<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_02_15_0321218</id>
	<title>The Worst Apple Products of All Time</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1266238620000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>An anonymous reader writes <i>"While Apple is frequently referred to as a leader in consumer electronic product design, the history of the company is filled with examples of poor design and questionable product strategies. This list of <a href="http://www.pcauthority.com.au/News/167240,top-10-worst-apple-products-of-all-time.aspx">Apple's worst ever products</a> includes some interesting trivia, including Apple's overpriced eWorld Internet service, their painfully bad attempt at a 'value' computer (the Performa), the much-loathed 'hockey puck' mouse, and the Apple Pippin gaming platform. The article also includes the infamous Apple III, which overheated so badly that it prompted one of the strangest repair techniques ever: 'Users were advised to pick the computer up a few inches off the ground and then drop it, hopefully jostling the chips back into position.'"</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>An anonymous reader writes " While Apple is frequently referred to as a leader in consumer electronic product design , the history of the company is filled with examples of poor design and questionable product strategies .
This list of Apple 's worst ever products includes some interesting trivia , including Apple 's overpriced eWorld Internet service , their painfully bad attempt at a 'value ' computer ( the Performa ) , the much-loathed 'hockey puck ' mouse , and the Apple Pippin gaming platform .
The article also includes the infamous Apple III , which overheated so badly that it prompted one of the strangest repair techniques ever : 'Users were advised to pick the computer up a few inches off the ground and then drop it , hopefully jostling the chips back into position .
' "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An anonymous reader writes "While Apple is frequently referred to as a leader in consumer electronic product design, the history of the company is filled with examples of poor design and questionable product strategies.
This list of Apple's worst ever products includes some interesting trivia, including Apple's overpriced eWorld Internet service, their painfully bad attempt at a 'value' computer (the Performa), the much-loathed 'hockey puck' mouse, and the Apple Pippin gaming platform.
The article also includes the infamous Apple III, which overheated so badly that it prompted one of the strangest repair techniques ever: 'Users were advised to pick the computer up a few inches off the ground and then drop it, hopefully jostling the chips back into position.
'"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143070</id>
	<title>What, no iPad?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266242460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Shame, guys... shame.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Shame , guys... shame .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Shame, guys... shame.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31144950</id>
	<title>Not sure about the quickTake inclusion</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266253620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm really not happy with the inclusion of the QuickTake camera. While they were not leading edge spec, and I doubt there were all that many private purchases, they were to be found with nearly every school or other educational institution that had Macintoshes.  Thusly they gave myself and several million other college types in the mid-90s their first experience with digital photography.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm really not happy with the inclusion of the QuickTake camera .
While they were not leading edge spec , and I doubt there were all that many private purchases , they were to be found with nearly every school or other educational institution that had Macintoshes .
Thusly they gave myself and several million other college types in the mid-90s their first experience with digital photography .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm really not happy with the inclusion of the QuickTake camera.
While they were not leading edge spec, and I doubt there were all that many private purchases, they were to be found with nearly every school or other educational institution that had Macintoshes.
Thusly they gave myself and several million other college types in the mid-90s their first experience with digital photography.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143412</id>
	<title>Strange Criticism of Built In Monitors</title>
	<author>DLG</author>
	<datestamp>1266245820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I am not sure how they came up with their criticsm of the Color classic being an indictment of the idea of the built in monitor.</p><p>"It could be argued that this system forced Apple to rethink building screens into systems. Sue it looks very good but it increases the overall cost of the system and limits users to a particular view. Built-in screens made sense at the start of the computing age but they have thankfully gone the way of the dinosaurs"</p><p>So I am wondering if anyone knows if the Australian Apple market is so different that the IMac and Macbook lines are marginal. In the US, the built in monitor is the standard on most models Apple sell. It is true that other computer companies don't do this on the desktop, but other than the mini there is no consumer desktop that Apple makes without being a single unit.</p><p>And the statement about the PowerPC is entirely 20/20 hindsight. The Intel Chips at the time were dogs. And apple is still producting development model and OS that differs entirely from the Windows one. As far as developer interest, I would say that once Mac OS X, and giving away the development tools began that jump start, and its still quite a bit different from any other environment.</p><p>Hard to imagine that the IPod Hi-Fi rates in any top 10 list. It seems so unimportant, but I guess Thomson saw one. That makes it special it seems considering he doesn't seem familiar with much about Apple's line from personal experience.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I am not sure how they came up with their criticsm of the Color classic being an indictment of the idea of the built in monitor .
" It could be argued that this system forced Apple to rethink building screens into systems .
Sue it looks very good but it increases the overall cost of the system and limits users to a particular view .
Built-in screens made sense at the start of the computing age but they have thankfully gone the way of the dinosaurs " So I am wondering if anyone knows if the Australian Apple market is so different that the IMac and Macbook lines are marginal .
In the US , the built in monitor is the standard on most models Apple sell .
It is true that other computer companies do n't do this on the desktop , but other than the mini there is no consumer desktop that Apple makes without being a single unit.And the statement about the PowerPC is entirely 20/20 hindsight .
The Intel Chips at the time were dogs .
And apple is still producting development model and OS that differs entirely from the Windows one .
As far as developer interest , I would say that once Mac OS X , and giving away the development tools began that jump start , and its still quite a bit different from any other environment.Hard to imagine that the IPod Hi-Fi rates in any top 10 list .
It seems so unimportant , but I guess Thomson saw one .
That makes it special it seems considering he does n't seem familiar with much about Apple 's line from personal experience .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am not sure how they came up with their criticsm of the Color classic being an indictment of the idea of the built in monitor.
"It could be argued that this system forced Apple to rethink building screens into systems.
Sue it looks very good but it increases the overall cost of the system and limits users to a particular view.
Built-in screens made sense at the start of the computing age but they have thankfully gone the way of the dinosaurs"So I am wondering if anyone knows if the Australian Apple market is so different that the IMac and Macbook lines are marginal.
In the US, the built in monitor is the standard on most models Apple sell.
It is true that other computer companies don't do this on the desktop, but other than the mini there is no consumer desktop that Apple makes without being a single unit.And the statement about the PowerPC is entirely 20/20 hindsight.
The Intel Chips at the time were dogs.
And apple is still producting development model and OS that differs entirely from the Windows one.
As far as developer interest, I would say that once Mac OS X, and giving away the development tools began that jump start, and its still quite a bit different from any other environment.Hard to imagine that the IPod Hi-Fi rates in any top 10 list.
It seems so unimportant, but I guess Thomson saw one.
That makes it special it seems considering he doesn't seem familiar with much about Apple's line from personal experience.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143886</id>
	<title>I'm with you; apple mice are crapola!</title>
	<author>oogoliegoogolie</author>
	<datestamp>1266248700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I love many Apple products, but I wish Apple would finally give up their conviction that a mouse has to have no buttons, throw in the towel, and make some nice mice that are usable and actually ergonomic.</p><p>The Mighty Mouse drove me nuts; far too often when I wanted a left click I got a right click, and vice-versa.  Now there is the Tragic..err...Magic Mouse looks purdy but is about as ergonomic as a deck of cards.  So unless you have the hands of a 13 year old or enjoy making eagle claws with your right hand all day just to perform an action like button-side button-scroll wheel, the Magic mouse is horrible.  It's a step forward in tech but goes back 15 years in usefulness:a perfect example of form over functionality.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I love many Apple products , but I wish Apple would finally give up their conviction that a mouse has to have no buttons , throw in the towel , and make some nice mice that are usable and actually ergonomic.The Mighty Mouse drove me nuts ; far too often when I wanted a left click I got a right click , and vice-versa .
Now there is the Tragic..err...Magic Mouse looks purdy but is about as ergonomic as a deck of cards .
So unless you have the hands of a 13 year old or enjoy making eagle claws with your right hand all day just to perform an action like button-side button-scroll wheel , the Magic mouse is horrible .
It 's a step forward in tech but goes back 15 years in usefulness : a perfect example of form over functionality .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I love many Apple products, but I wish Apple would finally give up their conviction that a mouse has to have no buttons, throw in the towel, and make some nice mice that are usable and actually ergonomic.The Mighty Mouse drove me nuts; far too often when I wanted a left click I got a right click, and vice-versa.
Now there is the Tragic..err...Magic Mouse looks purdy but is about as ergonomic as a deck of cards.
So unless you have the hands of a 13 year old or enjoy making eagle claws with your right hand all day just to perform an action like button-side button-scroll wheel, the Magic mouse is horrible.
It's a step forward in tech but goes back 15 years in usefulness:a perfect example of form over functionality.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143106</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143502</id>
	<title>Here's my summary for the article</title>
	<author>erroneus</author>
	<datestamp>1266246540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Everything Apple does is over-priced.  A the mark of a great Apple failure is being both over-priced and under-powered."</p><p>That's pretty much what they had to say about every product listed.</p><p>I used to love Apple II series computers.  They were the tinker and learning machines of the day.  People pushed them to all sorts of uncharted limits.  Macs were too expensive to hack on so most people who owned Mac paid so much for them that they were afraid to hack on them.  (Yeah, I know there were still some hacks and tricks going on in the early Mac scene, but it was nothing in comparison to the Apple II series hacking scene.)</p><p>I think the article missed a few things though... Newton received no mention?  Really?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Everything Apple does is over-priced .
A the mark of a great Apple failure is being both over-priced and under-powered .
" That 's pretty much what they had to say about every product listed.I used to love Apple II series computers .
They were the tinker and learning machines of the day .
People pushed them to all sorts of uncharted limits .
Macs were too expensive to hack on so most people who owned Mac paid so much for them that they were afraid to hack on them .
( Yeah , I know there were still some hacks and tricks going on in the early Mac scene , but it was nothing in comparison to the Apple II series hacking scene .
) I think the article missed a few things though... Newton received no mention ?
Really ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Everything Apple does is over-priced.
A the mark of a great Apple failure is being both over-priced and under-powered.
"That's pretty much what they had to say about every product listed.I used to love Apple II series computers.
They were the tinker and learning machines of the day.
People pushed them to all sorts of uncharted limits.
Macs were too expensive to hack on so most people who owned Mac paid so much for them that they were afraid to hack on them.
(Yeah, I know there were still some hacks and tricks going on in the early Mac scene, but it was nothing in comparison to the Apple II series hacking scene.
)I think the article missed a few things though... Newton received no mention?
Really?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31144132</id>
	<title>All</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266250080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I consider them all the worse products.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I consider them all the worse products .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I consider them all the worse products.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31148376</id>
	<title>Some items need a little work</title>
	<author>Old Man Kensey</author>
	<datestamp>1266227460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>They're simply wrong on a number of points.
<p>
* The QuickTake 100 was in no way limited to just 8 photos (that was the limit at maximum resolution).  I had a QuickTake 150 and it had a reasonable capacity.  The 200 took SmartMedia cards, so capacity was basically unlimited as it is now.
</p><p>
* They compare the PowerPC to Intel, as though the PowerPC represented an expensive migration from Intel processors, but forget that Macs were coming from the m68k universe, not x86 -- they were already Intel-incompatible.  PowerPC Macs could run 68K Mac software, so this was the natural choice at the time.
</p><p>
* Their criticism of OS 9's multitasking is a tad unfair unless OS 9 was particularly worse at multitasking than OS 8.  I used MacOS from System 6.1 all the way to 8 and from 7.x on it worked fine for me.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They 're simply wrong on a number of points .
* The QuickTake 100 was in no way limited to just 8 photos ( that was the limit at maximum resolution ) .
I had a QuickTake 150 and it had a reasonable capacity .
The 200 took SmartMedia cards , so capacity was basically unlimited as it is now .
* They compare the PowerPC to Intel , as though the PowerPC represented an expensive migration from Intel processors , but forget that Macs were coming from the m68k universe , not x86 -- they were already Intel-incompatible .
PowerPC Macs could run 68K Mac software , so this was the natural choice at the time .
* Their criticism of OS 9 's multitasking is a tad unfair unless OS 9 was particularly worse at multitasking than OS 8 .
I used MacOS from System 6.1 all the way to 8 and from 7.x on it worked fine for me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They're simply wrong on a number of points.
* The QuickTake 100 was in no way limited to just 8 photos (that was the limit at maximum resolution).
I had a QuickTake 150 and it had a reasonable capacity.
The 200 took SmartMedia cards, so capacity was basically unlimited as it is now.
* They compare the PowerPC to Intel, as though the PowerPC represented an expensive migration from Intel processors, but forget that Macs were coming from the m68k universe, not x86 -- they were already Intel-incompatible.
PowerPC Macs could run 68K Mac software, so this was the natural choice at the time.
* Their criticism of OS 9's multitasking is a tad unfair unless OS 9 was particularly worse at multitasking than OS 8.
I used MacOS from System 6.1 all the way to 8 and from 7.x on it worked fine for me.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143092</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143204</id>
	<title>Re:What, no iPad?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266243840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>insightful? why? how? maybe you should wait for the product to even appear in the shops and have a chance to flop before you spew your stinking gall, you silly, narrowminded linux tossers. (and yes it's always the conservative old dogs among the linux crowd who prematurely squirt their hate)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>insightful ?
why ? how ?
maybe you should wait for the product to even appear in the shops and have a chance to flop before you spew your stinking gall , you silly , narrowminded linux tossers .
( and yes it 's always the conservative old dogs among the linux crowd who prematurely squirt their hate )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>insightful?
why? how?
maybe you should wait for the product to even appear in the shops and have a chance to flop before you spew your stinking gall, you silly, narrowminded linux tossers.
(and yes it's always the conservative old dogs among the linux crowd who prematurely squirt their hate)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143070</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31148798</id>
	<title>Re:Mobile Me?</title>
	<author>dwighteb</author>
	<datestamp>1266229560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I've been using<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.mac since its release, and I haven't had any issues whatsoever regarding lost email.  I have had syncing issues in which my address book gets doubled up on one of my systems, but a deletion and resync has always fixed it.  So yeah - I call your anecdote with my anecdote.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've been using .mac since its release , and I have n't had any issues whatsoever regarding lost email .
I have had syncing issues in which my address book gets doubled up on one of my systems , but a deletion and resync has always fixed it .
So yeah - I call your anecdote with my anecdote .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've been using .mac since its release, and I haven't had any issues whatsoever regarding lost email.
I have had syncing issues in which my address book gets doubled up on one of my systems, but a deletion and resync has always fixed it.
So yeah - I call your anecdote with my anecdote.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143134</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31144686</id>
	<title>Bump-'n-Play</title>
	<author>The Rizz</author>
	<datestamp>1266252480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Users were advised to pick the computer up a few inches off the ground and then drop it, hopefully jostling the chips back into position.</p></div><p>Strangely enough, I ran into this, too - but not on Macs. I was working at a tech support company in 2000 that provided support for Gateway computers. They had acquired a whole batch of defective hard drives at a cut-rate price, and sent thousands of them out to consumers. Apparently the drives had a manufacturing defect where one of the parts in the motor was just slightly out of spec, and would cause the motor to get stuck (and thus, the system to freeze up). The actual, honest-to-god solution in the case of hard drive failure was, "pick up your computer, hold it three inches off the table, then drop it. Now try turn it back on."</p><p>We used to refer to these computers as having "the new bump-'n-play hard drives".</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Users were advised to pick the computer up a few inches off the ground and then drop it , hopefully jostling the chips back into position.Strangely enough , I ran into this , too - but not on Macs .
I was working at a tech support company in 2000 that provided support for Gateway computers .
They had acquired a whole batch of defective hard drives at a cut-rate price , and sent thousands of them out to consumers .
Apparently the drives had a manufacturing defect where one of the parts in the motor was just slightly out of spec , and would cause the motor to get stuck ( and thus , the system to freeze up ) .
The actual , honest-to-god solution in the case of hard drive failure was , " pick up your computer , hold it three inches off the table , then drop it .
Now try turn it back on .
" We used to refer to these computers as having " the new bump-'n-play hard drives " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Users were advised to pick the computer up a few inches off the ground and then drop it, hopefully jostling the chips back into position.Strangely enough, I ran into this, too - but not on Macs.
I was working at a tech support company in 2000 that provided support for Gateway computers.
They had acquired a whole batch of defective hard drives at a cut-rate price, and sent thousands of them out to consumers.
Apparently the drives had a manufacturing defect where one of the parts in the motor was just slightly out of spec, and would cause the motor to get stuck (and thus, the system to freeze up).
The actual, honest-to-god solution in the case of hard drive failure was, "pick up your computer, hold it three inches off the table, then drop it.
Now try turn it back on.
"We used to refer to these computers as having "the new bump-'n-play hard drives".
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143228</id>
	<title>A friend of mine who's a diehard fan...</title>
	<author>IANAAC</author>
	<datestamp>1266244080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I have an admitted fanboy friend that has had all those items throughout the years, except for the 20th anniversary mac.
<p>
At the time he had them, "they were the greatest thing ever".
</p><p>
Ask him about them now and he'll tell you they were all crap, with the exception of the PowerPC.  He still swears by that (which I really don't understand).
</p><p>
Point being, with technology being what it is and constantly advancing, doesn't everything eventually become crap?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have an admitted fanboy friend that has had all those items throughout the years , except for the 20th anniversary mac .
At the time he had them , " they were the greatest thing ever " .
Ask him about them now and he 'll tell you they were all crap , with the exception of the PowerPC .
He still swears by that ( which I really do n't understand ) .
Point being , with technology being what it is and constantly advancing , does n't everything eventually become crap ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have an admitted fanboy friend that has had all those items throughout the years, except for the 20th anniversary mac.
At the time he had them, "they were the greatest thing ever".
Ask him about them now and he'll tell you they were all crap, with the exception of the PowerPC.
He still swears by that (which I really don't understand).
Point being, with technology being what it is and constantly advancing, doesn't everything eventually become crap?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31163986</id>
	<title>Re:The List</title>
	<author>adonoman</author>
	<datestamp>1266336300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yup, I'm just happy Windows 7 finally supports<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.mov files out of the box- along with just about anything else without need my a codec pack (mkv files do require a splitter)</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yup , I 'm just happy Windows 7 finally supports .mov files out of the box- along with just about anything else without need my a codec pack ( mkv files do require a splitter )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yup, I'm just happy Windows 7 finally supports .mov files out of the box- along with just about anything else without need my a codec pack (mkv files do require a splitter)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143122</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31149104</id>
	<title>QuickTake</title>
	<author>GrahamCox</author>
	<datestamp>1266231180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The QuickTake was very short-lived and probably fair enough that it was, but I recall that it was the first simple to use point-and-shoot digital camera that just worked and did in fact herald a whole new market segment of consumer device. The competition at the time was no better in terms of resolution and price and was much more awkward to use and interface to a PC or Mac (USB hadn't yet been adopted). I had a borrowed QuickTake 150 when it was brand new and took it to a family wedding. People were astonished at the device. It's easy to dismiss it now that digital cameras are a mature product but at the time it was a glimpse of the future.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The QuickTake was very short-lived and probably fair enough that it was , but I recall that it was the first simple to use point-and-shoot digital camera that just worked and did in fact herald a whole new market segment of consumer device .
The competition at the time was no better in terms of resolution and price and was much more awkward to use and interface to a PC or Mac ( USB had n't yet been adopted ) .
I had a borrowed QuickTake 150 when it was brand new and took it to a family wedding .
People were astonished at the device .
It 's easy to dismiss it now that digital cameras are a mature product but at the time it was a glimpse of the future .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The QuickTake was very short-lived and probably fair enough that it was, but I recall that it was the first simple to use point-and-shoot digital camera that just worked and did in fact herald a whole new market segment of consumer device.
The competition at the time was no better in terms of resolution and price and was much more awkward to use and interface to a PC or Mac (USB hadn't yet been adopted).
I had a borrowed QuickTake 150 when it was brand new and took it to a family wedding.
People were astonished at the device.
It's easy to dismiss it now that digital cameras are a mature product but at the time it was a glimpse of the future.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31146018</id>
	<title>Re:Not all the items listed were failures..</title>
	<author>Sancho</author>
	<datestamp>1266258960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>PowerPC was not a failure.</p></div><p>Correct, but it could still be a bad product.  Windows is a raging success.  Most people here consider it a bad product.  Anyway, the article clearly states that it's on the list because moving to PowerPC over Intel was a bad business move, which I bet most people would agree with.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>20th anniversary Mac:<br>exclusive, high priced item, for collectors..that the author has mistaken for a consumer level product.</p></div><p>There wasn't any criteria set forth for calling these products "bad."  I think that the idea of a collectible computer is a terrible idea.  The market for them is tiny.  If that's really what this computer was meant for, then it should be considered a bad product on that alone.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>PowerPC was not a failure.Correct , but it could still be a bad product .
Windows is a raging success .
Most people here consider it a bad product .
Anyway , the article clearly states that it 's on the list because moving to PowerPC over Intel was a bad business move , which I bet most people would agree with.20th anniversary Mac : exclusive , high priced item , for collectors..that the author has mistaken for a consumer level product.There was n't any criteria set forth for calling these products " bad .
" I think that the idea of a collectible computer is a terrible idea .
The market for them is tiny .
If that 's really what this computer was meant for , then it should be considered a bad product on that alone .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>PowerPC was not a failure.Correct, but it could still be a bad product.
Windows is a raging success.
Most people here consider it a bad product.
Anyway, the article clearly states that it's on the list because moving to PowerPC over Intel was a bad business move, which I bet most people would agree with.20th anniversary Mac:exclusive, high priced item, for collectors..that the author has mistaken for a consumer level product.There wasn't any criteria set forth for calling these products "bad.
"  I think that the idea of a collectible computer is a terrible idea.
The market for them is tiny.
If that's really what this computer was meant for, then it should be considered a bad product on that alone.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143324</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143592</id>
	<title>iMac G5</title>
	<author>firefarter</author>
	<datestamp>1266247140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The iMac G5 was the first of the all-in one iMac designs that Apple sold. I got one and still regret it.<br>It's a good computer - no question about that. But it's frigging LOUD! I took it to the shop, phoned support but it apparently was by design. That's just what happens when you take hot G5 processors and stick them in an inch-thick enclosure. Figures that it took them only half a year to update the line.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The iMac G5 was the first of the all-in one iMac designs that Apple sold .
I got one and still regret it.It 's a good computer - no question about that .
But it 's frigging LOUD !
I took it to the shop , phoned support but it apparently was by design .
That 's just what happens when you take hot G5 processors and stick them in an inch-thick enclosure .
Figures that it took them only half a year to update the line .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The iMac G5 was the first of the all-in one iMac designs that Apple sold.
I got one and still regret it.It's a good computer - no question about that.
But it's frigging LOUD!
I took it to the shop, phoned support but it apparently was by design.
That's just what happens when you take hot G5 processors and stick them in an inch-thick enclosure.
Figures that it took them only half a year to update the line.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143694</id>
	<title>Re:No G4 Cube?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266247740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>PC vendors were making machines in book and cube form before Apple was. There was nothing particularly innovative or daring about either of those ideas.</p><p>Apple dramatically improved it's marketing. That's been the most significant recent change.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>PC vendors were making machines in book and cube form before Apple was .
There was nothing particularly innovative or daring about either of those ideas.Apple dramatically improved it 's marketing .
That 's been the most significant recent change .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>PC vendors were making machines in book and cube form before Apple was.
There was nothing particularly innovative or daring about either of those ideas.Apple dramatically improved it's marketing.
That's been the most significant recent change.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143188</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143270</id>
	<title>Re:What, no iPad?</title>
	<author>Carewolf</author>
	<datestamp>1266244500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>While the iPad seems pointless, it doesn't appear bad. The iPad predecessor the forgotten Newt would be more a much more likely candidate.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>While the iPad seems pointless , it does n't appear bad .
The iPad predecessor the forgotten Newt would be more a much more likely candidate .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While the iPad seems pointless, it doesn't appear bad.
The iPad predecessor the forgotten Newt would be more a much more likely candidate.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143070</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143760</id>
	<title>Re:The List</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266248040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm quite surprised to see the performa on the list but not the LC, which stood quite literally for 'Low Cost'. I have at least two performas in my garage in prime working condition - the 5400 has the still-awesome feature of a separate PC card, so it'll run separate operating systems on separate hardware simultaneously. For the price, it was absolutely mindblowing.</p><p>I'd count the performa line as a failure in the same way the mac mini is a failure. It isn't their biggest selling product by far, but it certainly has a market, and it's generally well regarded.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm quite surprised to see the performa on the list but not the LC , which stood quite literally for 'Low Cost' .
I have at least two performas in my garage in prime working condition - the 5400 has the still-awesome feature of a separate PC card , so it 'll run separate operating systems on separate hardware simultaneously .
For the price , it was absolutely mindblowing.I 'd count the performa line as a failure in the same way the mac mini is a failure .
It is n't their biggest selling product by far , but it certainly has a market , and it 's generally well regarded .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm quite surprised to see the performa on the list but not the LC, which stood quite literally for 'Low Cost'.
I have at least two performas in my garage in prime working condition - the 5400 has the still-awesome feature of a separate PC card, so it'll run separate operating systems on separate hardware simultaneously.
For the price, it was absolutely mindblowing.I'd count the performa line as a failure in the same way the mac mini is a failure.
It isn't their biggest selling product by far, but it certainly has a market, and it's generally well regarded.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143092</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143820</id>
	<title>Macbook Air</title>
	<author>VoiceInTheDesert</author>
	<datestamp>1266248340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>No mention for this paperweight? I'll admit that I don't have the figures in front of me as to how many units sold, but the short of it was that it was underpowered, had no DVD-ROM, firewire, etc. It was awful and cost nealry $2000, despite having only slightly more capability beyond a good netbook.</htmltext>
<tokenext>No mention for this paperweight ?
I 'll admit that I do n't have the figures in front of me as to how many units sold , but the short of it was that it was underpowered , had no DVD-ROM , firewire , etc .
It was awful and cost nealry $ 2000 , despite having only slightly more capability beyond a good netbook .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No mention for this paperweight?
I'll admit that I don't have the figures in front of me as to how many units sold, but the short of it was that it was underpowered, had no DVD-ROM, firewire, etc.
It was awful and cost nealry $2000, despite having only slightly more capability beyond a good netbook.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31145938</id>
	<title>Re:Hasn't been out long enough yet</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266258540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>By that reckoning they should release the iRock. A slighly prettier looking stone with googly eyes glued on at twice the price of other pet rocks. It would sell like hotcakes to the fanboys anyway.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>By that reckoning they should release the iRock .
A slighly prettier looking stone with googly eyes glued on at twice the price of other pet rocks .
It would sell like hotcakes to the fanboys anyway .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>By that reckoning they should release the iRock.
A slighly prettier looking stone with googly eyes glued on at twice the price of other pet rocks.
It would sell like hotcakes to the fanboys anyway.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143254</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31144866</id>
	<title>Re:The List</title>
	<author>david\_thornley</author>
	<datestamp>1266253260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
The worst thing about the Apple III was that Apple stopped pushing Apple II development, and (according to a Byte article I read at the time) artificially limited the Apple II's capabilities to make more of a market for the III.  So, instead of being an overpriced and underdeveloped dog of a product, it actively hurt the company's main product.
</p><p>
The PowerPC was not a mistake, although we could argue about the exact best time to go x86.  At the time, it offered much better performance than Intel could (anybody remember the Mac as a munition commercial?), and compatibility with Intel-based software wasn't all that important.
</p><p>
I don't remember anything wrong with Mac OS9 compared to the rest of the pre-OSX systems, except the age.  Like MS-DOS and non-NT versions of Windows, MacOS was a relic from the old days of personal computing.  The problem was not Mac OS9 in particular, but that there was nothing to replace it (like Rhapsody).  It did introduce the much-needed Carbon simplification of the MacOS API.
</p><p>
As far as other contenders go, there's a rather sordid history of Apple pushing development environments, only to drop them shortly thereafter (OpenDoc comes to mind), and the Macintosh Programmer's Workshop was very peculiar, although liked by some people.  The Lisa was very nice, and sold reasonably well as the Macintosh XL once Apple slashed the price.
</p><p>
Speaking of price, if you consider Apple pricing to be an Apple product, going high rather than low with the original Macintosh price was, I think, just plain dumb.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The worst thing about the Apple III was that Apple stopped pushing Apple II development , and ( according to a Byte article I read at the time ) artificially limited the Apple II 's capabilities to make more of a market for the III .
So , instead of being an overpriced and underdeveloped dog of a product , it actively hurt the company 's main product .
The PowerPC was not a mistake , although we could argue about the exact best time to go x86 .
At the time , it offered much better performance than Intel could ( anybody remember the Mac as a munition commercial ?
) , and compatibility with Intel-based software was n't all that important .
I do n't remember anything wrong with Mac OS9 compared to the rest of the pre-OSX systems , except the age .
Like MS-DOS and non-NT versions of Windows , MacOS was a relic from the old days of personal computing .
The problem was not Mac OS9 in particular , but that there was nothing to replace it ( like Rhapsody ) .
It did introduce the much-needed Carbon simplification of the MacOS API .
As far as other contenders go , there 's a rather sordid history of Apple pushing development environments , only to drop them shortly thereafter ( OpenDoc comes to mind ) , and the Macintosh Programmer 's Workshop was very peculiar , although liked by some people .
The Lisa was very nice , and sold reasonably well as the Macintosh XL once Apple slashed the price .
Speaking of price , if you consider Apple pricing to be an Apple product , going high rather than low with the original Macintosh price was , I think , just plain dumb .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
The worst thing about the Apple III was that Apple stopped pushing Apple II development, and (according to a Byte article I read at the time) artificially limited the Apple II's capabilities to make more of a market for the III.
So, instead of being an overpriced and underdeveloped dog of a product, it actively hurt the company's main product.
The PowerPC was not a mistake, although we could argue about the exact best time to go x86.
At the time, it offered much better performance than Intel could (anybody remember the Mac as a munition commercial?
), and compatibility with Intel-based software wasn't all that important.
I don't remember anything wrong with Mac OS9 compared to the rest of the pre-OSX systems, except the age.
Like MS-DOS and non-NT versions of Windows, MacOS was a relic from the old days of personal computing.
The problem was not Mac OS9 in particular, but that there was nothing to replace it (like Rhapsody).
It did introduce the much-needed Carbon simplification of the MacOS API.
As far as other contenders go, there's a rather sordid history of Apple pushing development environments, only to drop them shortly thereafter (OpenDoc comes to mind), and the Macintosh Programmer's Workshop was very peculiar, although liked by some people.
The Lisa was very nice, and sold reasonably well as the Macintosh XL once Apple slashed the price.
Speaking of price, if you consider Apple pricing to be an Apple product, going high rather than low with the original Macintosh price was, I think, just plain dumb.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143092</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31151790</id>
	<title>Re:Hasn't been out long enough yet</title>
	<author>Paxtez</author>
	<datestamp>1266250920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's a matter of perspective.  If you are the company that sells BAD\_WIDGET but you make a lot of money doing so, it is a 'good' product.  Just because reviewers and everyone else doesn't like it, doesn't change the fact that it is making you money.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's a matter of perspective .
If you are the company that sells BAD \ _WIDGET but you make a lot of money doing so , it is a 'good ' product .
Just because reviewers and everyone else does n't like it , does n't change the fact that it is making you money .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's a matter of perspective.
If you are the company that sells BAD\_WIDGET but you make a lot of money doing so, it is a 'good' product.
Just because reviewers and everyone else doesn't like it, doesn't change the fact that it is making you money.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143570</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143132</id>
	<title>Hardcore repair methods</title>
	<author>kaaposc</author>
	<datestamp>1266243180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Dropping the computer from a few inches reminds me of the Soviet repair methods that worked for most of technics - couple of punches on the side of TV made those coloured stripes go away<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</htmltext>
<tokenext>Dropping the computer from a few inches reminds me of the Soviet repair methods that worked for most of technics - couple of punches on the side of TV made those coloured stripes go away : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dropping the computer from a few inches reminds me of the Soviet repair methods that worked for most of technics - couple of punches on the side of TV made those coloured stripes go away :)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31144558</id>
	<title>Re:All of thier mice suck</title>
	<author>0xdeadbeef</author>
	<datestamp>1266252060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>They at least stick their neck out there and try things. Sometimes it does not always work.</i></p><p>You fanboys will rationalize anything. Like a special child, Apple gets gold stars for effort, and you give them a free pass for the App Store, too, despite the fact that it makes the IBM of 1984 look like a hippie free love commune in comparison.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They at least stick their neck out there and try things .
Sometimes it does not always work.You fanboys will rationalize anything .
Like a special child , Apple gets gold stars for effort , and you give them a free pass for the App Store , too , despite the fact that it makes the IBM of 1984 look like a hippie free love commune in comparison .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They at least stick their neck out there and try things.
Sometimes it does not always work.You fanboys will rationalize anything.
Like a special child, Apple gets gold stars for effort, and you give them a free pass for the App Store, too, despite the fact that it makes the IBM of 1984 look like a hippie free love commune in comparison.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143106</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143936</id>
	<title>Re:Not all the items listed were failures..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266248940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Remember that the xbox 360 uses Power PC chips...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Remember that the xbox 360 uses Power PC chips.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Remember that the xbox 360 uses Power PC chips...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143324</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31147126</id>
	<title>Re:All of thier mice suck</title>
	<author>k2enemy</author>
	<datestamp>1266264540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>... I hate their mice and their keyboards.  They both have always sucked.</p></div><p>Not all of their keyboards have sucked.  I still think the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apple\_Extended\_Keyboard" title="wikipedia.org">Apple Extended II</a> [wikipedia.org] is one of the best keyboards ever made.  I have several backup keyboards squirreled away in case the one I'm using breaks.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>... I hate their mice and their keyboards .
They both have always sucked.Not all of their keyboards have sucked .
I still think the Apple Extended II [ wikipedia.org ] is one of the best keyboards ever made .
I have several backup keyboards squirreled away in case the one I 'm using breaks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... I hate their mice and their keyboards.
They both have always sucked.Not all of their keyboards have sucked.
I still think the Apple Extended II [wikipedia.org] is one of the best keyboards ever made.
I have several backup keyboards squirreled away in case the one I'm using breaks.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143106</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31144114</id>
	<title>Re: The Hockey Puck mouse</title>
	<author>rnturn</author>
	<datestamp>1266249960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It shouldn't have been as bad as it was. I don't think the hockey puck shape was the problem. <i>I</i> think the main problem with it was that the buttons were placed on the side of the mouse. I've used a hockey-puck-style mouse on VMS workstations (ages ago though I still have one of those mice) and found it very comfortable to use. The difference was the <i>three</i> buttons were on the front of the mouse rather than the sides. That made it possible to rest your entire hand on the mouse with your index, middle, and ring fingers positioned over the buttons. The Apple design seems to force you to hold the thing with mainly your thumb and pinky and then use your thumb for most of the clicking; an awful design choice, IMHO, since, at least for me, my thumb is probably the least agile finger. I'd bet Apple sacked the ergonomics engineer that came up with that design.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It should n't have been as bad as it was .
I do n't think the hockey puck shape was the problem .
I think the main problem with it was that the buttons were placed on the side of the mouse .
I 've used a hockey-puck-style mouse on VMS workstations ( ages ago though I still have one of those mice ) and found it very comfortable to use .
The difference was the three buttons were on the front of the mouse rather than the sides .
That made it possible to rest your entire hand on the mouse with your index , middle , and ring fingers positioned over the buttons .
The Apple design seems to force you to hold the thing with mainly your thumb and pinky and then use your thumb for most of the clicking ; an awful design choice , IMHO , since , at least for me , my thumb is probably the least agile finger .
I 'd bet Apple sacked the ergonomics engineer that came up with that design .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It shouldn't have been as bad as it was.
I don't think the hockey puck shape was the problem.
I think the main problem with it was that the buttons were placed on the side of the mouse.
I've used a hockey-puck-style mouse on VMS workstations (ages ago though I still have one of those mice) and found it very comfortable to use.
The difference was the three buttons were on the front of the mouse rather than the sides.
That made it possible to rest your entire hand on the mouse with your index, middle, and ring fingers positioned over the buttons.
The Apple design seems to force you to hold the thing with mainly your thumb and pinky and then use your thumb for most of the clicking; an awful design choice, IMHO, since, at least for me, my thumb is probably the least agile finger.
I'd bet Apple sacked the ergonomics engineer that came up with that design.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31144728</id>
	<title>Re:Laptops</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266252720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They aren't on the list because they were possibly the toughest laptop ever made for the consumer market, and I've seen them live through events that would reduce many Panasonic "Toughbooks" to so much silicon rubble.</p><p>I like the Panasonics, but those toilet-seat iBooks were awesomely reliable.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They are n't on the list because they were possibly the toughest laptop ever made for the consumer market , and I 've seen them live through events that would reduce many Panasonic " Toughbooks " to so much silicon rubble.I like the Panasonics , but those toilet-seat iBooks were awesomely reliable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They aren't on the list because they were possibly the toughest laptop ever made for the consumer market, and I've seen them live through events that would reduce many Panasonic "Toughbooks" to so much silicon rubble.I like the Panasonics, but those toilet-seat iBooks were awesomely reliable.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143154</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31144304</id>
	<title>Re:Laptops</title>
	<author>pavon</author>
	<datestamp>1266251040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually, I still like the way the original iBook and iMacs looked, especially the tangerine and <a href="http://apple-history.com/body.php?page=gallery&amp;model=dvplus&amp;sort=date&amp;performa=off&amp;order=ASC" title="apple-history.com">later green color</a> [apple-history.com]. However the <a href="http://apple-history.com/body.php?page=gallery&amp;model=imac\_cdrw&amp;sort=date&amp;performa=off&amp;order=ASC" title="apple-history.com">flower and polka-dot iMacs</a> [apple-history.com] were ugly as sin.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , I still like the way the original iBook and iMacs looked , especially the tangerine and later green color [ apple-history.com ] .
However the flower and polka-dot iMacs [ apple-history.com ] were ugly as sin .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, I still like the way the original iBook and iMacs looked, especially the tangerine and later green color [apple-history.com].
However the flower and polka-dot iMacs [apple-history.com] were ugly as sin.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143154</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31151440</id>
	<title>Strangest repair techniques ever?</title>
	<author>mike.mondy</author>
	<datestamp>1266247260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt;<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... strangest repair techniques ever: 'Users were advised to pick the computer up a few inches off the ground and then drop it</p><p>Well, that drop technique was what many of us used to use to nail the stiction problem...</p><p>Whatdda mean, "not every problem requires a hammer"?</p><p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stiction#Hard\_disk\_drives" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stiction#Hard\_disk\_drives</a> [wikipedia.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; ... strangest repair techniques ever : 'Users were advised to pick the computer up a few inches off the ground and then drop itWell , that drop technique was what many of us used to use to nail the stiction problem...Whatdda mean , " not every problem requires a hammer " ? http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stiction # Hard \ _disk \ _drives [ wikipedia.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; ... strangest repair techniques ever: 'Users were advised to pick the computer up a few inches off the ground and then drop itWell, that drop technique was what many of us used to use to nail the stiction problem...Whatdda mean, "not every problem requires a hammer"?http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stiction#Hard\_disk\_drives [wikipedia.org]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143312</id>
	<title>I think that's the point</title>
	<author>Sycraft-fu</author>
	<datestamp>1266244860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The article is just trying to point out that along with great successes, they have great failures too. The press as of late has been rather over the top fanboyish with Apple, hailing everything they do as amazing and generally projecting them as a company that makes bold decisions that are never wrong. This article seemed like a counterpoint to that. Showing that along with their successes, that everyone has heard about, there are plenty of failures, which many people have not. That will be true for any company, but in particular for companies that try something new.</p><p>I think it is a good reminder over all, given the massive over-hype that surrounded the iPad launch. Much of the tech press had worked themselves in to a frenzy and had decided it was going to be the greatest thing ever, without knowing anything about it. This has then been followed by a good bit of letdown. They seemed to have the idea that everything Apple produces is an amazing winner of a product. I think it is a useful reminder to say that no, Apple has produced some real bombs in the past. They are a company composed of people like any other and people make mistakes. They WILL fuck up sometimes.</p><p>I could add a few more recent products to that list, the cube being one, and Apple TV looking like another.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The article is just trying to point out that along with great successes , they have great failures too .
The press as of late has been rather over the top fanboyish with Apple , hailing everything they do as amazing and generally projecting them as a company that makes bold decisions that are never wrong .
This article seemed like a counterpoint to that .
Showing that along with their successes , that everyone has heard about , there are plenty of failures , which many people have not .
That will be true for any company , but in particular for companies that try something new.I think it is a good reminder over all , given the massive over-hype that surrounded the iPad launch .
Much of the tech press had worked themselves in to a frenzy and had decided it was going to be the greatest thing ever , without knowing anything about it .
This has then been followed by a good bit of letdown .
They seemed to have the idea that everything Apple produces is an amazing winner of a product .
I think it is a useful reminder to say that no , Apple has produced some real bombs in the past .
They are a company composed of people like any other and people make mistakes .
They WILL fuck up sometimes.I could add a few more recent products to that list , the cube being one , and Apple TV looking like another .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The article is just trying to point out that along with great successes, they have great failures too.
The press as of late has been rather over the top fanboyish with Apple, hailing everything they do as amazing and generally projecting them as a company that makes bold decisions that are never wrong.
This article seemed like a counterpoint to that.
Showing that along with their successes, that everyone has heard about, there are plenty of failures, which many people have not.
That will be true for any company, but in particular for companies that try something new.I think it is a good reminder over all, given the massive over-hype that surrounded the iPad launch.
Much of the tech press had worked themselves in to a frenzy and had decided it was going to be the greatest thing ever, without knowing anything about it.
This has then been followed by a good bit of letdown.
They seemed to have the idea that everything Apple produces is an amazing winner of a product.
I think it is a useful reminder to say that no, Apple has produced some real bombs in the past.
They are a company composed of people like any other and people make mistakes.
They WILL fuck up sometimes.I could add a few more recent products to that list, the cube being one, and Apple TV looking like another.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143106</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31146720</id>
	<title>Never made the jump from Apple ][ to Mac</title>
	<author>bzipitidoo</author>
	<datestamp>1266262620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When I realized my Apple ][+ was hopelessly obsolete, I jumped to PCs.  I wanted whichever system was the most popular, ubiquitous, and standard.  I wanted whatever work I did to be usable on as many computers as possible.  In high school, that was the Apple ][, but the PC was a close 2nd.  What I didn't realize then was that Apple had focused on education.  It's as if Apple took a leaf from religious fundamentalists, targeting people too young and inexperienced to see why Apple products aren't all that great, who are more easily impressed by bling and who, having not experienced proprietary lockdown, don't quite know what that is, what it means, and why it's bad.  Ubiquitous and standard did not describe the Mac.  That the PC was cheaper was a nice bonus.  As for the rest of the field, things like the Commodore Amiga were not even in the running.

</p><p>I could also see that Apple had grown arrogant.  Seemed to think their computers were worth ever higher prices even as they lost market share. Kept trying to convince the world that their computers were superior.  Except they weren't superior, not on the criteria that mattered most to me.  Recently, I read over a few tech magazine articles on Apple from around 1990, and it was striking how star struck and fawning most of them were.  An interview with Apple's CEO was practically magical.  They just ate up whatever Sculley had to say, no matter how stupid.  A lot of the things that wowed them then look like pathetic sad jokes today, but even then they should have known better on most of that stuff.  Apple and the press totally missed on networking and the Internet.  And Apple blew it on openness, locking up everything.

</p><p>I have never bought an Apple product since that Apple ][+.  From my point of view, the Mac was the number 1 failure.  Yet it is hailed as a great success.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When I realized my Apple ] [ + was hopelessly obsolete , I jumped to PCs .
I wanted whichever system was the most popular , ubiquitous , and standard .
I wanted whatever work I did to be usable on as many computers as possible .
In high school , that was the Apple ] [ , but the PC was a close 2nd .
What I did n't realize then was that Apple had focused on education .
It 's as if Apple took a leaf from religious fundamentalists , targeting people too young and inexperienced to see why Apple products are n't all that great , who are more easily impressed by bling and who , having not experienced proprietary lockdown , do n't quite know what that is , what it means , and why it 's bad .
Ubiquitous and standard did not describe the Mac .
That the PC was cheaper was a nice bonus .
As for the rest of the field , things like the Commodore Amiga were not even in the running .
I could also see that Apple had grown arrogant .
Seemed to think their computers were worth ever higher prices even as they lost market share .
Kept trying to convince the world that their computers were superior .
Except they were n't superior , not on the criteria that mattered most to me .
Recently , I read over a few tech magazine articles on Apple from around 1990 , and it was striking how star struck and fawning most of them were .
An interview with Apple 's CEO was practically magical .
They just ate up whatever Sculley had to say , no matter how stupid .
A lot of the things that wowed them then look like pathetic sad jokes today , but even then they should have known better on most of that stuff .
Apple and the press totally missed on networking and the Internet .
And Apple blew it on openness , locking up everything .
I have never bought an Apple product since that Apple ] [ + .
From my point of view , the Mac was the number 1 failure .
Yet it is hailed as a great success .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When I realized my Apple ][+ was hopelessly obsolete, I jumped to PCs.
I wanted whichever system was the most popular, ubiquitous, and standard.
I wanted whatever work I did to be usable on as many computers as possible.
In high school, that was the Apple ][, but the PC was a close 2nd.
What I didn't realize then was that Apple had focused on education.
It's as if Apple took a leaf from religious fundamentalists, targeting people too young and inexperienced to see why Apple products aren't all that great, who are more easily impressed by bling and who, having not experienced proprietary lockdown, don't quite know what that is, what it means, and why it's bad.
Ubiquitous and standard did not describe the Mac.
That the PC was cheaper was a nice bonus.
As for the rest of the field, things like the Commodore Amiga were not even in the running.
I could also see that Apple had grown arrogant.
Seemed to think their computers were worth ever higher prices even as they lost market share.
Kept trying to convince the world that their computers were superior.
Except they weren't superior, not on the criteria that mattered most to me.
Recently, I read over a few tech magazine articles on Apple from around 1990, and it was striking how star struck and fawning most of them were.
An interview with Apple's CEO was practically magical.
They just ate up whatever Sculley had to say, no matter how stupid.
A lot of the things that wowed them then look like pathetic sad jokes today, but even then they should have known better on most of that stuff.
Apple and the press totally missed on networking and the Internet.
And Apple blew it on openness, locking up everything.
I have never bought an Apple product since that Apple ][+.
From my point of view, the Mac was the number 1 failure.
Yet it is hailed as a great success.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31151040</id>
	<title>Re:The List</title>
	<author>Macgrrl</author>
	<datestamp>1266243000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The video issues on the P52xx deserve a special place in hell for the QA engineers who OK'd the product, however I always hated the P7220 more from the point of view of a tech. I would have said the PB190/5300 laptops (contemporaries of the P52xx) edged the Performas out for number of batch issues.</p><p>On the topic of PowerMacs, I had several great powermacs, and there were several generations of great designs. They don't deserve to all be slammed.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The video issues on the P52xx deserve a special place in hell for the QA engineers who OK 'd the product , however I always hated the P7220 more from the point of view of a tech .
I would have said the PB190/5300 laptops ( contemporaries of the P52xx ) edged the Performas out for number of batch issues.On the topic of PowerMacs , I had several great powermacs , and there were several generations of great designs .
They do n't deserve to all be slammed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The video issues on the P52xx deserve a special place in hell for the QA engineers who OK'd the product, however I always hated the P7220 more from the point of view of a tech.
I would have said the PB190/5300 laptops (contemporaries of the P52xx) edged the Performas out for number of batch issues.On the topic of PowerMacs, I had several great powermacs, and there were several generations of great designs.
They don't deserve to all be slammed.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143306</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143784</id>
	<title>Built-in screens gone the way of the dinosaurs??</title>
	<author>AC-x</author>
	<datestamp>1266248160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Color Classic: It could be argued that this system forced Apple to rethink building screens into systems. Sure it looks very good but it increases the overall cost of the system and limits users to a particular view. Built-in screens made sense at the start of the computing age but they have thankfully gone the way of the dinosaurs.</p></div><p>Did the author forget about the iMac?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Color Classic : It could be argued that this system forced Apple to rethink building screens into systems .
Sure it looks very good but it increases the overall cost of the system and limits users to a particular view .
Built-in screens made sense at the start of the computing age but they have thankfully gone the way of the dinosaurs.Did the author forget about the iMac ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Color Classic: It could be argued that this system forced Apple to rethink building screens into systems.
Sure it looks very good but it increases the overall cost of the system and limits users to a particular view.
Built-in screens made sense at the start of the computing age but they have thankfully gone the way of the dinosaurs.Did the author forget about the iMac?
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31154206</id>
	<title>Missing on the List:</title>
	<author>walter\_f</author>
	<datestamp>1266328260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Instead of PowerPC and Mac OS 9, there should be rather</p><p>Time Capsule<br><a href="http://timecapsuledead.org/" title="timecapsuledead.org">http://timecapsuledead.org/</a> [timecapsuledead.org]</p><p>and</p><p>iMac 27inch<br><a href="http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?threadID=2212682&amp;start=4080&amp;tstart=0" title="apple.com">http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?threadID=2212682&amp;start=4080&amp;tstart=0</a> [apple.com]<br>(Replies : 4,486, Pages : 300, thread locked by Apple Moderators on Feb 9)</p><p>on the list...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Instead of PowerPC and Mac OS 9 , there should be ratherTime Capsulehttp : //timecapsuledead.org/ [ timecapsuledead.org ] andiMac 27inchhttp : //discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa ? threadID = 2212682&amp;start = 4080&amp;tstart = 0 [ apple.com ] ( Replies : 4,486 , Pages : 300 , thread locked by Apple Moderators on Feb 9 ) on the list.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Instead of PowerPC and Mac OS 9, there should be ratherTime Capsulehttp://timecapsuledead.org/ [timecapsuledead.org]andiMac 27inchhttp://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?threadID=2212682&amp;start=4080&amp;tstart=0 [apple.com](Replies : 4,486, Pages : 300, thread locked by Apple Moderators on Feb 9)on the list...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143422</id>
	<title>Re:All of thier mice suck</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266245820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well,<b>rimcrazy</b>, I know exactly why you love Apple products in general.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well,rimcrazy , I know exactly why you love Apple products in general .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well,rimcrazy, I know exactly why you love Apple products in general.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143106</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31144836</id>
	<title>The TRUE list</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266253140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>5-iPad<br>4-Mackintosh<br>3-iMac<br>2-iPod(all models)<br>1-iPhone</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>5-iPad4-Mackintosh3-iMac2-iPod ( all models ) 1-iPhone</tokentext>
<sentencetext>5-iPad4-Mackintosh3-iMac2-iPod(all models)1-iPhone</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143570</id>
	<title>Re:Hasn't been out long enough yet</title>
	<author>goldaryn</author>
	<datestamp>1266247020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>A product can only be bad if it doesn't sell.<br>
<br>
[4 more paragraphs]</p></div><p>Let me stop you there. Of course bad products can sell, the do all the time. You are talking rubbish.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>A product can only be bad if it does n't sell .
[ 4 more paragraphs ] Let me stop you there .
Of course bad products can sell , the do all the time .
You are talking rubbish .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A product can only be bad if it doesn't sell.
[4 more paragraphs]Let me stop you there.
Of course bad products can sell, the do all the time.
You are talking rubbish.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143254</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143286</id>
	<title>Re:The List</title>
	<author>tehcyder</author>
	<datestamp>1266244680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>No Quicktime Player? It's a turd of a program on either OS, but <strong>the windows version definitely stand out as a major PITA</strong>.</p></div>
</blockquote><p>
Beaten only by iTunes, also strangely not on the list.
<br>
I don't care how cool iPods are, or how well the iTunes store works, the software is horrible on Windows.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>No Quicktime Player ?
It 's a turd of a program on either OS , but the windows version definitely stand out as a major PITA .
Beaten only by iTunes , also strangely not on the list .
I do n't care how cool iPods are , or how well the iTunes store works , the software is horrible on Windows .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No Quicktime Player?
It's a turd of a program on either OS, but the windows version definitely stand out as a major PITA.
Beaten only by iTunes, also strangely not on the list.
I don't care how cool iPods are, or how well the iTunes store works, the software is horrible on Windows.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143122</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143580</id>
	<title>How come...</title>
	<author>gmfeier</author>
	<datestamp>1266247080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>...nobody ever posts a list of the worst Dell products of all time? Just askin'.</htmltext>
<tokenext>...nobody ever posts a list of the worst Dell products of all time ?
Just askin' .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...nobody ever posts a list of the worst Dell products of all time?
Just askin'.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31144596</id>
	<title>Re:Hardcore repair methods</title>
	<author>geminidomino</author>
	<datestamp>1266252180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have a buddy that has a bunch of old tower cases with "Xs" drawn on various locations, since where he had to smack it depended on which drive bays he had his beloved Quantum Bigfoot drives in.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have a buddy that has a bunch of old tower cases with " Xs " drawn on various locations , since where he had to smack it depended on which drive bays he had his beloved Quantum Bigfoot drives in .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have a buddy that has a bunch of old tower cases with "Xs" drawn on various locations, since where he had to smack it depended on which drive bays he had his beloved Quantum Bigfoot drives in.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143132</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143124</id>
	<title>Re:The List</title>
	<author>Wingsy</author>
	<datestamp>1266243180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I notice that all these products are from quite a few years ago. They couldn't find anything recent?</htmltext>
<tokenext>I notice that all these products are from quite a few years ago .
They could n't find anything recent ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I notice that all these products are from quite a few years ago.
They couldn't find anything recent?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143092</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31145746</id>
	<title>Re:Not all the items listed were failures..</title>
	<author>bill\_mcgonigle</author>
	<datestamp>1266257520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>exclusive, high priced item, for collectors..</i></p><p>And nobody in Apple seems to have actually used one so it got poor support.</p><p>I had the dubious distinction of filing a bug on one in the MacOS 8.1 beta program that halted the production schedule of the gold-master release.  With the intended GM release if you pressed the power button on the remote control on a TAM it would power off immediately, not trigger shutdown.  They fixed it very quickly but it seems nobody at Apple was testing their new OS on a TAM (turning it off with the remote was a natural thing to do on your way out the door for the day).</p><p>It was only a laptop in a cool form factor, but in an era where everybody had CRT's on their desk, it was a very cool device.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>exclusive , high priced item , for collectors..And nobody in Apple seems to have actually used one so it got poor support.I had the dubious distinction of filing a bug on one in the MacOS 8.1 beta program that halted the production schedule of the gold-master release .
With the intended GM release if you pressed the power button on the remote control on a TAM it would power off immediately , not trigger shutdown .
They fixed it very quickly but it seems nobody at Apple was testing their new OS on a TAM ( turning it off with the remote was a natural thing to do on your way out the door for the day ) .It was only a laptop in a cool form factor , but in an era where everybody had CRT 's on their desk , it was a very cool device .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>exclusive, high priced item, for collectors..And nobody in Apple seems to have actually used one so it got poor support.I had the dubious distinction of filing a bug on one in the MacOS 8.1 beta program that halted the production schedule of the gold-master release.
With the intended GM release if you pressed the power button on the remote control on a TAM it would power off immediately, not trigger shutdown.
They fixed it very quickly but it seems nobody at Apple was testing their new OS on a TAM (turning it off with the remote was a natural thing to do on your way out the door for the day).It was only a laptop in a cool form factor, but in an era where everybody had CRT's on their desk, it was a very cool device.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143324</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31146864</id>
	<title>No mighty mouse?</title>
	<author>kuzb</author>
	<datestamp>1266263400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The mighty mouse is completely missing from this list.  Seriously, it was probably one of the most terrible hardware attempts since the hockey puck mouse.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The mighty mouse is completely missing from this list .
Seriously , it was probably one of the most terrible hardware attempts since the hockey puck mouse .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The mighty mouse is completely missing from this list.
Seriously, it was probably one of the most terrible hardware attempts since the hockey puck mouse.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143378</id>
	<title>Departmentalised</title>
	<author>goldaryn</author>
	<datestamp>1266245580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>from the performa-was-truly-a-dog dept.</p></div><p>In my country, the performa is a condom. It's also marginally (marginally!) preferable to a nasty disease</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>from the performa-was-truly-a-dog dept.In my country , the performa is a condom .
It 's also marginally ( marginally !
) preferable to a nasty disease</tokentext>
<sentencetext>from the performa-was-truly-a-dog dept.In my country, the performa is a condom.
It's also marginally (marginally!
) preferable to a nasty disease
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31144766</id>
	<title>Re:Hardcore repair methods</title>
	<author>dunkelfalke</author>
	<datestamp>1266252840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yep. And pretty much all electronic appliances came with a complete wiring diagram.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yep .
And pretty much all electronic appliances came with a complete wiring diagram .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yep.
And pretty much all electronic appliances came with a complete wiring diagram.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143132</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31151330</id>
	<title>Re:The List</title>
	<author>grouchomarxist</author>
	<datestamp>1266246120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>These kinds of lists get published every now and then, and the problem is that Apple's history is too long. There are many terrible products Apple has released and they've been flailed over and over again. A more interesting list would just cover the last ten years or so.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>These kinds of lists get published every now and then , and the problem is that Apple 's history is too long .
There are many terrible products Apple has released and they 've been flailed over and over again .
A more interesting list would just cover the last ten years or so .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>These kinds of lists get published every now and then, and the problem is that Apple's history is too long.
There are many terrible products Apple has released and they've been flailed over and over again.
A more interesting list would just cover the last ten years or so.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143092</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31148134</id>
	<title>Re:Hasn't been out long enough yet</title>
	<author>EvilBudMan</author>
	<datestamp>1266226320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>--An example would be the original Xbox.--</p><p>At the time, I thought that to be the best product that Microsoft ever produced. The kicker for me at that time was that the xbox had a hard drive and the PS2 did not. What made it a money loser was that they quit making it too soon. Just because the xbox 2 or 3 or whatever came out, doesn't mean they shouldn't have still made the old stuff like Sony did.</p><p>Now the hot one is the PS3, but it will be a few years more until everyone has real good 1080p games. I just think some PC games that are much older are much better and an even higher resolution and frame rate. So while the PC may made less and less, I don't think it will ever go away completely. There is still one horse manufacturer and maybe one buggy manufacturer and now there is no competition.</p><p>Anything, can be sold to anybody with the right tactics.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>--An example would be the original Xbox.--At the time , I thought that to be the best product that Microsoft ever produced .
The kicker for me at that time was that the xbox had a hard drive and the PS2 did not .
What made it a money loser was that they quit making it too soon .
Just because the xbox 2 or 3 or whatever came out , does n't mean they should n't have still made the old stuff like Sony did.Now the hot one is the PS3 , but it will be a few years more until everyone has real good 1080p games .
I just think some PC games that are much older are much better and an even higher resolution and frame rate .
So while the PC may made less and less , I do n't think it will ever go away completely .
There is still one horse manufacturer and maybe one buggy manufacturer and now there is no competition.Anything , can be sold to anybody with the right tactics .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>--An example would be the original Xbox.--At the time, I thought that to be the best product that Microsoft ever produced.
The kicker for me at that time was that the xbox had a hard drive and the PS2 did not.
What made it a money loser was that they quit making it too soon.
Just because the xbox 2 or 3 or whatever came out, doesn't mean they shouldn't have still made the old stuff like Sony did.Now the hot one is the PS3, but it will be a few years more until everyone has real good 1080p games.
I just think some PC games that are much older are much better and an even higher resolution and frame rate.
So while the PC may made less and less, I don't think it will ever go away completely.
There is still one horse manufacturer and maybe one buggy manufacturer and now there is no competition.Anything, can be sold to anybody with the right tactics.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143254</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143210</id>
	<title>Geomodem</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266243900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Unlike other modems the GeoModem did not <b>mo</b>ulate and <b>dem</b>odulate.  Instead it used the modem hidden inside your CPU!  By purchasing an adapter that cost as much as a real modem you could use the processor inside your computer to handle all the modulating and demodulating.  On an OS that used shared multitasking this was not very reliable.  Its one and only advantage is that you could upgrade the software.  It went from 14.4kbps to 33.6kbps over night.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Unlike other modems the GeoModem did not moulate and demodulate .
Instead it used the modem hidden inside your CPU !
By purchasing an adapter that cost as much as a real modem you could use the processor inside your computer to handle all the modulating and demodulating .
On an OS that used shared multitasking this was not very reliable .
Its one and only advantage is that you could upgrade the software .
It went from 14.4kbps to 33.6kbps over night .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unlike other modems the GeoModem did not moulate and demodulate.
Instead it used the modem hidden inside your CPU!
By purchasing an adapter that cost as much as a real modem you could use the processor inside your computer to handle all the modulating and demodulating.
On an OS that used shared multitasking this was not very reliable.
Its one and only advantage is that you could upgrade the software.
It went from 14.4kbps to 33.6kbps over night.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31146702</id>
	<title>Re:Mobile Me?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266262500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I havent had a MobileMe issue in at least a year....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I havent had a MobileMe issue in at least a year... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I havent had a MobileMe issue in at least a year....</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143134</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31146798</id>
	<title>Re:Geomodem</title>
	<author>Sandbags</author>
	<datestamp>1266263040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I had my 14.4 running at 19.2 with a firmware crack, and my 28.8 running at 56K (then 64K) with a similar crack.  I've seen 14.4s running at 56K as well.  Especially the US Robotics external models (which were FAR FAR FAR superior to internal modems on every level!)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I had my 14.4 running at 19.2 with a firmware crack , and my 28.8 running at 56K ( then 64K ) with a similar crack .
I 've seen 14.4s running at 56K as well .
Especially the US Robotics external models ( which were FAR FAR FAR superior to internal modems on every level !
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I had my 14.4 running at 19.2 with a firmware crack, and my 28.8 running at 56K (then 64K) with a similar crack.
I've seen 14.4s running at 56K as well.
Especially the US Robotics external models (which were FAR FAR FAR superior to internal modems on every level!
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143210</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31147426</id>
	<title>Re:The List</title>
	<author>LanMan04</author>
	<datestamp>1266265920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I don't care how cool iPods are, or how well the iTunes store works, the software is horrible on Windows.</p></div><p>I think that's on purpose.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't care how cool iPods are , or how well the iTunes store works , the software is horrible on Windows.I think that 's on purpose .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't care how cool iPods are, or how well the iTunes store works, the software is horrible on Windows.I think that's on purpose.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143286</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143318</id>
	<title>Re:The List</title>
	<author>jo\_ham</author>
	<datestamp>1266244920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What's wrong with it on OS X?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What 's wrong with it on OS X ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What's wrong with it on OS X?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143122</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31153858</id>
	<title>Re:Round of applause needed ...</title>
	<author>NorQue</author>
	<datestamp>1266322620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Exactly what I thought when I opened it. Very refreshing.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Exactly what I thought when I opened it .
Very refreshing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Exactly what I thought when I opened it.
Very refreshing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143234</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31148336</id>
	<title>Re:The List</title>
	<author>EvilBudMan</author>
	<datestamp>1266227340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Finally, someone gets an A+. That damn program is more annoying than almost anything else. It's almost spyware, trying to get me to add iTUNES or buy the paid version. Completely all opt out and no opt in at least on the PC. I wouldn't know about Apple since I dunno who is worse right now. Microsoft adding plugins to firefox is probably just as bad. Even Google is getting evil these days. I like the old days better when the entertainment companies didn't try to make things too.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Finally , someone gets an A + .
That damn program is more annoying than almost anything else .
It 's almost spyware , trying to get me to add iTUNES or buy the paid version .
Completely all opt out and no opt in at least on the PC .
I would n't know about Apple since I dunno who is worse right now .
Microsoft adding plugins to firefox is probably just as bad .
Even Google is getting evil these days .
I like the old days better when the entertainment companies did n't try to make things too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Finally, someone gets an A+.
That damn program is more annoying than almost anything else.
It's almost spyware, trying to get me to add iTUNES or buy the paid version.
Completely all opt out and no opt in at least on the PC.
I wouldn't know about Apple since I dunno who is worse right now.
Microsoft adding plugins to firefox is probably just as bad.
Even Google is getting evil these days.
I like the old days better when the entertainment companies didn't try to make things too.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143122</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143234</id>
	<title>Round of applause needed ...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266244140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>For the article itself not being a clickfest of 1 paragraph pages!   I nominate it for best top 10 list article of 2010!!</htmltext>
<tokenext>For the article itself not being a clickfest of 1 paragraph pages !
I nominate it for best top 10 list article of 2010 !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For the article itself not being a clickfest of 1 paragraph pages!
I nominate it for best top 10 list article of 2010!
!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143158</id>
	<title>Most</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266243480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I just took a crap, and it was a game changer, i mention this because so many similarities can be drawn between that and most apple products.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I just took a crap , and it was a game changer , i mention this because so many similarities can be drawn between that and most apple products .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I just took a crap, and it was a game changer, i mention this because so many similarities can be drawn between that and most apple products.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31145608</id>
	<title>Re:Mobile Me?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266256740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Dropbox + google services. Embrace the (working) cloud.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Dropbox + google services .
Embrace the ( working ) cloud .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dropbox + google services.
Embrace the (working) cloud.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143134</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31152510</id>
	<title>Re:All of thier mice suck</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266259140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Where are the home and end keys on their laptops?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Where are the home and end keys on their laptops ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Where are the home and end keys on their laptops?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143300</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31144262</id>
	<title>Timely...  Or not so much...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266250860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So the only product they chose as a failure from the last 10 years is the iPod Hi-Fi?<br>That seems to support the claim that Apple is "a leader in consumer electronic product design" *today*.  The article is a cautionary one (for anyone), but the implication in the opening sentence that it says something about the current company is really misleading.  Companies change over time (or they fail).  Especially in the consumer electronics space where products are effectively obsolete in that amount of time (if not significantly sooner).</p><p>As some other posters have said, Apple's trying new things.  That's risky and does leave them open to failures.  But it has its advantages, too, and Apple seems to be pretty successful right now.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So the only product they chose as a failure from the last 10 years is the iPod Hi-Fi ? That seems to support the claim that Apple is " a leader in consumer electronic product design " * today * .
The article is a cautionary one ( for anyone ) , but the implication in the opening sentence that it says something about the current company is really misleading .
Companies change over time ( or they fail ) .
Especially in the consumer electronics space where products are effectively obsolete in that amount of time ( if not significantly sooner ) .As some other posters have said , Apple 's trying new things .
That 's risky and does leave them open to failures .
But it has its advantages , too , and Apple seems to be pretty successful right now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So the only product they chose as a failure from the last 10 years is the iPod Hi-Fi?That seems to support the claim that Apple is "a leader in consumer electronic product design" *today*.
The article is a cautionary one (for anyone), but the implication in the opening sentence that it says something about the current company is really misleading.
Companies change over time (or they fail).
Especially in the consumer electronics space where products are effectively obsolete in that amount of time (if not significantly sooner).As some other posters have said, Apple's trying new things.
That's risky and does leave them open to failures.
But it has its advantages, too, and Apple seems to be pretty successful right now.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31144862</id>
	<title>Re:Not all the items listed were failures..</title>
	<author>Jesus\_666</author>
	<datestamp>1266253200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>PowerPC really went bad with the G5 - while adequate for normal desktop systems, it was too power-hungry for use in laptops, restricting PowerPC laptops to the G4; also, IBM couldn't acheive the high clock speeds the high-end market demanded. I'd qualify the G5 as decent if they ever got the power usage down and/or the clock speed up.<br>
<br>
I'm not sure whether the G6 would have fixed those problems but Apple couldn't afford to wait: Their laptops were performance-starved and the G6 would probably have made them both extraordinarily expensive and extraordinarily late - and they had no guarantee it was going to be laptop-ready anyway. Another round of G4 laptops would have made Apple look positively ridiculous.<br>
<br>
PowerPC was a sensible choice in the days of the 601 but Intel was an equally sensible choice when the G5 failed to deliver and the G6 was failed to deliver.</htmltext>
<tokenext>PowerPC really went bad with the G5 - while adequate for normal desktop systems , it was too power-hungry for use in laptops , restricting PowerPC laptops to the G4 ; also , IBM could n't acheive the high clock speeds the high-end market demanded .
I 'd qualify the G5 as decent if they ever got the power usage down and/or the clock speed up .
I 'm not sure whether the G6 would have fixed those problems but Apple could n't afford to wait : Their laptops were performance-starved and the G6 would probably have made them both extraordinarily expensive and extraordinarily late - and they had no guarantee it was going to be laptop-ready anyway .
Another round of G4 laptops would have made Apple look positively ridiculous .
PowerPC was a sensible choice in the days of the 601 but Intel was an equally sensible choice when the G5 failed to deliver and the G6 was failed to deliver .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>PowerPC really went bad with the G5 - while adequate for normal desktop systems, it was too power-hungry for use in laptops, restricting PowerPC laptops to the G4; also, IBM couldn't acheive the high clock speeds the high-end market demanded.
I'd qualify the G5 as decent if they ever got the power usage down and/or the clock speed up.
I'm not sure whether the G6 would have fixed those problems but Apple couldn't afford to wait: Their laptops were performance-starved and the G6 would probably have made them both extraordinarily expensive and extraordinarily late - and they had no guarantee it was going to be laptop-ready anyway.
Another round of G4 laptops would have made Apple look positively ridiculous.
PowerPC was a sensible choice in the days of the 601 but Intel was an equally sensible choice when the G5 failed to deliver and the G6 was failed to deliver.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143324</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31144362</id>
	<title>few compnaies have a 2nd hit ...</title>
	<author>peter303</author>
	<datestamp>1266251280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Apple has had four major hits by my reckoning: (1) Apple II (with VisiCalc), (2) MacIntosh (with LaserPrinter), (3) iPod (with iTunes) and (4) the iPhone (with Apps). I doesnt matter a lot if they've had some lemons along the way.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Apple has had four major hits by my reckoning : ( 1 ) Apple II ( with VisiCalc ) , ( 2 ) MacIntosh ( with LaserPrinter ) , ( 3 ) iPod ( with iTunes ) and ( 4 ) the iPhone ( with Apps ) .
I doesnt matter a lot if they 've had some lemons along the way .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Apple has had four major hits by my reckoning: (1) Apple II (with VisiCalc), (2) MacIntosh (with LaserPrinter), (3) iPod (with iTunes) and (4) the iPhone (with Apps).
I doesnt matter a lot if they've had some lemons along the way.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31148584</id>
	<title>Re:Geomodem</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266228420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Like WinModems only better?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Like WinModems only better ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Like WinModems only better?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143210</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31144286</id>
	<title>Re:The List</title>
	<author>joeyblades</author>
	<datestamp>1266250920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
The author's main complaint on the PowerPC was that it was not the ubiquitous Intel... I hardly think that makes it a mistake by Apple. The change to the Intel architecture does seem to have been a good one, but that doesn't make the long time support of the PowerPC was a bad one.
</p><p>
In fact, if Apple would have switched from the 68K architecture to an available Intel architecture at the time, it would have been crippling. There would not have been enough horsepower to support classic emulation. Until the MMX, the Intel architecture's pipelining was just not efficient enough and even then it was marginal. So in terms of performance, the PowerPC architecture was several years ahead of the Intel architecture.
</p><p>
The author's comment about the PowerPC power consumption is mystifying. Compared to the Intel offereings at the time, it was best in class.
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The author 's main complaint on the PowerPC was that it was not the ubiquitous Intel... I hardly think that makes it a mistake by Apple .
The change to the Intel architecture does seem to have been a good one , but that does n't make the long time support of the PowerPC was a bad one .
In fact , if Apple would have switched from the 68K architecture to an available Intel architecture at the time , it would have been crippling .
There would not have been enough horsepower to support classic emulation .
Until the MMX , the Intel architecture 's pipelining was just not efficient enough and even then it was marginal .
So in terms of performance , the PowerPC architecture was several years ahead of the Intel architecture .
The author 's comment about the PowerPC power consumption is mystifying .
Compared to the Intel offereings at the time , it was best in class .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
The author's main complaint on the PowerPC was that it was not the ubiquitous Intel... I hardly think that makes it a mistake by Apple.
The change to the Intel architecture does seem to have been a good one, but that doesn't make the long time support of the PowerPC was a bad one.
In fact, if Apple would have switched from the 68K architecture to an available Intel architecture at the time, it would have been crippling.
There would not have been enough horsepower to support classic emulation.
Until the MMX, the Intel architecture's pipelining was just not efficient enough and even then it was marginal.
So in terms of performance, the PowerPC architecture was several years ahead of the Intel architecture.
The author's comment about the PowerPC power consumption is mystifying.
Compared to the Intel offereings at the time, it was best in class.
</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143306</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31144978</id>
	<title>Re:The List</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266253740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As a Linux/Mac user I would say ANY software is horrible on Windows. The issue with Windows is that the programmer has to draw all the GUI theming stuff themselves (buttons, sliders, windows,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...) and that can be done for good or for bad. On Mac OS X and Gnome/KDE - if you follow the guidelines - any theme will work with your program, the buttons will be concise.</p><p>Windows GUI programming is like a webpage where you have to write all the HTML/CSS yourself.<br>Linux/Mac GUI programming is like a webpage based on Drupal where you get all the HTML/CSS predefined and you're pretty stupid if you roll your own.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As a Linux/Mac user I would say ANY software is horrible on Windows .
The issue with Windows is that the programmer has to draw all the GUI theming stuff themselves ( buttons , sliders , windows , ... ) and that can be done for good or for bad .
On Mac OS X and Gnome/KDE - if you follow the guidelines - any theme will work with your program , the buttons will be concise.Windows GUI programming is like a webpage where you have to write all the HTML/CSS yourself.Linux/Mac GUI programming is like a webpage based on Drupal where you get all the HTML/CSS predefined and you 're pretty stupid if you roll your own .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As a Linux/Mac user I would say ANY software is horrible on Windows.
The issue with Windows is that the programmer has to draw all the GUI theming stuff themselves (buttons, sliders, windows, ...) and that can be done for good or for bad.
On Mac OS X and Gnome/KDE - if you follow the guidelines - any theme will work with your program, the buttons will be concise.Windows GUI programming is like a webpage where you have to write all the HTML/CSS yourself.Linux/Mac GUI programming is like a webpage based on Drupal where you get all the HTML/CSS predefined and you're pretty stupid if you roll your own.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143286</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31146506</id>
	<title>Re:Hasn't been out long enough yet</title>
	<author>MightyYar</author>
	<datestamp>1266261480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Let me stop you there. Of course bad products can sell, the do all the time.</p></div><p>"Bad" is such an ambiguous term, and actually meaningless if not put in context. A product might set fire to orphan hair, but if it sells well then it is good in someone's eyes.</p><p>Do I want an iPad? No. Does that make it "bad"? Well, yes, certainly from my perspective if you must choose between only "good" or "bad"... though personally I have it in a third category: "meh". I'm not much of a gamer, and I don't have much opportunity to watch video or browse the internet on the go... so what is left? If I did those things, then maybe the device wouldn't be so "meh".</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Let me stop you there .
Of course bad products can sell , the do all the time .
" Bad " is such an ambiguous term , and actually meaningless if not put in context .
A product might set fire to orphan hair , but if it sells well then it is good in someone 's eyes.Do I want an iPad ?
No. Does that make it " bad " ?
Well , yes , certainly from my perspective if you must choose between only " good " or " bad " ... though personally I have it in a third category : " meh " .
I 'm not much of a gamer , and I do n't have much opportunity to watch video or browse the internet on the go... so what is left ?
If I did those things , then maybe the device would n't be so " meh " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Let me stop you there.
Of course bad products can sell, the do all the time.
"Bad" is such an ambiguous term, and actually meaningless if not put in context.
A product might set fire to orphan hair, but if it sells well then it is good in someone's eyes.Do I want an iPad?
No. Does that make it "bad"?
Well, yes, certainly from my perspective if you must choose between only "good" or "bad"... though personally I have it in a third category: "meh".
I'm not much of a gamer, and I don't have much opportunity to watch video or browse the internet on the go... so what is left?
If I did those things, then maybe the device wouldn't be so "meh".
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143570</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143428</id>
	<title>Missing Option</title>
	<author>rossdee</author>
	<datestamp>1266245940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The Lisa</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Lisa</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Lisa</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31147058</id>
	<title>Re:Not all the items listed were failures..</title>
	<author>Uberbah</author>
	<datestamp>1266264180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>By the time Apple adopted the PowerPC it had become clear that Intel would remain ahead of the curve in the processor wars</i></p><p>Uh, no.  The 604e, released two years after the first PowerPC chip, was a faster chip than anything you could get from Intel.  The G4's and G5's were competitive chips but fell behind as Motorola and IBM lost interest in making processors for Apple.  After the fiasco of IBM promising 3 ghz chips within a year of the G5's launch (which they never delivered on), Apple threw in the towel and went to Intel.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>By the time Apple adopted the PowerPC it had become clear that Intel would remain ahead of the curve in the processor warsUh , no .
The 604e , released two years after the first PowerPC chip , was a faster chip than anything you could get from Intel .
The G4 's and G5 's were competitive chips but fell behind as Motorola and IBM lost interest in making processors for Apple .
After the fiasco of IBM promising 3 ghz chips within a year of the G5 's launch ( which they never delivered on ) , Apple threw in the towel and went to Intel .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>By the time Apple adopted the PowerPC it had become clear that Intel would remain ahead of the curve in the processor warsUh, no.
The 604e, released two years after the first PowerPC chip, was a faster chip than anything you could get from Intel.
The G4's and G5's were competitive chips but fell behind as Motorola and IBM lost interest in making processors for Apple.
After the fiasco of IBM promising 3 ghz chips within a year of the G5's launch (which they never delivered on), Apple threw in the towel and went to Intel.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31145234</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31163690</id>
	<title>No LIsa?</title>
	<author>bryan1945</author>
	<datestamp>1266333840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Surprised.  A bunch of $10K computers dumped into a landfill, kinda like that ET Atari fiasco.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Surprised .
A bunch of $ 10K computers dumped into a landfill , kinda like that ET Atari fiasco .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Surprised.
A bunch of $10K computers dumped into a landfill, kinda like that ET Atari fiasco.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31149722</id>
	<title>Re:The List</title>
	<author>Brian Gordon</author>
	<datestamp>1266233820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>strangely not on the list</p></div></blockquote><p>The list is pathetically pro-Apple. They're not going to criticize a current product. Look at this quote from TFA:</p><blockquote><div><p>There was some benefit, however. The hockey puck helped to boost the market for third-party peripherals, and its cold reception forced Apple to rethink its ergonomic approach for future mouse designs.</p></div></blockquote><p>Translation: Apple is great because the product was <i>so bad</i> that it boosted the market for third-party peripherals!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>strangely not on the listThe list is pathetically pro-Apple .
They 're not going to criticize a current product .
Look at this quote from TFA : There was some benefit , however .
The hockey puck helped to boost the market for third-party peripherals , and its cold reception forced Apple to rethink its ergonomic approach for future mouse designs.Translation : Apple is great because the product was so bad that it boosted the market for third-party peripherals !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>strangely not on the listThe list is pathetically pro-Apple.
They're not going to criticize a current product.
Look at this quote from TFA:There was some benefit, however.
The hockey puck helped to boost the market for third-party peripherals, and its cold reception forced Apple to rethink its ergonomic approach for future mouse designs.Translation: Apple is great because the product was so bad that it boosted the market for third-party peripherals!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143286</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31144300</id>
	<title>APPLE-TV hands down...</title>
	<author>MindPrison</author>
	<datestamp>1266250980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...worst - most redundant product ever.</p><p>When it came , no HDTV...limited amount of titles, not worth getting. Period.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...worst - most redundant product ever.When it came , no HDTV...limited amount of titles , not worth getting .
Period .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...worst - most redundant product ever.When it came , no HDTV...limited amount of titles, not worth getting.
Period.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143106</id>
	<title>All of thier mice suck</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266242940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Love their products in general.  MacPro and MacBook user myself but I hate their mice and their keyboards.  They both have always sucked.</p><p>The Lisa sucked big time. As did Newton but<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... they paved the way for future products some by Apple some not that were quite successful.</p><p>No guts no glory. They at least stick their neck out there and try things.  Sometimes it does not always work.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Love their products in general .
MacPro and MacBook user myself but I hate their mice and their keyboards .
They both have always sucked.The Lisa sucked big time .
As did Newton but ... they paved the way for future products some by Apple some not that were quite successful.No guts no glory .
They at least stick their neck out there and try things .
Sometimes it does not always work .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Love their products in general.
MacPro and MacBook user myself but I hate their mice and their keyboards.
They both have always sucked.The Lisa sucked big time.
As did Newton but ... they paved the way for future products some by Apple some not that were quite successful.No guts no glory.
They at least stick their neck out there and try things.
Sometimes it does not always work.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31145512</id>
	<title>Re:Not all the items listed were failures..</title>
	<author>Gilmoure</author>
	<datestamp>1266256320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Apple had always done development work for Mac OS on Intel. They also had dev versions for Alpha Spec chips back then. 'Course, compared to PI/II chips, PPC 601/604's were really cool chips. Who knew they'd end up stalling out on the development side?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Apple had always done development work for Mac OS on Intel .
They also had dev versions for Alpha Spec chips back then .
'Course , compared to PI/II chips , PPC 601/604 's were really cool chips .
Who knew they 'd end up stalling out on the development side ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Apple had always done development work for Mac OS on Intel.
They also had dev versions for Alpha Spec chips back then.
'Course, compared to PI/II chips, PPC 601/604's were really cool chips.
Who knew they'd end up stalling out on the development side?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143324</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31151604</id>
	<title>Re:The List</title>
	<author>mattack2</author>
	<datestamp>1266248820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>unlike OS X, OS 9 is able to remember window sizes and positions.</p></div></blockquote><p>Can you give specific examples of where this doesn't work?</p><p>Better, go to bugreport.apple.com, create a free online only account, and write up bugs that will get into the bug system.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>unlike OS X , OS 9 is able to remember window sizes and positions.Can you give specific examples of where this does n't work ? Better , go to bugreport.apple.com , create a free online only account , and write up bugs that will get into the bug system .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>unlike OS X, OS 9 is able to remember window sizes and positions.Can you give specific examples of where this doesn't work?Better, go to bugreport.apple.com, create a free online only account, and write up bugs that will get into the bug system.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143306</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31145684</id>
	<title>Re:A friend of mine who's a diehard fan...</title>
	<author>HTH NE1</author>
	<datestamp>1266257160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I have an admitted fanboy friend that has had all those items throughout the years, except for the 20th anniversary mac.</p></div><p>I have two of them. ("Wow! You must be rich!" -- Milton Baines)</p><p>One was my sister's. The other belonged to a friend of hers and had suffered a lightning strike, used for salvage to upgrade hers. One of them has a TV tuner. They gather dust.</p><p>I also had a chance to own an Apple color pen plotter.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have an admitted fanboy friend that has had all those items throughout the years , except for the 20th anniversary mac.I have two of them .
( " Wow ! You must be rich !
" -- Milton Baines ) One was my sister 's .
The other belonged to a friend of hers and had suffered a lightning strike , used for salvage to upgrade hers .
One of them has a TV tuner .
They gather dust.I also had a chance to own an Apple color pen plotter .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have an admitted fanboy friend that has had all those items throughout the years, except for the 20th anniversary mac.I have two of them.
("Wow! You must be rich!
" -- Milton Baines)One was my sister's.
The other belonged to a friend of hers and had suffered a lightning strike, used for salvage to upgrade hers.
One of them has a TV tuner.
They gather dust.I also had a chance to own an Apple color pen plotter.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143228</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31145784</id>
	<title>Re:They forgot to mention...</title>
	<author>meringuoid</author>
	<datestamp>1266257700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>TWO is the right number for buttons a mouse.</i>

<p>Two buttons? How do you paste, or open a link into a new tab?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>TWO is the right number for buttons a mouse .
Two buttons ?
How do you paste , or open a link into a new tab ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>TWO is the right number for buttons a mouse.
Two buttons?
How do you paste, or open a link into a new tab?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143470</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31148378</id>
	<title>Spelling?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266227460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The article was interesting, but I kept getting distracted by the poor spelling.</p><p>Maybe the authors should have used spell check prior to publishing...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The article was interesting , but I kept getting distracted by the poor spelling.Maybe the authors should have used spell check prior to publishing.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The article was interesting, but I kept getting distracted by the poor spelling.Maybe the authors should have used spell check prior to publishing...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31173620</id>
	<title>Re:All of thier mice suck</title>
	<author>Rakarra</author>
	<datestamp>1265053980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Macintosh mice may have sucked, and most of their keyboards have similarly-sucked.. but I have to admit their iMac and Powermac laptops have really good keyboards now.. for laptops. Nothing will replace my desktop keyboard, but the very best laptop keyboards I've ever used were on Macs.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Macintosh mice may have sucked , and most of their keyboards have similarly-sucked.. but I have to admit their iMac and Powermac laptops have really good keyboards now.. for laptops .
Nothing will replace my desktop keyboard , but the very best laptop keyboards I 've ever used were on Macs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Macintosh mice may have sucked, and most of their keyboards have similarly-sucked.. but I have to admit their iMac and Powermac laptops have really good keyboards now.. for laptops.
Nothing will replace my desktop keyboard, but the very best laptop keyboards I've ever used were on Macs.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143106</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31145522</id>
	<title>Re:I am betting iPad will succeed.</title>
	<author>Sancho</author>
	<datestamp>1266256380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm betting that it is closer to "flop" than "raging success."  But I'm no market analyst, so who knows?  And that said, I'm very tempted to buy one.  I'll almost certainly buy one if they become jailbroken.  Unencumbered, it could be a really neat toy.</p><p>The main thing is that Apple hasn't made a compelling case for buying one.  With the iPhone, the case was obvious.  The smartphone market was already there.  They made owning a smartphone cool, expanded the market, and took almost all of the new new marketshare.</p><p>What's compelling about the iPad?  About as much as was compelling about the Macbook Air.  They've created a product which needs to create a market in order to survive.  The Air failed to create that market.  Will the iPad?  I don't know, but like I said, I doubt it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm betting that it is closer to " flop " than " raging success .
" But I 'm no market analyst , so who knows ?
And that said , I 'm very tempted to buy one .
I 'll almost certainly buy one if they become jailbroken .
Unencumbered , it could be a really neat toy.The main thing is that Apple has n't made a compelling case for buying one .
With the iPhone , the case was obvious .
The smartphone market was already there .
They made owning a smartphone cool , expanded the market , and took almost all of the new new marketshare.What 's compelling about the iPad ?
About as much as was compelling about the Macbook Air .
They 've created a product which needs to create a market in order to survive .
The Air failed to create that market .
Will the iPad ?
I do n't know , but like I said , I doubt it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm betting that it is closer to "flop" than "raging success.
"  But I'm no market analyst, so who knows?
And that said, I'm very tempted to buy one.
I'll almost certainly buy one if they become jailbroken.
Unencumbered, it could be a really neat toy.The main thing is that Apple hasn't made a compelling case for buying one.
With the iPhone, the case was obvious.
The smartphone market was already there.
They made owning a smartphone cool, expanded the market, and took almost all of the new new marketshare.What's compelling about the iPad?
About as much as was compelling about the Macbook Air.
They've created a product which needs to create a market in order to survive.
The Air failed to create that market.
Will the iPad?
I don't know, but like I said, I doubt it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143668</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31148920</id>
	<title>Re:The List</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266230160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>First of all, the worst Apple product ever is without any doubt the Performa 5200, but not the whole performa line.</p></div></blockquote><p>Hell, what was so bad about the 5200 even? Seems if the list had to include Performa, the article was reaching pretty hard. We're not talking lemons here like WinMe, we're talking machines that just weren't great from a geek point of view. They worked okay as general consumer machines, though I thought they were rather expensive.</p><p>I<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/can/ bitch about the beige era. Opening those boxes and monitors with all their secret-handshake tabs to avoid the odd sensible machine bolt was the worst sort of inbred designer-wants-award-from-other-designers crap. That still makes me twitch when I think about it. But they worked. People used them, people mostly liked them. They were okay, just not great. A "worst" list ought to be about real stinkers.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>First of all , the worst Apple product ever is without any doubt the Performa 5200 , but not the whole performa line.Hell , what was so bad about the 5200 even ?
Seems if the list had to include Performa , the article was reaching pretty hard .
We 're not talking lemons here like WinMe , we 're talking machines that just were n't great from a geek point of view .
They worked okay as general consumer machines , though I thought they were rather expensive.I /can/ bitch about the beige era .
Opening those boxes and monitors with all their secret-handshake tabs to avoid the odd sensible machine bolt was the worst sort of inbred designer-wants-award-from-other-designers crap .
That still makes me twitch when I think about it .
But they worked .
People used them , people mostly liked them .
They were okay , just not great .
A " worst " list ought to be about real stinkers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>First of all, the worst Apple product ever is without any doubt the Performa 5200, but not the whole performa line.Hell, what was so bad about the 5200 even?
Seems if the list had to include Performa, the article was reaching pretty hard.
We're not talking lemons here like WinMe, we're talking machines that just weren't great from a geek point of view.
They worked okay as general consumer machines, though I thought they were rather expensive.I /can/ bitch about the beige era.
Opening those boxes and monitors with all their secret-handshake tabs to avoid the odd sensible machine bolt was the worst sort of inbred designer-wants-award-from-other-designers crap.
That still makes me twitch when I think about it.
But they worked.
People used them, people mostly liked them.
They were okay, just not great.
A "worst" list ought to be about real stinkers.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143306</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31153644</id>
	<title>Re:All of thier mice suck</title>
	<author>blind biker</author>
	<datestamp>1266318780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have a biased view on this, as I work with blind and visually impaired people, but anyhow: Apple keyboards suck bigtime, because it's extremely difficult to differentiate the keys by just touch. They are purposely made to be all alike. The Enter key is almost exactly like any other, except a bit longer - this is NOT enough for a touch-typist to distinguish it easily from other keys.</p><p>For reference, Thinkpads have excellent keyboards, on which one can type quite comfortably without looking at them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have a biased view on this , as I work with blind and visually impaired people , but anyhow : Apple keyboards suck bigtime , because it 's extremely difficult to differentiate the keys by just touch .
They are purposely made to be all alike .
The Enter key is almost exactly like any other , except a bit longer - this is NOT enough for a touch-typist to distinguish it easily from other keys.For reference , Thinkpads have excellent keyboards , on which one can type quite comfortably without looking at them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have a biased view on this, as I work with blind and visually impaired people, but anyhow: Apple keyboards suck bigtime, because it's extremely difficult to differentiate the keys by just touch.
They are purposely made to be all alike.
The Enter key is almost exactly like any other, except a bit longer - this is NOT enough for a touch-typist to distinguish it easily from other keys.For reference, Thinkpads have excellent keyboards, on which one can type quite comfortably without looking at them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143300</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31144334</id>
	<title>The Lisa?</title>
	<author>rickb928</author>
	<datestamp>1266251160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How did the Lisa not get first place?</p><p>This was such a great product it drove Apple's share price up amost 150\% in a few months.  And then drove it down almost 30\% from before.</p><p>Such a great product the leftovers were sold by liquidators.  Apple screwed that up by not crushing the last 5,000 or so.  That liquidator is actually still in business, wanna buy a nonworking apple-anything?  They got em!</p><p>The Lisa was such a pile it forced Apple to bail and expedite the Macintosh, which seems to have been the desperate answer to save the company from certain failure.  So, if you look at it that way, it saved the company by giving the Mac team the chance to deliver.</p><p>But the Lisa clearly is Numero Uno for Apple failures.  So far as I know, Apple didn't even use them internally.  Pure pus.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How did the Lisa not get first place ? This was such a great product it drove Apple 's share price up amost 150 \ % in a few months .
And then drove it down almost 30 \ % from before.Such a great product the leftovers were sold by liquidators .
Apple screwed that up by not crushing the last 5,000 or so .
That liquidator is actually still in business , wan na buy a nonworking apple-anything ?
They got em ! The Lisa was such a pile it forced Apple to bail and expedite the Macintosh , which seems to have been the desperate answer to save the company from certain failure .
So , if you look at it that way , it saved the company by giving the Mac team the chance to deliver.But the Lisa clearly is Numero Uno for Apple failures .
So far as I know , Apple did n't even use them internally .
Pure pus .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How did the Lisa not get first place?This was such a great product it drove Apple's share price up amost 150\% in a few months.
And then drove it down almost 30\% from before.Such a great product the leftovers were sold by liquidators.
Apple screwed that up by not crushing the last 5,000 or so.
That liquidator is actually still in business, wanna buy a nonworking apple-anything?
They got em!The Lisa was such a pile it forced Apple to bail and expedite the Macintosh, which seems to have been the desperate answer to save the company from certain failure.
So, if you look at it that way, it saved the company by giving the Mac team the chance to deliver.But the Lisa clearly is Numero Uno for Apple failures.
So far as I know, Apple didn't even use them internally.
Pure pus.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31146708</id>
	<title>Re:All of thier mice suck</title>
	<author>Sandbags</author>
	<datestamp>1266262560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Lisa was revolutionary, it was the PRICE that sucked big time.  A basic PC for a student, a school, or a small office that didn't need complex spreadsheets or graphically impressive documents was about half the price.  Apple misjudged how people would quantify the value of WYSIWYG, and overpriced and over engineered the system (not to mention bundling in too much R&amp;D cost into the initial run).</p><p>The Lisa and the Macintosh XL were virtually the same.  The Macintosh (original) was a different OS platform completely (different ROM) , and was far less powerful (though it was slightly faster in terms of CPU, having aged 2 years).  The big separation between Lisa and Macintosh was the Lisa was a workstation class machine, and the Mac was a home computer.  It even had a HDD, Protected Memory (not otherwise available until OS X!), virtual memory, and cooperative multitasking.  The OS was a bit more complex than the Mac OS, but better in many ways.</p><p>We did not trade ours in for a Mac Plus, as many other people did (which included a cash rebate in addition to the trade), as there was no easy way to convert the lisa files we'd created into Mac files, and we had a TON of work on it.  Instead, we actually bough a Mac to go beside it, and started a slow process of remaking all our docs on the Mac.  We sold the Lisa to a museum in 2006, it still worked.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Lisa was revolutionary , it was the PRICE that sucked big time .
A basic PC for a student , a school , or a small office that did n't need complex spreadsheets or graphically impressive documents was about half the price .
Apple misjudged how people would quantify the value of WYSIWYG , and overpriced and over engineered the system ( not to mention bundling in too much R&amp;D cost into the initial run ) .The Lisa and the Macintosh XL were virtually the same .
The Macintosh ( original ) was a different OS platform completely ( different ROM ) , and was far less powerful ( though it was slightly faster in terms of CPU , having aged 2 years ) .
The big separation between Lisa and Macintosh was the Lisa was a workstation class machine , and the Mac was a home computer .
It even had a HDD , Protected Memory ( not otherwise available until OS X !
) , virtual memory , and cooperative multitasking .
The OS was a bit more complex than the Mac OS , but better in many ways.We did not trade ours in for a Mac Plus , as many other people did ( which included a cash rebate in addition to the trade ) , as there was no easy way to convert the lisa files we 'd created into Mac files , and we had a TON of work on it .
Instead , we actually bough a Mac to go beside it , and started a slow process of remaking all our docs on the Mac .
We sold the Lisa to a museum in 2006 , it still worked .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Lisa was revolutionary, it was the PRICE that sucked big time.
A basic PC for a student, a school, or a small office that didn't need complex spreadsheets or graphically impressive documents was about half the price.
Apple misjudged how people would quantify the value of WYSIWYG, and overpriced and over engineered the system (not to mention bundling in too much R&amp;D cost into the initial run).The Lisa and the Macintosh XL were virtually the same.
The Macintosh (original) was a different OS platform completely (different ROM) , and was far less powerful (though it was slightly faster in terms of CPU, having aged 2 years).
The big separation between Lisa and Macintosh was the Lisa was a workstation class machine, and the Mac was a home computer.
It even had a HDD, Protected Memory (not otherwise available until OS X!
), virtual memory, and cooperative multitasking.
The OS was a bit more complex than the Mac OS, but better in many ways.We did not trade ours in for a Mac Plus, as many other people did (which included a cash rebate in addition to the trade), as there was no easy way to convert the lisa files we'd created into Mac files, and we had a TON of work on it.
Instead, we actually bough a Mac to go beside it, and started a slow process of remaking all our docs on the Mac.
We sold the Lisa to a museum in 2006, it still worked.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143106</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31144890</id>
	<title>Re:The List</title>
	<author>Hatta</author>
	<datestamp>1266253380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>For once, it's a top ten list that's all on one page.  Go ahead, click through, it won't hurt!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For once , it 's a top ten list that 's all on one page .
Go ahead , click through , it wo n't hurt !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For once, it's a top ten list that's all on one page.
Go ahead, click through, it won't hurt!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143092</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31146072</id>
	<title>Forgive my ennui...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266259260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>but heated, passionate "discussion" over product marketing (90\% of which could be quite accurately described as "useless junk", much like the opinions it generates) has finally become a tedious bore to me. I choose to perceive this as a watershed in my character development- a moment in which the choice of subject concentration has become very clear. And it ain't Mac vs. Windows. Just sayin.</htmltext>
<tokenext>but heated , passionate " discussion " over product marketing ( 90 \ % of which could be quite accurately described as " useless junk " , much like the opinions it generates ) has finally become a tedious bore to me .
I choose to perceive this as a watershed in my character development- a moment in which the choice of subject concentration has become very clear .
And it ai n't Mac vs. Windows. Just sayin .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>but heated, passionate "discussion" over product marketing (90\% of which could be quite accurately described as "useless junk", much like the opinions it generates) has finally become a tedious bore to me.
I choose to perceive this as a watershed in my character development- a moment in which the choice of subject concentration has become very clear.
And it ain't Mac vs. Windows. Just sayin.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31145234</id>
	<title>Re:Not all the items listed were failures..</title>
	<author>Alomex</author>
	<datestamp>1266255060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>By the time Apple adopted the PowerPC it had become clear that Intel would remain ahead of the curve in the processor wars. Yes, the powerPC design was cleaner, but Intel's massive R&amp;D resources and silent adoption of RISC principles ensured their dominance in the microprocessor market.</p><p>If you are a struggling football team do you hitch your wagon to a falling star (Jay Cutler) or to a rising one (Drew Brees, highest rated QB in the last four years)?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>By the time Apple adopted the PowerPC it had become clear that Intel would remain ahead of the curve in the processor wars .
Yes , the powerPC design was cleaner , but Intel 's massive R&amp;D resources and silent adoption of RISC principles ensured their dominance in the microprocessor market.If you are a struggling football team do you hitch your wagon to a falling star ( Jay Cutler ) or to a rising one ( Drew Brees , highest rated QB in the last four years ) ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>By the time Apple adopted the PowerPC it had become clear that Intel would remain ahead of the curve in the processor wars.
Yes, the powerPC design was cleaner, but Intel's massive R&amp;D resources and silent adoption of RISC principles ensured their dominance in the microprocessor market.If you are a struggling football team do you hitch your wagon to a falling star (Jay Cutler) or to a rising one (Drew Brees, highest rated QB in the last four years)?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143324</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31144536</id>
	<title>Anonymous Coward</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266252000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Getting kinda tired at seeing these. It seems like every 2 weeks someone posts a thread on some site about "The top ten worst Apple products". You really have nothing better to do than reread the same list of the Newton, Lisa, Apple III, and now the iPad. The worst Apple product of all time is now officially iTunes. It's slow, bloated. and does entirely too much for a music player. I realize Apple is trying to market it as a multimedia player, but that's functionality I don't want for something originally designed to play music. It undermines the duties of Quicktime or whatever I choose to replace the standard video player with.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Getting kinda tired at seeing these .
It seems like every 2 weeks someone posts a thread on some site about " The top ten worst Apple products " .
You really have nothing better to do than reread the same list of the Newton , Lisa , Apple III , and now the iPad .
The worst Apple product of all time is now officially iTunes .
It 's slow , bloated .
and does entirely too much for a music player .
I realize Apple is trying to market it as a multimedia player , but that 's functionality I do n't want for something originally designed to play music .
It undermines the duties of Quicktime or whatever I choose to replace the standard video player with .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Getting kinda tired at seeing these.
It seems like every 2 weeks someone posts a thread on some site about "The top ten worst Apple products".
You really have nothing better to do than reread the same list of the Newton, Lisa, Apple III, and now the iPad.
The worst Apple product of all time is now officially iTunes.
It's slow, bloated.
and does entirely too much for a music player.
I realize Apple is trying to market it as a multimedia player, but that's functionality I don't want for something originally designed to play music.
It undermines the duties of Quicktime or whatever I choose to replace the standard video player with.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143846</id>
	<title>Re:Hasn't been out long enough yet</title>
	<author>flyneye</author>
	<datestamp>1266248520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So it is safe to say<nobr> <wbr></nobr>,you could be an advocate of the ''Yugo", which sold a lot in the states and turned out to be as disposable as a kleenex.<br>Welding the heads on an engine that wears itself to scrap inside a couple years is a way to "Think Different", I guess.<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; '</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So it is safe to say ,you could be an advocate of the ''Yugo " , which sold a lot in the states and turned out to be as disposable as a kleenex.Welding the heads on an engine that wears itself to scrap inside a couple years is a way to " Think Different " , I guess .
          '</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So it is safe to say ,you could be an advocate of the ''Yugo", which sold a lot in the states and turned out to be as disposable as a kleenex.Welding the heads on an engine that wears itself to scrap inside a couple years is a way to "Think Different", I guess.
          '</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143254</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143134</id>
	<title>Mobile Me?</title>
	<author>albyrne5</author>
	<datestamp>1266243240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>I made the switch to Apple about 2 years ago - iPhone, iMac and Mac Book Pro, and I've been very very pleased with almost every single aspect.
<br>
<br>
EXCEPT FOR MOBILE ME!
<br>
<br>

It's f***ing DOG-DIRT! Whether it's sync issues or the server dying, or e-mails vanishing into thin air; there's always SOMETHING going wrong with the goddamn thing.
<br>
<br>

And I keep holding on thinking, "well they're bound to get it right sooner or later", but it's later and later and later, and still no sign of it ever being fixed. Drives me batty.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I made the switch to Apple about 2 years ago - iPhone , iMac and Mac Book Pro , and I 've been very very pleased with almost every single aspect .
EXCEPT FOR MOBILE ME !
It 's f * * * ing DOG-DIRT !
Whether it 's sync issues or the server dying , or e-mails vanishing into thin air ; there 's always SOMETHING going wrong with the goddamn thing .
And I keep holding on thinking , " well they 're bound to get it right sooner or later " , but it 's later and later and later , and still no sign of it ever being fixed .
Drives me batty .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I made the switch to Apple about 2 years ago - iPhone, iMac and Mac Book Pro, and I've been very very pleased with almost every single aspect.
EXCEPT FOR MOBILE ME!
It's f***ing DOG-DIRT!
Whether it's sync issues or the server dying, or e-mails vanishing into thin air; there's always SOMETHING going wrong with the goddamn thing.
And I keep holding on thinking, "well they're bound to get it right sooner or later", but it's later and later and later, and still no sign of it ever being fixed.
Drives me batty.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31145086</id>
	<title>Re:The List</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266254400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm surprised that the Lisa did not show up on the list.  At the time it became the favorite whipping boy . . . like the newton it was a really great concept, ahead of the technology, but both have informed the products that are great successes today.  So hindsight took both off the list perhaps.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm surprised that the Lisa did not show up on the list .
At the time it became the favorite whipping boy .
. .
like the newton it was a really great concept , ahead of the technology , but both have informed the products that are great successes today .
So hindsight took both off the list perhaps .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm surprised that the Lisa did not show up on the list.
At the time it became the favorite whipping boy .
. .
like the newton it was a really great concept, ahead of the technology, but both have informed the products that are great successes today.
So hindsight took both off the list perhaps.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143092</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31146860</id>
	<title>Re:The List</title>
	<author>chthonicdaemon</author>
	<datestamp>1266263340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Strangely, I am very happy with the shuffle.  I use it for running and find the on-wire controls far easier to use than on device ones.  Turns out that I am not alone, as the shuffle seems to be selling well.  The only real measure of product failure is bad sales.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Strangely , I am very happy with the shuffle .
I use it for running and find the on-wire controls far easier to use than on device ones .
Turns out that I am not alone , as the shuffle seems to be selling well .
The only real measure of product failure is bad sales .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Strangely, I am very happy with the shuffle.
I use it for running and find the on-wire controls far easier to use than on device ones.
Turns out that I am not alone, as the shuffle seems to be selling well.
The only real measure of product failure is bad sales.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143256</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31146770</id>
	<title>Re:Mobile Me?</title>
	<author>Sandbags</author>
	<datestamp>1266262920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We've been on Mobileme since the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.Mac years, about the time OS X 10.3 came out.  Never had any issues with it, other than some post-launch bugs with mobileme in 2008.</p><p>Certainly no issues with e-mail (Mom and Dad use it as their primary accounts, My wife uses it as her secondary).  Syncing is sometimes wierd, but usually only when there's very little space on the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.mac drive.</p><p>I'm expecting a huge cut in the price (down to $39 a year if not 29), an again doubling if not more of the storage (I think up to 100GB per account soon), much tighter integration with the iPad, and more.  There's a lot coming from Apple's cloud computing initiatives, and current mobileme users are going to reap some big benefits at cut over for their loyalty I'm sure.  Improved online backups, new iWeb with a more web 2.0 focus, better integration with flicker/facebook/etc, streaming services, back-2-my-mac improvements, and more.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We 've been on Mobileme since the .Mac years , about the time OS X 10.3 came out .
Never had any issues with it , other than some post-launch bugs with mobileme in 2008.Certainly no issues with e-mail ( Mom and Dad use it as their primary accounts , My wife uses it as her secondary ) .
Syncing is sometimes wierd , but usually only when there 's very little space on the .mac drive.I 'm expecting a huge cut in the price ( down to $ 39 a year if not 29 ) , an again doubling if not more of the storage ( I think up to 100GB per account soon ) , much tighter integration with the iPad , and more .
There 's a lot coming from Apple 's cloud computing initiatives , and current mobileme users are going to reap some big benefits at cut over for their loyalty I 'm sure .
Improved online backups , new iWeb with a more web 2.0 focus , better integration with flicker/facebook/etc , streaming services , back-2-my-mac improvements , and more .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We've been on Mobileme since the .Mac years, about the time OS X 10.3 came out.
Never had any issues with it, other than some post-launch bugs with mobileme in 2008.Certainly no issues with e-mail (Mom and Dad use it as their primary accounts, My wife uses it as her secondary).
Syncing is sometimes wierd, but usually only when there's very little space on the .mac drive.I'm expecting a huge cut in the price (down to $39 a year if not 29), an again doubling if not more of the storage (I think up to 100GB per account soon), much tighter integration with the iPad, and more.
There's a lot coming from Apple's cloud computing initiatives, and current mobileme users are going to reap some big benefits at cut over for their loyalty I'm sure.
Improved online backups, new iWeb with a more web 2.0 focus, better integration with flicker/facebook/etc, streaming services, back-2-my-mac improvements, and more.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143134</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31145336</id>
	<title>"timothy" needs a new hobby</title>
	<author>bsandersen</author>
	<datestamp>1266255480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If this posting looks familiar, it is. With a minimum of effort I found these three (including the latest).

"The worst Apple products of all time", Feb 15, 2010 [posted by timothy].
"Apple's first flops", May 17, 2005 [posted by timothy].
"Top 10 Apple Flops", Jan 31, 2005 [posted by timothy].

Um, "timothy", can we stop rehashing stuff that happened 25 years ago?</htmltext>
<tokenext>If this posting looks familiar , it is .
With a minimum of effort I found these three ( including the latest ) .
" The worst Apple products of all time " , Feb 15 , 2010 [ posted by timothy ] .
" Apple 's first flops " , May 17 , 2005 [ posted by timothy ] .
" Top 10 Apple Flops " , Jan 31 , 2005 [ posted by timothy ] .
Um , " timothy " , can we stop rehashing stuff that happened 25 years ago ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If this posting looks familiar, it is.
With a minimum of effort I found these three (including the latest).
"The worst Apple products of all time", Feb 15, 2010 [posted by timothy].
"Apple's first flops", May 17, 2005 [posted by timothy].
"Top 10 Apple Flops", Jan 31, 2005 [posted by timothy].
Um, "timothy", can we stop rehashing stuff that happened 25 years ago?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143668</id>
	<title>I am betting iPad will succeed.</title>
	<author>guidryp</author>
	<datestamp>1266247620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Aside from your point that it is too soon to call a flop, when it isn't even on the market, I suspect it will do quite well.</p><p>I want one for myself and it will be my first Apple anything. I don't think in terms of laptop vs iPad. The iPad is a complementary device for e-reading/couch surfing, seems absolutely the PERFECT reader for comics (.CBZ/.CBR). I haven't figured out everything I will do with it, but already enough that I plan to buy as soon as I can get one (well after a hands on to verify I really like it).</p><p>I note the one who called iPad flop was an anonymous coward. A non slashdotter, or someone without the courage to have their prediction on record?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Aside from your point that it is too soon to call a flop , when it is n't even on the market , I suspect it will do quite well.I want one for myself and it will be my first Apple anything .
I do n't think in terms of laptop vs iPad .
The iPad is a complementary device for e-reading/couch surfing , seems absolutely the PERFECT reader for comics ( .CBZ/.CBR ) .
I have n't figured out everything I will do with it , but already enough that I plan to buy as soon as I can get one ( well after a hands on to verify I really like it ) .I note the one who called iPad flop was an anonymous coward .
A non slashdotter , or someone without the courage to have their prediction on record ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Aside from your point that it is too soon to call a flop, when it isn't even on the market, I suspect it will do quite well.I want one for myself and it will be my first Apple anything.
I don't think in terms of laptop vs iPad.
The iPad is a complementary device for e-reading/couch surfing, seems absolutely the PERFECT reader for comics (.CBZ/.CBR).
I haven't figured out everything I will do with it, but already enough that I plan to buy as soon as I can get one (well after a hands on to verify I really like it).I note the one who called iPad flop was an anonymous coward.
A non slashdotter, or someone without the courage to have their prediction on record?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143254</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31144632</id>
	<title>Re:The List</title>
	<author>fprintf</author>
	<datestamp>1266252300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We love our iPod Hi-Fi. The sounds is decent enough and is way better than any of the competing products that were available at the time (iHome among others). Sure we could have easily hooked up the iPod through a dock to the stereo, but we like the remote control but especially how it looks on the table top. And iPod in a dock hooked up to the non-remote-enabled stereo would have been worse.  I am still a fan of it!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We love our iPod Hi-Fi .
The sounds is decent enough and is way better than any of the competing products that were available at the time ( iHome among others ) .
Sure we could have easily hooked up the iPod through a dock to the stereo , but we like the remote control but especially how it looks on the table top .
And iPod in a dock hooked up to the non-remote-enabled stereo would have been worse .
I am still a fan of it !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We love our iPod Hi-Fi.
The sounds is decent enough and is way better than any of the competing products that were available at the time (iHome among others).
Sure we could have easily hooked up the iPod through a dock to the stereo, but we like the remote control but especially how it looks on the table top.
And iPod in a dock hooked up to the non-remote-enabled stereo would have been worse.
I am still a fan of it!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143092</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143300</id>
	<title>Re:All of thier mice suck</title>
	<author>beelsebob</author>
	<datestamp>1266244800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I agree totally that their mice suck, but I adore their keyboards.  To offset the mouse bit too &ndash; their track pads are by far the best in the business.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I agree totally that their mice suck , but I adore their keyboards .
To offset the mouse bit too    their track pads are by far the best in the business .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I agree totally that their mice suck, but I adore their keyboards.
To offset the mouse bit too – their track pads are by far the best in the business.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143106</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31144316</id>
	<title>Re:Mobile Me?</title>
	<author>Cronock</author>
	<datestamp>1266251100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Works great for me too, though it's overpriced like crazy.  I sync multiple macs and my phone.  I've had a couple hiccups with syncing, but so is the nature of syncing.  For the price it needs more of something... though I don't know what they can offer.  It's in dire need of a name change though.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Works great for me too , though it 's overpriced like crazy .
I sync multiple macs and my phone .
I 've had a couple hiccups with syncing , but so is the nature of syncing .
For the price it needs more of something... though I do n't know what they can offer .
It 's in dire need of a name change though .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Works great for me too, though it's overpriced like crazy.
I sync multiple macs and my phone.
I've had a couple hiccups with syncing, but so is the nature of syncing.
For the price it needs more of something... though I don't know what they can offer.
It's in dire need of a name change though.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143134</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143154</id>
	<title>Laptops</title>
	<author>Nerdfest</author>
	<datestamp>1266243420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's strange that the early multi-coloured iMac laptops are not on the list. I still have nightmares of the semi-transparent coloured plastic fad those things 'inspired'. I think I might vote for those as the ugliest computer ever designed. It's especially strange given that the later laptops are some of the nicest looking machines around.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's strange that the early multi-coloured iMac laptops are not on the list .
I still have nightmares of the semi-transparent coloured plastic fad those things 'inspired' .
I think I might vote for those as the ugliest computer ever designed .
It 's especially strange given that the later laptops are some of the nicest looking machines around .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's strange that the early multi-coloured iMac laptops are not on the list.
I still have nightmares of the semi-transparent coloured plastic fad those things 'inspired'.
I think I might vote for those as the ugliest computer ever designed.
It's especially strange given that the later laptops are some of the nicest looking machines around.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143254</id>
	<title>Hasn't been out long enough yet</title>
	<author>Sycraft-fu</author>
	<datestamp>1266244320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A product can only be bad if it doesn't sell. No matter how worthless the functionality is, if a product generates a lot of sales and thus a lot of profits, it is a success from a business point of view. The pet rock is a great example. No utility, whatsoever. It is just a rock with goggle eyes glued on it. However people loved the thing, tons were sold, lots of money was made. It was a success.</p><p>So, the iPad's status will be determined later. If it sells tons, then it'll be a success, even if the people who buy it just end up using it as an expensive cup holder. If it has few sales, it'll most likely be a failure since it doesn't seem to have anything that will generate any advances over all.</p><p>You have to remember that can also be a factor in success. Just because something doesn't make money doesn't mean it is a failure. An example would be the original Xbox. Overall, MS lost money on the venture. However it was a success. Why? Because it established them as a legit player in the console market, which is extremely difficult to break in to (many, many companies have tried and failed). Thus it was still a successful product in the long run.</p><p>So we can't say about the iPad till much later. Personally, I suspect it'll be a failure. I suspect it won't make much, if any, money (remember there's a lot of R&amp;D to pay off) and it'll provide nothing to Apple overall in the long run. However, we won't be able to say for a couple years at least.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A product can only be bad if it does n't sell .
No matter how worthless the functionality is , if a product generates a lot of sales and thus a lot of profits , it is a success from a business point of view .
The pet rock is a great example .
No utility , whatsoever .
It is just a rock with goggle eyes glued on it .
However people loved the thing , tons were sold , lots of money was made .
It was a success.So , the iPad 's status will be determined later .
If it sells tons , then it 'll be a success , even if the people who buy it just end up using it as an expensive cup holder .
If it has few sales , it 'll most likely be a failure since it does n't seem to have anything that will generate any advances over all.You have to remember that can also be a factor in success .
Just because something does n't make money does n't mean it is a failure .
An example would be the original Xbox .
Overall , MS lost money on the venture .
However it was a success .
Why ? Because it established them as a legit player in the console market , which is extremely difficult to break in to ( many , many companies have tried and failed ) .
Thus it was still a successful product in the long run.So we ca n't say about the iPad till much later .
Personally , I suspect it 'll be a failure .
I suspect it wo n't make much , if any , money ( remember there 's a lot of R&amp;D to pay off ) and it 'll provide nothing to Apple overall in the long run .
However , we wo n't be able to say for a couple years at least .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A product can only be bad if it doesn't sell.
No matter how worthless the functionality is, if a product generates a lot of sales and thus a lot of profits, it is a success from a business point of view.
The pet rock is a great example.
No utility, whatsoever.
It is just a rock with goggle eyes glued on it.
However people loved the thing, tons were sold, lots of money was made.
It was a success.So, the iPad's status will be determined later.
If it sells tons, then it'll be a success, even if the people who buy it just end up using it as an expensive cup holder.
If it has few sales, it'll most likely be a failure since it doesn't seem to have anything that will generate any advances over all.You have to remember that can also be a factor in success.
Just because something doesn't make money doesn't mean it is a failure.
An example would be the original Xbox.
Overall, MS lost money on the venture.
However it was a success.
Why? Because it established them as a legit player in the console market, which is extremely difficult to break in to (many, many companies have tried and failed).
Thus it was still a successful product in the long run.So we can't say about the iPad till much later.
Personally, I suspect it'll be a failure.
I suspect it won't make much, if any, money (remember there's a lot of R&amp;D to pay off) and it'll provide nothing to Apple overall in the long run.
However, we won't be able to say for a couple years at least.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143070</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31145206</id>
	<title>Re:A friend of mine who's a diehard fan...</title>
	<author>Hatta</author>
	<datestamp>1266254880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The Apple II is still a ton of fun to use. Great for games and programming.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Apple II is still a ton of fun to use .
Great for games and programming .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Apple II is still a ton of fun to use.
Great for games and programming.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143228</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143786</id>
	<title>Mac Clone</title>
	<author>jimbolauski</author>
	<datestamp>1266248160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Why isn't the mac clone line on here that was the largest disaster in Apple.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why is n't the mac clone line on here that was the largest disaster in Apple .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why isn't the mac clone line on here that was the largest disaster in Apple.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143092</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143324</id>
	<title>Not all the items listed were failures..</title>
	<author>kangsterizer</author>
	<datestamp>1266245040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Disclaimer:<br>- i did RTFA (it happens!)<br>- i know Apple history<br>- i'm not Apple fan and don't own any Apple product (anymore) actually</p><p>Anyways..</p><p>PowerPC:</p><p>PowerPC was not a failure. PowerPC's were sold by IBM in their POWER architectures and had quite a bit of success there as well. They were quick, worked well, and they allowed the transition for Apple. If apple went x86 back then, there might have been no apple today. The only "failure" would have been the G5, or in fact, the lack of G6.<br>Undelivered promises of updates, for 2 years, and Apple had to switch to Intel.</p><p>MacOS 9:<br>TFA is confusing MacOS 8 with Copland (MacOS 8 original codename).<br>Copland was from-scratch operating system, with true preemptive multitasking and most of the things we're used to today.<br>It took ages and never got completed (in fact, the failure here, was Copland).<br>Apple released instead MacOS 8 and subsequent updates with partial features of Copland, but no rewrite. MacOS 9 was the last of the serie, nothing more, nothing less (MacOS 9.2.2). On top of that, it is the only MacOS that could run natively inside OSX. MacOS classic pionnered todays GUI.</p><p>20th anniversary Mac:<br>exclusive, high priced item, for collectors.. that the author has mistaken for a consumer level product. don't really need to say more. (actually ill quote: "the issue here is not the product but that it was released during a financial crisis" then "i know the financial crisis was not related to the 20th mac".. yeah well keep on contradicting yourself just to add 1 product to the list")</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Disclaimer : - i did RTFA ( it happens !
) - i know Apple history- i 'm not Apple fan and do n't own any Apple product ( anymore ) actuallyAnyways..PowerPC : PowerPC was not a failure .
PowerPC 's were sold by IBM in their POWER architectures and had quite a bit of success there as well .
They were quick , worked well , and they allowed the transition for Apple .
If apple went x86 back then , there might have been no apple today .
The only " failure " would have been the G5 , or in fact , the lack of G6.Undelivered promises of updates , for 2 years , and Apple had to switch to Intel.MacOS 9 : TFA is confusing MacOS 8 with Copland ( MacOS 8 original codename ) .Copland was from-scratch operating system , with true preemptive multitasking and most of the things we 're used to today.It took ages and never got completed ( in fact , the failure here , was Copland ) .Apple released instead MacOS 8 and subsequent updates with partial features of Copland , but no rewrite .
MacOS 9 was the last of the serie , nothing more , nothing less ( MacOS 9.2.2 ) .
On top of that , it is the only MacOS that could run natively inside OSX .
MacOS classic pionnered todays GUI.20th anniversary Mac : exclusive , high priced item , for collectors.. that the author has mistaken for a consumer level product .
do n't really need to say more .
( actually ill quote : " the issue here is not the product but that it was released during a financial crisis " then " i know the financial crisis was not related to the 20th mac " .. yeah well keep on contradicting yourself just to add 1 product to the list " )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Disclaimer:- i did RTFA (it happens!
)- i know Apple history- i'm not Apple fan and don't own any Apple product (anymore) actuallyAnyways..PowerPC:PowerPC was not a failure.
PowerPC's were sold by IBM in their POWER architectures and had quite a bit of success there as well.
They were quick, worked well, and they allowed the transition for Apple.
If apple went x86 back then, there might have been no apple today.
The only "failure" would have been the G5, or in fact, the lack of G6.Undelivered promises of updates, for 2 years, and Apple had to switch to Intel.MacOS 9:TFA is confusing MacOS 8 with Copland (MacOS 8 original codename).Copland was from-scratch operating system, with true preemptive multitasking and most of the things we're used to today.It took ages and never got completed (in fact, the failure here, was Copland).Apple released instead MacOS 8 and subsequent updates with partial features of Copland, but no rewrite.
MacOS 9 was the last of the serie, nothing more, nothing less (MacOS 9.2.2).
On top of that, it is the only MacOS that could run natively inside OSX.
MacOS classic pionnered todays GUI.20th anniversary Mac:exclusive, high priced item, for collectors.. that the author has mistaken for a consumer level product.
don't really need to say more.
(actually ill quote: "the issue here is not the product but that it was released during a financial crisis" then "i know the financial crisis was not related to the 20th mac".. yeah well keep on contradicting yourself just to add 1 product to the list")
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143470</id>
	<title>They forgot to mention...</title>
	<author>kevingolding2001</author>
	<datestamp>1266246240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... Every single mouse ever produced by Apple. Ever!</p><p>C'mon Steve, get over your button-o-phobia already!</p><p>TWO is the right number for buttons a mouse. Two buttons, one on each side of the mouse, with definite clicky tactile feedback.</p><p>Not one big clicky button in the middle (with no right click).</p><p>Not some vague number of buttons with zero tactile feedback and random results if a stray finger is slightly touching the mouse somewhere else.</p><p>TWO! BUTTONS! THAT CLICK!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... Every single mouse ever produced by Apple .
Ever ! C'mon Steve , get over your button-o-phobia already ! TWO is the right number for buttons a mouse .
Two buttons , one on each side of the mouse , with definite clicky tactile feedback.Not one big clicky button in the middle ( with no right click ) .Not some vague number of buttons with zero tactile feedback and random results if a stray finger is slightly touching the mouse somewhere else.TWO !
BUTTONS ! THAT CLICK !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... Every single mouse ever produced by Apple.
Ever!C'mon Steve, get over your button-o-phobia already!TWO is the right number for buttons a mouse.
Two buttons, one on each side of the mouse, with definite clicky tactile feedback.Not one big clicky button in the middle (with no right click).Not some vague number of buttons with zero tactile feedback and random results if a stray finger is slightly touching the mouse somewhere else.TWO!
BUTTONS! THAT CLICK!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143744</id>
	<title>Re:Hardcore repair methods</title>
	<author>azalin</author>
	<datestamp>1266247980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I once was riding in a russian electric bus (interesting concept btw.). The door didn't close completly, so the driver got out and gave it a few good kicks. On of our local friends turned around and said with a smile (insert strong accent here): "Russian technology".<br>That really made our day</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I once was riding in a russian electric bus ( interesting concept btw. ) .
The door did n't close completly , so the driver got out and gave it a few good kicks .
On of our local friends turned around and said with a smile ( insert strong accent here ) : " Russian technology " .That really made our day</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I once was riding in a russian electric bus (interesting concept btw.).
The door didn't close completly, so the driver got out and gave it a few good kicks.
On of our local friends turned around and said with a smile (insert strong accent here): "Russian technology".That really made our day</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143132</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143188</id>
	<title>No G4 Cube?</title>
	<author>alen</author>
	<datestamp>1266243660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>At least Apple learns from it's mistakes. they finally found a home for the cube/box computer as the Mac Mini and a lot of people like it. and if you look at almost everything Steve Jobs has built over the years starting from the 1980's, it's like he's making the same computer over and over again. everything in one unit except for the keyboard and mouse</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>At least Apple learns from it 's mistakes .
they finally found a home for the cube/box computer as the Mac Mini and a lot of people like it .
and if you look at almost everything Steve Jobs has built over the years starting from the 1980 's , it 's like he 's making the same computer over and over again .
everything in one unit except for the keyboard and mouse</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At least Apple learns from it's mistakes.
they finally found a home for the cube/box computer as the Mac Mini and a lot of people like it.
and if you look at almost everything Steve Jobs has built over the years starting from the 1980's, it's like he's making the same computer over and over again.
everything in one unit except for the keyboard and mouse</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31144120</id>
	<title>Re:How come...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266249960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>cuz nobody ever goes round actin like Dell is all cool an' shit, dawg.  apple people piss all the normal people off, we love to find a reason to say stuff that will make em squirm.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>cuz nobody ever goes round actin like Dell is all cool an ' shit , dawg .
apple people piss all the normal people off , we love to find a reason to say stuff that will make em squirm .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>cuz nobody ever goes round actin like Dell is all cool an' shit, dawg.
apple people piss all the normal people off, we love to find a reason to say stuff that will make em squirm.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143580</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143092</id>
	<title>The List</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266242820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>10 QuickTake <br>
9 Pippin <br>
8 iPod Hi-Fi <br>
7 Power PC <br>
6 Mac OS9 <br>
5 eWorld <br>
4 Performa line <br>
3 "Hockey Puck" mouse <br>
2 20th Anniversary Mac <br>
1 Apple III <br>
<br>
Honourable Mentions: Color Classic and the Mac Portable</htmltext>
<tokenext>10 QuickTake 9 Pippin 8 iPod Hi-Fi 7 Power PC 6 Mac OS9 5 eWorld 4 Performa line 3 " Hockey Puck " mouse 2 20th Anniversary Mac 1 Apple III Honourable Mentions : Color Classic and the Mac Portable</tokentext>
<sentencetext>10 QuickTake 
9 Pippin 
8 iPod Hi-Fi 
7 Power PC 
6 Mac OS9 
5 eWorld 
4 Performa line 
3 "Hockey Puck" mouse 
2 20th Anniversary Mac 
1 Apple III 

Honourable Mentions: Color Classic and the Mac Portable</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31157598</id>
	<title>Re:Laptops</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266346920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There's no such thing as an iMac laptop. iMacs are desktop computers with an all-in-one form factor.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's no such thing as an iMac laptop .
iMacs are desktop computers with an all-in-one form factor .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's no such thing as an iMac laptop.
iMacs are desktop computers with an all-in-one form factor.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143154</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31146980</id>
	<title>Re:Not all the items listed were failures..</title>
	<author>Sandbags</author>
	<datestamp>1266263820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Correct on most counts, nice retort.</p><p>However, Mac OS was not the pioneer of the GUI.  Lisa OS if anything was the start 2 years earlier, however, even this tipped a big hat and admittedly had significant influence from the Xerox Alto and PARC.  PARC introduced windows, radio buttons, and icons in the first WYSIWYG GUI.  Lisa added a contextual menu bar system on top of this work, as well as drag and drop.  System (1.0), the original Mac OS lacked many of Lisa's features, which would not be included until System 7, and some not until OS X 10.0...  system (1.0) even lacked an HFS file system instead using a flat file system.  System X (1-4) was a fairly limited GUI compared to the Lisa, unfortunately, the Lisa was more complicated, and it's hardware was more than double the price, and thus failed.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Correct on most counts , nice retort.However , Mac OS was not the pioneer of the GUI .
Lisa OS if anything was the start 2 years earlier , however , even this tipped a big hat and admittedly had significant influence from the Xerox Alto and PARC .
PARC introduced windows , radio buttons , and icons in the first WYSIWYG GUI .
Lisa added a contextual menu bar system on top of this work , as well as drag and drop .
System ( 1.0 ) , the original Mac OS lacked many of Lisa 's features , which would not be included until System 7 , and some not until OS X 10.0... system ( 1.0 ) even lacked an HFS file system instead using a flat file system .
System X ( 1-4 ) was a fairly limited GUI compared to the Lisa , unfortunately , the Lisa was more complicated , and it 's hardware was more than double the price , and thus failed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Correct on most counts, nice retort.However, Mac OS was not the pioneer of the GUI.
Lisa OS if anything was the start 2 years earlier, however, even this tipped a big hat and admittedly had significant influence from the Xerox Alto and PARC.
PARC introduced windows, radio buttons, and icons in the first WYSIWYG GUI.
Lisa added a contextual menu bar system on top of this work, as well as drag and drop.
System (1.0), the original Mac OS lacked many of Lisa's features, which would not be included until System 7, and some not until OS X 10.0...  system (1.0) even lacked an HFS file system instead using a flat file system.
System X (1-4) was a fairly limited GUI compared to the Lisa, unfortunately, the Lisa was more complicated, and it's hardware was more than double the price, and thus failed.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143324</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143288</id>
	<title>Re:All of thier mice suck</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266244740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Love their products in general.  MacPro and MacBook user myself but I hate their mice and their keyboards.  They both have always sucked</p></div><p>This is true.
</p><p>Missing item from the "worst" list is every Apple UK keyboard ever, which is just a US keyboard with the (#) key replaced by a (&pound;) key, leaving all sorts of punctuation keys in the US positions. Fail.
</p><p>I think the mouse problem is that you really need to go out and choose a mouse that fits your hand - Apple are constrained to (a) only having one or two models (b) making it one-size-fits-all and ambidextrous and (c) being obliged to make something "different" and "designer-y". Fortunately, for ages now, any PC USB mouse has worked fine, including multiple buttons and scroll wheels.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Love their products in general .
MacPro and MacBook user myself but I hate their mice and their keyboards .
They both have always suckedThis is true .
Missing item from the " worst " list is every Apple UK keyboard ever , which is just a US keyboard with the ( # ) key replaced by a (   ) key , leaving all sorts of punctuation keys in the US positions .
Fail . I think the mouse problem is that you really need to go out and choose a mouse that fits your hand - Apple are constrained to ( a ) only having one or two models ( b ) making it one-size-fits-all and ambidextrous and ( c ) being obliged to make something " different " and " designer-y " .
Fortunately , for ages now , any PC USB mouse has worked fine , including multiple buttons and scroll wheels .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Love their products in general.
MacPro and MacBook user myself but I hate their mice and their keyboards.
They both have always suckedThis is true.
Missing item from the "worst" list is every Apple UK keyboard ever, which is just a US keyboard with the (#) key replaced by a (£) key, leaving all sorts of punctuation keys in the US positions.
Fail.
I think the mouse problem is that you really need to go out and choose a mouse that fits your hand - Apple are constrained to (a) only having one or two models (b) making it one-size-fits-all and ambidextrous and (c) being obliged to make something "different" and "designer-y".
Fortunately, for ages now, any PC USB mouse has worked fine, including multiple buttons and scroll wheels.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143106</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143582</id>
	<title>Re:Not all the items listed were failures..</title>
	<author>mdwh2</author>
	<datestamp>1266247080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>exclusive, high priced item, for collectors.. that the author has mistaken for a consumer level product</i></p><p>But wait<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... I thought that was all Apple products?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>exclusive , high priced item , for collectors.. that the author has mistaken for a consumer level productBut wait ... I thought that was all Apple products ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>exclusive, high priced item, for collectors.. that the author has mistaken for a consumer level productBut wait ... I thought that was all Apple products?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143324</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143708</id>
	<title>The Snuggie</title>
	<author>jimbolauski</author>
	<datestamp>1266247800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>A product can only be bad if it doesn't sell. No matter how worthless the functionality is, if a product generates a lot of sales and thus a lot of profits, it is a success from a business point of view. </p></div><p>
So you think the snuggie was not a bad idea, it's high sales are a direct result of how awful it is.  The Phantom Menace was a great product according to you because of how well it did in the box office it's single day (Wensday) nearly beat Titanic's weekend gross.  Bad products can be popular, just because the masses purchase a product does not indicate that product is good or lacks suckyness.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>A product can only be bad if it does n't sell .
No matter how worthless the functionality is , if a product generates a lot of sales and thus a lot of profits , it is a success from a business point of view .
So you think the snuggie was not a bad idea , it 's high sales are a direct result of how awful it is .
The Phantom Menace was a great product according to you because of how well it did in the box office it 's single day ( Wensday ) nearly beat Titanic 's weekend gross .
Bad products can be popular , just because the masses purchase a product does not indicate that product is good or lacks suckyness .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A product can only be bad if it doesn't sell.
No matter how worthless the functionality is, if a product generates a lot of sales and thus a lot of profits, it is a success from a business point of view.
So you think the snuggie was not a bad idea, it's high sales are a direct result of how awful it is.
The Phantom Menace was a great product according to you because of how well it did in the box office it's single day (Wensday) nearly beat Titanic's weekend gross.
Bad products can be popular, just because the masses purchase a product does not indicate that product is good or lacks suckyness.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143254</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31147280</id>
	<title>Performa was bad?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266265200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I had a Performa with a 68040 CPU and a DOS card with a 486. It was fantastic. Flipping between environments took one keystroke, sharing data between the two was easy. I could run all the Mac apps and DOS/Windows 3.1 software I needed. It didn't cost that much and I got two computers for the price of one. On the "Mac side" I could have Netscape running for web and mail, listen to MPEG or CD audio, and on the "PC side" I could do programming. All at the same time.</p><p>What I didn't like was the software - Mac OS 7 (IIRC) was buggy. I spent so much time patching it and dealing with glitches. In fact it was so much of a hassle that I eventually moved to a Windows 95 machine years later. I read a few years ago that the Mac OS at that time was at its buggiest, and I certainly believe that.</p><p>Apple has made a lot of blunders, but the DOS-compatible Performa was brilliant.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I had a Performa with a 68040 CPU and a DOS card with a 486 .
It was fantastic .
Flipping between environments took one keystroke , sharing data between the two was easy .
I could run all the Mac apps and DOS/Windows 3.1 software I needed .
It did n't cost that much and I got two computers for the price of one .
On the " Mac side " I could have Netscape running for web and mail , listen to MPEG or CD audio , and on the " PC side " I could do programming .
All at the same time.What I did n't like was the software - Mac OS 7 ( IIRC ) was buggy .
I spent so much time patching it and dealing with glitches .
In fact it was so much of a hassle that I eventually moved to a Windows 95 machine years later .
I read a few years ago that the Mac OS at that time was at its buggiest , and I certainly believe that.Apple has made a lot of blunders , but the DOS-compatible Performa was brilliant .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I had a Performa with a 68040 CPU and a DOS card with a 486.
It was fantastic.
Flipping between environments took one keystroke, sharing data between the two was easy.
I could run all the Mac apps and DOS/Windows 3.1 software I needed.
It didn't cost that much and I got two computers for the price of one.
On the "Mac side" I could have Netscape running for web and mail, listen to MPEG or CD audio, and on the "PC side" I could do programming.
All at the same time.What I didn't like was the software - Mac OS 7 (IIRC) was buggy.
I spent so much time patching it and dealing with glitches.
In fact it was so much of a hassle that I eventually moved to a Windows 95 machine years later.
I read a few years ago that the Mac OS at that time was at its buggiest, and I certainly believe that.Apple has made a lot of blunders, but the DOS-compatible Performa was brilliant.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31148636</id>
	<title>Re:Mobile Me?</title>
	<author>BikeHelmet</author>
	<datestamp>1266228660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've never been impressed with their routers.</p><p>Airport... the features of a $30 router, for $99.99! Oh yeah - it's white with rounded edges.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've never been impressed with their routers.Airport... the features of a $ 30 router , for $ 99.99 !
Oh yeah - it 's white with rounded edges .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've never been impressed with their routers.Airport... the features of a $30 router, for $99.99!
Oh yeah - it's white with rounded edges.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143134</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31147018</id>
	<title>Re:The List</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266264000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>No mention of the latest generation ipod shuffle?  The one where they figured control buttons would "clutter up" the design, so instead you have to buy special, expensive apple earbuds/headphones that are all cluttered up with inline controls and only cost ten times the cost of normal headphones?  So the shuffle plus a pair of "special" headphones costs more than a nano?</p></div><p>You do realize the shuffle comes with those "special" headphones right? Separately, they cost 30 dollars... even the most expensive shuffle (the 100 dollar steel one) and those headphones (30 dollars) is still less than the least expensive nano (150 dollars).</p><p>Don't like the basic ones? Buy the ones made by dozens of other companies that also include the in-line remote, which by the way is not some special Apple thing. Some Blackberries also use an identical connector/remote style, and I'm sure other mp3 players must support it.</p><p>I can tolerate a little bit of exaggeration to illustrate a point but really, when your entire argument is exaggeration? Just stop posting.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>No mention of the latest generation ipod shuffle ?
The one where they figured control buttons would " clutter up " the design , so instead you have to buy special , expensive apple earbuds/headphones that are all cluttered up with inline controls and only cost ten times the cost of normal headphones ?
So the shuffle plus a pair of " special " headphones costs more than a nano ? You do realize the shuffle comes with those " special " headphones right ?
Separately , they cost 30 dollars... even the most expensive shuffle ( the 100 dollar steel one ) and those headphones ( 30 dollars ) is still less than the least expensive nano ( 150 dollars ) .Do n't like the basic ones ?
Buy the ones made by dozens of other companies that also include the in-line remote , which by the way is not some special Apple thing .
Some Blackberries also use an identical connector/remote style , and I 'm sure other mp3 players must support it.I can tolerate a little bit of exaggeration to illustrate a point but really , when your entire argument is exaggeration ?
Just stop posting .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No mention of the latest generation ipod shuffle?
The one where they figured control buttons would "clutter up" the design, so instead you have to buy special, expensive apple earbuds/headphones that are all cluttered up with inline controls and only cost ten times the cost of normal headphones?
So the shuffle plus a pair of "special" headphones costs more than a nano?You do realize the shuffle comes with those "special" headphones right?
Separately, they cost 30 dollars... even the most expensive shuffle (the 100 dollar steel one) and those headphones (30 dollars) is still less than the least expensive nano (150 dollars).Don't like the basic ones?
Buy the ones made by dozens of other companies that also include the in-line remote, which by the way is not some special Apple thing.
Some Blackberries also use an identical connector/remote style, and I'm sure other mp3 players must support it.I can tolerate a little bit of exaggeration to illustrate a point but really, when your entire argument is exaggeration?
Just stop posting.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143256</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143342</id>
	<title>screens</title>
	<author>Swampash</author>
	<datestamp>1266245220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Built-in screens made sense at the start of the computing age but they have thankfully gone the way of the dinosaurs</p></div></blockquote><p>

It's funny to read this on an iMac.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Built-in screens made sense at the start of the computing age but they have thankfully gone the way of the dinosaurs It 's funny to read this on an iMac .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Built-in screens made sense at the start of the computing age but they have thankfully gone the way of the dinosaurs

It's funny to read this on an iMac.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143894</id>
	<title>Every mouse and keyboard under Jobs</title>
	<author>argent</author>
	<datestamp>1266248760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'd add every mouse and keyboard under Jobs. The last decent keyboard Apple made was the Extended-II, and their passive-aggressive fight with the second mouse button has sold a lot of Microsoft mice to Mac users (no, there's no clue-anticlue explosion when you plug it in).</p><p>Oh, and the first and second generation iPod shuffles were great products. The current model... yeesh, I hope they wise up and put he controls back on the case for the next version.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd add every mouse and keyboard under Jobs .
The last decent keyboard Apple made was the Extended-II , and their passive-aggressive fight with the second mouse button has sold a lot of Microsoft mice to Mac users ( no , there 's no clue-anticlue explosion when you plug it in ) .Oh , and the first and second generation iPod shuffles were great products .
The current model... yeesh , I hope they wise up and put he controls back on the case for the next version .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd add every mouse and keyboard under Jobs.
The last decent keyboard Apple made was the Extended-II, and their passive-aggressive fight with the second mouse button has sold a lot of Microsoft mice to Mac users (no, there's no clue-anticlue explosion when you plug it in).Oh, and the first and second generation iPod shuffles were great products.
The current model... yeesh, I hope they wise up and put he controls back on the case for the next version.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31146258</id>
	<title>Wozniak</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266260220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Steve Wozniak was the <i>only</i> good thing about Apple and its one truly great product line, the Apple ][.  Jobs is a hack.</p><p>Really guys, think back.  The Apple ][ was <i>the it</i> when it existed.  It wasn't some "elegant" piece of frippery - it was the best goddamned computer on the planet.  Look what Apple has done since: the limp-wristed Mac (and straight-out-faggy iMac), then a hipster-friendly line of mere <i>gadgets</i>.</p><p>Apple devolved when Woz left.  It changed from a computer company to a boutique.  Put him back in charge, kick Jobs out to Black Turtleneck Island, and maybe salvage what's left of a dying, formerly great brand.</p><p>Never gonna happen.  RIP Apple: you made great computers, then you became Starbucks.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Steve Wozniak was the only good thing about Apple and its one truly great product line , the Apple ] [ .
Jobs is a hack.Really guys , think back .
The Apple ] [ was the it when it existed .
It was n't some " elegant " piece of frippery - it was the best goddamned computer on the planet .
Look what Apple has done since : the limp-wristed Mac ( and straight-out-faggy iMac ) , then a hipster-friendly line of mere gadgets.Apple devolved when Woz left .
It changed from a computer company to a boutique .
Put him back in charge , kick Jobs out to Black Turtleneck Island , and maybe salvage what 's left of a dying , formerly great brand.Never gon na happen .
RIP Apple : you made great computers , then you became Starbucks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Steve Wozniak was the only good thing about Apple and its one truly great product line, the Apple ][.
Jobs is a hack.Really guys, think back.
The Apple ][ was the it when it existed.
It wasn't some "elegant" piece of frippery - it was the best goddamned computer on the planet.
Look what Apple has done since: the limp-wristed Mac (and straight-out-faggy iMac), then a hipster-friendly line of mere gadgets.Apple devolved when Woz left.
It changed from a computer company to a boutique.
Put him back in charge, kick Jobs out to Black Turtleneck Island, and maybe salvage what's left of a dying, formerly great brand.Never gonna happen.
RIP Apple: you made great computers, then you became Starbucks.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31146362</id>
	<title>This is the most overdone tech topic of all-time</title>
	<author>axl917</author>
	<datestamp>1266260640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I loathe and ridicule Apple as much as the next guy, but seriously, how many times to we have to be subjected to this?  The same giggles and snickers over the puck mouse and the Apple III?  C'mon...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I loathe and ridicule Apple as much as the next guy , but seriously , how many times to we have to be subjected to this ?
The same giggles and snickers over the puck mouse and the Apple III ?
C'mon.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I loathe and ridicule Apple as much as the next guy, but seriously, how many times to we have to be subjected to this?
The same giggles and snickers over the puck mouse and the Apple III?
C'mon...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31144854</id>
	<title>Re:Not all the items listed were failures..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266253200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The statement that I find particularly bizarre about the PowerPC is "as was the ordeal involved in porting over software from x86 platforms such as Windows."</p><p>Er, it doesn't run Windows anyway so you are always going to have to port the software. Does the guy who said this have any clue about the difference between operating system or that most application code isn't written in assembler?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The statement that I find particularly bizarre about the PowerPC is " as was the ordeal involved in porting over software from x86 platforms such as Windows .
" Er , it does n't run Windows anyway so you are always going to have to port the software .
Does the guy who said this have any clue about the difference between operating system or that most application code is n't written in assembler ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The statement that I find particularly bizarre about the PowerPC is "as was the ordeal involved in porting over software from x86 platforms such as Windows.
"Er, it doesn't run Windows anyway so you are always going to have to port the software.
Does the guy who said this have any clue about the difference between operating system or that most application code isn't written in assembler?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143324</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143306</id>
	<title>Re:The List</title>
	<author>aaaaaaargh!</author>
	<datestamp>1266244860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As someone who has been using Macs since around 1990 I disagree with quite a number of points on this list. First of all, the worst Apple product ever is without any doubt the <a href="http://lowendmac.com/ppc/performa-5200.html" title="lowendmac.com">Performa 5200</a> [lowendmac.com], but not the whole performa line. I've owned several performas that were very good and compact machines. Regarding the 5200, it is true that just about everything about this machine was wrong: its weight, its design, the built-in monitor, the speed (Powermac, but slower than most 68k Macs). The next point: OS 9 was an absolutely great OS and IMHO only OS 6 was better at its time. At least, unlike OS X, OS 9 is able to remember window sizes and positions. As for the "honorable mention" color classic, this <i>still</i> is a great machine. I once had one and have always regretted that I had sold it. It was completely silent and with a few modifications would be quite suitable for text processing <b>today</b>.</p><p>Moreover, given that the author of this article claims that Power PC (especially the B/W Macs) were a failure, I doubt whether he has ever owned a Mac at all. I bought a b/w Power PC Mac just when it came out, it absolutely rocked, and was usable for around 10 years. Generally speaking, the built quality of Power PC Macs was much better (except for the Performa 5200) than today's Macs. (To be fair, the b/w Mac keyboard really sucked.) In fact, the built quality of Macs has declined constantly since the Mac Plus (I have one standing on my shelf, it still boots without problems) and is worse than ever now with the exception of that of the overprized Mac Pro.</p><p>To cut a long story short, some of the items in the list are fairly incomprehensible and I suspect the author of the article has never owned or used them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As someone who has been using Macs since around 1990 I disagree with quite a number of points on this list .
First of all , the worst Apple product ever is without any doubt the Performa 5200 [ lowendmac.com ] , but not the whole performa line .
I 've owned several performas that were very good and compact machines .
Regarding the 5200 , it is true that just about everything about this machine was wrong : its weight , its design , the built-in monitor , the speed ( Powermac , but slower than most 68k Macs ) .
The next point : OS 9 was an absolutely great OS and IMHO only OS 6 was better at its time .
At least , unlike OS X , OS 9 is able to remember window sizes and positions .
As for the " honorable mention " color classic , this still is a great machine .
I once had one and have always regretted that I had sold it .
It was completely silent and with a few modifications would be quite suitable for text processing today.Moreover , given that the author of this article claims that Power PC ( especially the B/W Macs ) were a failure , I doubt whether he has ever owned a Mac at all .
I bought a b/w Power PC Mac just when it came out , it absolutely rocked , and was usable for around 10 years .
Generally speaking , the built quality of Power PC Macs was much better ( except for the Performa 5200 ) than today 's Macs .
( To be fair , the b/w Mac keyboard really sucked .
) In fact , the built quality of Macs has declined constantly since the Mac Plus ( I have one standing on my shelf , it still boots without problems ) and is worse than ever now with the exception of that of the overprized Mac Pro.To cut a long story short , some of the items in the list are fairly incomprehensible and I suspect the author of the article has never owned or used them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As someone who has been using Macs since around 1990 I disagree with quite a number of points on this list.
First of all, the worst Apple product ever is without any doubt the Performa 5200 [lowendmac.com], but not the whole performa line.
I've owned several performas that were very good and compact machines.
Regarding the 5200, it is true that just about everything about this machine was wrong: its weight, its design, the built-in monitor, the speed (Powermac, but slower than most 68k Macs).
The next point: OS 9 was an absolutely great OS and IMHO only OS 6 was better at its time.
At least, unlike OS X, OS 9 is able to remember window sizes and positions.
As for the "honorable mention" color classic, this still is a great machine.
I once had one and have always regretted that I had sold it.
It was completely silent and with a few modifications would be quite suitable for text processing today.Moreover, given that the author of this article claims that Power PC (especially the B/W Macs) were a failure, I doubt whether he has ever owned a Mac at all.
I bought a b/w Power PC Mac just when it came out, it absolutely rocked, and was usable for around 10 years.
Generally speaking, the built quality of Power PC Macs was much better (except for the Performa 5200) than today's Macs.
(To be fair, the b/w Mac keyboard really sucked.
) In fact, the built quality of Macs has declined constantly since the Mac Plus (I have one standing on my shelf, it still boots without problems) and is worse than ever now with the exception of that of the overprized Mac Pro.To cut a long story short, some of the items in the list are fairly incomprehensible and I suspect the author of the article has never owned or used them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143092</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31146476</id>
	<title>Re:A friend of mine who's a diehard fan...</title>
	<author>ducomputergeek</author>
	<datestamp>1266261240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you look back, the Power chips are RISC basic processors as opposed to CISC on the Intels.  Throughout the 1990's, the PPC's were superior to vastly superior for the graphics and and audio worlds.  The last time I knew anything, submarines used PPC chips for sonar analysis (not Apples, made by somebody else to custom specs) for that reason.</p><p>Although things began to change in the early 2000's.  For one, companies like Newtek began optimizing their renderers for x86 and it lead to the Intel chips to become the favorite.  Also, at the same time, IBM and Motorola/Freescale kept making promises they couldn't deliver on the PPC side things.  The G5 (PowerPC 970 series) simply produced too much heat and sucked down too much power to be used in Laptops.  They also had problems delivering increased clock speeds.  This was about the time that Intel announced their goal of performance per watt and IBM was demanding that Apple pony up $$$ for continued R&amp;D of PPC line.</p><p>So Apple made the decision to move to Intel, which worked out extremely well.  I didn't know how well it was going to work and bought one of the last Quadcore PowerMac G5's off the line.  I was heavily in the video world at the time and got my use out of the $8k machine.  But once all the software was ported over to Intel, I've been extremely happy with my Intel iMac and Macbook.</p><p>That being said, I am typing this from my 6 year old 12.1" Powerbook.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you look back , the Power chips are RISC basic processors as opposed to CISC on the Intels .
Throughout the 1990 's , the PPC 's were superior to vastly superior for the graphics and and audio worlds .
The last time I knew anything , submarines used PPC chips for sonar analysis ( not Apples , made by somebody else to custom specs ) for that reason.Although things began to change in the early 2000 's .
For one , companies like Newtek began optimizing their renderers for x86 and it lead to the Intel chips to become the favorite .
Also , at the same time , IBM and Motorola/Freescale kept making promises they could n't deliver on the PPC side things .
The G5 ( PowerPC 970 series ) simply produced too much heat and sucked down too much power to be used in Laptops .
They also had problems delivering increased clock speeds .
This was about the time that Intel announced their goal of performance per watt and IBM was demanding that Apple pony up $ $ $ for continued R&amp;D of PPC line.So Apple made the decision to move to Intel , which worked out extremely well .
I did n't know how well it was going to work and bought one of the last Quadcore PowerMac G5 's off the line .
I was heavily in the video world at the time and got my use out of the $ 8k machine .
But once all the software was ported over to Intel , I 've been extremely happy with my Intel iMac and Macbook.That being said , I am typing this from my 6 year old 12.1 " Powerbook .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you look back, the Power chips are RISC basic processors as opposed to CISC on the Intels.
Throughout the 1990's, the PPC's were superior to vastly superior for the graphics and and audio worlds.
The last time I knew anything, submarines used PPC chips for sonar analysis (not Apples, made by somebody else to custom specs) for that reason.Although things began to change in the early 2000's.
For one, companies like Newtek began optimizing their renderers for x86 and it lead to the Intel chips to become the favorite.
Also, at the same time, IBM and Motorola/Freescale kept making promises they couldn't deliver on the PPC side things.
The G5 (PowerPC 970 series) simply produced too much heat and sucked down too much power to be used in Laptops.
They also had problems delivering increased clock speeds.
This was about the time that Intel announced their goal of performance per watt and IBM was demanding that Apple pony up $$$ for continued R&amp;D of PPC line.So Apple made the decision to move to Intel, which worked out extremely well.
I didn't know how well it was going to work and bought one of the last Quadcore PowerMac G5's off the line.
I was heavily in the video world at the time and got my use out of the $8k machine.
But once all the software was ported over to Intel, I've been extremely happy with my Intel iMac and Macbook.That being said, I am typing this from my 6 year old 12.1" Powerbook.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143228</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31144546</id>
	<title>Re:The List</title>
	<author>iscgy</author>
	<datestamp>1266252000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>How about<p>


0 The one with half a worm....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How about 0 The one with half a worm... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How about


0 The one with half a worm....</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143092</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31144532</id>
	<title>Re:Laptops</title>
	<author>Fished</author>
	<datestamp>1266252000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yet, at the time they were an enormous success and people were really excited about getting computers in colors.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yet , at the time they were an enormous success and people were really excited about getting computers in colors .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yet, at the time they were an enormous success and people were really excited about getting computers in colors.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143154</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31149648</id>
	<title>Re:Not all the items listed were failures..</title>
	<author>Kaboom13</author>
	<datestamp>1266233400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The 20th anniversary Mac was a collectors item, meant to be an exclusive item for execs and the well to do.  Unfortunately it blew chunks and they couldn't give them away.  To own one was supposed to be a status symbol, but what it conveyed was "I'm a tool and don't know shit about computers".  Especially as their price plummeted in desperation.  A collectors item should be rare and hard to find, they were being sold for a pittance in the back of mac magazines with the refurb g3's and performa systems.  Ask a mac collector what piece in their collection they are proudest of, it will probably be some rare revision of a mac classic, not the 20th anniversary edition.  It failed as a computer, it failed as a collectors item, it failed as a product.  it belongs on the list.  If they had made 500 of them they probably would have done ok (although never made back their R+D cost).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The 20th anniversary Mac was a collectors item , meant to be an exclusive item for execs and the well to do .
Unfortunately it blew chunks and they could n't give them away .
To own one was supposed to be a status symbol , but what it conveyed was " I 'm a tool and do n't know shit about computers " .
Especially as their price plummeted in desperation .
A collectors item should be rare and hard to find , they were being sold for a pittance in the back of mac magazines with the refurb g3 's and performa systems .
Ask a mac collector what piece in their collection they are proudest of , it will probably be some rare revision of a mac classic , not the 20th anniversary edition .
It failed as a computer , it failed as a collectors item , it failed as a product .
it belongs on the list .
If they had made 500 of them they probably would have done ok ( although never made back their R + D cost ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The 20th anniversary Mac was a collectors item, meant to be an exclusive item for execs and the well to do.
Unfortunately it blew chunks and they couldn't give them away.
To own one was supposed to be a status symbol, but what it conveyed was "I'm a tool and don't know shit about computers".
Especially as their price plummeted in desperation.
A collectors item should be rare and hard to find, they were being sold for a pittance in the back of mac magazines with the refurb g3's and performa systems.
Ask a mac collector what piece in their collection they are proudest of, it will probably be some rare revision of a mac classic, not the 20th anniversary edition.
It failed as a computer, it failed as a collectors item, it failed as a product.
it belongs on the list.
If they had made 500 of them they probably would have done ok (although never made back their R+D cost).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143324</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31144350</id>
	<title>Re:Geomodem</title>
	<author>Chris Mattern</author>
	<datestamp>1266251220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Apple wasn't the only folks who did that.  Google up "Winmodem" some time.  Though I can see how it'd suck extra hard on an OS that didn't have pre-emptive multitasking.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Apple was n't the only folks who did that .
Google up " Winmodem " some time .
Though I can see how it 'd suck extra hard on an OS that did n't have pre-emptive multitasking .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Apple wasn't the only folks who did that.
Google up "Winmodem" some time.
Though I can see how it'd suck extra hard on an OS that didn't have pre-emptive multitasking.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143210</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31144010</id>
	<title>Re:The List</title>
	<author>Saint Fnordius</author>
	<datestamp>1266249360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Gotta agree with you there.But the PowerPC chips kept the Mac alive longer than a switch to any other processor at the time; they were close enough to the Motorola 680x0 line that the OS could be ported with decent emulation to run older binaries. It was only near the end, when Motorola and IBM lost interest in going head to head with intel that Apple decided to switch again.</p><p>I think the Performa got singled out as a line despite there being gems in the mix due to how terrible it was for the stores to sell. Looking back now it was muddled, and infuriating. The only thing that made it worse was when Apple began to license System 7.5 to other manufacturers, and effectively shot themselves in the foot. As a series, it was a mess. I had one of those awful 5200 machines, mainly because it also doubled as my television.</p><p>I also don't see Mac OS 9 as a failure, as it was built specifically to be the "classic" part of Mac OS X. In that role, especially as Mac OS 9.2, it performed admirably. I still use it now and then to run vintage games.</p><p>I am surprised to see that the G4 Mac Cube wasn't mentioned, nor the Newton. Both of those products were cases of Apple falling flat, though the Cube did turn out to be a "break even" model for Apple that was overhyped.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Got ta agree with you there.But the PowerPC chips kept the Mac alive longer than a switch to any other processor at the time ; they were close enough to the Motorola 680x0 line that the OS could be ported with decent emulation to run older binaries .
It was only near the end , when Motorola and IBM lost interest in going head to head with intel that Apple decided to switch again.I think the Performa got singled out as a line despite there being gems in the mix due to how terrible it was for the stores to sell .
Looking back now it was muddled , and infuriating .
The only thing that made it worse was when Apple began to license System 7.5 to other manufacturers , and effectively shot themselves in the foot .
As a series , it was a mess .
I had one of those awful 5200 machines , mainly because it also doubled as my television.I also do n't see Mac OS 9 as a failure , as it was built specifically to be the " classic " part of Mac OS X. In that role , especially as Mac OS 9.2 , it performed admirably .
I still use it now and then to run vintage games.I am surprised to see that the G4 Mac Cube was n't mentioned , nor the Newton .
Both of those products were cases of Apple falling flat , though the Cube did turn out to be a " break even " model for Apple that was overhyped .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Gotta agree with you there.But the PowerPC chips kept the Mac alive longer than a switch to any other processor at the time; they were close enough to the Motorola 680x0 line that the OS could be ported with decent emulation to run older binaries.
It was only near the end, when Motorola and IBM lost interest in going head to head with intel that Apple decided to switch again.I think the Performa got singled out as a line despite there being gems in the mix due to how terrible it was for the stores to sell.
Looking back now it was muddled, and infuriating.
The only thing that made it worse was when Apple began to license System 7.5 to other manufacturers, and effectively shot themselves in the foot.
As a series, it was a mess.
I had one of those awful 5200 machines, mainly because it also doubled as my television.I also don't see Mac OS 9 as a failure, as it was built specifically to be the "classic" part of Mac OS X. In that role, especially as Mac OS 9.2, it performed admirably.
I still use it now and then to run vintage games.I am surprised to see that the G4 Mac Cube wasn't mentioned, nor the Newton.
Both of those products were cases of Apple falling flat, though the Cube did turn out to be a "break even" model for Apple that was overhyped.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143306</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31146496</id>
	<title>Re:Not all the items listed were failures..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266261420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>On top of that, it is the only MacOS that could run natively inside OSX. MacOS classic pionnered todays GUI.</p><p>20th anniversary Mac:<br>exclusive, high priced item, for collectors.. that the author has mistaken for a consumer level product. don't really need to say more. (actually ill quote: "the issue here is not the product but that it was released during a financial crisis" then "i know the financial crisis was not related to the 20th mac".. yeah well keep on contradicting yourself just to add 1 product to the list")</p></div><p>1) Fuck "today's GUI" then, it's a POS design and I hate that Windows copied it (posting from a Vista machine that works fine and has never crashed).</p><p>2) Um, no one makes "collector" computers, that's the stupidest idea I've heard in a long time. There is no "collector level" for computer pricing. Especially not for new products.</p><p>And you aren't understanding the author's english. When he says "the financial crisis was not related to the 20th mac" he means it was not CAUSED by that computer being designed and sold. It was still <i>released</i> during the crisis, and it was an even stupider business decision to release it during that sort of period for your company than it was to make a $7-9k "collector's computer" in the first place.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>On top of that , it is the only MacOS that could run natively inside OSX .
MacOS classic pionnered todays GUI.20th anniversary Mac : exclusive , high priced item , for collectors.. that the author has mistaken for a consumer level product .
do n't really need to say more .
( actually ill quote : " the issue here is not the product but that it was released during a financial crisis " then " i know the financial crisis was not related to the 20th mac " .. yeah well keep on contradicting yourself just to add 1 product to the list " ) 1 ) Fuck " today 's GUI " then , it 's a POS design and I hate that Windows copied it ( posting from a Vista machine that works fine and has never crashed ) .2 ) Um , no one makes " collector " computers , that 's the stupidest idea I 've heard in a long time .
There is no " collector level " for computer pricing .
Especially not for new products.And you are n't understanding the author 's english .
When he says " the financial crisis was not related to the 20th mac " he means it was not CAUSED by that computer being designed and sold .
It was still released during the crisis , and it was an even stupider business decision to release it during that sort of period for your company than it was to make a $ 7-9k " collector 's computer " in the first place .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>On top of that, it is the only MacOS that could run natively inside OSX.
MacOS classic pionnered todays GUI.20th anniversary Mac:exclusive, high priced item, for collectors.. that the author has mistaken for a consumer level product.
don't really need to say more.
(actually ill quote: "the issue here is not the product but that it was released during a financial crisis" then "i know the financial crisis was not related to the 20th mac".. yeah well keep on contradicting yourself just to add 1 product to the list")1) Fuck "today's GUI" then, it's a POS design and I hate that Windows copied it (posting from a Vista machine that works fine and has never crashed).2) Um, no one makes "collector" computers, that's the stupidest idea I've heard in a long time.
There is no "collector level" for computer pricing.
Especially not for new products.And you aren't understanding the author's english.
When he says "the financial crisis was not related to the 20th mac" he means it was not CAUSED by that computer being designed and sold.
It was still released during the crisis, and it was an even stupider business decision to release it during that sort of period for your company than it was to make a $7-9k "collector's computer" in the first place.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143324</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143866</id>
	<title>AppleDefects</title>
	<author>cerberusss</author>
	<datestamp>1266248640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The list is very nice when looking over a decade-plus period, but for the most recent fuck-ups, I often check out the <a href="http://www.appledefects.com/wiki/" title="appledefects.com">AppleDefects wiki</a> [appledefects.com]. My number one interest at the moment is the <a href="http://www.appledefects.com/wiki/index.php?title=Magsafe" title="appledefects.com">power adapter for the MacBook laptops (MagSafe)</a> [appledefects.com]. This baby has been fraying, melting and even <a href="http://discussions.apple.com/message.jspa?messageID=10954716" title="apple.com">burning holes in bed sheets</a> [apple.com].</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The list is very nice when looking over a decade-plus period , but for the most recent fuck-ups , I often check out the AppleDefects wiki [ appledefects.com ] .
My number one interest at the moment is the power adapter for the MacBook laptops ( MagSafe ) [ appledefects.com ] .
This baby has been fraying , melting and even burning holes in bed sheets [ apple.com ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The list is very nice when looking over a decade-plus period, but for the most recent fuck-ups, I often check out the AppleDefects wiki [appledefects.com].
My number one interest at the moment is the power adapter for the MacBook laptops (MagSafe) [appledefects.com].
This baby has been fraying, melting and even burning holes in bed sheets [apple.com].</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31144808</id>
	<title>Re:Mobile Me?</title>
	<author>fazookus</author>
	<datestamp>1266253020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>
Happily you can use Google to sync up your various devices now...  not sure if it scales beyond my iPhone and a couple of varied Windows and Mac computers but it does nicely for my purposes.

I'm sure everybody knows this, just thought I'd throw it in.

PS  It uses Active Sync!!!!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Happily you can use Google to sync up your various devices now... not sure if it scales beyond my iPhone and a couple of varied Windows and Mac computers but it does nicely for my purposes .
I 'm sure everybody knows this , just thought I 'd throw it in .
PS It uses Active Sync ! ! !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
Happily you can use Google to sync up your various devices now...  not sure if it scales beyond my iPhone and a couple of varied Windows and Mac computers but it does nicely for my purposes.
I'm sure everybody knows this, just thought I'd throw it in.
PS  It uses Active Sync!!!
!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143134</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143640</id>
	<title>Re:The List</title>
	<author>EastCoastSurfer</author>
	<datestamp>1266247560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I initially ripped on the controls on the ear phone cable until I started using them with my iPhone.  Now I think about how stupid it is to have to pull the device out of my pocket or go searching around on my waistband just to skip a song or adjust the volume.  For example, last time I was snowboarding I wanted to adjust the song.  Instead of having to go digging through my jacket I was able to just change it from the ear buds.  That also alleviated the need to pull the device out in the cold air and have it shut down from the cold (0F doesn't get along with the batteries in most devices).</p><p>I also have one of the shuffles with the controls still on it that I use for the gym.  It's perfect for it is and for what I use it for.  I wish it could be controlled by the headphone controls though.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I initially ripped on the controls on the ear phone cable until I started using them with my iPhone .
Now I think about how stupid it is to have to pull the device out of my pocket or go searching around on my waistband just to skip a song or adjust the volume .
For example , last time I was snowboarding I wanted to adjust the song .
Instead of having to go digging through my jacket I was able to just change it from the ear buds .
That also alleviated the need to pull the device out in the cold air and have it shut down from the cold ( 0F does n't get along with the batteries in most devices ) .I also have one of the shuffles with the controls still on it that I use for the gym .
It 's perfect for it is and for what I use it for .
I wish it could be controlled by the headphone controls though .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I initially ripped on the controls on the ear phone cable until I started using them with my iPhone.
Now I think about how stupid it is to have to pull the device out of my pocket or go searching around on my waistband just to skip a song or adjust the volume.
For example, last time I was snowboarding I wanted to adjust the song.
Instead of having to go digging through my jacket I was able to just change it from the ear buds.
That also alleviated the need to pull the device out in the cold air and have it shut down from the cold (0F doesn't get along with the batteries in most devices).I also have one of the shuffles with the controls still on it that I use for the gym.
It's perfect for it is and for what I use it for.
I wish it could be controlled by the headphone controls though.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143256</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31144112</id>
	<title>Re:Hasn't been out long enough yet</title>
	<author>Gilmoure</author>
	<datestamp>1266249960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My pet rock (circa 1976) didn't have any eyes. Was just a smooth water worn rock, like a bunch that were out front in the landscaping. But the box it came in was funny. To an 8 year old. For a few minutes.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My pet rock ( circa 1976 ) did n't have any eyes .
Was just a smooth water worn rock , like a bunch that were out front in the landscaping .
But the box it came in was funny .
To an 8 year old .
For a few minutes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My pet rock (circa 1976) didn't have any eyes.
Was just a smooth water worn rock, like a bunch that were out front in the landscaping.
But the box it came in was funny.
To an 8 year old.
For a few minutes.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143254</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31145514</id>
	<title>iPod socks</title>
	<author>ForceQuit</author>
	<datestamp>1266256320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What? No mention of the (in)famous iPod sock keynote announcement?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What ?
No mention of the ( in ) famous iPod sock keynote announcement ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What?
No mention of the (in)famous iPod sock keynote announcement?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31147148</id>
	<title>Apple Air Port</title>
	<author>Logic Worshipper</author>
	<datestamp>1266264660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What the fuck is with no web GUI like every other router on the planet?  Forcing you to install unsupported apple crap to administrator the damn thing on Windows, which is nearly impossible to administer from Linux. Such a damn pain.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What the fuck is with no web GUI like every other router on the planet ?
Forcing you to install unsupported apple crap to administrator the damn thing on Windows , which is nearly impossible to administer from Linux .
Such a damn pain .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What the fuck is with no web GUI like every other router on the planet?
Forcing you to install unsupported apple crap to administrator the damn thing on Windows, which is nearly impossible to administer from Linux.
Such a damn pain.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31144736</id>
	<title>Re:The List</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266252720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>No Quicktime Player? It's a turd of a program on either OS, but the windows version definitely stand out as a major PITA.</p></div><p>As opposed to Windows Media Player which doesn't appear able to play media of any type? Sorry but when it comes to playing video Quicktime actually works. It usually sucks playing Microsoft movie files, WMVs, but I'm not sure if it's that's a Mac or a Microsoft issue since even Windows has issues playing them at times. For functionality I've seen better players than either but given the choice I'd stick to Quicktime. Windows just plain sucks for playing media. Now I do have a complaint that Apple decided to cripple Quicktime so if you want to do anything useful with it you have to buy Quicktime Pro. That's annoying. It costs as much as the Snow Leopard upgrade. The problem with apple players is a lack of options, kind of like anything Apple. I refer to Apple products as being like a Club Med vacation. Very regimented. I hope you like doing things their way because there are no options. I think more than anything that's why the Slashdot crowd tends to be heavily anti Apple. I used to like Windows but Vista turned me to the dark side. Vista is twitchy, unstable and the UI just plain sucks! It's the worst of Mac with none of the cool stuff. I think if more people tried Quicktime on a Mac they'd change their tune. I rarely run onto a video file on the web I can't play and even then it's usually an issue with the site. WMV codec sucks on a Mac but hey the codec kind of sucks period. There are far better codecs out there but Microsoft won't let go of it.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>No Quicktime Player ?
It 's a turd of a program on either OS , but the windows version definitely stand out as a major PITA.As opposed to Windows Media Player which does n't appear able to play media of any type ?
Sorry but when it comes to playing video Quicktime actually works .
It usually sucks playing Microsoft movie files , WMVs , but I 'm not sure if it 's that 's a Mac or a Microsoft issue since even Windows has issues playing them at times .
For functionality I 've seen better players than either but given the choice I 'd stick to Quicktime .
Windows just plain sucks for playing media .
Now I do have a complaint that Apple decided to cripple Quicktime so if you want to do anything useful with it you have to buy Quicktime Pro .
That 's annoying .
It costs as much as the Snow Leopard upgrade .
The problem with apple players is a lack of options , kind of like anything Apple .
I refer to Apple products as being like a Club Med vacation .
Very regimented .
I hope you like doing things their way because there are no options .
I think more than anything that 's why the Slashdot crowd tends to be heavily anti Apple .
I used to like Windows but Vista turned me to the dark side .
Vista is twitchy , unstable and the UI just plain sucks !
It 's the worst of Mac with none of the cool stuff .
I think if more people tried Quicktime on a Mac they 'd change their tune .
I rarely run onto a video file on the web I ca n't play and even then it 's usually an issue with the site .
WMV codec sucks on a Mac but hey the codec kind of sucks period .
There are far better codecs out there but Microsoft wo n't let go of it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No Quicktime Player?
It's a turd of a program on either OS, but the windows version definitely stand out as a major PITA.As opposed to Windows Media Player which doesn't appear able to play media of any type?
Sorry but when it comes to playing video Quicktime actually works.
It usually sucks playing Microsoft movie files, WMVs, but I'm not sure if it's that's a Mac or a Microsoft issue since even Windows has issues playing them at times.
For functionality I've seen better players than either but given the choice I'd stick to Quicktime.
Windows just plain sucks for playing media.
Now I do have a complaint that Apple decided to cripple Quicktime so if you want to do anything useful with it you have to buy Quicktime Pro.
That's annoying.
It costs as much as the Snow Leopard upgrade.
The problem with apple players is a lack of options, kind of like anything Apple.
I refer to Apple products as being like a Club Med vacation.
Very regimented.
I hope you like doing things their way because there are no options.
I think more than anything that's why the Slashdot crowd tends to be heavily anti Apple.
I used to like Windows but Vista turned me to the dark side.
Vista is twitchy, unstable and the UI just plain sucks!
It's the worst of Mac with none of the cool stuff.
I think if more people tried Quicktime on a Mac they'd change their tune.
I rarely run onto a video file on the web I can't play and even then it's usually an issue with the site.
WMV codec sucks on a Mac but hey the codec kind of sucks period.
There are far better codecs out there but Microsoft won't let go of it.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143122</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31312088</id>
	<title>Re:The List</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267380240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Everything is horrible on Windows.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Everything is horrible on Windows .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Everything is horrible on Windows.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143286</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31145058</id>
	<title>Re:The List</title>
	<author>pubwvj</author>
	<datestamp>1266254220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>PowerPC and MacOS9 were fine. I would replace them with Lisa and MacOSX10.5/10.6/10.7/10....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>PowerPC and MacOS9 were fine .
I would replace them with Lisa and MacOSX10.5/10.6/10.7/10... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>PowerPC and MacOS9 were fine.
I would replace them with Lisa and MacOSX10.5/10.6/10.7/10....</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143092</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31144484</id>
	<title>Apple IIgs doesn't make the list?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266251820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This was gonna be the Amiga buster - as the Amiga was released with much more capability than the original Mac.  As an Amiga killer, it didn't happen.  Commodore killed the Amiga by itself.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This was gon na be the Amiga buster - as the Amiga was released with much more capability than the original Mac .
As an Amiga killer , it did n't happen .
Commodore killed the Amiga by itself .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This was gonna be the Amiga buster - as the Amiga was released with much more capability than the original Mac.
As an Amiga killer, it didn't happen.
Commodore killed the Amiga by itself.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31145610</id>
	<title>Re:Geomodem</title>
	<author>bill\_mcgonigle</author>
	<datestamp>1266256740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>. Its one and only advantage is that you could upgrade the software.</i></p><p>Well, yes, that's the entire point of a DSP.  I had a pretty decent phone system (voice) running off of one at one point.  Some people hacked them to be awesome/cheap high-speed D/A's for non-telephony apps.</p><p>The only advantage of a CPU-based computer is that it can execute general-purpose programs.  Right?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>.
Its one and only advantage is that you could upgrade the software.Well , yes , that 's the entire point of a DSP .
I had a pretty decent phone system ( voice ) running off of one at one point .
Some people hacked them to be awesome/cheap high-speed D/A 's for non-telephony apps.The only advantage of a CPU-based computer is that it can execute general-purpose programs .
Right ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>.
Its one and only advantage is that you could upgrade the software.Well, yes, that's the entire point of a DSP.
I had a pretty decent phone system (voice) running off of one at one point.
Some people hacked them to be awesome/cheap high-speed D/A's for non-telephony apps.The only advantage of a CPU-based computer is that it can execute general-purpose programs.
Right?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143210</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31162426</id>
	<title>Re:The List</title>
	<author>g253</author>
	<datestamp>1266325500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I do remember using QuickTime, probably 2.x, on win95, around twelve or thirteen years ago. It was good indeed, in the sense that it got the job done. But then again, video on a personal computer was a relatively recent idea, and as you pointed out it was pretty much the only app which did that.<br>If I may risk an analogy, it's as if you said Lotus SmartSuite is really cool because 1-2-3 once was.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do remember using QuickTime , probably 2.x , on win95 , around twelve or thirteen years ago .
It was good indeed , in the sense that it got the job done .
But then again , video on a personal computer was a relatively recent idea , and as you pointed out it was pretty much the only app which did that.If I may risk an analogy , it 's as if you said Lotus SmartSuite is really cool because 1-2-3 once was .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I do remember using QuickTime, probably 2.x, on win95, around twelve or thirteen years ago.
It was good indeed, in the sense that it got the job done.
But then again, video on a personal computer was a relatively recent idea, and as you pointed out it was pretty much the only app which did that.If I may risk an analogy, it's as if you said Lotus SmartSuite is really cool because 1-2-3 once was.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31146152</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143512</id>
	<title>2009 mac pro should be on the list as it has</title>
	<author>Joe The Dragon</author>
	<datestamp>1266246660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>2009 mac pro should be on the list as it has</p><p>* High price for it's hardware come on $2500 for 3gb of ram and poor video card NVIDIA GeForce GT 120 512MB. The last on started at $2200 and the old g5 was at $2000.<br>* High priced video card upgrade add $200 for a ATI Radeon HD 4870 512MB makeing it's real cost $350 (200+150 base cost of gt120)<br>* NO SLI or crossfire in osx as well.<br>* Does not work in osx with non efi / apple video cards.<br>* reused the old g5 case with little change.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>2009 mac pro should be on the list as it has * High price for it 's hardware come on $ 2500 for 3gb of ram and poor video card NVIDIA GeForce GT 120 512MB .
The last on started at $ 2200 and the old g5 was at $ 2000 .
* High priced video card upgrade add $ 200 for a ATI Radeon HD 4870 512MB makeing it 's real cost $ 350 ( 200 + 150 base cost of gt120 ) * NO SLI or crossfire in osx as well .
* Does not work in osx with non efi / apple video cards .
* reused the old g5 case with little change .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>2009 mac pro should be on the list as it has* High price for it's hardware come on $2500 for 3gb of ram and poor video card NVIDIA GeForce GT 120 512MB.
The last on started at $2200 and the old g5 was at $2000.
* High priced video card upgrade add $200 for a ATI Radeon HD 4870 512MB makeing it's real cost $350 (200+150 base cost of gt120)* NO SLI or crossfire in osx as well.
* Does not work in osx with non efi / apple video cards.
* reused the old g5 case with little change.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31146152</id>
	<title>Re:The List</title>
	<author>Daniel Dvorkin</author>
	<datestamp>1266259740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You may not remember this, but there was a point when Quicktime was pretty much the only decent video player available on any platform.  The product as a whole is more likely to end up on a best-of than a worst-of list, regardless of how lousy recent versions have been.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You may not remember this , but there was a point when Quicktime was pretty much the only decent video player available on any platform .
The product as a whole is more likely to end up on a best-of than a worst-of list , regardless of how lousy recent versions have been .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You may not remember this, but there was a point when Quicktime was pretty much the only decent video player available on any platform.
The product as a whole is more likely to end up on a best-of than a worst-of list, regardless of how lousy recent versions have been.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143122</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143800</id>
	<title>No MacintoshTV???</title>
	<author>d23tek</author>
	<datestamp>1266248220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The problem with lists like this is that truly lame products don't stick around long enough for most people to remember them. Consider the <a href="http://lowendmac.com/500/macintosh-tv.html" title="lowendmac.com" rel="nofollow">Macintosh TV</a> [lowendmac.com]. Only 10,000 were made before Apple came to its senses. Who would buy a 14" TV for $2,000? Sure it was a computer, too, but you could either compute, or watch TV, not both simultaneously.<p>

Seems like anything from Apple with "TV" in the name is a dud.</p><p>

My only other quibble with the list is the inclusion of the PowerPC platform. I bought a PowerMac 6100/60 when they came out in 1994 and used it until 2001. Heck, I still had it running (and on the web with Netscape 3.1) in 2005! Overall, PowerPC was a solid platform. The fact that the Performa line used its chips is a completely separate issue.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem with lists like this is that truly lame products do n't stick around long enough for most people to remember them .
Consider the Macintosh TV [ lowendmac.com ] .
Only 10,000 were made before Apple came to its senses .
Who would buy a 14 " TV for $ 2,000 ?
Sure it was a computer , too , but you could either compute , or watch TV , not both simultaneously .
Seems like anything from Apple with " TV " in the name is a dud .
My only other quibble with the list is the inclusion of the PowerPC platform .
I bought a PowerMac 6100/60 when they came out in 1994 and used it until 2001 .
Heck , I still had it running ( and on the web with Netscape 3.1 ) in 2005 !
Overall , PowerPC was a solid platform .
The fact that the Performa line used its chips is a completely separate issue .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem with lists like this is that truly lame products don't stick around long enough for most people to remember them.
Consider the Macintosh TV [lowendmac.com].
Only 10,000 were made before Apple came to its senses.
Who would buy a 14" TV for $2,000?
Sure it was a computer, too, but you could either compute, or watch TV, not both simultaneously.
Seems like anything from Apple with "TV" in the name is a dud.
My only other quibble with the list is the inclusion of the PowerPC platform.
I bought a PowerMac 6100/60 when they came out in 1994 and used it until 2001.
Heck, I still had it running (and on the web with Netscape 3.1) in 2005!
Overall, PowerPC was a solid platform.
The fact that the Performa line used its chips is a completely separate issue.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143092</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31146002</id>
	<title>Re:The List</title>
	<author>tmp31416</author>
	<datestamp>1266258900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>if this is "the list", then it is badly chosen (to be polite).</p><p>the powerpc was not a bad product.  in fact, at first, it beat intel's offerings easily (faster, etc.).  it is only moto's incapability to get its act together, along with ibm's unwillingness to continue developing the product that prevented the powerpc from staying competitive.</p><p>os9 was a perfectly serviceable version of "macos classic".</p><p>two turkeys (imnsho) that should have been there instead are: the 1990 mac classic and the mac iisi.  two products made by cost-cutting and hobbling existing designs to prevent them to compete with existing "better" products (the iici, in this case).  oh, we can the original mac lc whilst we're at it.</p><p>i guess it was too much work to improve the "mainstream" machine of the time (the iici) so that the new low-cost offerings could be feature competitive with what the pc crowd were seeing on their side of the fence.  but what can you expect when bean-counting marketroids run the show?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>if this is " the list " , then it is badly chosen ( to be polite ) .the powerpc was not a bad product .
in fact , at first , it beat intel 's offerings easily ( faster , etc. ) .
it is only moto 's incapability to get its act together , along with ibm 's unwillingness to continue developing the product that prevented the powerpc from staying competitive.os9 was a perfectly serviceable version of " macos classic " .two turkeys ( imnsho ) that should have been there instead are : the 1990 mac classic and the mac iisi .
two products made by cost-cutting and hobbling existing designs to prevent them to compete with existing " better " products ( the iici , in this case ) .
oh , we can the original mac lc whilst we 're at it.i guess it was too much work to improve the " mainstream " machine of the time ( the iici ) so that the new low-cost offerings could be feature competitive with what the pc crowd were seeing on their side of the fence .
but what can you expect when bean-counting marketroids run the show ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>if this is "the list", then it is badly chosen (to be polite).the powerpc was not a bad product.
in fact, at first, it beat intel's offerings easily (faster, etc.).
it is only moto's incapability to get its act together, along with ibm's unwillingness to continue developing the product that prevented the powerpc from staying competitive.os9 was a perfectly serviceable version of "macos classic".two turkeys (imnsho) that should have been there instead are: the 1990 mac classic and the mac iisi.
two products made by cost-cutting and hobbling existing designs to prevent them to compete with existing "better" products (the iici, in this case).
oh, we can the original mac lc whilst we're at it.i guess it was too much work to improve the "mainstream" machine of the time (the iici) so that the new low-cost offerings could be feature competitive with what the pc crowd were seeing on their side of the fence.
but what can you expect when bean-counting marketroids run the show?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143092</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31145158</id>
	<title>Re:Not all the items listed were failures..</title>
	<author>RR</author>
	<datestamp>1266254700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>PowerPC:</p><p>PowerPC was not a failure. PowerPC's were sold by IBM in their POWER architectures and had quite a bit of success there as well.</p></div><p>IBM was selling POWER before PowerPC, and it took until 1998 with the POWER3 before POWER chips were based on PowerPC.</p><p>I'm surprised you didn't note that all 3 of the current generation game consoles now have PowerPC processors.</p><p>However, the failure that I remember was the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PReP" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">PowerPC Reference Platform (PReP)</a> [wikipedia.org]. It was supposed to usher in a golden age for RISC, with cloners helping IBM and Motorola to develop faster processors by buying lots of them, like they do with Intel, and with lots of operating systems including MacOS and Windows.</p><p>Instead, development was bogged down in territorial squabbles, no cloners built anything except the Mac clones, and Microsoft soon discontinued their Windows NT port. Apple's experiment with clones hurt the company a great deal. Now, outside of IBM and the game consoles, the only systems using PowerPC are embedded, and PowerPC is nowhere near the performance lead.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>PowerPC : PowerPC was not a failure .
PowerPC 's were sold by IBM in their POWER architectures and had quite a bit of success there as well.IBM was selling POWER before PowerPC , and it took until 1998 with the POWER3 before POWER chips were based on PowerPC.I 'm surprised you did n't note that all 3 of the current generation game consoles now have PowerPC processors.However , the failure that I remember was the PowerPC Reference Platform ( PReP ) [ wikipedia.org ] .
It was supposed to usher in a golden age for RISC , with cloners helping IBM and Motorola to develop faster processors by buying lots of them , like they do with Intel , and with lots of operating systems including MacOS and Windows.Instead , development was bogged down in territorial squabbles , no cloners built anything except the Mac clones , and Microsoft soon discontinued their Windows NT port .
Apple 's experiment with clones hurt the company a great deal .
Now , outside of IBM and the game consoles , the only systems using PowerPC are embedded , and PowerPC is nowhere near the performance lead .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>PowerPC:PowerPC was not a failure.
PowerPC's were sold by IBM in their POWER architectures and had quite a bit of success there as well.IBM was selling POWER before PowerPC, and it took until 1998 with the POWER3 before POWER chips were based on PowerPC.I'm surprised you didn't note that all 3 of the current generation game consoles now have PowerPC processors.However, the failure that I remember was the PowerPC Reference Platform (PReP) [wikipedia.org].
It was supposed to usher in a golden age for RISC, with cloners helping IBM and Motorola to develop faster processors by buying lots of them, like they do with Intel, and with lots of operating systems including MacOS and Windows.Instead, development was bogged down in territorial squabbles, no cloners built anything except the Mac clones, and Microsoft soon discontinued their Windows NT port.
Apple's experiment with clones hurt the company a great deal.
Now, outside of IBM and the game consoles, the only systems using PowerPC are embedded, and PowerPC is nowhere near the performance lead.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143324</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143928</id>
	<title>There were good products from Apple?</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1266248880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ok, I guess if you ignore the pricing, and deprivation of the target markets.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ok , I guess if you ignore the pricing , and deprivation of the target markets .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ok, I guess if you ignore the pricing, and deprivation of the target markets.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31144016</id>
	<title>That same argument leads to Britney Spears</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266249360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That same argument leads to Britney Spears getting and deserving a lifetime achievement award for music.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That same argument leads to Britney Spears getting and deserving a lifetime achievement award for music .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That same argument leads to Britney Spears getting and deserving a lifetime achievement award for music.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143254</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31151438</id>
	<title>Re:The List</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266247200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><blockquote><div><p>No Quicktime Player? It's a turd of a program on either OS, but <strong>the windows version definitely stand out as a major PITA</strong>.</p></div></blockquote><p>Beaten only by iTunes, also strangely not on the list.</p><p>I don't care how cool iPods are, or how well the iTunes store works, the software is horrible on Windows.</p></div><p>Whos talking about windows, tha pseudo program OS<br>is worthless<br>So who cares if itunes is horrible on windows,buy an apple</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>No Quicktime Player ?
It 's a turd of a program on either OS , but the windows version definitely stand out as a major PITA.Beaten only by iTunes , also strangely not on the list.I do n't care how cool iPods are , or how well the iTunes store works , the software is horrible on Windows.Whos talking about windows , tha pseudo program OSis worthlessSo who cares if itunes is horrible on windows,buy an apple</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No Quicktime Player?
It's a turd of a program on either OS, but the windows version definitely stand out as a major PITA.Beaten only by iTunes, also strangely not on the list.I don't care how cool iPods are, or how well the iTunes store works, the software is horrible on Windows.Whos talking about windows, tha pseudo program OSis worthlessSo who cares if itunes is horrible on windows,buy an apple
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143286</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31145758</id>
	<title>So 2 points here...</title>
	<author>Colourspace</author>
	<datestamp>1266257580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>From the summary.. The Amigas had a similar problem.. I worked in computer retail late 80's to mid 90's . the easiest money we made In that place was fixing the old 'green screen bootup' (precursor to BSOD). Take &pound;30 off sucker, take Amiga out the back, smoke and drink coffee for half hour. Drop amiga 2 inches from floor. Happy kids, very happy parents. I should have really got into garbage collection round thAt time.</htmltext>
<tokenext>From the summary.. The Amigas had a similar problem.. I worked in computer retail late 80 's to mid 90 's .
the easiest money we made In that place was fixing the old 'green screen bootup ' ( precursor to BSOD ) .
Take   30 off sucker , take Amiga out the back , smoke and drink coffee for half hour .
Drop amiga 2 inches from floor .
Happy kids , very happy parents .
I should have really got into garbage collection round thAt time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From the summary.. The Amigas had a similar problem.. I worked in computer retail late 80's to mid 90's .
the easiest money we made In that place was fixing the old 'green screen bootup' (precursor to BSOD).
Take £30 off sucker, take Amiga out the back, smoke and drink coffee for half hour.
Drop amiga 2 inches from floor.
Happy kids, very happy parents.
I should have really got into garbage collection round thAt time.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143122</id>
	<title>Re:The List</title>
	<author>EdZ</author>
	<datestamp>1266243180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>No Quicktime Player? It's a turd of a program on either OS, but the windows version definitely stand out as a major PITA.</htmltext>
<tokenext>No Quicktime Player ?
It 's a turd of a program on either OS , but the windows version definitely stand out as a major PITA .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No Quicktime Player?
It's a turd of a program on either OS, but the windows version definitely stand out as a major PITA.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143092</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31146862</id>
	<title>The Color Classic?</title>
	<author>dpbsmith</author>
	<datestamp>1266263400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, all I can say is I owned one from about 1994 to 1997 and I loved it. It served me well. Maybe not the greatest product Apple ever produced but FAR from the worst. <em>It more than lived up to my expectations</em> which, by the way, the Performa 6400 Video Editing Edition I replaced it with did not. (The Avid-designed video hardware and software acquired more and more glitches and bugs with each minor OS release. When I finally sold it, restored the original software bundle and was amazed to see how well the video editing stuff worked again! I'd thought the hardware was dying).</p><p>The only real complaint I had about the Color Classic was that the screen was not quite as sharp as the black-and-white screen on the MacPlus it replaced.</p><p>The hockey-puck mouse? Sure. The Apple<nobr> <wbr></nobr>///? Sure. eWorld? Sure. And how could they forget Lisa in general, and its Twiggy drives in particular? And we're ranking on Apple you can throw in Pages, that feels like it tried to be a desktop publishing program and failed, so they marketed it as a word processor. And you can throw in, or throw out, the crappy monitors Apple provided under their own name in the late nineties. And you can add all the babies that Apple unnecessarily threw out with the OS X bathwater; I know of nothing about preemptive multitasking that would force anyone to ditch resources and type/creator. They had clever-clever arguments about how you could get the same benefits without using resources, but either the arguments were wrong or they never followed through, because Mac OS X deteriorated into the same world of extension hell and documents never being associated with the right applications that Windows users have enjoyed all along.</p><p>But the rest of the stuff in the article is offbase.  It's not very perceptive. It's just a couple of guys who don't like Macs taking random potshots. People who don't like Macs in the first place don't seem to "get" what the people who do like them, like about them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , all I can say is I owned one from about 1994 to 1997 and I loved it .
It served me well .
Maybe not the greatest product Apple ever produced but FAR from the worst .
It more than lived up to my expectations which , by the way , the Performa 6400 Video Editing Edition I replaced it with did not .
( The Avid-designed video hardware and software acquired more and more glitches and bugs with each minor OS release .
When I finally sold it , restored the original software bundle and was amazed to see how well the video editing stuff worked again !
I 'd thought the hardware was dying ) .The only real complaint I had about the Color Classic was that the screen was not quite as sharp as the black-and-white screen on the MacPlus it replaced.The hockey-puck mouse ?
Sure. The Apple /// ?
Sure. eWorld ?
Sure. And how could they forget Lisa in general , and its Twiggy drives in particular ?
And we 're ranking on Apple you can throw in Pages , that feels like it tried to be a desktop publishing program and failed , so they marketed it as a word processor .
And you can throw in , or throw out , the crappy monitors Apple provided under their own name in the late nineties .
And you can add all the babies that Apple unnecessarily threw out with the OS X bathwater ; I know of nothing about preemptive multitasking that would force anyone to ditch resources and type/creator .
They had clever-clever arguments about how you could get the same benefits without using resources , but either the arguments were wrong or they never followed through , because Mac OS X deteriorated into the same world of extension hell and documents never being associated with the right applications that Windows users have enjoyed all along.But the rest of the stuff in the article is offbase .
It 's not very perceptive .
It 's just a couple of guys who do n't like Macs taking random potshots .
People who do n't like Macs in the first place do n't seem to " get " what the people who do like them , like about them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, all I can say is I owned one from about 1994 to 1997 and I loved it.
It served me well.
Maybe not the greatest product Apple ever produced but FAR from the worst.
It more than lived up to my expectations which, by the way, the Performa 6400 Video Editing Edition I replaced it with did not.
(The Avid-designed video hardware and software acquired more and more glitches and bugs with each minor OS release.
When I finally sold it, restored the original software bundle and was amazed to see how well the video editing stuff worked again!
I'd thought the hardware was dying).The only real complaint I had about the Color Classic was that the screen was not quite as sharp as the black-and-white screen on the MacPlus it replaced.The hockey-puck mouse?
Sure. The Apple ///?
Sure. eWorld?
Sure. And how could they forget Lisa in general, and its Twiggy drives in particular?
And we're ranking on Apple you can throw in Pages, that feels like it tried to be a desktop publishing program and failed, so they marketed it as a word processor.
And you can throw in, or throw out, the crappy monitors Apple provided under their own name in the late nineties.
And you can add all the babies that Apple unnecessarily threw out with the OS X bathwater; I know of nothing about preemptive multitasking that would force anyone to ditch resources and type/creator.
They had clever-clever arguments about how you could get the same benefits without using resources, but either the arguments were wrong or they never followed through, because Mac OS X deteriorated into the same world of extension hell and documents never being associated with the right applications that Windows users have enjoyed all along.But the rest of the stuff in the article is offbase.
It's not very perceptive.
It's just a couple of guys who don't like Macs taking random potshots.
People who don't like Macs in the first place don't seem to "get" what the people who do like them, like about them.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143728</id>
	<title>Re:The List</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266247920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You do realise that the thing comes with Apple headphones with inline controls, right? The market for iPod users who use anything other than the default headphones is not, outside the tech and audiophile community, very large. Belkin also sell an adapter for something like $20, which is what I use with my 3G shuffle at the gym with alternative headphones, and I'm very happy with it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You do realise that the thing comes with Apple headphones with inline controls , right ?
The market for iPod users who use anything other than the default headphones is not , outside the tech and audiophile community , very large .
Belkin also sell an adapter for something like $ 20 , which is what I use with my 3G shuffle at the gym with alternative headphones , and I 'm very happy with it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You do realise that the thing comes with Apple headphones with inline controls, right?
The market for iPod users who use anything other than the default headphones is not, outside the tech and audiophile community, very large.
Belkin also sell an adapter for something like $20, which is what I use with my 3G shuffle at the gym with alternative headphones, and I'm very happy with it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143256</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31151010</id>
	<title>Re:The List</title>
	<author>Macgrrl</author>
	<datestamp>1266242760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I wonder what their definition of success was. Take the 20th Anniversary Mac for example, they were a limited edition item which had a waiting list. Sounds pretty successful to me.</p><p>The Mac Portable is another example which I would have said was a market leader and what they learned from the luggable became the PB100 line which was hugely successful.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I wonder what their definition of success was .
Take the 20th Anniversary Mac for example , they were a limited edition item which had a waiting list .
Sounds pretty successful to me.The Mac Portable is another example which I would have said was a market leader and what they learned from the luggable became the PB100 line which was hugely successful .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wonder what their definition of success was.
Take the 20th Anniversary Mac for example, they were a limited edition item which had a waiting list.
Sounds pretty successful to me.The Mac Portable is another example which I would have said was a market leader and what they learned from the luggable became the PB100 line which was hugely successful.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143092</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143246</id>
	<title>no comparison</title>
	<author>TRRosen</author>
	<datestamp>1266244260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>At least they didn't invent BOB.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>At least they did n't invent BOB .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At least they didn't invent BOB.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143316</id>
	<title>AOL came from eWorld</title>
	<author>zerosomething</author>
	<datestamp>1266244920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>eWorld and AOL never competed agains each other as the article would suggest. In fact AOL grew out of the remains of eWorld. <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EWorld" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EWorld</a> [wikipedia.org]

Oh and the pricing wasn't really so bad compared to not being online or long distance dial up and membership fees for other BBS.</htmltext>
<tokenext>eWorld and AOL never competed agains each other as the article would suggest .
In fact AOL grew out of the remains of eWorld .
http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EWorld [ wikipedia.org ] Oh and the pricing was n't really so bad compared to not being online or long distance dial up and membership fees for other BBS .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>eWorld and AOL never competed agains each other as the article would suggest.
In fact AOL grew out of the remains of eWorld.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EWorld [wikipedia.org]

Oh and the pricing wasn't really so bad compared to not being online or long distance dial up and membership fees for other BBS.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31147410</id>
	<title>Re:Hardcore repair methods</title>
	<author>geekthesteve</author>
	<datestamp>1266265860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Our finance department bought an Apple III for doing VivCalc spreadsheets.  It was a reliable computer for us until the hard drive started to make a grinding noise.  Occasionally it would refuse to load or save a file when grinding away and the fix for us was to raise the separate hard drive cabinet a few inches off of the desk it was no and drop it.  The grinding might stop after doing this and if it didn't then we just dropped it again.  Eventually this process stopped working but by this time the IBM PC XT had come out and we replace Apple VisiCalc with IBM/Lotus.  DOS was a disappointment after using the Apple III OS but the hardware worked flawlessly.  Once we had implemented menus on the character interface the users were much happier with the IBM machines.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Our finance department bought an Apple III for doing VivCalc spreadsheets .
It was a reliable computer for us until the hard drive started to make a grinding noise .
Occasionally it would refuse to load or save a file when grinding away and the fix for us was to raise the separate hard drive cabinet a few inches off of the desk it was no and drop it .
The grinding might stop after doing this and if it did n't then we just dropped it again .
Eventually this process stopped working but by this time the IBM PC XT had come out and we replace Apple VisiCalc with IBM/Lotus .
DOS was a disappointment after using the Apple III OS but the hardware worked flawlessly .
Once we had implemented menus on the character interface the users were much happier with the IBM machines .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Our finance department bought an Apple III for doing VivCalc spreadsheets.
It was a reliable computer for us until the hard drive started to make a grinding noise.
Occasionally it would refuse to load or save a file when grinding away and the fix for us was to raise the separate hard drive cabinet a few inches off of the desk it was no and drop it.
The grinding might stop after doing this and if it didn't then we just dropped it again.
Eventually this process stopped working but by this time the IBM PC XT had come out and we replace Apple VisiCalc with IBM/Lotus.
DOS was a disappointment after using the Apple III OS but the hardware worked flawlessly.
Once we had implemented menus on the character interface the users were much happier with the IBM machines.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143132</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31151058</id>
	<title>Re:All of thier mice suck</title>
	<author>Macgrrl</author>
	<datestamp>1266243180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You obviously never used on of the original Apple Extended Keyboards, which had a great action on them and were fabulously durable. I kept using one right up until the loss of the ADB port.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You obviously never used on of the original Apple Extended Keyboards , which had a great action on them and were fabulously durable .
I kept using one right up until the loss of the ADB port .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You obviously never used on of the original Apple Extended Keyboards, which had a great action on them and were fabulously durable.
I kept using one right up until the loss of the ADB port.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143288</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143486</id>
	<title>Bohr said it best</title>
	<author>ral</author>
	<datestamp>1266246420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>An expert is a person who has made all the mistakes that can be made in a very narrow field.</i> <br> <br>
-Niels Bohr</htmltext>
<tokenext>An expert is a person who has made all the mistakes that can be made in a very narrow field .
-Niels Bohr</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An expert is a person who has made all the mistakes that can be made in a very narrow field.
-Niels Bohr</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31144450</id>
	<title>Re:How come...</title>
	<author>The Breeze</author>
	<datestamp>1266251640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It is posted:</p><p>www.dell.com -&gt; current promotions.</p><p>Just kidding.  I actually use Dell.  It's just their products are...not memorable.  Dell's a copier, not an innovator.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It is posted : www.dell.com - &gt; current promotions.Just kidding .
I actually use Dell .
It 's just their products are...not memorable .
Dell 's a copier , not an innovator .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It is posted:www.dell.com -&gt; current promotions.Just kidding.
I actually use Dell.
It's just their products are...not memorable.
Dell's a copier, not an innovator.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143580</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143256</id>
	<title>Re:The List</title>
	<author>vlm</author>
	<datestamp>1266244380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No mention of the latest generation ipod shuffle?  The one where they figured control buttons would "clutter up" the design, so instead you have to buy special, expensive apple earbuds/headphones that are all cluttered up with inline controls and only cost ten times the cost of normal headphones?  So the shuffle plus a pair of "special" headphones costs more than a nano?</p><p>I'd buy a shuffle in an instant, if it had volume up / volume down / play-pause buttons on the device.</p><p>I know adapter cables are sold, and I guess I could duct tape / hot glue gun the adapter onto the shuffle, to make an almost usable "exercise ipod".  But having to pay the "apple tax" and then whip out the duct tape and hot glue gun to make it usable is just going too far.</p><p>Note I'm not an apple hater, I enjoy by nano for exercise listening and my ipod touch for PDA and video use, but the shuffle is just a design disaster.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No mention of the latest generation ipod shuffle ?
The one where they figured control buttons would " clutter up " the design , so instead you have to buy special , expensive apple earbuds/headphones that are all cluttered up with inline controls and only cost ten times the cost of normal headphones ?
So the shuffle plus a pair of " special " headphones costs more than a nano ? I 'd buy a shuffle in an instant , if it had volume up / volume down / play-pause buttons on the device.I know adapter cables are sold , and I guess I could duct tape / hot glue gun the adapter onto the shuffle , to make an almost usable " exercise ipod " .
But having to pay the " apple tax " and then whip out the duct tape and hot glue gun to make it usable is just going too far.Note I 'm not an apple hater , I enjoy by nano for exercise listening and my ipod touch for PDA and video use , but the shuffle is just a design disaster .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No mention of the latest generation ipod shuffle?
The one where they figured control buttons would "clutter up" the design, so instead you have to buy special, expensive apple earbuds/headphones that are all cluttered up with inline controls and only cost ten times the cost of normal headphones?
So the shuffle plus a pair of "special" headphones costs more than a nano?I'd buy a shuffle in an instant, if it had volume up / volume down / play-pause buttons on the device.I know adapter cables are sold, and I guess I could duct tape / hot glue gun the adapter onto the shuffle, to make an almost usable "exercise ipod".
But having to pay the "apple tax" and then whip out the duct tape and hot glue gun to make it usable is just going too far.Note I'm not an apple hater, I enjoy by nano for exercise listening and my ipod touch for PDA and video use, but the shuffle is just a design disaster.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143092</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143550</id>
	<title>Re:I think that's the point</title>
	<author>mdwh2</author>
	<datestamp>1266246840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I fully agree. The fallacy in the press, and my users here, seems to be "The Ipod was successful, therefore anything else from them will be".</p><p>The fact that the Mac has always been a niche product, and the Iphone is a niche product, is ignored. Indeed, the press hype it up as if the Iphone was as successful as the Ipod!</p><p>The annoying thing is, these people aren't even consistent. By their logic, since Windows is massively successful, we should all be talking about Microsoft's Zune as if it's going to be the next big thing...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I fully agree .
The fallacy in the press , and my users here , seems to be " The Ipod was successful , therefore anything else from them will be " .The fact that the Mac has always been a niche product , and the Iphone is a niche product , is ignored .
Indeed , the press hype it up as if the Iphone was as successful as the Ipod ! The annoying thing is , these people are n't even consistent .
By their logic , since Windows is massively successful , we should all be talking about Microsoft 's Zune as if it 's going to be the next big thing.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I fully agree.
The fallacy in the press, and my users here, seems to be "The Ipod was successful, therefore anything else from them will be".The fact that the Mac has always been a niche product, and the Iphone is a niche product, is ignored.
Indeed, the press hype it up as if the Iphone was as successful as the Ipod!The annoying thing is, these people aren't even consistent.
By their logic, since Windows is massively successful, we should all be talking about Microsoft's Zune as if it's going to be the next big thing...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143312</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31162474</id>
	<title>Re:The List</title>
	<author>g253</author>
	<datestamp>1266325680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>FTFA, the part about the Quicktake: "Sure you could download your snaps very easily onto your computer but that hardly made it a usable product. It typified Apple's approach at the time, when the company's management thought that its users would buy almost anything if it had an Apple logo on it. That attitude seems to be largely reformed now, although if you look at the iPod Shuffle I have my doubts."</htmltext>
<tokenext>FTFA , the part about the Quicktake : " Sure you could download your snaps very easily onto your computer but that hardly made it a usable product .
It typified Apple 's approach at the time , when the company 's management thought that its users would buy almost anything if it had an Apple logo on it .
That attitude seems to be largely reformed now , although if you look at the iPod Shuffle I have my doubts .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>FTFA, the part about the Quicktake: "Sure you could download your snaps very easily onto your computer but that hardly made it a usable product.
It typified Apple's approach at the time, when the company's management thought that its users would buy almost anything if it had an Apple logo on it.
That attitude seems to be largely reformed now, although if you look at the iPod Shuffle I have my doubts.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143256</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_68</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143092
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31145058
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_73</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143210
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31144350
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_87</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143154
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31144532
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143324
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31145234
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31147058
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143092
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143122
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31148336
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_64</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143070
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143204
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143234
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31153858
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143092
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31145086
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143324
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31144854
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143092
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31144632
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_88</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143580
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31144120
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_61</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143092
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143122
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31146152
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31162426
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143132
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31147410
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143092
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31151010
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143210
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31146798
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_66</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143134
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31145608
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_85</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143092
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143760
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143580
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31144450
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143324
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31146018
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_59</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143106
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143288
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31151058
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_62</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143092
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143786
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_90</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143092
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143306
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31151604
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143154
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31144728
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143092
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143122
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143286
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31149722
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143106
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31173620
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143324
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31144862
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143132
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31144596
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143070
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143254
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31145938
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143106
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143300
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31153644
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_77</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143092
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143122
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143286
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31144978
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143070
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143254
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143570
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31151790
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143210
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31148584
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_79</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143070
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143254
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143668
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31145522
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_82</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143324
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31145512
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143106
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31144558
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143106
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143300
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31152510
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_78</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143092
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31148376
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_69</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143188
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143694
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_72</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143070
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143254
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31148134
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143324
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31146980
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143106
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143422
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143154
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31144304
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_65</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143324
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143582
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143324
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143936
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143228
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31145206
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143106
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143886
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143470
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31145784
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_89</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143228
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31146476
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_80</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143134
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31146702
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143134
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31144316
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143092
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31151330
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_71</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143134
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31148636
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143092
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143122
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143318
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_67</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143324
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31145158
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143092
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143256
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31146860
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_70</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143134
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31148798
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143092
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143306
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31151040
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143154
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31157598
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143070
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143254
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31144016
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_63</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143092
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143122
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31144736
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143132
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31144766
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143092
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143306
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31148920
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_86</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143228
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31145684
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143324
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31149648
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143210
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31145610
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143092
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143306
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31144010
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_93</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143092
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31144890
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_76</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143070
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143270
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_92</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143092
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143256
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143728
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_83</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143070
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143254
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143570
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31146506
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143106
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31147126
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143070
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143254
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143708
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_60</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143092
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143256
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143640
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143092
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143256
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31162474
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143092
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143122
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143286
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31312088
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143132
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143744
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143092
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31144866
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143092
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143122
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31163986
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143106
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31146708
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_84</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143324
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31145746
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143134
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31144808
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_75</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143070
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143254
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143846
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143324
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31146496
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_91</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143092
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143122
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143286
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31147426
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_74</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143092
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143122
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143286
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31151438
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143092
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31146002
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143092
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31144546
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_81</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143092
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143800
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143106
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143312
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143550
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143092
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143256
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31147018
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143070
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143254
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31144112
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143092
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143124
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143134
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31146770
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_15_0321218_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143092
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143306
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31144286
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_0321218.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143092
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31146002
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31145058
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143256
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31147018
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31146860
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143728
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31162474
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143640
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143786
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143124
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31144890
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143760
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143306
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31151040
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31148920
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31144010
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31151604
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31144286
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31144546
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143800
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31148376
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31151010
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31144866
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31145086
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31144632
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31151330
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143122
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31146152
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31162426
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31144736
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31163986
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143286
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31151438
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31149722
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31144978
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31312088
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31147426
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143318
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31148336
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_0321218.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143470
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31145784
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_0321218.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31147148
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_0321218.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143580
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31144450
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31144120
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_0321218.21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143324
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31145158
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31146018
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31144862
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31149648
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31145234
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31147058
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31145746
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143582
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31146980
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31144854
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31146496
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143936
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31145512
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_0321218.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143210
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31145610
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31148584
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31146798
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31144350
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_0321218.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31145758
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_0321218.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143342
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_0321218.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143894
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_0321218.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143158
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_0321218.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143070
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143254
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143846
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143570
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31146506
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31151790
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143708
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31144016
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31144112
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31145938
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31148134
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143668
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31145522
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143270
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143204
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_0321218.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143316
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_0321218.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143428
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_0321218.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143134
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31145608
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31144316
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31148636
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31146702
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31146770
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31148798
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31144808
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_0321218.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143228
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31146476
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31145684
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31145206
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_0321218.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143188
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143694
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_0321218.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143234
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31153858
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_0321218.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143132
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31144766
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143744
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31147410
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31144596
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_0321218.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143154
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31157598
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31144532
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31144304
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31144728
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_0321218.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143866
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_0321218.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143106
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143300
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31152510
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31153644
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143422
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143886
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143288
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31151058
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31147126
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31146708
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143312
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31143550
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31144558
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31173620
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_15_0321218.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_15_0321218.31144484
</commentlist>
</conversation>
