Microsoft launches aren't always to fix bugs... but to patch exploits as well.  PC!</p><p>I think this dude explains it very well - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hn5K3V62CFQ</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Windows will always be more secure than Mac OSX .
Those patches and updates Microsoft launches are n't always to fix bugs... but to patch exploits as well .
PC ! I think this dude explains it very well - http : //www.youtube.com/watch ? v = Hn5K3V62CFQ</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Windows will always be more secure than Mac OSX.
Those patches and updates Microsoft launches aren't always to fix bugs... but to patch exploits as well.
PC!I think this dude explains it very well - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hn5K3V62CFQ</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30896430</id>
	<title>Re:I guess Apple did all that themselves...</title>
	<author>bonch</author>
	<datestamp>1264416420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'd love to gleam a point from your post, but I was too distracted by your strange insertion of a slash into every "OS X" and could not overcome my anal retentiveness.  I'm sorry.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd love to gleam a point from your post , but I was too distracted by your strange insertion of a slash into every " OS X " and could not overcome my anal retentiveness .
I 'm sorry .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd love to gleam a point from your post, but I was too distracted by your strange insertion of a slash into every "OS X" and could not overcome my anal retentiveness.
I'm sorry.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889768</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891128</id>
	<title>Re:I'm off-duty</title>
	<author>IdleTime</author>
	<datestamp>1264438980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This is incorrect.<br>
Even before Apple launches the Mac, I ran a graphical environment much like Windows under CP/M-86, it was called Gem and was used by amiong others, the British computer Apricot. It was made by Digital Research, the same company that made CP/M</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is incorrect .
Even before Apple launches the Mac , I ran a graphical environment much like Windows under CP/M-86 , it was called Gem and was used by amiong others , the British computer Apricot .
It was made by Digital Research , the same company that made CP/M</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is incorrect.
Even before Apple launches the Mac, I ran a graphical environment much like Windows under CP/M-86, it was called Gem and was used by amiong others, the British computer Apricot.
It was made by Digital Research, the same company that made CP/M</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889380</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889494</id>
	<title>Steve Jobs Fanboy Worship Alert...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264433040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually I'm quite amazed at Steve Jobs. He brought the era of desktop computing to the masses, and when they kicked him out of his own company, he founded NeXT and built an OS so good there that the company that kicked him out asked him to return, with said OS in hand, that would be further developed as OS X. How did he not suffer second system syndrome and still manage to ship something so polished? It's more of a management skill I guess, and perhaps of designing a system so forward-looking, it is simple to improve.</p><p>But Systems 8 and 9 were quite the pain for end-users, and perhaps an expulsion of a good team from Apple, plus money, to make whatever they want, was the best idea, because otherwise they would be stuck trying to make their legacy OSes modern.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually I 'm quite amazed at Steve Jobs .
He brought the era of desktop computing to the masses , and when they kicked him out of his own company , he founded NeXT and built an OS so good there that the company that kicked him out asked him to return , with said OS in hand , that would be further developed as OS X. How did he not suffer second system syndrome and still manage to ship something so polished ?
It 's more of a management skill I guess , and perhaps of designing a system so forward-looking , it is simple to improve.But Systems 8 and 9 were quite the pain for end-users , and perhaps an expulsion of a good team from Apple , plus money , to make whatever they want , was the best idea , because otherwise they would be stuck trying to make their legacy OSes modern .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually I'm quite amazed at Steve Jobs.
He brought the era of desktop computing to the masses, and when they kicked him out of his own company, he founded NeXT and built an OS so good there that the company that kicked him out asked him to return, with said OS in hand, that would be further developed as OS X. How did he not suffer second system syndrome and still manage to ship something so polished?
It's more of a management skill I guess, and perhaps of designing a system so forward-looking, it is simple to improve.But Systems 8 and 9 were quite the pain for end-users, and perhaps an expulsion of a good team from Apple, plus money, to make whatever they want, was the best idea, because otherwise they would be stuck trying to make their legacy OSes modern.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30893560</id>
	<title>It's not rocket science, really.</title>
	<author>hazydave</author>
	<datestamp>1264447800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Apple users embrace the "free-thinking" mantra because that's the image Apple's served up. In short, they were told that using a Mac makes them free-thinking. And no, I'm certain the irony is not lost of those of us who abhor Apple's general policies, which are nothing of the kind.</p><p>Apple found themselves, entering the early 1990s, as the lone major computer platform other than Windows, and they had arguably better graphics and a few pretty good music applications, which were struggling to actually function on the PC/Windows until well into the Windows 95 era (UNIX-like OSs didn't do audio well at all... you needed a DSP subsystem, as on the SGIs and the NeXT machines, to do audio at all in the very non-realtimey, who-cares-about-interrupt-latency versions of UNIX/Linux at the time).</p><p>So they used this as a sales pitch. The PC equals Windows, it's from IBM, and it's used in business... thus, its only uses are business-related. They weren't selling Macs to computer experts who knew this to be false, and certainly not those of us who actually did the PC work as well, then better than the Mac on media content creation of all sorts. They're selling to users who are fairly clueless about PCs.</p><p>Apple always had very good marketing, and both that, and their message, continue today. They were selling a slightly more capable 8-bit machine, back in the early 80s, versus Commodore and Atari machines at 1/5th the price (they had slots... that's the "more capable" part). The Mac came in, with hardware so oversimplified it was actually kind of creepy (the "Ready" pin on the SCSI controller drover<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/DTACK on the 68000, for any bitheads in the crowd) and cheap, but got huge margins. Today, a Mac is exactly a PC in a fancy case without a battery door... there's nothing different about an Apple PC, and yet they still get 2x-3x the cash. That pays for a ton of brainwashing.</p><p>And it's also something like human nature. As some may know, I was a senior hardware designer at Commodore on several high-end models of the Amiga computer. There was a time when the Amiga was the best (only) personal computer for color graphics or video work. Like, the mid-to-late 1980s. Today I do my video stuff on a PC running Windows 7 and Sony Vegas, with 8GB of RAM, a Quad-core CPU, and Terabytes of storage. But I still hear from people talking about how the Amiga IS better (not was, but IS).</p><p>When you join an exclusive club, you immediately embrace all the positive memes associated with club membership, and you employ these to justify your decision. This isn't restricted to computers, it's found in Video software  (Vegas vs. Avid vs. Premiere vs. FCP, etc), cars (Ford vs. Chevy vs. Dodge), still cameras (Canon vs. Nikon), videocameras (Sony vs. Canon vs. Panasonic vs. JVC), soft drinks (Coke vs. Pepsi... sorry, Rock Star rules here, folks), etc. And sure, the cultier that club's culture becomes, the more the users grab hold of it.</p><p>Apple is one of the few remaining exclusive clubs in computing, and they're perhaps the cultiest and most exclusive there is in just about any discipline. Ok, Amiga fans could have given them a run for their money back in the early 1990s, but not since... the Mac hardcores have expended to embrace the iPhone. The iPhone has delivered new converts to the alter of Mac. There's a persistent meme that "Windows is hard", bug ridden, full of viruses, and of course, MacOS is impervious to any and all problems, the only way to do media content in computing, and so simple your cat can use it without reading a manual. Apple works very hard to keep these memes alive, in the general population to an extent, too, not just among the Apple Faithful.</p><p>Another factor, among those in a successful cult, is that they reinforce one another and don't pay much attention to the outside world. You can stay blissfully within your world of Apple -- magazines, web sites, etc. and never hear more than frightening stories about the world outside. This is also something that Apple cultivates...they were among t</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Apple users embrace the " free-thinking " mantra because that 's the image Apple 's served up .
In short , they were told that using a Mac makes them free-thinking .
And no , I 'm certain the irony is not lost of those of us who abhor Apple 's general policies , which are nothing of the kind.Apple found themselves , entering the early 1990s , as the lone major computer platform other than Windows , and they had arguably better graphics and a few pretty good music applications , which were struggling to actually function on the PC/Windows until well into the Windows 95 era ( UNIX-like OSs did n't do audio well at all... you needed a DSP subsystem , as on the SGIs and the NeXT machines , to do audio at all in the very non-realtimey , who-cares-about-interrupt-latency versions of UNIX/Linux at the time ) .So they used this as a sales pitch .
The PC equals Windows , it 's from IBM , and it 's used in business... thus , its only uses are business-related .
They were n't selling Macs to computer experts who knew this to be false , and certainly not those of us who actually did the PC work as well , then better than the Mac on media content creation of all sorts .
They 're selling to users who are fairly clueless about PCs.Apple always had very good marketing , and both that , and their message , continue today .
They were selling a slightly more capable 8-bit machine , back in the early 80s , versus Commodore and Atari machines at 1/5th the price ( they had slots... that 's the " more capable " part ) .
The Mac came in , with hardware so oversimplified it was actually kind of creepy ( the " Ready " pin on the SCSI controller drover /DTACK on the 68000 , for any bitheads in the crowd ) and cheap , but got huge margins .
Today , a Mac is exactly a PC in a fancy case without a battery door... there 's nothing different about an Apple PC , and yet they still get 2x-3x the cash .
That pays for a ton of brainwashing.And it 's also something like human nature .
As some may know , I was a senior hardware designer at Commodore on several high-end models of the Amiga computer .
There was a time when the Amiga was the best ( only ) personal computer for color graphics or video work .
Like , the mid-to-late 1980s .
Today I do my video stuff on a PC running Windows 7 and Sony Vegas , with 8GB of RAM , a Quad-core CPU , and Terabytes of storage .
But I still hear from people talking about how the Amiga IS better ( not was , but IS ) .When you join an exclusive club , you immediately embrace all the positive memes associated with club membership , and you employ these to justify your decision .
This is n't restricted to computers , it 's found in Video software ( Vegas vs. Avid vs. Premiere vs. FCP , etc ) , cars ( Ford vs. Chevy vs. Dodge ) , still cameras ( Canon vs. Nikon ) , videocameras ( Sony vs. Canon vs. Panasonic vs. JVC ) , soft drinks ( Coke vs. Pepsi... sorry , Rock Star rules here , folks ) , etc .
And sure , the cultier that club 's culture becomes , the more the users grab hold of it.Apple is one of the few remaining exclusive clubs in computing , and they 're perhaps the cultiest and most exclusive there is in just about any discipline .
Ok , Amiga fans could have given them a run for their money back in the early 1990s , but not since... the Mac hardcores have expended to embrace the iPhone .
The iPhone has delivered new converts to the alter of Mac .
There 's a persistent meme that " Windows is hard " , bug ridden , full of viruses , and of course , MacOS is impervious to any and all problems , the only way to do media content in computing , and so simple your cat can use it without reading a manual .
Apple works very hard to keep these memes alive , in the general population to an extent , too , not just among the Apple Faithful.Another factor , among those in a successful cult , is that they reinforce one another and do n't pay much attention to the outside world .
You can stay blissfully within your world of Apple -- magazines , web sites , etc .
and never hear more than frightening stories about the world outside .
This is also something that Apple cultivates...they were among t</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Apple users embrace the "free-thinking" mantra because that's the image Apple's served up.
In short, they were told that using a Mac makes them free-thinking.
And no, I'm certain the irony is not lost of those of us who abhor Apple's general policies, which are nothing of the kind.Apple found themselves, entering the early 1990s, as the lone major computer platform other than Windows, and they had arguably better graphics and a few pretty good music applications, which were struggling to actually function on the PC/Windows until well into the Windows 95 era (UNIX-like OSs didn't do audio well at all... you needed a DSP subsystem, as on the SGIs and the NeXT machines, to do audio at all in the very non-realtimey, who-cares-about-interrupt-latency versions of UNIX/Linux at the time).So they used this as a sales pitch.
The PC equals Windows, it's from IBM, and it's used in business... thus, its only uses are business-related.
They weren't selling Macs to computer experts who knew this to be false, and certainly not those of us who actually did the PC work as well, then better than the Mac on media content creation of all sorts.
They're selling to users who are fairly clueless about PCs.Apple always had very good marketing, and both that, and their message, continue today.
They were selling a slightly more capable 8-bit machine, back in the early 80s, versus Commodore and Atari machines at 1/5th the price (they had slots... that's the "more capable" part).
The Mac came in, with hardware so oversimplified it was actually kind of creepy (the "Ready" pin on the SCSI controller drover /DTACK on the 68000, for any bitheads in the crowd) and cheap, but got huge margins.
Today, a Mac is exactly a PC in a fancy case without a battery door... there's nothing different about an Apple PC, and yet they still get 2x-3x the cash.
That pays for a ton of brainwashing.And it's also something like human nature.
As some may know, I was a senior hardware designer at Commodore on several high-end models of the Amiga computer.
There was a time when the Amiga was the best (only) personal computer for color graphics or video work.
Like, the mid-to-late 1980s.
Today I do my video stuff on a PC running Windows 7 and Sony Vegas, with 8GB of RAM, a Quad-core CPU, and Terabytes of storage.
But I still hear from people talking about how the Amiga IS better (not was, but IS).When you join an exclusive club, you immediately embrace all the positive memes associated with club membership, and you employ these to justify your decision.
This isn't restricted to computers, it's found in Video software  (Vegas vs. Avid vs. Premiere vs. FCP, etc), cars (Ford vs. Chevy vs. Dodge), still cameras (Canon vs. Nikon), videocameras (Sony vs. Canon vs. Panasonic vs. JVC), soft drinks (Coke vs. Pepsi... sorry, Rock Star rules here, folks), etc.
And sure, the cultier that club's culture becomes, the more the users grab hold of it.Apple is one of the few remaining exclusive clubs in computing, and they're perhaps the cultiest and most exclusive there is in just about any discipline.
Ok, Amiga fans could have given them a run for their money back in the early 1990s, but not since... the Mac hardcores have expended to embrace the iPhone.
The iPhone has delivered new converts to the alter of Mac.
There's a persistent meme that "Windows is hard", bug ridden, full of viruses, and of course, MacOS is impervious to any and all problems, the only way to do media content in computing, and so simple your cat can use it without reading a manual.
Apple works very hard to keep these memes alive, in the general population to an extent, too, not just among the Apple Faithful.Another factor, among those in a successful cult, is that they reinforce one another and don't pay much attention to the outside world.
You can stay blissfully within your world of Apple -- magazines, web sites, etc.
and never hear more than frightening stories about the world outside.
This is also something that Apple cultivates...they were among t</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890034</id>
	<title>Re:Lesson: Apple marketing i working!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264435020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We are all Mac users for different reasons, like Slashdot has actually many different opinions.<br>But saying that Apple has never produced anything remotely as useful as the open source software movement doesn't make any sense. Most of MacOS X code is based on open source (as you said). So I can do as much as you can with your Linux/BSD box, how can that be less useful ?<br>And if you add all the stuff Apple added on top of the open source core (and that's an awful lot, have a look at developer.apple.com for information) you'll realise that this is actually more useful... No ?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We are all Mac users for different reasons , like Slashdot has actually many different opinions.But saying that Apple has never produced anything remotely as useful as the open source software movement does n't make any sense .
Most of MacOS X code is based on open source ( as you said ) .
So I can do as much as you can with your Linux/BSD box , how can that be less useful ? And if you add all the stuff Apple added on top of the open source core ( and that 's an awful lot , have a look at developer.apple.com for information ) you 'll realise that this is actually more useful... No ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We are all Mac users for different reasons, like Slashdot has actually many different opinions.But saying that Apple has never produced anything remotely as useful as the open source software movement doesn't make any sense.
Most of MacOS X code is based on open source (as you said).
So I can do as much as you can with your Linux/BSD box, how can that be less useful ?And if you add all the stuff Apple added on top of the open source core (and that's an awful lot, have a look at developer.apple.com for information) you'll realise that this is actually more useful... No ?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889362</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889748</id>
	<title>Some of which.</title>
	<author>DrYak</author>
	<datestamp>1264434000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Linux, and many other open source products</p></div><p>Among which the *BSD family of unices, which forms the basis of Mac OS X.<br>It even looks like the open source movement has produced a viable set of unix implementations for a long time before an (almost-on-the-brink-of-extinction) Apple decide to borrow it, slap a nice interface on it and call it "Mac OS X" to replace the ageing (not-even-true-multitasking) shit it had before.</p><p>In fact, I still wait to see OS X on anything but Macs and iPhone. Whereas open source, although often unnoticed, tends to show up discretely in lots of crazy places. Actually it's now getting difficult to find a modem/router which doesn't run some embed Linux - for example.<br>Opensource movement have achieved quite much. They just don't make a huge marketing fuss about it with an artsy logo slapped on it.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Linux , and many other open source productsAmong which the * BSD family of unices , which forms the basis of Mac OS X.It even looks like the open source movement has produced a viable set of unix implementations for a long time before an ( almost-on-the-brink-of-extinction ) Apple decide to borrow it , slap a nice interface on it and call it " Mac OS X " to replace the ageing ( not-even-true-multitasking ) shit it had before.In fact , I still wait to see OS X on anything but Macs and iPhone .
Whereas open source , although often unnoticed , tends to show up discretely in lots of crazy places .
Actually it 's now getting difficult to find a modem/router which does n't run some embed Linux - for example.Opensource movement have achieved quite much .
They just do n't make a huge marketing fuss about it with an artsy logo slapped on it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Linux, and many other open source productsAmong which the *BSD family of unices, which forms the basis of Mac OS X.It even looks like the open source movement has produced a viable set of unix implementations for a long time before an (almost-on-the-brink-of-extinction) Apple decide to borrow it, slap a nice interface on it and call it "Mac OS X" to replace the ageing (not-even-true-multitasking) shit it had before.In fact, I still wait to see OS X on anything but Macs and iPhone.
Whereas open source, although often unnoticed, tends to show up discretely in lots of crazy places.
Actually it's now getting difficult to find a modem/router which doesn't run some embed Linux - for example.Opensource movement have achieved quite much.
They just don't make a huge marketing fuss about it with an artsy logo slapped on it.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889326</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889992</id>
	<title>Re:It is product's quality, stupid</title>
	<author>buddyglass</author>
	<datestamp>1264434900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>For the record, I've had OS X crash on me more often than Windows XP.  But then I'm neither the typical Mac user nor the typical Windows user.</htmltext>
<tokenext>For the record , I 've had OS X crash on me more often than Windows XP .
But then I 'm neither the typical Mac user nor the typical Windows user .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For the record, I've had OS X crash on me more often than Windows XP.
But then I'm neither the typical Mac user nor the typical Windows user.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889516</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891460</id>
	<title>Re:Not sure in USA but in Spain...</title>
	<author>Timtimes</author>
	<datestamp>1264439880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Naw.  I bought mine because they work.  Whatever extra I paid for my Apple computers it has been worth it in savings from not having to deal with virus junk and O/S troubles.  You don't have to be gay, pretentious or an Apple fanboy to desire a computing experience free from the hassle that is Windoz.
Enjoy.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Naw .
I bought mine because they work .
Whatever extra I paid for my Apple computers it has been worth it in savings from not having to deal with virus junk and O/S troubles .
You do n't have to be gay , pretentious or an Apple fanboy to desire a computing experience free from the hassle that is Windoz .
Enjoy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Naw.
I bought mine because they work.
Whatever extra I paid for my Apple computers it has been worth it in savings from not having to deal with virus junk and O/S troubles.
You don't have to be gay, pretentious or an Apple fanboy to desire a computing experience free from the hassle that is Windoz.
Enjoy.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889256</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30893368</id>
	<title>Re:Not sure in USA but in Spain...</title>
	<author>sbeckstead</author>
	<datestamp>1264447140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Hey I bought one and I own one simply because I AM Better than someone who can't or won't afford one.  "Smug Assholes" of the world Unite.  We can beat the Windows and Linux weenies wherever they pop up.   We are better than they are and we know it.  Why don't we just accept the superiority that they assign to us, we have it anyway.  Inferior people simply refuse to recognize the perfection that we have and that they don't, they are insanely jealous of our coolness and superior taste in computing devices.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hey I bought one and I own one simply because I AM Better than someone who ca n't or wo n't afford one .
" Smug Assholes " of the world Unite .
We can beat the Windows and Linux weenies wherever they pop up .
We are better than they are and we know it .
Why do n't we just accept the superiority that they assign to us , we have it anyway .
Inferior people simply refuse to recognize the perfection that we have and that they do n't , they are insanely jealous of our coolness and superior taste in computing devices .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hey I bought one and I own one simply because I AM Better than someone who can't or won't afford one.
"Smug Assholes" of the world Unite.
We can beat the Windows and Linux weenies wherever they pop up.
We are better than they are and we know it.
Why don't we just accept the superiority that they assign to us, we have it anyway.
Inferior people simply refuse to recognize the perfection that we have and that they don't, they are insanely jealous of our coolness and superior taste in computing devices.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890432</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889486</id>
	<title>Alternate Definition Of Freedom 0</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264432980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Perhaps fans of Apple products consider usability and "Just Works" to be an Essential Software Freedom and likewise consider any software with a bad UI that requires lots of fiddling to work to be "closed" to them.</p><p>Of course, one would have to be a free thinker to accept such a heretical idea.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Perhaps fans of Apple products consider usability and " Just Works " to be an Essential Software Freedom and likewise consider any software with a bad UI that requires lots of fiddling to work to be " closed " to them.Of course , one would have to be a free thinker to accept such a heretical idea .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Perhaps fans of Apple products consider usability and "Just Works" to be an Essential Software Freedom and likewise consider any software with a bad UI that requires lots of fiddling to work to be "closed" to them.Of course, one would have to be a free thinker to accept such a heretical idea.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891550</id>
	<title>Non-sequiteur</title>
	<author>shish</author>
	<datestamp>1264440240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Customers want high quality computers, Apple sells high quality computers; where does corporate culture come into this equation?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Customers want high quality computers , Apple sells high quality computers ; where does corporate culture come into this equation ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Customers want high quality computers, Apple sells high quality computers; where does corporate culture come into this equation?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889818</id>
	<title>Huh?</title>
	<author>Quiet\_Desperation</author>
	<datestamp>1264434240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>How can a company whose philosophy of information sharing is so at odds with that of most of its customers be so successful?</p></div><p>Just seems like a non sequitur to me. Or it illustrates the fact that people who gravitate to the Mac are interested in a tool they can use and, say, Linux users are interested in a toy (and I mean that in a good way- I love me my toys) they can fiddle with. Windows users (those who choose it when they don't have to for some reason), well, who can understand them?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;-)</p><p>Does a an artist care about the inner workings of the companies that makes paints and brushes?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>How can a company whose philosophy of information sharing is so at odds with that of most of its customers be so successful ? Just seems like a non sequitur to me .
Or it illustrates the fact that people who gravitate to the Mac are interested in a tool they can use and , say , Linux users are interested in a toy ( and I mean that in a good way- I love me my toys ) they can fiddle with .
Windows users ( those who choose it when they do n't have to for some reason ) , well , who can understand them ?
; - ) Does a an artist care about the inner workings of the companies that makes paints and brushes ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How can a company whose philosophy of information sharing is so at odds with that of most of its customers be so successful?Just seems like a non sequitur to me.
Or it illustrates the fact that people who gravitate to the Mac are interested in a tool they can use and, say, Linux users are interested in a toy (and I mean that in a good way- I love me my toys) they can fiddle with.
Windows users (those who choose it when they don't have to for some reason), well, who can understand them?
;-)Does a an artist care about the inner workings of the companies that makes paints and brushes?
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30903538</id>
	<title>What BS</title>
	<author>vaporland</author>
	<datestamp>1264518360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>I cant make the association between free thinking and Apple.</p></div></blockquote><p>Yes, because Windows is such an open, user accessible, DRM-free OS from an open, user accessible, DRM-free software company.</p><blockquote><div><p>Everyone I know who bought Apple did so because of the marketing, the artist "says" it is better but is completely unable to quantify it beyond "but everyone says Mac is better".</p></div></blockquote><p>Everyone I know who bought Toyota, BMW, or Mercedes did so because of the marketing, not because those products are of dramatically better quality than GM or Chrysler.</p><blockquote><div><p>Most Mac do not understand computers particularly well, thus they turn to an OS that limits what they can do. We call Apple a cult for a reason. I really cant see Mac users being "free thinking" about tech, especially as one of Mac's biggest selling points is that it Just Works(TM) meaning that you arent meant to think about using your computer...</p></div></blockquote><p>And I know that in order to drive my car, I need to be constantly thinking about internal combustion mechanics or I will run off of the road.</p><blockquote><div><p>I know a few designers having done tech support for a Marketing company before (so glad I'm out of that gig now) and the most talented designers can do everything they can do on a Mac in Windows, unfortunately the reverse isn't true due to the limitations of the Mac OS, it's not hacker friendly and was never meant to be.</p></div></blockquote><p>For the sake of your former Mac-using designer clients, I'm also glad you're out of that gig now. And, yeah, it's a shame that the UNIX based OS X operating system is so much less versatile and secure than Windows 7. I mean, all it's really good for is developing iPhone apps, and everyone knows what a dead end that path is. Better to stick with Windows and Windows Mobile.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I cant make the association between free thinking and Apple.Yes , because Windows is such an open , user accessible , DRM-free OS from an open , user accessible , DRM-free software company.Everyone I know who bought Apple did so because of the marketing , the artist " says " it is better but is completely unable to quantify it beyond " but everyone says Mac is better " .Everyone I know who bought Toyota , BMW , or Mercedes did so because of the marketing , not because those products are of dramatically better quality than GM or Chrysler.Most Mac do not understand computers particularly well , thus they turn to an OS that limits what they can do .
We call Apple a cult for a reason .
I really cant see Mac users being " free thinking " about tech , especially as one of Mac 's biggest selling points is that it Just Works ( TM ) meaning that you arent meant to think about using your computer...And I know that in order to drive my car , I need to be constantly thinking about internal combustion mechanics or I will run off of the road.I know a few designers having done tech support for a Marketing company before ( so glad I 'm out of that gig now ) and the most talented designers can do everything they can do on a Mac in Windows , unfortunately the reverse is n't true due to the limitations of the Mac OS , it 's not hacker friendly and was never meant to be.For the sake of your former Mac-using designer clients , I 'm also glad you 're out of that gig now .
And , yeah , it 's a shame that the UNIX based OS X operating system is so much less versatile and secure than Windows 7 .
I mean , all it 's really good for is developing iPhone apps , and everyone knows what a dead end that path is .
Better to stick with Windows and Windows Mobile .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I cant make the association between free thinking and Apple.Yes, because Windows is such an open, user accessible, DRM-free OS from an open, user accessible, DRM-free software company.Everyone I know who bought Apple did so because of the marketing, the artist "says" it is better but is completely unable to quantify it beyond "but everyone says Mac is better".Everyone I know who bought Toyota, BMW, or Mercedes did so because of the marketing, not because those products are of dramatically better quality than GM or Chrysler.Most Mac do not understand computers particularly well, thus they turn to an OS that limits what they can do.
We call Apple a cult for a reason.
I really cant see Mac users being "free thinking" about tech, especially as one of Mac's biggest selling points is that it Just Works(TM) meaning that you arent meant to think about using your computer...And I know that in order to drive my car, I need to be constantly thinking about internal combustion mechanics or I will run off of the road.I know a few designers having done tech support for a Marketing company before (so glad I'm out of that gig now) and the most talented designers can do everything they can do on a Mac in Windows, unfortunately the reverse isn't true due to the limitations of the Mac OS, it's not hacker friendly and was never meant to be.For the sake of your former Mac-using designer clients, I'm also glad you're out of that gig now.
And, yeah, it's a shame that the UNIX based OS X operating system is so much less versatile and secure than Windows 7.
I mean, all it's really good for is developing iPhone apps, and everyone knows what a dead end that path is.
Better to stick with Windows and Windows Mobile.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30900062</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889444</id>
	<title>wrong assumptions</title>
	<author>Tom</author>
	<datestamp>1264432800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>How can a company whose philosophy of information sharing is so at odds with that of most of its customers be so successful?</p> </div><p>Really? The first thing you should always question is your assumptions. <b>Does</b> Apple have a "philosophy of information sharing" and if so, what is it?</p><p>The company is secretive about upcoming, not-yet-available products. Which is not information that customers require in their day-to-day work anyways. As a user or as a developer, it is information about the <b>current, existing</b> products that you need most. And as both I've always found that to be readily available whenever I needed it.</p><p>So how does a philosophy of "not talking (much) about unreleased ideas" merge with the mindset of a designer, artist, programmer or any other kind of creative person? Quite well. A <b>lot</b> of creative people don't talk (much) about their work-in-progress, either, until it's finished. Programmers are about the only kind who feel that putting a half-finished thing out for the public is the thing to do.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>How can a company whose philosophy of information sharing is so at odds with that of most of its customers be so successful ?
Really ? The first thing you should always question is your assumptions .
Does Apple have a " philosophy of information sharing " and if so , what is it ? The company is secretive about upcoming , not-yet-available products .
Which is not information that customers require in their day-to-day work anyways .
As a user or as a developer , it is information about the current , existing products that you need most .
And as both I 've always found that to be readily available whenever I needed it.So how does a philosophy of " not talking ( much ) about unreleased ideas " merge with the mindset of a designer , artist , programmer or any other kind of creative person ?
Quite well .
A lot of creative people do n't talk ( much ) about their work-in-progress , either , until it 's finished .
Programmers are about the only kind who feel that putting a half-finished thing out for the public is the thing to do .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How can a company whose philosophy of information sharing is so at odds with that of most of its customers be so successful?
Really? The first thing you should always question is your assumptions.
Does Apple have a "philosophy of information sharing" and if so, what is it?The company is secretive about upcoming, not-yet-available products.
Which is not information that customers require in their day-to-day work anyways.
As a user or as a developer, it is information about the current, existing products that you need most.
And as both I've always found that to be readily available whenever I needed it.So how does a philosophy of "not talking (much) about unreleased ideas" merge with the mindset of a designer, artist, programmer or any other kind of creative person?
Quite well.
A lot of creative people don't talk (much) about their work-in-progress, either, until it's finished.
Programmers are about the only kind who feel that putting a half-finished thing out for the public is the thing to do.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30894270</id>
	<title>Re:I'm off-duty</title>
	<author>leonbloy</author>
	<datestamp>1264451220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> You don't buy a computer because of its culture, you buy it because it serves you purposes better than other brands.</p></div><p>Often your real purpose is  belonging to a culture (ie: being cool).</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>You do n't buy a computer because of its culture , you buy it because it serves you purposes better than other brands.Often your real purpose is belonging to a culture ( ie : being cool ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> You don't buy a computer because of its culture, you buy it because it serves you purposes better than other brands.Often your real purpose is  belonging to a culture (ie: being cool).
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889380</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889670</id>
	<title>Re:I guess Apple did all that themselves...</title>
	<author>Penguinisto</author>
	<datestamp>1264433760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>No.. they just created what runs on the them, that's all..<br>Meh.</p></div><p>Err, not entirely... OSX came primarily out of <a href="http://lowendmac.com/orchard/05/next-computer-history.html" title="lowendmac.com">NeXTStep</a> [lowendmac.com].</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>No.. they just created what runs on the them , that 's all..Meh.Err , not entirely... OSX came primarily out of NeXTStep [ lowendmac.com ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No.. they just created what runs on the them, that's all..Meh.Err, not entirely... OSX came primarily out of NeXTStep [lowendmac.com].
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889282</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890688</id>
	<title>Re:Not sure in USA but in Spain...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264437420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I know a current Mac user that bought a Mac ONLY because she was tired of getting infected and re-infected by viruses. And she was a "poor blue collar bastard" with a tax return. While your "social class" idea is a popular thought, it doesn't fit every reality.</p><p>As an aside, once her family, all PC users, saw her computer, they, one-by-one purchased Macs. They were more affluent, but their DRIVING thought? That iChat sure is cool to check up on the family with.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I know a current Mac user that bought a Mac ONLY because she was tired of getting infected and re-infected by viruses .
And she was a " poor blue collar bastard " with a tax return .
While your " social class " idea is a popular thought , it does n't fit every reality.As an aside , once her family , all PC users , saw her computer , they , one-by-one purchased Macs .
They were more affluent , but their DRIVING thought ?
That iChat sure is cool to check up on the family with .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I know a current Mac user that bought a Mac ONLY because she was tired of getting infected and re-infected by viruses.
And she was a "poor blue collar bastard" with a tax return.
While your "social class" idea is a popular thought, it doesn't fit every reality.As an aside, once her family, all PC users, saw her computer, they, one-by-one purchased Macs.
They were more affluent, but their DRIVING thought?
That iChat sure is cool to check up on the family with.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889256</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889540</id>
	<title>Re:I guess Apple did all that themselves...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264433220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You have to wonder which KoolAid fountain they were drinking from when they wrote that line....</p><p>The core components of Mac OSX &amp; the iPhone OS are taken from open source.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You have to wonder which KoolAid fountain they were drinking from when they wrote that line....The core components of Mac OSX &amp; the iPhone OS are taken from open source .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You have to wonder which KoolAid fountain they were drinking from when they wrote that line....The core components of Mac OSX &amp; the iPhone OS are taken from open source.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889282</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891780</id>
	<title>Howabout having a brand older than Microsoft...</title>
	<author>jedidiah</author>
	<datestamp>1264440900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>People talk about Apple's success as if they just sprung from the ether.<br>However, they have been trying to compete against Microsoft with their<br>Macintosh line since long before any other current desktop competitors<br>existed. The Apple brand name is over 30 years old and it's older than<br>the Microsoft brand. The original userbase for Apple survived well into<br>the Macintosh era. In those days, Macs were having trouble getting<br>traction against MS-DOS of all things.</p><p>So any discussion of Apple needs to acknowledge it's whole history and<br>not just the stuff that happened only recently.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>People talk about Apple 's success as if they just sprung from the ether.However , they have been trying to compete against Microsoft with theirMacintosh line since long before any other current desktop competitorsexisted .
The Apple brand name is over 30 years old and it 's older thanthe Microsoft brand .
The original userbase for Apple survived well intothe Macintosh era .
In those days , Macs were having trouble gettingtraction against MS-DOS of all things.So any discussion of Apple needs to acknowledge it 's whole history andnot just the stuff that happened only recently .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>People talk about Apple's success as if they just sprung from the ether.However, they have been trying to compete against Microsoft with theirMacintosh line since long before any other current desktop competitorsexisted.
The Apple brand name is over 30 years old and it's older thanthe Microsoft brand.
The original userbase for Apple survived well intothe Macintosh era.
In those days, Macs were having trouble gettingtraction against MS-DOS of all things.So any discussion of Apple needs to acknowledge it's whole history andnot just the stuff that happened only recently.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890166</id>
	<title>Re:Apple sells hardware</title>
	<author>jfruhlinger</author>
	<datestamp>1264435560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> Apple is primarily a *hardware* company - it sells Macs and iPhones, which are physical devices.  Yes, it has to write software to make that hardware useful, but the software is intentionally not sold separately... you can only get the software by getting the hardware.  So comparing Apple to software organizations misses the point... they're not really doing the same thing.</p> </div><p>I don't think this is quite right.  Apple is a company that sells, to use an irritating word from the server world, hardware-software stacks, and the software is the impetus for the premium you pay on the hardware.  My MacBook could run Windows if I wanted it to, but I could buy a comparable piece of Windows-running hardware for much cheaper if I wanted to run Windows, so there's no reason I would do that.  But, on the flip side, I think OS X is preferable to Windows to the extent that I'm willing to pay more for hardware that will run it.  I'm not paying "too much" for standard hardware; I'm paying extra for software I like.</p><p>A lot of people interpret this is as meaning that you're paying $500 extra (or whatever the discount is for assembling an "equivalent" computer on the Asus website) for the "Apple logo."  People who think this either honestly don't prefer OS X to other options (in which case more power to you, you should buy the cheaper thing that runs your preferred OS, and you get a win-win), or they think that the quality of system software is unimportant.  I think people in the latter camp are crazy.  System software is what you spend your time interacting with.  If you spend a lot of time on a computer, you should spend it using an OS you find enjoyable.  Again, if you like Linux or Windows better, then you should use them, but I don't see the point of making fun of people who use something else.</p><p>And yes, of course, we could all have the best of both worlds if Apple just sold OS X software unbundled and capable on running on generic x86 hardware.  But if it did that, Apple wouldn't have a sky-high stock price and a gajillion dollars in the bank, both of which are pretty much its reason for existence, it being a publicly traded corporation with employees and execs to pay and all.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Apple is primarily a * hardware * company - it sells Macs and iPhones , which are physical devices .
Yes , it has to write software to make that hardware useful , but the software is intentionally not sold separately... you can only get the software by getting the hardware .
So comparing Apple to software organizations misses the point... they 're not really doing the same thing .
I do n't think this is quite right .
Apple is a company that sells , to use an irritating word from the server world , hardware-software stacks , and the software is the impetus for the premium you pay on the hardware .
My MacBook could run Windows if I wanted it to , but I could buy a comparable piece of Windows-running hardware for much cheaper if I wanted to run Windows , so there 's no reason I would do that .
But , on the flip side , I think OS X is preferable to Windows to the extent that I 'm willing to pay more for hardware that will run it .
I 'm not paying " too much " for standard hardware ; I 'm paying extra for software I like.A lot of people interpret this is as meaning that you 're paying $ 500 extra ( or whatever the discount is for assembling an " equivalent " computer on the Asus website ) for the " Apple logo .
" People who think this either honestly do n't prefer OS X to other options ( in which case more power to you , you should buy the cheaper thing that runs your preferred OS , and you get a win-win ) , or they think that the quality of system software is unimportant .
I think people in the latter camp are crazy .
System software is what you spend your time interacting with .
If you spend a lot of time on a computer , you should spend it using an OS you find enjoyable .
Again , if you like Linux or Windows better , then you should use them , but I do n't see the point of making fun of people who use something else.And yes , of course , we could all have the best of both worlds if Apple just sold OS X software unbundled and capable on running on generic x86 hardware .
But if it did that , Apple would n't have a sky-high stock price and a gajillion dollars in the bank , both of which are pretty much its reason for existence , it being a publicly traded corporation with employees and execs to pay and all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Apple is primarily a *hardware* company - it sells Macs and iPhones, which are physical devices.
Yes, it has to write software to make that hardware useful, but the software is intentionally not sold separately... you can only get the software by getting the hardware.
So comparing Apple to software organizations misses the point... they're not really doing the same thing.
I don't think this is quite right.
Apple is a company that sells, to use an irritating word from the server world, hardware-software stacks, and the software is the impetus for the premium you pay on the hardware.
My MacBook could run Windows if I wanted it to, but I could buy a comparable piece of Windows-running hardware for much cheaper if I wanted to run Windows, so there's no reason I would do that.
But, on the flip side, I think OS X is preferable to Windows to the extent that I'm willing to pay more for hardware that will run it.
I'm not paying "too much" for standard hardware; I'm paying extra for software I like.A lot of people interpret this is as meaning that you're paying $500 extra (or whatever the discount is for assembling an "equivalent" computer on the Asus website) for the "Apple logo.
"  People who think this either honestly don't prefer OS X to other options (in which case more power to you, you should buy the cheaper thing that runs your preferred OS, and you get a win-win), or they think that the quality of system software is unimportant.
I think people in the latter camp are crazy.
System software is what you spend your time interacting with.
If you spend a lot of time on a computer, you should spend it using an OS you find enjoyable.
Again, if you like Linux or Windows better, then you should use them, but I don't see the point of making fun of people who use something else.And yes, of course, we could all have the best of both worlds if Apple just sold OS X software unbundled and capable on running on generic x86 hardware.
But if it did that, Apple wouldn't have a sky-high stock price and a gajillion dollars in the bank, both of which are pretty much its reason for existence, it being a publicly traded corporation with employees and execs to pay and all.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889436</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30901080</id>
	<title>Re:I'm off-duty</title>
	<author>node 3</author>
	<datestamp>1264536540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Unless of course you're seriously going to tell me that you think all those damn hipsters at my coffee shop really sat down and did some comparative analysis and decided that a Mac would "serve their purposes better."</p></div><p>And you're going to tell me that those with Dells and HPs did some comparative analysis and decided that their choice would "serve their purposes better"?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Unless of course you 're seriously going to tell me that you think all those damn hipsters at my coffee shop really sat down and did some comparative analysis and decided that a Mac would " serve their purposes better .
" And you 're going to tell me that those with Dells and HPs did some comparative analysis and decided that their choice would " serve their purposes better " ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unless of course you're seriously going to tell me that you think all those damn hipsters at my coffee shop really sat down and did some comparative analysis and decided that a Mac would "serve their purposes better.
"And you're going to tell me that those with Dells and HPs did some comparative analysis and decided that their choice would "serve their purposes better"?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30895402</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890508</id>
	<title>Re:It's number 3</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264436880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you're using ndiswrapper you're doing it wrong. You can go out there and buy a laptop for ~&pound;400 that'll work flawlessly on most decent Linux distros (i.e. any that don't force ndiswrapper down your throat).</p><p>Get an Intel CPU, get an Intel onboard GMA chipset for the video, get a wifi card that is Intel made and tada, that's everything major in your system supported. Choose right and the touchpad will be a Synaptics touchpad (support for in modern Linux kernels) and you're sorted.</p><p>Hell, you also save some &pound;1000 over the price of a MacBook.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you 're using ndiswrapper you 're doing it wrong .
You can go out there and buy a laptop for ~   400 that 'll work flawlessly on most decent Linux distros ( i.e .
any that do n't force ndiswrapper down your throat ) .Get an Intel CPU , get an Intel onboard GMA chipset for the video , get a wifi card that is Intel made and tada , that 's everything major in your system supported .
Choose right and the touchpad will be a Synaptics touchpad ( support for in modern Linux kernels ) and you 're sorted.Hell , you also save some   1000 over the price of a MacBook .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you're using ndiswrapper you're doing it wrong.
You can go out there and buy a laptop for ~£400 that'll work flawlessly on most decent Linux distros (i.e.
any that don't force ndiswrapper down your throat).Get an Intel CPU, get an Intel onboard GMA chipset for the video, get a wifi card that is Intel made and tada, that's everything major in your system supported.
Choose right and the touchpad will be a Synaptics touchpad (support for in modern Linux kernels) and you're sorted.Hell, you also save some £1000 over the price of a MacBook.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889382</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30892212</id>
	<title>Re:Not sure in USA but in Spain...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264442460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No kidding. I have an attic office that no one but me goes into and it's damn hard to bring a Mac Pro to Starbucks.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No kidding .
I have an attic office that no one but me goes into and it 's damn hard to bring a Mac Pro to Starbucks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No kidding.
I have an attic office that no one but me goes into and it's damn hard to bring a Mac Pro to Starbucks.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890432</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30892406</id>
	<title>Re:I'm off-duty</title>
	<author>dubbreak</author>
	<datestamp>1264443120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If you want to take a dip in the gay pool...</p></div><p>Isn't that generally referred to as a "bath house"?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you want to take a dip in the gay pool...Is n't that generally referred to as a " bath house " ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you want to take a dip in the gay pool...Isn't that generally referred to as a "bath house"?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889756</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891720</id>
	<title>Re:Not sure in USA but in Spain...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264440720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I want to buy a mac because I'm a geek and have never used MacOS.  Then again I've never used it because I'd rather pay off my house...</p></div><p>To be honest, that's why I picked up my MacBook a year and a half ago.  Bottom-of-the-line MacBook.  Still a bit absurd in cost, but I could take it, and I wanted to see if it was all that and whatnot and the thing.  Yes, I actually bothered to try something before I passed judgment on it.  I'm a horrible Slashdotter, I know.</p><p>A year and a half later, it's... well, a decent chunk of computer, I'll give them that, and its pieces, hardware and software-wise, are well-integrated in and of themselves.  But for the added cost, not really worth it in the end, in my opinion.  The lack of keys I take for granted on otherwise "normal" keyboards (especially home, end, pgup, and pgdn) still gets to me, and I'll note the goofy clover button combined with the arrow keys (the substitute for those four keys, as I keep hearing) doesn't seem to work in all applications.  And I don't want to plug in an external keyboard.  This is a <i>laptop</i>, after all.  I have my desktop Linux box for THAT.</p><p>And, as a Linux user, there's just, well, a lot that just doesn't feel right about it, and I can't quite put my finger on it.  Maybe it's in the way the window manager behaves, maybe it's how applications are written to assume a "never close" attitude, I don't know, it just... doesn't ring true with me.  That and, as noted, this is a year-and-a-half-old MacBook that was the lowest model I could get at the time.  We all know how Apple very poignantly stops caring about people who don't re-buy all their hardware on a yearly basis.</p><p>But, since I tend to hold on to hardware until it either breaks or gets completely useless, I'm not getting a new laptop right away.  Though it does seem like the DVD drive on this MacBook is starting to go bad...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I want to buy a mac because I 'm a geek and have never used MacOS .
Then again I 've never used it because I 'd rather pay off my house...To be honest , that 's why I picked up my MacBook a year and a half ago .
Bottom-of-the-line MacBook .
Still a bit absurd in cost , but I could take it , and I wanted to see if it was all that and whatnot and the thing .
Yes , I actually bothered to try something before I passed judgment on it .
I 'm a horrible Slashdotter , I know.A year and a half later , it 's... well , a decent chunk of computer , I 'll give them that , and its pieces , hardware and software-wise , are well-integrated in and of themselves .
But for the added cost , not really worth it in the end , in my opinion .
The lack of keys I take for granted on otherwise " normal " keyboards ( especially home , end , pgup , and pgdn ) still gets to me , and I 'll note the goofy clover button combined with the arrow keys ( the substitute for those four keys , as I keep hearing ) does n't seem to work in all applications .
And I do n't want to plug in an external keyboard .
This is a laptop , after all .
I have my desktop Linux box for THAT.And , as a Linux user , there 's just , well , a lot that just does n't feel right about it , and I ca n't quite put my finger on it .
Maybe it 's in the way the window manager behaves , maybe it 's how applications are written to assume a " never close " attitude , I do n't know , it just... does n't ring true with me .
That and , as noted , this is a year-and-a-half-old MacBook that was the lowest model I could get at the time .
We all know how Apple very poignantly stops caring about people who do n't re-buy all their hardware on a yearly basis.But , since I tend to hold on to hardware until it either breaks or gets completely useless , I 'm not getting a new laptop right away .
Though it does seem like the DVD drive on this MacBook is starting to go bad.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I want to buy a mac because I'm a geek and have never used MacOS.
Then again I've never used it because I'd rather pay off my house...To be honest, that's why I picked up my MacBook a year and a half ago.
Bottom-of-the-line MacBook.
Still a bit absurd in cost, but I could take it, and I wanted to see if it was all that and whatnot and the thing.
Yes, I actually bothered to try something before I passed judgment on it.
I'm a horrible Slashdotter, I know.A year and a half later, it's... well, a decent chunk of computer, I'll give them that, and its pieces, hardware and software-wise, are well-integrated in and of themselves.
But for the added cost, not really worth it in the end, in my opinion.
The lack of keys I take for granted on otherwise "normal" keyboards (especially home, end, pgup, and pgdn) still gets to me, and I'll note the goofy clover button combined with the arrow keys (the substitute for those four keys, as I keep hearing) doesn't seem to work in all applications.
And I don't want to plug in an external keyboard.
This is a laptop, after all.
I have my desktop Linux box for THAT.And, as a Linux user, there's just, well, a lot that just doesn't feel right about it, and I can't quite put my finger on it.
Maybe it's in the way the window manager behaves, maybe it's how applications are written to assume a "never close" attitude, I don't know, it just... doesn't ring true with me.
That and, as noted, this is a year-and-a-half-old MacBook that was the lowest model I could get at the time.
We all know how Apple very poignantly stops caring about people who don't re-buy all their hardware on a yearly basis.But, since I tend to hold on to hardware until it either breaks or gets completely useless, I'm not getting a new laptop right away.
Though it does seem like the DVD drive on this MacBook is starting to go bad...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889608</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889656</id>
	<title>Re:status of shiny white thingys</title>
	<author>Drethon</author>
	<datestamp>1264433640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>So as soon as she makes enough money working to afford the difference between an affordable PC and that Mac she can buy one.</htmltext>
<tokenext>So as soon as she makes enough money working to afford the difference between an affordable PC and that Mac she can buy one .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So as soon as she makes enough money working to afford the difference between an affordable PC and that Mac she can buy one.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889332</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889256</id>
	<title>Not sure in USA but in Spain...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264432020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Mac users are bought by those that want to distinguish themselves from the rest in terms of money or social class, more in the lines of "I can afford an Mac and you are a poor blue collar bastard"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Mac users are bought by those that want to distinguish themselves from the rest in terms of money or social class , more in the lines of " I can afford an Mac and you are a poor blue collar bastard "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Mac users are bought by those that want to distinguish themselves from the rest in terms of money or social class, more in the lines of "I can afford an Mac and you are a poor blue collar bastard"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889722</id>
	<title>Re:Option 4</title>
	<author>whisper\_jeff</author>
	<datestamp>1264433880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I've already replied to this thread so I can't mod you up but please consider this +1 insightful. Slashdot users often think they are "the norm" when we are far, far, far from the norm. Most people don't have a clue what "open" is and, even when told what it is, don't care. All they care is whether their computer does what they want it to do the way they want it to do it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've already replied to this thread so I ca n't mod you up but please consider this + 1 insightful .
Slashdot users often think they are " the norm " when we are far , far , far from the norm .
Most people do n't have a clue what " open " is and , even when told what it is , do n't care .
All they care is whether their computer does what they want it to do the way they want it to do it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've already replied to this thread so I can't mod you up but please consider this +1 insightful.
Slashdot users often think they are "the norm" when we are far, far, far from the norm.
Most people don't have a clue what "open" is and, even when told what it is, don't care.
All they care is whether their computer does what they want it to do the way they want it to do it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889408</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890992</id>
	<title>Re:Not sure in USA but in Spain...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264438500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... Are we sure this is supposed to be funny?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... Are we sure this is supposed to be funny ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... Are we sure this is supposed to be funny?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889712</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891660</id>
	<title>Re:Not sure in USA but in Spain...</title>
	<author>Monkeedude1212</author>
	<datestamp>1264440540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ah but thats just the world we live in. People don't say <i>Some</i> windows operating systems are insecure, or that <i>some</i> Adobe products are vulnerable. They also don't say that <i>some</i> ISP's are ripping their customers off, or that <i>some</i> linux users are computer Gurus.</p><p>We live in a world where generalizing, rationalizing, and stereotypes are the norm. You are going to be lumped into a group whether you use a mac or not, like it or not. If it bothers you to the point that you "really hate" (as in actual full fledge hatred), perhaps you shouldn't put yourself in a position to be lumped. No one singled you out either.</p><p>Just saying.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ah but thats just the world we live in .
People do n't say Some windows operating systems are insecure , or that some Adobe products are vulnerable .
They also do n't say that some ISP 's are ripping their customers off , or that some linux users are computer Gurus.We live in a world where generalizing , rationalizing , and stereotypes are the norm .
You are going to be lumped into a group whether you use a mac or not , like it or not .
If it bothers you to the point that you " really hate " ( as in actual full fledge hatred ) , perhaps you should n't put yourself in a position to be lumped .
No one singled you out either.Just saying .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ah but thats just the world we live in.
People don't say Some windows operating systems are insecure, or that some Adobe products are vulnerable.
They also don't say that some ISP's are ripping their customers off, or that some linux users are computer Gurus.We live in a world where generalizing, rationalizing, and stereotypes are the norm.
You are going to be lumped into a group whether you use a mac or not, like it or not.
If it bothers you to the point that you "really hate" (as in actual full fledge hatred), perhaps you shouldn't put yourself in a position to be lumped.
No one singled you out either.Just saying.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890432</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891344</id>
	<title>Re:Not sure in USA but in Spain...</title>
	<author>ElSupreme</author>
	<datestamp>1264439640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Refinement and DESIGN. There is nothing apple does with engineering the other guys do. They put commodity parts into slick aluminum casings.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Refinement and DESIGN .
There is nothing apple does with engineering the other guys do .
They put commodity parts into slick aluminum casings .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Refinement and DESIGN.
There is nothing apple does with engineering the other guys do.
They put commodity parts into slick aluminum casings.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889712</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890042</id>
	<title>Disagree</title>
	<author>PeanutButterBreath</author>
	<datestamp>1264435080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I often feel like I am battling the Apple computer my employer provides for development work.  Window management is a major PITA, IMO.  This is no doubt a party personal issue, after years of working on other systems, but I fault Apple for dictating that I interact in the manner that they deem best rather allowing me to choose methods that, whether they like it or not, are conventional and intuitive.</p><p>Oh, and the scroll wheel on the mouse <i>just doesn't work</i> because it is not cleanable.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I often feel like I am battling the Apple computer my employer provides for development work .
Window management is a major PITA , IMO .
This is no doubt a party personal issue , after years of working on other systems , but I fault Apple for dictating that I interact in the manner that they deem best rather allowing me to choose methods that , whether they like it or not , are conventional and intuitive.Oh , and the scroll wheel on the mouse just does n't work because it is not cleanable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I often feel like I am battling the Apple computer my employer provides for development work.
Window management is a major PITA, IMO.
This is no doubt a party personal issue, after years of working on other systems, but I fault Apple for dictating that I interact in the manner that they deem best rather allowing me to choose methods that, whether they like it or not, are conventional and intuitive.Oh, and the scroll wheel on the mouse just doesn't work because it is not cleanable.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889406</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889412</id>
	<title>Re:FOSS</title>
	<author>pydev</author>
	<datestamp>1264432740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>If *only* there were a freely available OS to us on phones that wasn't from Apple - hmmm</i></p><p>Most of Apple's iPhone and desktop OS is FOSS anyway: the Mach kernel, BSD libraries, the gcc compiler and runtime, and tons more.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If * only * there were a freely available OS to us on phones that was n't from Apple - hmmmMost of Apple 's iPhone and desktop OS is FOSS anyway : the Mach kernel , BSD libraries , the gcc compiler and runtime , and tons more .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If *only* there were a freely available OS to us on phones that wasn't from Apple - hmmmMost of Apple's iPhone and desktop OS is FOSS anyway: the Mach kernel, BSD libraries, the gcc compiler and runtime, and tons more.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889316</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30905228</id>
	<title>Re:Subjectivity presented as fact</title>
	<author>left00coaster</author>
	<datestamp>1264524720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Say what you will about Mac v. Windows, but I have seen the evidence for myself. <br> <br>I often had occasion to visit the Redmond campus when I was doing interface designs for CitibankOnline, and we were co-branding a Bill Payment service with MS. PCs of all brands were everywhere in abundance -- except for one location -- the Design Graphics Lab (or whatever it was called). Twenty seats for the "creative types" and thirty or more workstations, all but two were Macs. One of the two PCs blue-screened while I was there. Chuckling a bit, the lab director admitted, "now you know why we use Apple."</htmltext>
<tokenext>Say what you will about Mac v. Windows , but I have seen the evidence for myself .
I often had occasion to visit the Redmond campus when I was doing interface designs for CitibankOnline , and we were co-branding a Bill Payment service with MS. PCs of all brands were everywhere in abundance -- except for one location -- the Design Graphics Lab ( or whatever it was called ) .
Twenty seats for the " creative types " and thirty or more workstations , all but two were Macs .
One of the two PCs blue-screened while I was there .
Chuckling a bit , the lab director admitted , " now you know why we use Apple .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Say what you will about Mac v. Windows, but I have seen the evidence for myself.
I often had occasion to visit the Redmond campus when I was doing interface designs for CitibankOnline, and we were co-branding a Bill Payment service with MS. PCs of all brands were everywhere in abundance -- except for one location -- the Design Graphics Lab (or whatever it was called).
Twenty seats for the "creative types" and thirty or more workstations, all but two were Macs.
One of the two PCs blue-screened while I was there.
Chuckling a bit, the lab director admitted, "now you know why we use Apple.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889454</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889662</id>
	<title>How is this a paradox?</title>
	<author>SoupIsGoodFood\_42</author>
	<datestamp>1264433700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't understand how this is a paradox.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't understand how this is a paradox .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't understand how this is a paradox.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889756</id>
	<title>Re:I'm off-duty</title>
	<author>Scrameustache</author>
	<datestamp>1264434000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Actually, there is some correlation between creativity and homosexuality; you'll find a larger percentage of gays in art school than studying any other discipline.</p></div><p>I don't remember that many gays (some, but not that many), but there were a lot of left-handers... And crazy art chicks. THAT was memorable.</p><p>If you want to take a dip in the gay pool, it's the theater you'll want to visit, rather than the art gallery.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , there is some correlation between creativity and homosexuality ; you 'll find a larger percentage of gays in art school than studying any other discipline.I do n't remember that many gays ( some , but not that many ) , but there were a lot of left-handers... And crazy art chicks .
THAT was memorable.If you want to take a dip in the gay pool , it 's the theater you 'll want to visit , rather than the art gallery .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, there is some correlation between creativity and homosexuality; you'll find a larger percentage of gays in art school than studying any other discipline.I don't remember that many gays (some, but not that many), but there were a lot of left-handers... And crazy art chicks.
THAT was memorable.If you want to take a dip in the gay pool, it's the theater you'll want to visit, rather than the art gallery.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889380</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889380</id>
	<title>Re:I'm off-duty</title>
	<author>mcgrew</author>
	<datestamp>1264432620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually, there is some correlation between creativity and homosexuality; you'll find a larger percentage of gays in art school than studying any other discipline.</p><p>But the disparity TFS speaks of isn't real. You don't buy a computer because of its culture, you buy it because it serves you purposes better than other brands. For a long time, Apple made the only computers that you could do art on; the Mac was graphic when DOS was text-only.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , there is some correlation between creativity and homosexuality ; you 'll find a larger percentage of gays in art school than studying any other discipline.But the disparity TFS speaks of is n't real .
You do n't buy a computer because of its culture , you buy it because it serves you purposes better than other brands .
For a long time , Apple made the only computers that you could do art on ; the Mac was graphic when DOS was text-only .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, there is some correlation between creativity and homosexuality; you'll find a larger percentage of gays in art school than studying any other discipline.But the disparity TFS speaks of isn't real.
You don't buy a computer because of its culture, you buy it because it serves you purposes better than other brands.
For a long time, Apple made the only computers that you could do art on; the Mac was graphic when DOS was text-only.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889228</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890084</id>
	<title>Re:Nice Troll</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264435200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How many applications for general usage are just copy cats?  OpenOffice is a MS Office 2003 clone, and they are even now working on copying the ribbon interface in 2007.  Gimp is a poor man's Photoshop.  Eclipse and most other IDEs are copying Visual Studio.  Face it, most linux user apps are not leading the pack.  They are following and trying to keep pace with somebody else.  In areas where Linux has gone its own way they are awesome, but the consumer area they have fallen short and just trying to do "me too!".  I can't think of any consumer level applications that are killer apps that help define the platform.  Note I said consumer level.  Most people here are used to more administrator and programmer level type of apps that work directly with the systems.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How many applications for general usage are just copy cats ?
OpenOffice is a MS Office 2003 clone , and they are even now working on copying the ribbon interface in 2007 .
Gimp is a poor man 's Photoshop .
Eclipse and most other IDEs are copying Visual Studio .
Face it , most linux user apps are not leading the pack .
They are following and trying to keep pace with somebody else .
In areas where Linux has gone its own way they are awesome , but the consumer area they have fallen short and just trying to do " me too ! " .
I ca n't think of any consumer level applications that are killer apps that help define the platform .
Note I said consumer level .
Most people here are used to more administrator and programmer level type of apps that work directly with the systems .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How many applications for general usage are just copy cats?
OpenOffice is a MS Office 2003 clone, and they are even now working on copying the ribbon interface in 2007.
Gimp is a poor man's Photoshop.
Eclipse and most other IDEs are copying Visual Studio.
Face it, most linux user apps are not leading the pack.
They are following and trying to keep pace with somebody else.
In areas where Linux has gone its own way they are awesome, but the consumer area they have fallen short and just trying to do "me too!".
I can't think of any consumer level applications that are killer apps that help define the platform.
Note I said consumer level.
Most people here are used to more administrator and programmer level type of apps that work directly with the systems.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889326</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30892548</id>
	<title>Re:Not sure in USA but in Spain...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264443540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I agree.  90\% of Apple users seriously give the rest of us a bad name...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I agree .
90 \ % of Apple users seriously give the rest of us a bad name.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I agree.
90\% of Apple users seriously give the rest of us a bad name...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890432</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889944</id>
	<title>no contradiction at all</title>
	<author>buddyglass</author>
	<datestamp>1264434720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Creative and free thinking" doesn't mean "lets one's entire create process be totally transparent, and broadcasts everything one is going to do months in advance".</p><p>As for why so many artsy folks like Apple, I'd identify two main reasons:</p><p>1. Microsoft is synonymous with "stodgy corporate culture".  Apple gives these folks a way to be "alternative" without having to jump through all the Linux hoops.</p><p>2. Apple stuff "looks cool".  That's important to a lot of people.  They've successfully transformed consumer electronics into an "image accessory".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Creative and free thinking " does n't mean " lets one 's entire create process be totally transparent , and broadcasts everything one is going to do months in advance " .As for why so many artsy folks like Apple , I 'd identify two main reasons : 1 .
Microsoft is synonymous with " stodgy corporate culture " .
Apple gives these folks a way to be " alternative " without having to jump through all the Linux hoops.2 .
Apple stuff " looks cool " .
That 's important to a lot of people .
They 've successfully transformed consumer electronics into an " image accessory " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Creative and free thinking" doesn't mean "lets one's entire create process be totally transparent, and broadcasts everything one is going to do months in advance".As for why so many artsy folks like Apple, I'd identify two main reasons:1.
Microsoft is synonymous with "stodgy corporate culture".
Apple gives these folks a way to be "alternative" without having to jump through all the Linux hoops.2.
Apple stuff "looks cool".
That's important to a lot of people.
They've successfully transformed consumer electronics into an "image accessory".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889316</id>
	<title>FOSS</title>
	<author>littlefoo</author>
	<datestamp>1264432320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"the open source and free software movements haven't produced anything remotely as useful as<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... the iPhone"</p><p>I'm not sure whether this is due to the difficulty getting make and gcc to construct things out of plastic, metal and semi-conductors - or a lack of configure options...</p><p>If *only* there were a freely available OS to us on phones that wasn't from Apple - hmmm</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" the open source and free software movements have n't produced anything remotely as useful as ... the iPhone " I 'm not sure whether this is due to the difficulty getting make and gcc to construct things out of plastic , metal and semi-conductors - or a lack of configure options...If * only * there were a freely available OS to us on phones that was n't from Apple - hmmm</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"the open source and free software movements haven't produced anything remotely as useful as ... the iPhone"I'm not sure whether this is due to the difficulty getting make and gcc to construct things out of plastic, metal and semi-conductors - or a lack of configure options...If *only* there were a freely available OS to us on phones that wasn't from Apple - hmmm</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891756</id>
	<title>Re:Not sure in USA but in Spain...</title>
	<author>Pikkebaas</author>
	<datestamp>1264440840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I am seriously considering buying a Mac user, because I'm a hipster with a penchant for showing off my material means and social standing. I could make him use my Mac for me which I bought because it's pretty. Yeah, sure you have a Mac - I've got a <i>Mac user</i> lounging around my apartment waiting to do trivial wiki searches for me!</htmltext>
<tokenext>I am seriously considering buying a Mac user , because I 'm a hipster with a penchant for showing off my material means and social standing .
I could make him use my Mac for me which I bought because it 's pretty .
Yeah , sure you have a Mac - I 've got a Mac user lounging around my apartment waiting to do trivial wiki searches for me !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am seriously considering buying a Mac user, because I'm a hipster with a penchant for showing off my material means and social standing.
I could make him use my Mac for me which I bought because it's pretty.
Yeah, sure you have a Mac - I've got a Mac user lounging around my apartment waiting to do trivial wiki searches for me!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889256</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891900</id>
	<title>Re:I'm off-duty</title>
	<author>misexistentialist</author>
	<datestamp>1264441320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>True, why else does anyone do art except to score chicks?</htmltext>
<tokenext>True , why else does anyone do art except to score chicks ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>True, why else does anyone do art except to score chicks?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889680</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890612</id>
	<title>Re:Designed to stay out of your way</title>
	<author>slim</author>
	<datestamp>1264437180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>[People] like Apple's products is because the user interface and the physical products are designed to, as they say, Just work.</p></div><p>I'd love a system like this. Windows ain't it. But Mac ain't it either. I've lost count of the number of times I've wanted to do something in iLife and either:</p><ul> <li>The help documentation says "You can [do something]" without actually telling you <i>how</i> </li><li>Despite it seeming like an obvious thing to be able to do, extensive Googling eventually reveals it can't be done</li></ul><p>The Mac way is often "Everything's really easy, as long as you only want to do the narrow range of things we wanted you to do".</p><p>This is equally true of the iPhone, although in a way I can forgive it more on the iPhone - with its small form factor and lack of inputs, you'd expect it to be a less open-ended appliance.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>[ People ] like Apple 's products is because the user interface and the physical products are designed to , as they say , Just work.I 'd love a system like this .
Windows ai n't it .
But Mac ai n't it either .
I 've lost count of the number of times I 've wanted to do something in iLife and either : The help documentation says " You can [ do something ] " without actually telling you how Despite it seeming like an obvious thing to be able to do , extensive Googling eventually reveals it ca n't be doneThe Mac way is often " Everything 's really easy , as long as you only want to do the narrow range of things we wanted you to do " .This is equally true of the iPhone , although in a way I can forgive it more on the iPhone - with its small form factor and lack of inputs , you 'd expect it to be a less open-ended appliance .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>[People] like Apple's products is because the user interface and the physical products are designed to, as they say, Just work.I'd love a system like this.
Windows ain't it.
But Mac ain't it either.
I've lost count of the number of times I've wanted to do something in iLife and either: The help documentation says "You can [do something]" without actually telling you how Despite it seeming like an obvious thing to be able to do, extensive Googling eventually reveals it can't be doneThe Mac way is often "Everything's really easy, as long as you only want to do the narrow range of things we wanted you to do".This is equally true of the iPhone, although in a way I can forgive it more on the iPhone - with its small form factor and lack of inputs, you'd expect it to be a less open-ended appliance.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889406</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891230</id>
	<title>Re:Subjectivity presented as fact</title>
	<author>Ma8thew</author>
	<datestamp>1264439340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How's this for some examples:</p><ul>
<li>NetNewsWire vs. FeedDemon</li><li>Textmate vs. Any text editor</li><li>CSSEdit/Expresso/Coda vs. Dreamweaver</li><li>iWork vs. MS Office</li></ul><p>If you've only used iLife (as you seem to have), then you're missing out on the wide variety of extremely high quality applications of Mac OS X.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How 's this for some examples : NetNewsWire vs. FeedDemonTextmate vs. Any text editorCSSEdit/Expresso/Coda vs. DreamweaveriWork vs. MS OfficeIf you 've only used iLife ( as you seem to have ) , then you 're missing out on the wide variety of extremely high quality applications of Mac OS X .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How's this for some examples:
NetNewsWire vs. FeedDemonTextmate vs. Any text editorCSSEdit/Expresso/Coda vs. DreamweaveriWork vs. MS OfficeIf you've only used iLife (as you seem to have), then you're missing out on the wide variety of extremely high quality applications of Mac OS X.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889454</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891648</id>
	<title>Re:Not sure in USA but in Spain...</title>
	<author>SakuraDreams</author>
	<datestamp>1264440480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The right tool for the job, I guess. I have a 2006 Mac Pro and use it for Final Cut Pro work. I have a 2008 Panasonic Let's Note (probably the best built consumer laptop out there, better than MBP)
for email/www and a NEC VersaPro UltraLite for portability (it's 700g in weight, has a Toshiba SSD and can be dropped 78cm or packed with 150kg of luggage without problems).
The right tool for the job. I guess I'm a Mac Pro/Panasonic Toughbook/NEC netbook fanboy - but these devices work best for me. The right tool for the job, I guess. To each their own without any false allusions to user superiority or whatnot. MacOSX does have benefits because it is easier to use than Windows. I grew up on Windows 3 and OSX was way easier to learn as an adult.

If only Apple got NEC or Panasonic to build their notebooks in Osaka for them, that would make the ultimate notebook.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-)</htmltext>
<tokenext>The right tool for the job , I guess .
I have a 2006 Mac Pro and use it for Final Cut Pro work .
I have a 2008 Panasonic Let 's Note ( probably the best built consumer laptop out there , better than MBP ) for email/www and a NEC VersaPro UltraLite for portability ( it 's 700g in weight , has a Toshiba SSD and can be dropped 78cm or packed with 150kg of luggage without problems ) .
The right tool for the job .
I guess I 'm a Mac Pro/Panasonic Toughbook/NEC netbook fanboy - but these devices work best for me .
The right tool for the job , I guess .
To each their own without any false allusions to user superiority or whatnot .
MacOSX does have benefits because it is easier to use than Windows .
I grew up on Windows 3 and OSX was way easier to learn as an adult .
If only Apple got NEC or Panasonic to build their notebooks in Osaka for them , that would make the ultimate notebook .
: - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The right tool for the job, I guess.
I have a 2006 Mac Pro and use it for Final Cut Pro work.
I have a 2008 Panasonic Let's Note (probably the best built consumer laptop out there, better than MBP)
for email/www and a NEC VersaPro UltraLite for portability (it's 700g in weight, has a Toshiba SSD and can be dropped 78cm or packed with 150kg of luggage without problems).
The right tool for the job.
I guess I'm a Mac Pro/Panasonic Toughbook/NEC netbook fanboy - but these devices work best for me.
The right tool for the job, I guess.
To each their own without any false allusions to user superiority or whatnot.
MacOSX does have benefits because it is easier to use than Windows.
I grew up on Windows 3 and OSX was way easier to learn as an adult.
If only Apple got NEC or Panasonic to build their notebooks in Osaka for them, that would make the ultimate notebook.
:-)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889256</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30894204</id>
	<title>Not in a world of cloners</title>
	<author>bgspence</author>
	<datestamp>1264450980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Apple' innovation would be quickly copied by the Open Source cloning community. Apple's use of an Open Source foundation is based on a clone of a closed source UNIX from Bell Labs. And Firefox is a clone of Mozilla which is a clone of<nobr> <wbr></nobr>,,, (you get the idea). Telegraphing innovation before it is ready is bad business in a world of cloners.</p><p>Apple learned the lesson that killed IBM's PC. Apple tried allowing controlled cloning, but found it to be a bad way to go. IBM fought the cloning of it's PC's BIOS, lost and now is out of the PC market entirely. Allowing clones wasn't a winning idea on the IBM PC side of the world, either.</p><p>Don't sweat the high cost of owning Apple's next new thing. The cloners will be there with their copies soon enough. Cheaper and with all the quality and innovation you expect from a knock off Rolex.</p><p>Apple's Developer conference releasing information on the upcoming Tiger OS lead off with big banners saying "Redmond start your copy machines". Apple gets how the real world works. They release quality products based on significant innovation into broken markets that have lost their way. Apple's first steps often look naive in retrospect, but they are groundbreaking when the first appear. I can't wait to see what version 2.0 of this thing looks like a year or so from now once they have a chance to make real world adjustments to their innovations.</p><p>I would expect to see market baskets of magazines and newspapers on a model similar to Cable TV. Pay one price and get subscriptions to lots of print channels. You've already seen the future look of newspapers in the Harry Potter flicks. And, kids will no longer be breaking their backs lugging hardbound school materials. Apple will be back in schools in a profound way. Homework and quizzes all integrated with the schoolroom. Paid for by cheaper book subscriptions.  Killing off the used textbook market completely.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Apple ' innovation would be quickly copied by the Open Source cloning community .
Apple 's use of an Open Source foundation is based on a clone of a closed source UNIX from Bell Labs .
And Firefox is a clone of Mozilla which is a clone of ,, , ( you get the idea ) .
Telegraphing innovation before it is ready is bad business in a world of cloners.Apple learned the lesson that killed IBM 's PC .
Apple tried allowing controlled cloning , but found it to be a bad way to go .
IBM fought the cloning of it 's PC 's BIOS , lost and now is out of the PC market entirely .
Allowing clones was n't a winning idea on the IBM PC side of the world , either.Do n't sweat the high cost of owning Apple 's next new thing .
The cloners will be there with their copies soon enough .
Cheaper and with all the quality and innovation you expect from a knock off Rolex.Apple 's Developer conference releasing information on the upcoming Tiger OS lead off with big banners saying " Redmond start your copy machines " .
Apple gets how the real world works .
They release quality products based on significant innovation into broken markets that have lost their way .
Apple 's first steps often look naive in retrospect , but they are groundbreaking when the first appear .
I ca n't wait to see what version 2.0 of this thing looks like a year or so from now once they have a chance to make real world adjustments to their innovations.I would expect to see market baskets of magazines and newspapers on a model similar to Cable TV .
Pay one price and get subscriptions to lots of print channels .
You 've already seen the future look of newspapers in the Harry Potter flicks .
And , kids will no longer be breaking their backs lugging hardbound school materials .
Apple will be back in schools in a profound way .
Homework and quizzes all integrated with the schoolroom .
Paid for by cheaper book subscriptions .
Killing off the used textbook market completely .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Apple' innovation would be quickly copied by the Open Source cloning community.
Apple's use of an Open Source foundation is based on a clone of a closed source UNIX from Bell Labs.
And Firefox is a clone of Mozilla which is a clone of ,,, (you get the idea).
Telegraphing innovation before it is ready is bad business in a world of cloners.Apple learned the lesson that killed IBM's PC.
Apple tried allowing controlled cloning, but found it to be a bad way to go.
IBM fought the cloning of it's PC's BIOS, lost and now is out of the PC market entirely.
Allowing clones wasn't a winning idea on the IBM PC side of the world, either.Don't sweat the high cost of owning Apple's next new thing.
The cloners will be there with their copies soon enough.
Cheaper and with all the quality and innovation you expect from a knock off Rolex.Apple's Developer conference releasing information on the upcoming Tiger OS lead off with big banners saying "Redmond start your copy machines".
Apple gets how the real world works.
They release quality products based on significant innovation into broken markets that have lost their way.
Apple's first steps often look naive in retrospect, but they are groundbreaking when the first appear.
I can't wait to see what version 2.0 of this thing looks like a year or so from now once they have a chance to make real world adjustments to their innovations.I would expect to see market baskets of magazines and newspapers on a model similar to Cable TV.
Pay one price and get subscriptions to lots of print channels.
You've already seen the future look of newspapers in the Harry Potter flicks.
And, kids will no longer be breaking their backs lugging hardbound school materials.
Apple will be back in schools in a profound way.
Homework and quizzes all integrated with the schoolroom.
Paid for by cheaper book subscriptions.
Killing off the used textbook market completely.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890476</id>
	<title>Re:Not sure in USA but in Spain...</title>
	<author>TheDarkMaster</author>
	<datestamp>1264436760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Same here, in Brazil. Only the rich buy a Mac, to say they have more money than others and therefore more status. It's like buying a pair of famous jeans just to say you have, when any good jeans would do.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Same here , in Brazil .
Only the rich buy a Mac , to say they have more money than others and therefore more status .
It 's like buying a pair of famous jeans just to say you have , when any good jeans would do .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Same here, in Brazil.
Only the rich buy a Mac, to say they have more money than others and therefore more status.
It's like buying a pair of famous jeans just to say you have, when any good jeans would do.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889256</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30893914</id>
	<title>Re:FOSS</title>
	<author>VortexCortex</author>
	<datestamp>1264449600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not only on phones...</p><p><div class="quote"><p>The open source and free software movements haven't produced anything remotely as useful as [Mac OS X]<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p></div><p>Free BSD, Linux, Open BSD -- Just because you don't have to buy it doesn't mean it wasn't "produced".</p><p>Not just for desktops...<br>The percentage of web servers running FOSS vs proprietary OSs is staggering.<br>I'd venture to say that the Internet is far more "useful" than Mac OS X.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Not only on phones...The open source and free software movements have n't produced anything remotely as useful as [ Mac OS X ] ...Free BSD , Linux , Open BSD -- Just because you do n't have to buy it does n't mean it was n't " produced " .Not just for desktops...The percentage of web servers running FOSS vs proprietary OSs is staggering.I 'd venture to say that the Internet is far more " useful " than Mac OS X .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not only on phones...The open source and free software movements haven't produced anything remotely as useful as [Mac OS X] ...Free BSD, Linux, Open BSD -- Just because you don't have to buy it doesn't mean it wasn't "produced".Not just for desktops...The percentage of web servers running FOSS vs proprietary OSs is staggering.I'd venture to say that the Internet is far more "useful" than Mac OS X.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889316</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30893618</id>
	<title>Re:Not sure in USA but in Spain...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264448040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I'll bet that you can't even comprehend the refinement and engineering that goes into Apple's devices</p></div><p>So true!  I like to rub them against my skin.  It's like being caressed by Steve Jobs himself.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'll bet that you ca n't even comprehend the refinement and engineering that goes into Apple 's devicesSo true !
I like to rub them against my skin .
It 's like being caressed by Steve Jobs himself .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'll bet that you can't even comprehend the refinement and engineering that goes into Apple's devicesSo true!
I like to rub them against my skin.
It's like being caressed by Steve Jobs himself.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889712</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889986</id>
	<title>free thinking is not the same as being open</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264434900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Do not confuse free and open. A free thinking person has his own idea's  and does not mind what others think of it. A free thinking person does not need constant approval.  So the apple way of developing products reflect the way freethinker Steve Jobs works.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do not confuse free and open .
A free thinking person has his own idea 's and does not mind what others think of it .
A free thinking person does not need constant approval .
So the apple way of developing products reflect the way freethinker Steve Jobs works .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do not confuse free and open.
A free thinking person has his own idea's  and does not mind what others think of it.
A free thinking person does not need constant approval.
So the apple way of developing products reflect the way freethinker Steve Jobs works.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30896046</id>
	<title>Re:I'm off-duty</title>
	<author>dan828</author>
	<datestamp>1264415220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Or maybe that she's full of shit and doesn't like to admit her choice is about fashion and not utility.  Being the IT guru for an extended family, in the last few years I've given purchase advice for the laptops of about 8 college bound students.  All of them wanted Macs, and the reason was because they were a premium brand and status symbol.  None of them had any idea about the differences in the operating systems or what applications where available.  At least one of them uses windows pretty much exclusively on his.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Or maybe that she 's full of shit and does n't like to admit her choice is about fashion and not utility .
Being the IT guru for an extended family , in the last few years I 've given purchase advice for the laptops of about 8 college bound students .
All of them wanted Macs , and the reason was because they were a premium brand and status symbol .
None of them had any idea about the differences in the operating systems or what applications where available .
At least one of them uses windows pretty much exclusively on his .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or maybe that she's full of shit and doesn't like to admit her choice is about fashion and not utility.
Being the IT guru for an extended family, in the last few years I've given purchase advice for the laptops of about 8 college bound students.
All of them wanted Macs, and the reason was because they were a premium brand and status symbol.
None of them had any idea about the differences in the operating systems or what applications where available.
At least one of them uses windows pretty much exclusively on his.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30894750</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890604</id>
	<title>Re:Not sure in USA but in Spain...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264437180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I am a long-time Mac user, and my reasons for "distinguishing myself" are that I am willing to pay for a superior product having exceptional performance, design, and integration, . .</p><p>rather than buy a "P of C".  One thing that American culture has done very well is advance the misconception that cheaper is better.  Not always, and with PC's that's for sure.</p><p>I have used pc's at work for along time, so I do have quite a bit of experience with them.  Yes, they work, but they are inferior, aggravating, and poorer in design.</p><p>One example:  OS design.  Mac OS X is built on BSD Unix.  It is a true pre-emptively multi-tasking operating system (POXIS compliant).  Everything is a process and all processes are time-sliced by the OS.  Print jobs become background processes naturally.  The OS makes clear distinctions between User, Admin and Root privileges.</p><p>All Windows OS's, including XP, Vista, and 7, are not true POSIX-compliant OS's.  The garble and confuse the privileges hierarchy.  Printing a pdf from Adobe Acrobat, running from within Internet Explorer, completely locks up the browser until the print job is complete.</p><p>Yes they are only my preferences and perspectives.  As an engineer, I respect quality and design, and I am sensitive to all the damage that bean-counting is doing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I am a long-time Mac user , and my reasons for " distinguishing myself " are that I am willing to pay for a superior product having exceptional performance , design , and integration , .
.rather than buy a " P of C " .
One thing that American culture has done very well is advance the misconception that cheaper is better .
Not always , and with PC 's that 's for sure.I have used pc 's at work for along time , so I do have quite a bit of experience with them .
Yes , they work , but they are inferior , aggravating , and poorer in design.One example : OS design .
Mac OS X is built on BSD Unix .
It is a true pre-emptively multi-tasking operating system ( POXIS compliant ) .
Everything is a process and all processes are time-sliced by the OS .
Print jobs become background processes naturally .
The OS makes clear distinctions between User , Admin and Root privileges.All Windows OS 's , including XP , Vista , and 7 , are not true POSIX-compliant OS 's .
The garble and confuse the privileges hierarchy .
Printing a pdf from Adobe Acrobat , running from within Internet Explorer , completely locks up the browser until the print job is complete.Yes they are only my preferences and perspectives .
As an engineer , I respect quality and design , and I am sensitive to all the damage that bean-counting is doing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am a long-time Mac user, and my reasons for "distinguishing myself" are that I am willing to pay for a superior product having exceptional performance, design, and integration, .
.rather than buy a "P of C".
One thing that American culture has done very well is advance the misconception that cheaper is better.
Not always, and with PC's that's for sure.I have used pc's at work for along time, so I do have quite a bit of experience with them.
Yes, they work, but they are inferior, aggravating, and poorer in design.One example:  OS design.
Mac OS X is built on BSD Unix.
It is a true pre-emptively multi-tasking operating system (POXIS compliant).
Everything is a process and all processes are time-sliced by the OS.
Print jobs become background processes naturally.
The OS makes clear distinctions between User, Admin and Root privileges.All Windows OS's, including XP, Vista, and 7, are not true POSIX-compliant OS's.
The garble and confuse the privileges hierarchy.
Printing a pdf from Adobe Acrobat, running from within Internet Explorer, completely locks up the browser until the print job is complete.Yes they are only my preferences and perspectives.
As an engineer, I respect quality and design, and I am sensitive to all the damage that bean-counting is doing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889256</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890200</id>
	<title>But look at the source of OS X...</title>
	<author>oblivionboy</author>
	<datestamp>1264435680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>....it is largely simply a later version of NeXTStep. The interesting thing about this, is that NeXT WAS an open company. IIRC there were two salary bands only $50K and $70K. There was little if any heirarchy, and according to wikipedia anyways, any employee at any time could go to HR and see what anyone else was making at any given moment. And even before that at Apple, under Steve Jobs, programmers were credited directly in "About" screens in applications, and there is of course the famous "signatures" of all the people who worked on the original Mac. These practices are largely non-existant now at the big A. The change to extreme level of secrecy that came later, seems to be a logical byproduct of the "Oh yeah, and just one more thing" that Steve Jobs has honned over the years to near perfection.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>....it is largely simply a later version of NeXTStep .
The interesting thing about this , is that NeXT WAS an open company .
IIRC there were two salary bands only $ 50K and $ 70K .
There was little if any heirarchy , and according to wikipedia anyways , any employee at any time could go to HR and see what anyone else was making at any given moment .
And even before that at Apple , under Steve Jobs , programmers were credited directly in " About " screens in applications , and there is of course the famous " signatures " of all the people who worked on the original Mac .
These practices are largely non-existant now at the big A. The change to extreme level of secrecy that came later , seems to be a logical byproduct of the " Oh yeah , and just one more thing " that Steve Jobs has honned over the years to near perfection .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>....it is largely simply a later version of NeXTStep.
The interesting thing about this, is that NeXT WAS an open company.
IIRC there were two salary bands only $50K and $70K.
There was little if any heirarchy, and according to wikipedia anyways, any employee at any time could go to HR and see what anyone else was making at any given moment.
And even before that at Apple, under Steve Jobs, programmers were credited directly in "About" screens in applications, and there is of course the famous "signatures" of all the people who worked on the original Mac.
These practices are largely non-existant now at the big A. The change to extreme level of secrecy that came later, seems to be a logical byproduct of the "Oh yeah, and just one more thing" that Steve Jobs has honned over the years to near perfection.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30895998</id>
	<title>Re:I guess Apple did all that themselves...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264415040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Yes, some portions of OS X are derived from OSS.  The GNU userland that almost no mac users use....</p></div><p>Well, I use all that.  It's why I bought my original MacBook Pro.  I know I'm not alone in thinking of my Mac as good quality Unix workstation that I can Photoshop and Aperture on.  I also recompile stuff from the GNU userland whenever the need arises and again I know I'm not alone in doing that.  Thankfully, OSS IS very important to Apple's future.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , some portions of OS X are derived from OSS .
The GNU userland that almost no mac users use....Well , I use all that .
It 's why I bought my original MacBook Pro .
I know I 'm not alone in thinking of my Mac as good quality Unix workstation that I can Photoshop and Aperture on .
I also recompile stuff from the GNU userland whenever the need arises and again I know I 'm not alone in doing that .
Thankfully , OSS IS very important to Apple 's future .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, some portions of OS X are derived from OSS.
The GNU userland that almost no mac users use....Well, I use all that.
It's why I bought my original MacBook Pro.
I know I'm not alone in thinking of my Mac as good quality Unix workstation that I can Photoshop and Aperture on.
I also recompile stuff from the GNU userland whenever the need arises and again I know I'm not alone in doing that.
Thankfully, OSS IS very important to Apple's future.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890082</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30892598</id>
	<title>Okay.</title>
	<author>phmadore</author>
	<datestamp>1264443660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>This is the most boring argument on the internet. But I will say that I switched to Mac because I could afford it and because I was tired of the same-old with Windows. I paid about $300 more for this Mac than I paid for my last PC, which was about a thousand bucks. I bought the basement Macbook. It wasn't until I bought my first iPod in 2008 that I even considered buying a Mac. I first got an old iBook and tried it out, just to get a feel for the system. Then in March 2009 I finally bought this Macbook, and I have no intention of going back. There are very few times I've been anywhere near as frustrated with this system as I used to be on Windows. I also think the prevalence of people who pirate Windows is very telling: you love it so much but you're not willing to pay for it. It's like stealing a car with three wheels.

I get all my work done faster and more efficiently on my Mac. I'm less distracted by viruses and other things that used to suck up an exorbitant amount of time in my computing.

Since I've switched, three of my friends have switched when it came time to buy new computers. They of course gave mine a try first.

The truth is that most people aren't wanting to play games and do all this other bullshit that Windows users are talking about. The other truth is that the crazy Mac users you're talking about, the ones who think they're better than everyone else, they are more easily identifiable by their @me.com or @mac.com e-mail addresses. That shows true, baseless loyalty.

I can think of two times I got angry at Apple. One of them was unrelated to my experience, the other was directly related. In both cases I made my resolutions.

I own more Apple products now than anyone I know. And I see no reason to switch back to the wide and virus-infested world of PC computing. I also have a Linux netbook and an IBM thinkpad, both running Ubuntu. I use those for specific purposes. This Mac is my general purpose computer, and pound for pound I spent a lot less on it--I won't upgrade for another three years, you'll surely be upgrading next year. Shit, the iBook would have suited me just fine had it about 200Mhz more.

And that's the truth, and that's all I have.

Fuck Bill Gates and Steve Jobs. I make my decisions based on my needs, not my image, and people who criticize me for using a better computer well, fuck you too.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is the most boring argument on the internet .
But I will say that I switched to Mac because I could afford it and because I was tired of the same-old with Windows .
I paid about $ 300 more for this Mac than I paid for my last PC , which was about a thousand bucks .
I bought the basement Macbook .
It was n't until I bought my first iPod in 2008 that I even considered buying a Mac .
I first got an old iBook and tried it out , just to get a feel for the system .
Then in March 2009 I finally bought this Macbook , and I have no intention of going back .
There are very few times I 've been anywhere near as frustrated with this system as I used to be on Windows .
I also think the prevalence of people who pirate Windows is very telling : you love it so much but you 're not willing to pay for it .
It 's like stealing a car with three wheels .
I get all my work done faster and more efficiently on my Mac .
I 'm less distracted by viruses and other things that used to suck up an exorbitant amount of time in my computing .
Since I 've switched , three of my friends have switched when it came time to buy new computers .
They of course gave mine a try first .
The truth is that most people are n't wanting to play games and do all this other bullshit that Windows users are talking about .
The other truth is that the crazy Mac users you 're talking about , the ones who think they 're better than everyone else , they are more easily identifiable by their @ me.com or @ mac.com e-mail addresses .
That shows true , baseless loyalty .
I can think of two times I got angry at Apple .
One of them was unrelated to my experience , the other was directly related .
In both cases I made my resolutions .
I own more Apple products now than anyone I know .
And I see no reason to switch back to the wide and virus-infested world of PC computing .
I also have a Linux netbook and an IBM thinkpad , both running Ubuntu .
I use those for specific purposes .
This Mac is my general purpose computer , and pound for pound I spent a lot less on it--I wo n't upgrade for another three years , you 'll surely be upgrading next year .
Shit , the iBook would have suited me just fine had it about 200Mhz more .
And that 's the truth , and that 's all I have .
Fuck Bill Gates and Steve Jobs .
I make my decisions based on my needs , not my image , and people who criticize me for using a better computer well , fuck you too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is the most boring argument on the internet.
But I will say that I switched to Mac because I could afford it and because I was tired of the same-old with Windows.
I paid about $300 more for this Mac than I paid for my last PC, which was about a thousand bucks.
I bought the basement Macbook.
It wasn't until I bought my first iPod in 2008 that I even considered buying a Mac.
I first got an old iBook and tried it out, just to get a feel for the system.
Then in March 2009 I finally bought this Macbook, and I have no intention of going back.
There are very few times I've been anywhere near as frustrated with this system as I used to be on Windows.
I also think the prevalence of people who pirate Windows is very telling: you love it so much but you're not willing to pay for it.
It's like stealing a car with three wheels.
I get all my work done faster and more efficiently on my Mac.
I'm less distracted by viruses and other things that used to suck up an exorbitant amount of time in my computing.
Since I've switched, three of my friends have switched when it came time to buy new computers.
They of course gave mine a try first.
The truth is that most people aren't wanting to play games and do all this other bullshit that Windows users are talking about.
The other truth is that the crazy Mac users you're talking about, the ones who think they're better than everyone else, they are more easily identifiable by their @me.com or @mac.com e-mail addresses.
That shows true, baseless loyalty.
I can think of two times I got angry at Apple.
One of them was unrelated to my experience, the other was directly related.
In both cases I made my resolutions.
I own more Apple products now than anyone I know.
And I see no reason to switch back to the wide and virus-infested world of PC computing.
I also have a Linux netbook and an IBM thinkpad, both running Ubuntu.
I use those for specific purposes.
This Mac is my general purpose computer, and pound for pound I spent a lot less on it--I won't upgrade for another three years, you'll surely be upgrading next year.
Shit, the iBook would have suited me just fine had it about 200Mhz more.
And that's the truth, and that's all I have.
Fuck Bill Gates and Steve Jobs.
I make my decisions based on my needs, not my image, and people who criticize me for using a better computer well, fuck you too.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30908960</id>
	<title>Re:But they work</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264539540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Uh, yes, you bought a <em>Dell</em>. Surely you knew what you were getting into. Buy a more reputable brand, and you'll get better quality. (Apple used to be a pretty disreputable brand for laptop quality, although I don't hear too bad things about them nowadays.)</htmltext>
<tokenext>Uh , yes , you bought a Dell .
Surely you knew what you were getting into .
Buy a more reputable brand , and you 'll get better quality .
( Apple used to be a pretty disreputable brand for laptop quality , although I do n't hear too bad things about them nowadays .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Uh, yes, you bought a Dell.
Surely you knew what you were getting into.
Buy a more reputable brand, and you'll get better quality.
(Apple used to be a pretty disreputable brand for laptop quality, although I don't hear too bad things about them nowadays.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890120</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889496</id>
	<title>Re:Nice Troll</title>
	<author>Tom</author>
	<datestamp>1264433040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Tell them to try it. I'm talking from personal experience. Linux fanatic for ~10 years, then I bought a Mac, with the "if this OS X doesn't work out for me, I can always install Linux on it" thought in the back of my mind.</p><p>Guess what, I now have 3 Macs in my home and 0 Linux computers. My servers still run Linux, but for a desktop, Gnome, KDE and everything else has about 20 years in user interface design before it comes close. Gimmicks and visuals isn't what it's about, that's just the icing on the cake and icing without cake just doesn't cut it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Tell them to try it .
I 'm talking from personal experience .
Linux fanatic for ~ 10 years , then I bought a Mac , with the " if this OS X does n't work out for me , I can always install Linux on it " thought in the back of my mind.Guess what , I now have 3 Macs in my home and 0 Linux computers .
My servers still run Linux , but for a desktop , Gnome , KDE and everything else has about 20 years in user interface design before it comes close .
Gimmicks and visuals is n't what it 's about , that 's just the icing on the cake and icing without cake just does n't cut it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Tell them to try it.
I'm talking from personal experience.
Linux fanatic for ~10 years, then I bought a Mac, with the "if this OS X doesn't work out for me, I can always install Linux on it" thought in the back of my mind.Guess what, I now have 3 Macs in my home and 0 Linux computers.
My servers still run Linux, but for a desktop, Gnome, KDE and everything else has about 20 years in user interface design before it comes close.
Gimmicks and visuals isn't what it's about, that's just the icing on the cake and icing without cake just doesn't cut it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889326</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_80</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889328
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891996
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889326
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889748
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_108</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889256
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890432
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30897012
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_156</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889256
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889712
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891344
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30895146
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30900396
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_98</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889454
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30896452
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_140</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889256
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890432
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30896796
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889282
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889768
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30893138
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889256
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889712
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30893618
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_118</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889256
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890604
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_164</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889444
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30896940
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_150</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889332
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30892340
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889256
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890820
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_69</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889282
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889768
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30894126
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889316
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891204
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889256
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890432
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30893196
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_79</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889228
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889380
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30897160
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889516
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889992
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889256
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890432
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891688
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30902414
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_145</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889228
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889380
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889680
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30892420
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_87</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889282
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890082
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30895998
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889382
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890508
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889256
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890476
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_107</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889256
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890432
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30892010
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_153</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889332
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889850
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_97</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889332
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889656
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889228
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889380
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889528
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30895620
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_66</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889332
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889826
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889256
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890112
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_129</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889516
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30892210
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_163</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889228
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889380
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890056
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30894750
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30896046
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889228
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889380
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889498
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30892118
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_161</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889454
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30892068
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889282
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889768
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891836
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_74</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889396
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30892854
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_60</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889382
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890146
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_137</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889282
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30896460
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_148</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889362
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891298
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_84</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889228
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889380
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889498
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30892408
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_82</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889228
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889380
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889498
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891072
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30895532
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_158</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889256
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890014
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_116</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889228
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889380
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889528
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30900062
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30903538
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889228
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889380
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30895402
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30901080
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_100</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889256
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889832
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30900232
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_90</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891536
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_166</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889282
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889768
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30896430
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_124</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889228
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889380
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890314
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30898908
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_110</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889454
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30900856
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889228
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889380
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889528
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30893900
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_63</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889256
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889712
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890992
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_134</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889454
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30895960
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889256
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890432
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30893368
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889454
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30896516
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_73</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889332
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890812
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_71</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30893560
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30922668
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_147</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889406
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890312
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30893616
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_105</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889256
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889846
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_95</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889444
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30893850
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889406
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30894508
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_155</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889228
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889380
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889680
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891900
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_113</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889326
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890084
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889228
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889380
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890582
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_68</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889362
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890034
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889256
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891430
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889408
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30894284
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889790
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30893760
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_165</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889256
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890808
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30893252
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_123</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889256
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890432
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891324
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_76</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889256
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890432
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891112
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889494
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891966
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889256
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890432
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891688
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30898642
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889256
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890432
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30892212
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_131</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889256
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890432
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891660
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_142</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889228
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889380
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889672
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_86</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889362
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890910
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889406
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890042
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_152</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889256
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891756
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889256
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890432
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891688
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30899102
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_126</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889406
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890612
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_65</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889328
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890024
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889256
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890432
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891510
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889228
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889380
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889498
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889916
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_136</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889408
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889722
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_89</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30893560
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30901762
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_75</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889256
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889608
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891720
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889228
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889380
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890248
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_109</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890166
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_99</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889790
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30897424
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_141</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889316
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30893914
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889316
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889412
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890382
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_115</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890090
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889228
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889380
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889528
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30913656
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889292
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889868
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_62</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889408
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889804
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_139</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889256
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889712
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891344
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30895146
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30898596
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_125</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889256
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891460
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30893560
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30899570
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_133</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889228
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889380
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889680
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30895074
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_144</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889332
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889700
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30894370
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_102</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889818
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891012
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889228
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889380
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30893396
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_92</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889256
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889888
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_154</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889332
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890120
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30908960
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_112</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889454
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30892034
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889282
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889540
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889316
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890118
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_162</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889228
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889380
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30897914
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889326
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889658
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_120</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889292
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889690
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889228
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889380
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890056
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891268
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_130</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889282
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889670
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891358
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_149</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889256
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890688
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889362
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890900
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889256
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889654
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_81</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889256
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891200
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_157</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889362
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889704
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_143</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889326
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889914
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_59</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889256
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890432
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891688
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30895644
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_101</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889454
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30893824
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889256
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890432
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30892548
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_91</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889228
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889380
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889680
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30892158
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889228
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889380
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889528
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30895584
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_119</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889228
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889380
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890056
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30913666
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_167</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889362
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30898404
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_151</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889256
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889712
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891344
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30895146
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30895976
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_78</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889454
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30893938
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889326
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890560
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889454
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30893924
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_64</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889256
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890432
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30895132
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889362
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891616
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_88</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889444
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890306
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_72</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889326
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889496
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889228
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889380
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891128
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_106</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889256
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890432
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30905356
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_96</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889382
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30896074
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_104</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889282
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889670
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30893248
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_94</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889332
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30892144
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889228
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889380
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30896232
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_128</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889228
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889380
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890314
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891334
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_114</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889292
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889806
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_160</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889454
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30905228
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889396
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891110
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889282
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889682
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_67</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889406
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891796
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889228
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889380
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30894270
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_138</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889256
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891648
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_122</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889228
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889380
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889638
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889228
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889380
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889756
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30892406
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889256
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890432
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30896534
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_77</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889316
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30893890
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_61</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889454
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891230
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_132</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889408
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889880
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_85</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889228
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889380
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889958
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_83</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889362
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889686
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891388
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_159</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889256
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890572
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_117</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889228
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889380
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30894668
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_103</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889382
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30892242
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_93</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889256
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891088
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889610
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890336
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_127</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889316
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30913584
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_111</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889282
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889778
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889256
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890432
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30892410
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889454
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30894646
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889256
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890432
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30895426
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_70</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889228
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889380
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889756
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30894998
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_135</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889292
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889814
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_146</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889406
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30893142
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_121</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889228
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889380
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889680
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30894426
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_25_1334220_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889256
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890432
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30893076
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_25_1334220.37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889384
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_25_1334220.31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889818
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891012
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_25_1334220.28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889610
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890336
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_25_1334220.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30892598
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_25_1334220.34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891784
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_25_1334220.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890414
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_25_1334220.23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889406
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890612
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30894508
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890042
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891796
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890312
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30893616
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30893142
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_25_1334220.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889328
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890024
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891996
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_25_1334220.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889266
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_25_1334220.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889668
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_25_1334220.26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889316
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890118
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891204
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30893914
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30913584
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889412
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890382
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30893890
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_25_1334220.39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30913774
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_25_1334220.38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889436
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890090
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891536
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890166
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_25_1334220.24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889972
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_25_1334220.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889282
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30896460
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889778
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889682
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889540
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890082
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30895998
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889768
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30896430
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891836
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30893138
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30894126
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889670
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30893248
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891358
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_25_1334220.33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30894480
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_25_1334220.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889396
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891110
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30892854
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_25_1334220.36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889424
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_25_1334220.30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889444
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30893850
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30896940
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890306
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_25_1334220.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889382
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30892242
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30896074
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890508
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890146
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_25_1334220.27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889454
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30893924
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30894646
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30905228
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30895960
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30896516
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891230
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30892068
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30892034
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30893938
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30896452
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30900856
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30893824
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_25_1334220.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889292
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889806
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889814
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889868
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889690
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_25_1334220.25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889256
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889888
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890808
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30893252
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890014
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889832
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30900232
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889846
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889712
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30893618
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891344
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30895146
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30895976
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30898596
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30900396
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890992
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890572
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890112
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889654
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891088
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890476
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891756
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891460
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891430
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890820
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891200
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890604
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890432
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30893196
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30905356
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30897012
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30892548
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30893076
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891510
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891324
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30892212
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30896534
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891688
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30898642
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30895644
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30902414
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30899102
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30895132
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891660
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30893368
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30895426
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30892010
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891112
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30892410
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30896796
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889608
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891720
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891648
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890688
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_25_1334220.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889326
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890084
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889496
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889658
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889914
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890560
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889748
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_25_1334220.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889516
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889992
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30892210
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_25_1334220.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889502
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_25_1334220.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890172
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_25_1334220.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889408
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889804
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889722
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889880
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30894284
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_25_1334220.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889508
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_25_1334220.35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30893560
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30901762
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30922668
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30899570
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_25_1334220.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889494
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891966
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_25_1334220.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889564
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_25_1334220.32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889376
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_25_1334220.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889790
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30897424
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30893760
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_25_1334220.29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889228
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889380
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889528
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30893900
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30895584
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30913656
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30895620
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30900062
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30903538
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889958
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889756
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30892406
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30894998
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890582
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890314
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891334
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30898908
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30896232
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30895402
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30901080
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30897914
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891128
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30894270
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889672
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890248
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889638
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890056
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891268
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30894750
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30896046
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30913666
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30894668
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30897160
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889498
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889916
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891072
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30895532
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30892408
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30892118
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889680
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30894426
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30892158
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30892420
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30895074
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891900
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30893396
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_25_1334220.21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891722
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_25_1334220.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889332
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889826
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890812
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889850
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889656
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30892144
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890120
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30908960
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889700
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30894370
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30892340
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_25_1334220.40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889362
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890910
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890034
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30898404
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889704
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889686
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891388
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891298
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30891616
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890900
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_25_1334220.22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890428
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_25_1334220.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30889486
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_25_1334220.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_25_1334220.30890200
</commentlist>
</conversation>
