<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_02_21_1529202</id>
	<title>Why Flash Is Fundamentally Flawed On Touchscreen Devices</title>
	<author>Soulskill</author>
	<datestamp>1266771540000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>An anonymous reader passes along this excerpt from Roughly Drafted:
<i>"I'm a full-time Flash developer and I'd love to get paid to make Flash sites for the iPad. I want that to make sense &mdash; but it doesn't. <a href="http://www.roughlydrafted.com/2010/02/20/an-adobe-flash-developer-on-why-the-ipad-cant-use-flash/">Flash on the iPad will not (and should not) happen</a> &mdash; and the main reason, as I see it, is one that never gets talked about: current Flash sites could never be made to work well on any touchscreen device, and this cannot be solved by Apple, Adobe, or magical new hardware. That's not because of slow mobile performance, battery drain or crashes. It's because of the hover or mouseover problem. ... All that Apple and Adobe could ever do is make current Flash content visible. It would be seen, but very often would not work."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>An anonymous reader passes along this excerpt from Roughly Drafted : " I 'm a full-time Flash developer and I 'd love to get paid to make Flash sites for the iPad .
I want that to make sense    but it does n't .
Flash on the iPad will not ( and should not ) happen    and the main reason , as I see it , is one that never gets talked about : current Flash sites could never be made to work well on any touchscreen device , and this can not be solved by Apple , Adobe , or magical new hardware .
That 's not because of slow mobile performance , battery drain or crashes .
It 's because of the hover or mouseover problem .
... All that Apple and Adobe could ever do is make current Flash content visible .
It would be seen , but very often would not work .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An anonymous reader passes along this excerpt from Roughly Drafted:
"I'm a full-time Flash developer and I'd love to get paid to make Flash sites for the iPad.
I want that to make sense — but it doesn't.
Flash on the iPad will not (and should not) happen — and the main reason, as I see it, is one that never gets talked about: current Flash sites could never be made to work well on any touchscreen device, and this cannot be solved by Apple, Adobe, or magical new hardware.
That's not because of slow mobile performance, battery drain or crashes.
It's because of the hover or mouseover problem.
... All that Apple and Adobe could ever do is make current Flash content visible.
It would be seen, but very often would not work.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219980</id>
	<title>Re:Yeah, this is a totally unsolvable problem.</title>
	<author>fidget42</author>
	<datestamp>1266778680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Try to mix that implementation with the rest of the system.  Let's say that your Flash implementation has press and move mean move the cursor.  Now place that into a browser were press and move means move the content under the window.  What happens if I click and drag inside the Flash section of the web page?  How will I move the web page's content?  Will I need to select multitouch events that are unique?  Now add right-click.  How useful will that interface be in the end?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Try to mix that implementation with the rest of the system .
Let 's say that your Flash implementation has press and move mean move the cursor .
Now place that into a browser were press and move means move the content under the window .
What happens if I click and drag inside the Flash section of the web page ?
How will I move the web page 's content ?
Will I need to select multitouch events that are unique ?
Now add right-click .
How useful will that interface be in the end ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Try to mix that implementation with the rest of the system.
Let's say that your Flash implementation has press and move mean move the cursor.
Now place that into a browser were press and move means move the content under the window.
What happens if I click and drag inside the Flash section of the web page?
How will I move the web page's content?
Will I need to select multitouch events that are unique?
Now add right-click.
How useful will that interface be in the end?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219408</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31221108</id>
	<title>My 2 Cents</title>
	<author>Nuvious</author>
	<datestamp>1266784800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://slashdot.org/submission/1177568/Why-Flash-Will-Work-on-Touch-Screen-Devices" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">http://slashdot.org/submission/1177568/Why-Flash-Will-Work-on-Touch-Screen-Devices</a> [slashdot.org]</htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //slashdot.org/submission/1177568/Why-Flash-Will-Work-on-Touch-Screen-Devices [ slashdot.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://slashdot.org/submission/1177568/Why-Flash-Will-Work-on-Touch-Screen-Devices [slashdot.org]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31221740</id>
	<title>Re:Not entirely true</title>
	<author>bgspence</author>
	<datestamp>1266745860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Using a mouse or trackpad to move a visible cursor is the problem. You could use the finger position on a touch screen to perform the same action, but the finger obscures the very pixels the visible cursor is pointing to. Even a mouse's arrow cursor is smart enough to stay out of the way of the cursor's hotspot. It doesn't obscure that pixel.</p><p>On a smaller screen the finger obscures an even greater proportion of the screen at the hotspot of the cursor. Thats the problem.</p><p>The solution: A finger gesture that makes the tracking finger invisible! Or, just use your invisibility cloak's matching invisibility glove, and Flash will be fine on the iPhone.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Using a mouse or trackpad to move a visible cursor is the problem .
You could use the finger position on a touch screen to perform the same action , but the finger obscures the very pixels the visible cursor is pointing to .
Even a mouse 's arrow cursor is smart enough to stay out of the way of the cursor 's hotspot .
It does n't obscure that pixel.On a smaller screen the finger obscures an even greater proportion of the screen at the hotspot of the cursor .
Thats the problem.The solution : A finger gesture that makes the tracking finger invisible !
Or , just use your invisibility cloak 's matching invisibility glove , and Flash will be fine on the iPhone .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Using a mouse or trackpad to move a visible cursor is the problem.
You could use the finger position on a touch screen to perform the same action, but the finger obscures the very pixels the visible cursor is pointing to.
Even a mouse's arrow cursor is smart enough to stay out of the way of the cursor's hotspot.
It doesn't obscure that pixel.On a smaller screen the finger obscures an even greater proportion of the screen at the hotspot of the cursor.
Thats the problem.The solution: A finger gesture that makes the tracking finger invisible!
Or, just use your invisibility cloak's matching invisibility glove, and Flash will be fine on the iPhone.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219340</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31223878</id>
	<title>Re:Not to defend Flash, but...</title>
	<author>nine-times</author>
	<datestamp>1266759240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I'm in no way a supporter of Flash, but how is this any different than anything else in the browser with a<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:hover state?</p></div><p>Well it depends on how you're using your "hover" state, but at least HTML has the option of doing things like detecting the browser and feeding alternate stylesheets.  If the use of "hover" is using a stylesheet, then an alternate stylesheet can be used to present a version of the page that would be more appropriate to a touchscreen.  As far as I know, Flash doesn't really work like that.  I suppose Flash could work like that, but I don't think it currently does.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm in no way a supporter of Flash , but how is this any different than anything else in the browser with a : hover state ? Well it depends on how you 're using your " hover " state , but at least HTML has the option of doing things like detecting the browser and feeding alternate stylesheets .
If the use of " hover " is using a stylesheet , then an alternate stylesheet can be used to present a version of the page that would be more appropriate to a touchscreen .
As far as I know , Flash does n't really work like that .
I suppose Flash could work like that , but I do n't think it currently does .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm in no way a supporter of Flash, but how is this any different than anything else in the browser with a :hover state?Well it depends on how you're using your "hover" state, but at least HTML has the option of doing things like detecting the browser and feeding alternate stylesheets.
If the use of "hover" is using a stylesheet, then an alternate stylesheet can be used to present a version of the page that would be more appropriate to a touchscreen.
As far as I know, Flash doesn't really work like that.
I suppose Flash could work like that, but I don't think it currently does.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219426</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31223398</id>
	<title>Hovers, Mouseovers?</title>
	<author>ratboy666</author>
	<datestamp>1266755820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And what IS the problem?</p><p>The iPhone/iPod Touch/iPad have a touch surface of the entire screen. This appears to be the issue...</p><p>But it's really not. The active touch area could be constrained while running flash. At that point, the "flash" would run the same as on any touchpad laptop -- except for buttons. These can also be dedicated hot areas.</p><p>No, it may not be pretty, but it would work. I imagine a reasonable design for this feature would be a pop-in "trackpad", similar to the current keyboard. It would be a 4-way choice - none/keyboard/trackpad/both.</p><p>And, no, I don't see Apple offering this ever.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And what IS the problem ? The iPhone/iPod Touch/iPad have a touch surface of the entire screen .
This appears to be the issue...But it 's really not .
The active touch area could be constrained while running flash .
At that point , the " flash " would run the same as on any touchpad laptop -- except for buttons .
These can also be dedicated hot areas.No , it may not be pretty , but it would work .
I imagine a reasonable design for this feature would be a pop-in " trackpad " , similar to the current keyboard .
It would be a 4-way choice - none/keyboard/trackpad/both.And , no , I do n't see Apple offering this ever .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And what IS the problem?The iPhone/iPod Touch/iPad have a touch surface of the entire screen.
This appears to be the issue...But it's really not.
The active touch area could be constrained while running flash.
At that point, the "flash" would run the same as on any touchpad laptop -- except for buttons.
These can also be dedicated hot areas.No, it may not be pretty, but it would work.
I imagine a reasonable design for this feature would be a pop-in "trackpad", similar to the current keyboard.
It would be a 4-way choice - none/keyboard/trackpad/both.And, no, I don't see Apple offering this ever.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219830</id>
	<title>Isn't Flash Supposed to Come to Android Soon?</title>
	<author>ezdude</author>
	<datestamp>1266777840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Seems to me we just need to wait for 10.1 to see if the touchscreen is really the issue. Of course, if it is, then the wait for Flash to come to Android might be indefinite.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Seems to me we just need to wait for 10.1 to see if the touchscreen is really the issue .
Of course , if it is , then the wait for Flash to come to Android might be indefinite .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seems to me we just need to wait for 10.1 to see if the touchscreen is really the issue.
Of course, if it is, then the wait for Flash to come to Android might be indefinite.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31221688</id>
	<title>Re: the above comment</title>
	<author>MyBrotherSteve</author>
	<datestamp>1266745440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>After reading the entire article, it seems that Flash (or CSS, or [insert favorite web technology here] ) is not what needs to be rethought, but how device makers with touchscreens implement sufficient UI controls for users. An easy way to remedy the mouse-over / hover problem would be to include a cursor button (say, next to the text entry button that brings up the on-screen keyboard) as part of the UI. When you click this UI element, a cursor appears, which you can drag around with your finger, like on a touchpad. Perhaps it could even be programmed to appear by default when the device observes appropriate content on the screen, giving the user the ability to go back to 'normal' non-cursor mode if they chose to. Although this may not be considered the most elegant way to go about it, it seems that if there is a substantial amount of content and applications out there that require this type of interaction, then it is the responsibility of device makers to enable their users to interact with it, just as no PC maker would sell a PC without USB ports (or formerly ps/2) ports for plugging in a mouse and keyboard. No one would buy the damn thing, but more importantly, it makes the content that could be accessed by that device less valuable as a whole, just a giving users MORE ways to interact with content makes the content more valuable as a whole.</htmltext>
<tokenext>After reading the entire article , it seems that Flash ( or CSS , or [ insert favorite web technology here ] ) is not what needs to be rethought , but how device makers with touchscreens implement sufficient UI controls for users .
An easy way to remedy the mouse-over / hover problem would be to include a cursor button ( say , next to the text entry button that brings up the on-screen keyboard ) as part of the UI .
When you click this UI element , a cursor appears , which you can drag around with your finger , like on a touchpad .
Perhaps it could even be programmed to appear by default when the device observes appropriate content on the screen , giving the user the ability to go back to 'normal ' non-cursor mode if they chose to .
Although this may not be considered the most elegant way to go about it , it seems that if there is a substantial amount of content and applications out there that require this type of interaction , then it is the responsibility of device makers to enable their users to interact with it , just as no PC maker would sell a PC without USB ports ( or formerly ps/2 ) ports for plugging in a mouse and keyboard .
No one would buy the damn thing , but more importantly , it makes the content that could be accessed by that device less valuable as a whole , just a giving users MORE ways to interact with content makes the content more valuable as a whole .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>After reading the entire article, it seems that Flash (or CSS, or [insert favorite web technology here] ) is not what needs to be rethought, but how device makers with touchscreens implement sufficient UI controls for users.
An easy way to remedy the mouse-over / hover problem would be to include a cursor button (say, next to the text entry button that brings up the on-screen keyboard) as part of the UI.
When you click this UI element, a cursor appears, which you can drag around with your finger, like on a touchpad.
Perhaps it could even be programmed to appear by default when the device observes appropriate content on the screen, giving the user the ability to go back to 'normal' non-cursor mode if they chose to.
Although this may not be considered the most elegant way to go about it, it seems that if there is a substantial amount of content and applications out there that require this type of interaction, then it is the responsibility of device makers to enable their users to interact with it, just as no PC maker would sell a PC without USB ports (or formerly ps/2) ports for plugging in a mouse and keyboard.
No one would buy the damn thing, but more importantly, it makes the content that could be accessed by that device less valuable as a whole, just a giving users MORE ways to interact with content makes the content more valuable as a whole.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219496</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220768</id>
	<title>Funny...</title>
	<author>yoshi\_mon</author>
	<datestamp>1266782580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Flash works, not great but it does work, on my n810.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Flash works , not great but it does work , on my n810 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Flash works, not great but it does work, on my n810.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31221458</id>
	<title>Re:CPU usage/developers are the big problem</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266744000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>block the ad and get a clue you idiot!!!!!!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>block the ad and get a clue you idiot ! ! ! ! !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>block the ad and get a clue you idiot!!!!!
!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220740</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31243346</id>
	<title>Re:Opinion of a UI Game Developer who leverages Fl</title>
	<author>RogerWilco</author>
	<datestamp>1266933960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>While I agree that Apple might have a non-technical agenda with this, it is currently pure speculation.</p><p>As you seem to be an expert, I am wondering how the examples you give get around the problems mentioned in the article.</p><p>I am not interested in the option of building custom Flash (Lite) apps that work on a touchscreen handheld device, but how current existing Flash applications are made to work.</p><p>Given the experience you have, I would also like to hear your view on the effect that Flash advertisements have on speed, memory and battery usage of these devices while browsing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>While I agree that Apple might have a non-technical agenda with this , it is currently pure speculation.As you seem to be an expert , I am wondering how the examples you give get around the problems mentioned in the article.I am not interested in the option of building custom Flash ( Lite ) apps that work on a touchscreen handheld device , but how current existing Flash applications are made to work.Given the experience you have , I would also like to hear your view on the effect that Flash advertisements have on speed , memory and battery usage of these devices while browsing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While I agree that Apple might have a non-technical agenda with this, it is currently pure speculation.As you seem to be an expert, I am wondering how the examples you give get around the problems mentioned in the article.I am not interested in the option of building custom Flash (Lite) apps that work on a touchscreen handheld device, but how current existing Flash applications are made to work.Given the experience you have, I would also like to hear your view on the effect that Flash advertisements have on speed, memory and battery usage of these devices while browsing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219898</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31221194</id>
	<title>Re:Eat my balls!</title>
	<author>swilver</author>
	<datestamp>1266785340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Nah, hover is fundamentally flawed.</p><p>Hiding buttons and other interesting things until I mouse over them just means that people that look for things without pointing their mouse everywhere will never find your cleverly hidden gadgets.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Nah , hover is fundamentally flawed.Hiding buttons and other interesting things until I mouse over them just means that people that look for things without pointing their mouse everywhere will never find your cleverly hidden gadgets .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nah, hover is fundamentally flawed.Hiding buttons and other interesting things until I mouse over them just means that people that look for things without pointing their mouse everywhere will never find your cleverly hidden gadgets.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219496</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31224520</id>
	<title>Re:That's not why iDevices don't support flash</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266763560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That does not make sense. Apple is supporting HTML 5 as a replacement. So if dev's wanted to make these same flash games etc. available using HTML5, then Apple would have no problem. Your argument only stands valid if Apple then ban's those websites ( which is highly improbable).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That does not make sense .
Apple is supporting HTML 5 as a replacement .
So if dev 's wanted to make these same flash games etc .
available using HTML5 , then Apple would have no problem .
Your argument only stands valid if Apple then ban 's those websites ( which is highly improbable ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That does not make sense.
Apple is supporting HTML 5 as a replacement.
So if dev's wanted to make these same flash games etc.
available using HTML5, then Apple would have no problem.
Your argument only stands valid if Apple then ban's those websites ( which is highly improbable).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219780</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220202</id>
	<title>a problem everywhere</title>
	<author>CAIMLAS</author>
	<datestamp>1266779820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Guess what? Flash sites don't work well on any platform that exists now, so this is is hardly a surprise.</p><p>The "hover" issue is endemic to the web, these days. When you've got only a single tap or a hold to indicate input, you're bound to only two forms of input: this prevents things like mouseover javascript and the various "interactive" web features which are currently available.</p><p>Saying input limitations are what would keep Flash off touchscreen devices is a cop out. Complex web pages are browsable on mobile devices right now, albeit with some limitations. The real problems with flash are, indeed stability, bloat/inefficiency/memory use, and battery drain. When flash vvideo only just-barely plays full screen on a 2GHz desktop with mediocre dedicated graphics, there's an obvious problem.</p><p>At best, Flash will have limited utility on such devices due to memory use. Otherwise, they'd have to completely rewrite the platform.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Guess what ?
Flash sites do n't work well on any platform that exists now , so this is is hardly a surprise.The " hover " issue is endemic to the web , these days .
When you 've got only a single tap or a hold to indicate input , you 're bound to only two forms of input : this prevents things like mouseover javascript and the various " interactive " web features which are currently available.Saying input limitations are what would keep Flash off touchscreen devices is a cop out .
Complex web pages are browsable on mobile devices right now , albeit with some limitations .
The real problems with flash are , indeed stability , bloat/inefficiency/memory use , and battery drain .
When flash vvideo only just-barely plays full screen on a 2GHz desktop with mediocre dedicated graphics , there 's an obvious problem.At best , Flash will have limited utility on such devices due to memory use .
Otherwise , they 'd have to completely rewrite the platform .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Guess what?
Flash sites don't work well on any platform that exists now, so this is is hardly a surprise.The "hover" issue is endemic to the web, these days.
When you've got only a single tap or a hold to indicate input, you're bound to only two forms of input: this prevents things like mouseover javascript and the various "interactive" web features which are currently available.Saying input limitations are what would keep Flash off touchscreen devices is a cop out.
Complex web pages are browsable on mobile devices right now, albeit with some limitations.
The real problems with flash are, indeed stability, bloat/inefficiency/memory use, and battery drain.
When flash vvideo only just-barely plays full screen on a 2GHz desktop with mediocre dedicated graphics, there's an obvious problem.At best, Flash will have limited utility on such devices due to memory use.
Otherwise, they'd have to completely rewrite the platform.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31223462</id>
	<title>Re:Touchscreen is limited</title>
	<author>tgibbs</author>
	<datestamp>1266756240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A mouse and keyboard is very powerful, but not really very efficient in terms of resource utilization--it takes a lot of space and both hands, and you don't need all of that power to do the things that people do most on the web most of the time. On the other hand, touchscreens offer gestures, which can be extremely efficient, and need only one hand and a little patch of space.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A mouse and keyboard is very powerful , but not really very efficient in terms of resource utilization--it takes a lot of space and both hands , and you do n't need all of that power to do the things that people do most on the web most of the time .
On the other hand , touchscreens offer gestures , which can be extremely efficient , and need only one hand and a little patch of space .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A mouse and keyboard is very powerful, but not really very efficient in terms of resource utilization--it takes a lot of space and both hands, and you don't need all of that power to do the things that people do most on the web most of the time.
On the other hand, touchscreens offer gestures, which can be extremely efficient, and need only one hand and a little patch of space.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219508</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219920</id>
	<title>looking at the wrong part of the problem</title>
	<author>acroyear</author>
	<datestamp>1266778320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>the problem with not providing flash on touch devices has nothing to do with all of the "flash programming" and "navigation" issues around the flashy hovers/mouseovers we're all used to associating with flash.  a gui is a gui, and if current flash developers think the touch-screen is a step backwards, they are the ones with the closed minds.  things change with technology, so adapt or be left behind, but quit blaming the new technology (even if it really is more than 25 years old) for your own lack of imagination.</p><p>on the key problem, the issue is simple: flash video, as served by youtube, is the de facto standard for open video linking and embedding on the web.</p><p>remove flash support (even with youtube adding apple's proprietary format to a percentage of its content), and you are explicitly removing support for the majority of the video on the web, especially as linked by blogs and facebook.</p><p>apple is intentionally crippling their device for the web in order to drive more users to iTunes for video content.  while that works to a point for the damned phones, for a larger device trying to find its <i>raison d'etre</i> as a potential replacement for netbooks, telling your potential userbase that the $200 netbook does more (and for free and with real freedom) than your $500 table with its appstore costs and restrictions, is NOT a good selling point.</p><p>apple is selling itself as a device for commercial content makers, but at the cost of not realizing you can't sell a device to the general public today if word gets out it is a bane to social networking.  without full youtube and facebook video support, it is exactly that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>the problem with not providing flash on touch devices has nothing to do with all of the " flash programming " and " navigation " issues around the flashy hovers/mouseovers we 're all used to associating with flash .
a gui is a gui , and if current flash developers think the touch-screen is a step backwards , they are the ones with the closed minds .
things change with technology , so adapt or be left behind , but quit blaming the new technology ( even if it really is more than 25 years old ) for your own lack of imagination.on the key problem , the issue is simple : flash video , as served by youtube , is the de facto standard for open video linking and embedding on the web.remove flash support ( even with youtube adding apple 's proprietary format to a percentage of its content ) , and you are explicitly removing support for the majority of the video on the web , especially as linked by blogs and facebook.apple is intentionally crippling their device for the web in order to drive more users to iTunes for video content .
while that works to a point for the damned phones , for a larger device trying to find its raison d'etre as a potential replacement for netbooks , telling your potential userbase that the $ 200 netbook does more ( and for free and with real freedom ) than your $ 500 table with its appstore costs and restrictions , is NOT a good selling point.apple is selling itself as a device for commercial content makers , but at the cost of not realizing you ca n't sell a device to the general public today if word gets out it is a bane to social networking .
without full youtube and facebook video support , it is exactly that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the problem with not providing flash on touch devices has nothing to do with all of the "flash programming" and "navigation" issues around the flashy hovers/mouseovers we're all used to associating with flash.
a gui is a gui, and if current flash developers think the touch-screen is a step backwards, they are the ones with the closed minds.
things change with technology, so adapt or be left behind, but quit blaming the new technology (even if it really is more than 25 years old) for your own lack of imagination.on the key problem, the issue is simple: flash video, as served by youtube, is the de facto standard for open video linking and embedding on the web.remove flash support (even with youtube adding apple's proprietary format to a percentage of its content), and you are explicitly removing support for the majority of the video on the web, especially as linked by blogs and facebook.apple is intentionally crippling their device for the web in order to drive more users to iTunes for video content.
while that works to a point for the damned phones, for a larger device trying to find its raison d'etre as a potential replacement for netbooks, telling your potential userbase that the $200 netbook does more (and for free and with real freedom) than your $500 table with its appstore costs and restrictions, is NOT a good selling point.apple is selling itself as a device for commercial content makers, but at the cost of not realizing you can't sell a device to the general public today if word gets out it is a bane to social networking.
without full youtube and facebook video support, it is exactly that.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219286</id>
	<title>Eat my balls!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266775320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Flash is the future of the internet.  Get with it, you limp-wristed cock-chugging mac faggots!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Flash is the future of the internet .
Get with it , you limp-wristed cock-chugging mac faggots !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Flash is the future of the internet.
Get with it, you limp-wristed cock-chugging mac faggots!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220740</id>
	<title>CPU usage/developers are the big problem</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266782400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Here's flash's problem in a nutshell.</p><p><a href="http://kakuro.com/" title="kakuro.com">http://kakuro.com/</a> [kakuro.com]</p><p>And this flash app doesn't even do anything complex.</p><p>Go there and watch your CPU go to over 50\% usage. No matter how much CPU you have! If you are on a laptop, your fan will come on within 1 minute.</p><p>The problem is that it is easy to hog the CPU with flash. So when you browse, you are hoping that the developers of every flash program you run is a good one. And unfortunately, there are a lot of bad programmers out there.</p><p>It's not all Flash's fault. If you ran 500 programs each day on your computer even as native apps, you'd run into a lot of stinkers. But that's what you're doing with flash, running programs from every site you go to, sometimes multiple ones.</p><p>If every developer was a good one and if they (and their managers) kept power usage and CPU efficiency in mind, then Flash would be a lot more viable on small portable devices.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Here 's flash 's problem in a nutshell.http : //kakuro.com/ [ kakuro.com ] And this flash app does n't even do anything complex.Go there and watch your CPU go to over 50 \ % usage .
No matter how much CPU you have !
If you are on a laptop , your fan will come on within 1 minute.The problem is that it is easy to hog the CPU with flash .
So when you browse , you are hoping that the developers of every flash program you run is a good one .
And unfortunately , there are a lot of bad programmers out there.It 's not all Flash 's fault .
If you ran 500 programs each day on your computer even as native apps , you 'd run into a lot of stinkers .
But that 's what you 're doing with flash , running programs from every site you go to , sometimes multiple ones.If every developer was a good one and if they ( and their managers ) kept power usage and CPU efficiency in mind , then Flash would be a lot more viable on small portable devices .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Here's flash's problem in a nutshell.http://kakuro.com/ [kakuro.com]And this flash app doesn't even do anything complex.Go there and watch your CPU go to over 50\% usage.
No matter how much CPU you have!
If you are on a laptop, your fan will come on within 1 minute.The problem is that it is easy to hog the CPU with flash.
So when you browse, you are hoping that the developers of every flash program you run is a good one.
And unfortunately, there are a lot of bad programmers out there.It's not all Flash's fault.
If you ran 500 programs each day on your computer even as native apps, you'd run into a lot of stinkers.
But that's what you're doing with flash, running programs from every site you go to, sometimes multiple ones.If every developer was a good one and if they (and their managers) kept power usage and CPU efficiency in mind, then Flash would be a lot more viable on small portable devices.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31225258</id>
	<title>That title is wrong...</title>
	<author>mad.frog</author>
	<datestamp>1266769020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A more accurate statement would be "Why Touchscreens Are Fundamentally Flawed For Existing Web Content".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A more accurate statement would be " Why Touchscreens Are Fundamentally Flawed For Existing Web Content " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A more accurate statement would be "Why Touchscreens Are Fundamentally Flawed For Existing Web Content".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31230514</id>
	<title>Issues with Flash</title>
	<author>aristotle-dude</author>
	<datestamp>1266860520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>There are several issues with flash that go beyond performance on mobile platforms.
<p>
1. Accessibility. Flash menus are not compatible with screen readers while HTML is designed to be screen reader compatible. You have to deliberately write inaccessible content by not using best practices like CSS markup.
</p><p>
2. The hover problem. This can affect HTML sites also but to a far lesser degree. It is also easy to provide alternatives to hover.
</p><p>
3. HTML and CSS are part of the W3C standards while Flash is a proprietary web plugin. It does not run within the browser renderer.
</p><p>
4. Because Flash is proprietary, languages such as Java and C# cannot dynamically generate flash content or modify flash content. You can pass in parameters but that is not the same thing. It is a black box.
</p><p>
It seems like the Adobe/Macromedia fanboys are out of touch with reality.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There are several issues with flash that go beyond performance on mobile platforms .
1. Accessibility .
Flash menus are not compatible with screen readers while HTML is designed to be screen reader compatible .
You have to deliberately write inaccessible content by not using best practices like CSS markup .
2. The hover problem .
This can affect HTML sites also but to a far lesser degree .
It is also easy to provide alternatives to hover .
3. HTML and CSS are part of the W3C standards while Flash is a proprietary web plugin .
It does not run within the browser renderer .
4. Because Flash is proprietary , languages such as Java and C # can not dynamically generate flash content or modify flash content .
You can pass in parameters but that is not the same thing .
It is a black box .
It seems like the Adobe/Macromedia fanboys are out of touch with reality .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are several issues with flash that go beyond performance on mobile platforms.
1. Accessibility.
Flash menus are not compatible with screen readers while HTML is designed to be screen reader compatible.
You have to deliberately write inaccessible content by not using best practices like CSS markup.
2. The hover problem.
This can affect HTML sites also but to a far lesser degree.
It is also easy to provide alternatives to hover.
3. HTML and CSS are part of the W3C standards while Flash is a proprietary web plugin.
It does not run within the browser renderer.
4. Because Flash is proprietary, languages such as Java and C# cannot dynamically generate flash content or modify flash content.
You can pass in parameters but that is not the same thing.
It is a black box.
It seems like the Adobe/Macromedia fanboys are out of touch with reality.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219956</id>
	<title>Re:I don't understand the hate.</title>
	<author>Mashiki</author>
	<datestamp>1266778560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I couldn't care one way or the other if apple does or not include flash.  My hate is just with flash, it needs to die, same with js in it's current form.  But really if the author of this opinion piece was worth their salt, they'd be saying "how can I make it work?  Then profit my expertise on it."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I could n't care one way or the other if apple does or not include flash .
My hate is just with flash , it needs to die , same with js in it 's current form .
But really if the author of this opinion piece was worth their salt , they 'd be saying " how can I make it work ?
Then profit my expertise on it .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I couldn't care one way or the other if apple does or not include flash.
My hate is just with flash, it needs to die, same with js in it's current form.
But really if the author of this opinion piece was worth their salt, they'd be saying "how can I make it work?
Then profit my expertise on it.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219686</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220856</id>
	<title>Re:Flawed Logic in OP</title>
	<author>neumayr</author>
	<datestamp>1266783000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'd be annoyed with the precision of movement that would require. The maximum distance between the screen and the stylus is too small, when using the device in a car you would touch the screen every time there's a bump in the road.<br>
Besides, it probably would be very tiring, leading to a kind of gorilla arm syndrome.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd be annoyed with the precision of movement that would require .
The maximum distance between the screen and the stylus is too small , when using the device in a car you would touch the screen every time there 's a bump in the road .
Besides , it probably would be very tiring , leading to a kind of gorilla arm syndrome .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd be annoyed with the precision of movement that would require.
The maximum distance between the screen and the stylus is too small, when using the device in a car you would touch the screen every time there's a bump in the road.
Besides, it probably would be very tiring, leading to a kind of gorilla arm syndrome.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219872</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219532</id>
	<title>Um, No.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266776340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Different capabilities and limitations means you need to code differently.  This is the same with every language/platform under the sun.  Some of the coolest HTML5 examples I've seen wouldn't work well on a touchscreen tablet because it requires hover (which is an HTML term, not usually a flash term).  Does that mean that HTML 5 is fundamentally incompatible with touchscreens?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Different capabilities and limitations means you need to code differently .
This is the same with every language/platform under the sun .
Some of the coolest HTML5 examples I 've seen would n't work well on a touchscreen tablet because it requires hover ( which is an HTML term , not usually a flash term ) .
Does that mean that HTML 5 is fundamentally incompatible with touchscreens ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Different capabilities and limitations means you need to code differently.
This is the same with every language/platform under the sun.
Some of the coolest HTML5 examples I've seen wouldn't work well on a touchscreen tablet because it requires hover (which is an HTML term, not usually a flash term).
Does that mean that HTML 5 is fundamentally incompatible with touchscreens?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31222014</id>
	<title>Re:The App Store</title>
	<author>indiechild</author>
	<datestamp>1266747780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How would you "mimick" native iPhone/iPad UI using Flash?</p><p>The web apps vs. native apps thing has been rehashed over and over in any case -- web apps are rarely a good or even acceptable replacement for well written native apps.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How would you " mimick " native iPhone/iPad UI using Flash ? The web apps vs. native apps thing has been rehashed over and over in any case -- web apps are rarely a good or even acceptable replacement for well written native apps .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How would you "mimick" native iPhone/iPad UI using Flash?The web apps vs. native apps thing has been rehashed over and over in any case -- web apps are rarely a good or even acceptable replacement for well written native apps.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219576</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220750</id>
	<title>Re:Never?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266782460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The Monkey Island port on the iPhone did exactly that. It took some getting used to but I managed to complete the entire game without being particularly annoyed. I'm guess that for high-speed interaction this method won't be very good, but it's definitely good enough for the large majority of applications/games.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Monkey Island port on the iPhone did exactly that .
It took some getting used to but I managed to complete the entire game without being particularly annoyed .
I 'm guess that for high-speed interaction this method wo n't be very good , but it 's definitely good enough for the large majority of applications/games .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Monkey Island port on the iPhone did exactly that.
It took some getting used to but I managed to complete the entire game without being particularly annoyed.
I'm guess that for high-speed interaction this method won't be very good, but it's definitely good enough for the large majority of applications/games.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219348</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219408</id>
	<title>Yeah, this is a totally unsolvable problem.</title>
	<author>Lowen\_SoDium</author>
	<datestamp>1266775920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Why would it be hard to implement a virtual cursor that moved to finger location?  And have the software detect if the users is clicking or moving the cursor to the location?

There, problem solved.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why would it be hard to implement a virtual cursor that moved to finger location ?
And have the software detect if the users is clicking or moving the cursor to the location ?
There , problem solved .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why would it be hard to implement a virtual cursor that moved to finger location?
And have the software detect if the users is clicking or moving the cursor to the location?
There, problem solved.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31221568</id>
	<title>Someone better tell the CA Lottery Commission</title>
	<author>Red\_Chaos1</author>
	<datestamp>1266744780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The lottery terminals are all Flash on top of Linux, and they're all touch screen only. At worst they stop responding for a moment while processing a large transaction.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The lottery terminals are all Flash on top of Linux , and they 're all touch screen only .
At worst they stop responding for a moment while processing a large transaction .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The lottery terminals are all Flash on top of Linux, and they're all touch screen only.
At worst they stop responding for a moment while processing a large transaction.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31227750</id>
	<title>Re:Eat my balls!</title>
	<author>ytpete</author>
	<datestamp>1266841620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Steve Jobs has been reported as saying that Flash sucks, is too slow and unstable, and takes up battery life. This is true.</p></div><p>You might want to ask all those other smartphone manufacturers why they're <a href="http://www.adobe.com/devnet/flashplayer/articles/mobile\_demos\_fp10.1.html" title="adobe.com" rel="nofollow">happily planning to support</a> [adobe.com] the upcoming release of Flash, then. Or could it be possible that Steve has other motives for keeping Flash out of the iPhone ecosystem?</p><p><div class="quote"><p>on OSX, Flash is a disaster</p></div><p>Adobe has said in the past that API limitations in Mac-based browsers prevent them from bringing performance up to par with Windows. Someone just below in this thread posted a link to <a href="http://www.kaourantin.net/2010/02/core-animation.html" title="kaourantin.net" rel="nofollow">one of the Flash engineers explaining</a> [kaourantin.net] how Adobe and Apple are actually working <i>together</i> to fix this.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Steve Jobs has been reported as saying that Flash sucks , is too slow and unstable , and takes up battery life .
This is true.You might want to ask all those other smartphone manufacturers why they 're happily planning to support [ adobe.com ] the upcoming release of Flash , then .
Or could it be possible that Steve has other motives for keeping Flash out of the iPhone ecosystem ? on OSX , Flash is a disasterAdobe has said in the past that API limitations in Mac-based browsers prevent them from bringing performance up to par with Windows .
Someone just below in this thread posted a link to one of the Flash engineers explaining [ kaourantin.net ] how Adobe and Apple are actually working together to fix this .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Steve Jobs has been reported as saying that Flash sucks, is too slow and unstable, and takes up battery life.
This is true.You might want to ask all those other smartphone manufacturers why they're happily planning to support [adobe.com] the upcoming release of Flash, then.
Or could it be possible that Steve has other motives for keeping Flash out of the iPhone ecosystem?on OSX, Flash is a disasterAdobe has said in the past that API limitations in Mac-based browsers prevent them from bringing performance up to par with Windows.
Someone just below in this thread posted a link to one of the Flash engineers explaining [kaourantin.net] how Adobe and Apple are actually working together to fix this.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31223952</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219610</id>
	<title>Re:Not entirely true</title>
	<author>Crudely\_Indecent</author>
	<datestamp>1266776760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>All that Apple and Adobe could ever do</p></div><p>Does this guy really think he's smarter than the engineers at Apple and Adobe?</p><p>Sounds to me like a defeatist attitude... The authors microwave probably flashes 12:00.</p><p>I can think of a very simple fix - don't let the cursor hover over flash when a finger isn't on the screen.....move it off the animation.  Dragging across the flash can activate the hover actions, releasing from a drag can act as click if hovering over a button immediately followed by moving the cursor off the animation.  Wham,  bam, he's wrong.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>All that Apple and Adobe could ever doDoes this guy really think he 's smarter than the engineers at Apple and Adobe ? Sounds to me like a defeatist attitude... The authors microwave probably flashes 12 : 00.I can think of a very simple fix - do n't let the cursor hover over flash when a finger is n't on the screen.....move it off the animation .
Dragging across the flash can activate the hover actions , releasing from a drag can act as click if hovering over a button immediately followed by moving the cursor off the animation .
Wham , bam , he 's wrong .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All that Apple and Adobe could ever doDoes this guy really think he's smarter than the engineers at Apple and Adobe?Sounds to me like a defeatist attitude... The authors microwave probably flashes 12:00.I can think of a very simple fix - don't let the cursor hover over flash when a finger isn't on the screen.....move it off the animation.
Dragging across the flash can activate the hover actions, releasing from a drag can act as click if hovering over a button immediately followed by moving the cursor off the animation.
Wham,  bam, he's wrong.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219340</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31229728</id>
	<title>Re:Eat my balls!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266856620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Even if they host the App store at a loss, strategically, it is still very important. When an iPhone user considers buying a new phone, switching to another brand will also mean throwing away all his current apps and starting a new. And so the more a user has invested in Apple only apps, the more likely he or she will upgrade to another Apple product. And that's when the app store pays for itself. Especially now that its competitors are starting to catch up.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Even if they host the App store at a loss , strategically , it is still very important .
When an iPhone user considers buying a new phone , switching to another brand will also mean throwing away all his current apps and starting a new .
And so the more a user has invested in Apple only apps , the more likely he or she will upgrade to another Apple product .
And that 's when the app store pays for itself .
Especially now that its competitors are starting to catch up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Even if they host the App store at a loss, strategically, it is still very important.
When an iPhone user considers buying a new phone, switching to another brand will also mean throwing away all his current apps and starting a new.
And so the more a user has invested in Apple only apps, the more likely he or she will upgrade to another Apple product.
And that's when the app store pays for itself.
Especially now that its competitors are starting to catch up.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220298</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220382</id>
	<title>The iPhone handles mouseovers already</title>
	<author>kiddailey</author>
	<datestamp>1266780660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... well, to some degree anyway.</p><p>It does this by essentially transforming the mouseover event to a intermediate click event.  For example, if you have a link that has a popup menu displayed on<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:hover, clicking the menu item will first show the popup menu.  Clicking again follows the actual navigation.  Although this doesn't address the issue of mystery-meat navigation and over events that are less obvious, it does seem to work well.  I don't see why Flash couldn't do the same.</p><p>To me, the issue with Flash is all about playback experience.  Adobe can't even get the player to be efficient and smooth under OS X on decent hardware, so having it on my iPhone sounds tortuous.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... well , to some degree anyway.It does this by essentially transforming the mouseover event to a intermediate click event .
For example , if you have a link that has a popup menu displayed on : hover , clicking the menu item will first show the popup menu .
Clicking again follows the actual navigation .
Although this does n't address the issue of mystery-meat navigation and over events that are less obvious , it does seem to work well .
I do n't see why Flash could n't do the same.To me , the issue with Flash is all about playback experience .
Adobe ca n't even get the player to be efficient and smooth under OS X on decent hardware , so having it on my iPhone sounds tortuous .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... well, to some degree anyway.It does this by essentially transforming the mouseover event to a intermediate click event.
For example, if you have a link that has a popup menu displayed on :hover, clicking the menu item will first show the popup menu.
Clicking again follows the actual navigation.
Although this doesn't address the issue of mystery-meat navigation and over events that are less obvious, it does seem to work well.
I don't see why Flash couldn't do the same.To me, the issue with Flash is all about playback experience.
Adobe can't even get the player to be efficient and smooth under OS X on decent hardware, so having it on my iPhone sounds tortuous.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220518</id>
	<title>Re:What???</title>
	<author>Midnight Thunder</author>
	<datestamp>1266781260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you read the article he doesn't dispute that it can't be done, its just that a lot of sites would need to be redone. Think of this as IE6 only sites being made to work with other browsers. If you are going to put the effort into redoing your website for accessibility, why not simply move onto HTML 5? Its begs the question of which is worse: broken technology or absent technology?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you read the article he does n't dispute that it ca n't be done , its just that a lot of sites would need to be redone .
Think of this as IE6 only sites being made to work with other browsers .
If you are going to put the effort into redoing your website for accessibility , why not simply move onto HTML 5 ?
Its begs the question of which is worse : broken technology or absent technology ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you read the article he doesn't dispute that it can't be done, its just that a lot of sites would need to be redone.
Think of this as IE6 only sites being made to work with other browsers.
If you are going to put the effort into redoing your website for accessibility, why not simply move onto HTML 5?
Its begs the question of which is worse: broken technology or absent technology?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219388</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31226406</id>
	<title>the author could open his eyes</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266779220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>this article shows only the lack of authors imagination UI-wise. All you need is a simple gesture:<br>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PVMPu83f22g</p><p>and where's the problem then?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>this article shows only the lack of authors imagination UI-wise .
All you need is a simple gesture : http : //www.youtube.com/watch ? v = PVMPu83f22gand where 's the problem then ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>this article shows only the lack of authors imagination UI-wise.
All you need is a simple gesture:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PVMPu83f22gand where's the problem then?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31221314</id>
	<title>Re:Eat my balls!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266742920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Apple is happy to support HTML5, because it knows that its going to be *years* before HTML5 is remotely competitive with the AppStore. Flash could start hurting the app store tomorrow. HTML 5 is years out, given the glacial pace of standards adoption.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Apple is happy to support HTML5 , because it knows that its going to be * years * before HTML5 is remotely competitive with the AppStore .
Flash could start hurting the app store tomorrow .
HTML 5 is years out , given the glacial pace of standards adoption .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Apple is happy to support HTML5, because it knows that its going to be *years* before HTML5 is remotely competitive with the AppStore.
Flash could start hurting the app store tomorrow.
HTML 5 is years out, given the glacial pace of standards adoption.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219714</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31228406</id>
	<title>Re:Title too long</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266848280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>..alternatively: "Why TheiPad Sucks, #69"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>..alternatively : " Why TheiPad Sucks , # 69 "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>..alternatively: "Why TheiPad Sucks, #69"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219436</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31222410</id>
	<title>RTFA, yo.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266749940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>From the article:</p><p>"D) Have a visible mouse pointer near your finger, and not interact with things directly. Use Apple track-pad style tap-and-drag gestures, as seen in some VNC clients. This kind of indirect control violates the very principle of direct touch manipulation. This is making the touchscreen be something &ldquo;like a laptop but worse&rdquo; and has little reason to exist. And again, you&rsquo;d have to keep remembering whether you were in direct touch mode or &ldquo;drag the arrow&rdquo; mode, and which parts of the page behaved in which way."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>From the article : " D ) Have a visible mouse pointer near your finger , and not interact with things directly .
Use Apple track-pad style tap-and-drag gestures , as seen in some VNC clients .
This kind of indirect control violates the very principle of direct touch manipulation .
This is making the touchscreen be something    like a laptop but worse    and has little reason to exist .
And again , you    d have to keep remembering whether you were in direct touch mode or    drag the arrow    mode , and which parts of the page behaved in which way .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From the article:"D) Have a visible mouse pointer near your finger, and not interact with things directly.
Use Apple track-pad style tap-and-drag gestures, as seen in some VNC clients.
This kind of indirect control violates the very principle of direct touch manipulation.
This is making the touchscreen be something “like a laptop but worse” and has little reason to exist.
And again, you’d have to keep remembering whether you were in direct touch mode or “drag the arrow” mode, and which parts of the page behaved in which way.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219348</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220028</id>
	<title>Re:Not entirely true</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266778980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There's a very simple reason why this might technically work, but Apple will not allow it: It's unnatural. Touching the surface is not equivalent to the actionless pointing that the hover event represents. When the user touches the screen, that is already an action event and consequently it's usually mapped to what would be the start of a drag or click interaction on a mouse desktop: "Finger touches the surface = mouse button down." But note that the latter is not the cause but the consequence of touching implicitly being an interaction, not a form of pointing.</p><p>The lack of a hover event for touch screens requires changes in user interfaces, particularly in modern user interfaces which use the hover event to normally hide additional widgets, only to show them when the cursor is close. This uncluttering of user interfaces does not work with touch screens.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's a very simple reason why this might technically work , but Apple will not allow it : It 's unnatural .
Touching the surface is not equivalent to the actionless pointing that the hover event represents .
When the user touches the screen , that is already an action event and consequently it 's usually mapped to what would be the start of a drag or click interaction on a mouse desktop : " Finger touches the surface = mouse button down .
" But note that the latter is not the cause but the consequence of touching implicitly being an interaction , not a form of pointing.The lack of a hover event for touch screens requires changes in user interfaces , particularly in modern user interfaces which use the hover event to normally hide additional widgets , only to show them when the cursor is close .
This uncluttering of user interfaces does not work with touch screens .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's a very simple reason why this might technically work, but Apple will not allow it: It's unnatural.
Touching the surface is not equivalent to the actionless pointing that the hover event represents.
When the user touches the screen, that is already an action event and consequently it's usually mapped to what would be the start of a drag or click interaction on a mouse desktop: "Finger touches the surface = mouse button down.
" But note that the latter is not the cause but the consequence of touching implicitly being an interaction, not a form of pointing.The lack of a hover event for touch screens requires changes in user interfaces, particularly in modern user interfaces which use the hover event to normally hide additional widgets, only to show them when the cursor is close.
This uncluttering of user interfaces does not work with touch screens.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219340</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31223822</id>
	<title>Weird how Google just added Flash to Maps</title>
	<author>Dr. Spork</author>
	<datestamp>1266758880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>To display geotagged photos on Google Maps, Google apparently implemented a flash interface, and this went live only very recently. Is this effect not possible to replicate in some HTML5 way? It's strange that just as Apple is weaning itself off Flash, Google is adding more dependence on Flash, and for an oft-used feature.</htmltext>
<tokenext>To display geotagged photos on Google Maps , Google apparently implemented a flash interface , and this went live only very recently .
Is this effect not possible to replicate in some HTML5 way ?
It 's strange that just as Apple is weaning itself off Flash , Google is adding more dependence on Flash , and for an oft-used feature .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To display geotagged photos on Google Maps, Google apparently implemented a flash interface, and this went live only very recently.
Is this effect not possible to replicate in some HTML5 way?
It's strange that just as Apple is weaning itself off Flash, Google is adding more dependence on Flash, and for an oft-used feature.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31226914</id>
	<title>So .. why doesn't facebook ...</title>
	<author>freaker\_TuC</author>
	<datestamp>1266829920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... program a version which just disables all mouseovers when it gets approached by a mobile browser?</p><p>That way all users got some piece of the cake.. or maybe that's thought too easy?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... program a version which just disables all mouseovers when it gets approached by a mobile browser ? That way all users got some piece of the cake.. or maybe that 's thought too easy ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... program a version which just disables all mouseovers when it gets approached by a mobile browser?That way all users got some piece of the cake.. or maybe that's thought too easy?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219422</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220412</id>
	<title>Flash does have MT for touch device</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266780720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>The full time flash developer probably not very up-to-date, there are a few open source lib in ActionScript3.0 for multi-touch way before iphone and the Macbook Air's MT touch pad.
and flash 10.1 beta has multi-touch support.

To the question, I guess it is more a CPU problem than touch unfortunately, I remember the days when adobe had the always open position for a linux machine-code engineer to work on MMX for the linux player, and the linux player were on beta for a very long time, so hardware acceleration seems to be the main problem with the player on other platforms.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The full time flash developer probably not very up-to-date , there are a few open source lib in ActionScript3.0 for multi-touch way before iphone and the Macbook Air 's MT touch pad .
and flash 10.1 beta has multi-touch support .
To the question , I guess it is more a CPU problem than touch unfortunately , I remember the days when adobe had the always open position for a linux machine-code engineer to work on MMX for the linux player , and the linux player were on beta for a very long time , so hardware acceleration seems to be the main problem with the player on other platforms .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The full time flash developer probably not very up-to-date, there are a few open source lib in ActionScript3.0 for multi-touch way before iphone and the Macbook Air's MT touch pad.
and flash 10.1 beta has multi-touch support.
To the question, I guess it is more a CPU problem than touch unfortunately, I remember the days when adobe had the always open position for a linux machine-code engineer to work on MMX for the linux player, and the linux player were on beta for a very long time, so hardware acceleration seems to be the main problem with the player on other platforms.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220000</id>
	<title>Re:The App Store</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266778800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The real reason why Apple would never allow Flash to work on one of it's mobile devices is simple.  The App Store.  Most of the available apps could easily be mimicked using Flash, and made easily available.  This would not be a good thing for Apple's bottom line.</p></div><p>As noted <a href="http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1558048&amp;cid=31219714" title="slashdot.org">above</a> [slashdot.org], this rationale is easily disproved by Apple's encouragement of <a href="http://developer.apple.com/safari/library/documentation/iPhone/Conceptual/SafariJSDatabaseGuide/OfflineApplicationCache/OfflineApplicationCache.html" title="apple.com">offline HTML5</a> [apple.com] web apps.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The real reason why Apple would never allow Flash to work on one of it 's mobile devices is simple .
The App Store .
Most of the available apps could easily be mimicked using Flash , and made easily available .
This would not be a good thing for Apple 's bottom line.As noted above [ slashdot.org ] , this rationale is easily disproved by Apple 's encouragement of offline HTML5 [ apple.com ] web apps .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The real reason why Apple would never allow Flash to work on one of it's mobile devices is simple.
The App Store.
Most of the available apps could easily be mimicked using Flash, and made easily available.
This would not be a good thing for Apple's bottom line.As noted above [slashdot.org], this rationale is easily disproved by Apple's encouragement of offline HTML5 [apple.com] web apps.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219576</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31223846</id>
	<title>Re:Title too long</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266759000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Title too long was my first thought as well.<br>Seriously, how about getting back to something like the 'semantic web' or at least a half measure approximation of it.  The display visual geometry, pointer implementation, et. al. of my particular device IS NOT THE BUSINESS OF THE REMOTE SERVER!  That's for a LOCAL browser's UI system to figure out, so whether I have a mouse, trackball, voice recognition input, neural interface, LCD, projector, 3D holo matrix, whatever, the semantics of the content and interaction with it are what's important to exchange between the browser and the back end, not the little details of my screen size, shape, whether my mouse is hovering, etc.</p><p>They teach patterns like Model / View / Controller, Model / View / View Model, Style sheet display presentation formatting separation from content encoding, et. al.  Why not actually take advantage of that and stop TRYING to dictate exactly how a page should RENDER on a browser from the server side -- that's what the BROWSER DOES, and IT is in a position to adapt its UI to the local device it runs on, not the remote server.</p><p>Wasn't the point of things like XFORMS to enable a UI interaction independent of the actual dialog presentation to a greater degree?<br>Just send<br>[MENU WHATEVER]<br>[CHOICE WHATEVER-A]<br>[CHOICE WHATEVER-B]<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.... etc. and let the browser at the remote end determine whether touch, mouse, hover, gesture, speech, electric shock, audification, haptics, or whatever are the right ways to let the user select the choices.  If you're going to force me into having things always flashing into existence based on an often unintentional hover, I'll probably HATE your UI even if I AM running it from a traditional desktop with a traditional mouse.</p><p>Worse than details of UI interactivity like touch vs. type are the basic issues of SCREEN SIZE and RESOLUTION and COLOR depth.  What if you're browsing the site on a Kindle or Nook or something black and white with slow visual refresh?  I don't want all kinds of textured pop ups and flashing content and whatever on that platform.  Heck even on a 24" LCD monitor on a desktop I often have to use FONT SIZES larger than some asshat web designer decided were relevant to 'allow' and so they kindly turned what should have been a text region with flow document type automatic dynamic text wrapping / reformatting / justification as basic HTML even defaults to into some kind of fixed format PDF style rendering that utterly breaks once the screen is too small or the font is too big by moving text totally off the bounds of the screen -- and often the horizontal scroll bar doesn't even work in this case, so it is truly unusable!</p><p>Common smart phones have anywhere from a 2" to 4" display; tablets / MIDs anywhere from 4" to 12", netbooks/laptops anywhere from 9" to 16", ebook readers anywhere from 3.5" to 11", etc.<br>e-Ink, black and white, greyscale, color, touch, not touch, speech recognition, eye tracking, neutal interfaces, projective displays, true or simulated 3D UIs, etc. the choices will just proliferate extremely rapidly and diversely in the next 5 years as the technologies change and improve.</p><p>The ONLY way to actually have a GOOD user experience on this kind of diversity of platforms --<br>and -- I must add -- to be ACCESSIBLE to people with not so good vision / hearing / color vision / physical interaction abilities -- is to just not TRY to dictate the UI from the remote side of an application at all, but send the semantic data about what content forms are available for presentation, what interaction options are available, and let the remote browser deal with the rendering and UI choices.</p><p>Are we trying to turn everything even generic web pages into VIDEO GAMES where you're basically just turned everything into one giant image map and you allow some kind of hyperlinked UI based on that?  It is the same reason PDFs and XPS and Office documents are so evil and inappropriate in terms of content formatting and accessibility / usability too -- once you try to</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Title too long was my first thought as well.Seriously , how about getting back to something like the 'semantic web ' or at least a half measure approximation of it .
The display visual geometry , pointer implementation , et .
al. of my particular device IS NOT THE BUSINESS OF THE REMOTE SERVER !
That 's for a LOCAL browser 's UI system to figure out , so whether I have a mouse , trackball , voice recognition input , neural interface , LCD , projector , 3D holo matrix , whatever , the semantics of the content and interaction with it are what 's important to exchange between the browser and the back end , not the little details of my screen size , shape , whether my mouse is hovering , etc.They teach patterns like Model / View / Controller , Model / View / View Model , Style sheet display presentation formatting separation from content encoding , et .
al. Why not actually take advantage of that and stop TRYING to dictate exactly how a page should RENDER on a browser from the server side -- that 's what the BROWSER DOES , and IT is in a position to adapt its UI to the local device it runs on , not the remote server.Was n't the point of things like XFORMS to enable a UI interaction independent of the actual dialog presentation to a greater degree ? Just send [ MENU WHATEVER ] [ CHOICE WHATEVER-A ] [ CHOICE WHATEVER-B ] .... etc. and let the browser at the remote end determine whether touch , mouse , hover , gesture , speech , electric shock , audification , haptics , or whatever are the right ways to let the user select the choices .
If you 're going to force me into having things always flashing into existence based on an often unintentional hover , I 'll probably HATE your UI even if I AM running it from a traditional desktop with a traditional mouse.Worse than details of UI interactivity like touch vs. type are the basic issues of SCREEN SIZE and RESOLUTION and COLOR depth .
What if you 're browsing the site on a Kindle or Nook or something black and white with slow visual refresh ?
I do n't want all kinds of textured pop ups and flashing content and whatever on that platform .
Heck even on a 24 " LCD monitor on a desktop I often have to use FONT SIZES larger than some asshat web designer decided were relevant to 'allow ' and so they kindly turned what should have been a text region with flow document type automatic dynamic text wrapping / reformatting / justification as basic HTML even defaults to into some kind of fixed format PDF style rendering that utterly breaks once the screen is too small or the font is too big by moving text totally off the bounds of the screen -- and often the horizontal scroll bar does n't even work in this case , so it is truly unusable ! Common smart phones have anywhere from a 2 " to 4 " display ; tablets / MIDs anywhere from 4 " to 12 " , netbooks/laptops anywhere from 9 " to 16 " , ebook readers anywhere from 3.5 " to 11 " , etc.e-Ink , black and white , greyscale , color , touch , not touch , speech recognition , eye tracking , neutal interfaces , projective displays , true or simulated 3D UIs , etc .
the choices will just proliferate extremely rapidly and diversely in the next 5 years as the technologies change and improve.The ONLY way to actually have a GOOD user experience on this kind of diversity of platforms --and -- I must add -- to be ACCESSIBLE to people with not so good vision / hearing / color vision / physical interaction abilities -- is to just not TRY to dictate the UI from the remote side of an application at all , but send the semantic data about what content forms are available for presentation , what interaction options are available , and let the remote browser deal with the rendering and UI choices.Are we trying to turn everything even generic web pages into VIDEO GAMES where you 're basically just turned everything into one giant image map and you allow some kind of hyperlinked UI based on that ?
It is the same reason PDFs and XPS and Office documents are so evil and inappropriate in terms of content formatting and accessibility / usability too -- once you try to</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Title too long was my first thought as well.Seriously, how about getting back to something like the 'semantic web' or at least a half measure approximation of it.
The display visual geometry, pointer implementation, et.
al. of my particular device IS NOT THE BUSINESS OF THE REMOTE SERVER!
That's for a LOCAL browser's UI system to figure out, so whether I have a mouse, trackball, voice recognition input, neural interface, LCD, projector, 3D holo matrix, whatever, the semantics of the content and interaction with it are what's important to exchange between the browser and the back end, not the little details of my screen size, shape, whether my mouse is hovering, etc.They teach patterns like Model / View / Controller, Model / View / View Model, Style sheet display presentation formatting separation from content encoding, et.
al.  Why not actually take advantage of that and stop TRYING to dictate exactly how a page should RENDER on a browser from the server side -- that's what the BROWSER DOES, and IT is in a position to adapt its UI to the local device it runs on, not the remote server.Wasn't the point of things like XFORMS to enable a UI interaction independent of the actual dialog presentation to a greater degree?Just send[MENU WHATEVER][CHOICE WHATEVER-A][CHOICE WHATEVER-B] .... etc. and let the browser at the remote end determine whether touch, mouse, hover, gesture, speech, electric shock, audification, haptics, or whatever are the right ways to let the user select the choices.
If you're going to force me into having things always flashing into existence based on an often unintentional hover, I'll probably HATE your UI even if I AM running it from a traditional desktop with a traditional mouse.Worse than details of UI interactivity like touch vs. type are the basic issues of SCREEN SIZE and RESOLUTION and COLOR depth.
What if you're browsing the site on a Kindle or Nook or something black and white with slow visual refresh?
I don't want all kinds of textured pop ups and flashing content and whatever on that platform.
Heck even on a 24" LCD monitor on a desktop I often have to use FONT SIZES larger than some asshat web designer decided were relevant to 'allow' and so they kindly turned what should have been a text region with flow document type automatic dynamic text wrapping / reformatting / justification as basic HTML even defaults to into some kind of fixed format PDF style rendering that utterly breaks once the screen is too small or the font is too big by moving text totally off the bounds of the screen -- and often the horizontal scroll bar doesn't even work in this case, so it is truly unusable!Common smart phones have anywhere from a 2" to 4" display; tablets / MIDs anywhere from 4" to 12", netbooks/laptops anywhere from 9" to 16", ebook readers anywhere from 3.5" to 11", etc.e-Ink, black and white, greyscale, color, touch, not touch, speech recognition, eye tracking, neutal interfaces, projective displays, true or simulated 3D UIs, etc.
the choices will just proliferate extremely rapidly and diversely in the next 5 years as the technologies change and improve.The ONLY way to actually have a GOOD user experience on this kind of diversity of platforms --and -- I must add -- to be ACCESSIBLE to people with not so good vision / hearing / color vision / physical interaction abilities -- is to just not TRY to dictate the UI from the remote side of an application at all, but send the semantic data about what content forms are available for presentation, what interaction options are available, and let the remote browser deal with the rendering and UI choices.Are we trying to turn everything even generic web pages into VIDEO GAMES where you're basically just turned everything into one giant image map and you allow some kind of hyperlinked UI based on that?
It is the same reason PDFs and XPS and Office documents are so evil and inappropriate in terms of content formatting and accessibility / usability too -- once you try to</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219436</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31224846</id>
	<title>Re:Eat my balls!</title>
	<author>russian\_casey</author>
	<datestamp>1266766320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>What's 30\% of $0 again? Why would I ever pay for Flash web content?</htmltext>
<tokenext>What 's 30 \ % of $ 0 again ?
Why would I ever pay for Flash web content ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What's 30\% of $0 again?
Why would I ever pay for Flash web content?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219496</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219836</id>
	<title>Can easily be fixed</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266777840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You choose to run flash content by clicking on it. This sets the iPhone browser in "running Flash" mode. In this mode, an icon appears in the bottom corner of the screen. The icon acts like a mouse button. Touch the screen normally with one hand to act like a pointer, for mouseover and click and drag. Touch or hold the click button for mouseclick. Zooming with two fingers can be done when the click button isn't held.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You choose to run flash content by clicking on it .
This sets the iPhone browser in " running Flash " mode .
In this mode , an icon appears in the bottom corner of the screen .
The icon acts like a mouse button .
Touch the screen normally with one hand to act like a pointer , for mouseover and click and drag .
Touch or hold the click button for mouseclick .
Zooming with two fingers can be done when the click button is n't held .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You choose to run flash content by clicking on it.
This sets the iPhone browser in "running Flash" mode.
In this mode, an icon appears in the bottom corner of the screen.
The icon acts like a mouse button.
Touch the screen normally with one hand to act like a pointer, for mouseover and click and drag.
Touch or hold the click button for mouseclick.
Zooming with two fingers can be done when the click button isn't held.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31227818</id>
	<title>Flash works fine on the N900</title>
	<author>Madsy</author>
	<datestamp>1266842460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Flash works fine in the Nokia N900 web browser, and it has a touch screen.<br>
The browser can also emulate a cursor, when it's needed.<br>
Which is thankfully, not very often. So I think the anonymous story poster is wrong.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Flash works fine in the Nokia N900 web browser , and it has a touch screen .
The browser can also emulate a cursor , when it 's needed .
Which is thankfully , not very often .
So I think the anonymous story poster is wrong .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Flash works fine in the Nokia N900 web browser, and it has a touch screen.
The browser can also emulate a cursor, when it's needed.
Which is thankfully, not very often.
So I think the anonymous story poster is wrong.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219810</id>
	<title>That&rsquo;s a stupid idea, and you&rsquo;re a stu</title>
	<author>clone53421</author>
	<datestamp>1266777720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>At the risk of sounding like flamebait... allow me to explain.</p><p>There is absolutely nothing unique about Flash that makes it &ldquo;fundamentally flawed&rdquo; on a touchscreen. You have the same &ldquo;problem&rdquo; with ANY application on such a device, whether it be native code, Java, javascript/ajax, or Flash.</p><p>It&rsquo;s only a &ldquo;problem&rdquo; when you INSIST on using mousover effects, which are usually redundant and annoying anyway... and you&rsquo;re an idiot if you design an application which <em>can&rsquo;t work without them!</em> then you have the audacity to whine that it won&rsquo;t work on a system that doesn&rsquo;t support them...</p><p>Not to mention that they&rsquo;re developing touch-screens with finger proximity sensors that can detect a &ldquo;hover&rdquo; anyway. The problem is all in your head.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>At the risk of sounding like flamebait... allow me to explain.There is absolutely nothing unique about Flash that makes it    fundamentally flawed    on a touchscreen .
You have the same    problem    with ANY application on such a device , whether it be native code , Java , javascript/ajax , or Flash.It    s only a    problem    when you INSIST on using mousover effects , which are usually redundant and annoying anyway... and you    re an idiot if you design an application which can    t work without them !
then you have the audacity to whine that it won    t work on a system that doesn    t support them...Not to mention that they    re developing touch-screens with finger proximity sensors that can detect a    hover    anyway .
The problem is all in your head .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At the risk of sounding like flamebait... allow me to explain.There is absolutely nothing unique about Flash that makes it “fundamentally flawed” on a touchscreen.
You have the same “problem” with ANY application on such a device, whether it be native code, Java, javascript/ajax, or Flash.It’s only a “problem” when you INSIST on using mousover effects, which are usually redundant and annoying anyway... and you’re an idiot if you design an application which can’t work without them!
then you have the audacity to whine that it won’t work on a system that doesn’t support them...Not to mention that they’re developing touch-screens with finger proximity sensors that can detect a “hover” anyway.
The problem is all in your head.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219436</id>
	<title>Title too long</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266776040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The title of the article should have been: "Why Flash is Fundamentally Flawed."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The title of the article should have been : " Why Flash is Fundamentally Flawed .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The title of the article should have been: "Why Flash is Fundamentally Flawed.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31226548</id>
	<title>Re:Eat my balls!</title>
	<author>mysidia</author>
	<datestamp>1266781080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
Indeed.  It is no flaw in flash itself.
It's a flaw in the way flash has been used.
</p><p>
Developers have attempted to use flash to create things like 'menus' that do not really act like menus.
</p><p>
Just stick with flash apps that do not do dumb things like require 'hovering'  to get to important UI elements, in the first place.
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Indeed .
It is no flaw in flash itself .
It 's a flaw in the way flash has been used .
Developers have attempted to use flash to create things like 'menus ' that do not really act like menus .
Just stick with flash apps that do not do dumb things like require 'hovering ' to get to important UI elements , in the first place .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
Indeed.
It is no flaw in flash itself.
It's a flaw in the way flash has been used.
Developers have attempted to use flash to create things like 'menus' that do not really act like menus.
Just stick with flash apps that do not do dumb things like require 'hovering'  to get to important UI elements, in the first place.
</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219496</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219422</id>
	<title>Agreed, and the mouseover is elsewhere too.</title>
	<author>shumacher</author>
	<datestamp>1266775980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>I have a ClarionMiND. It's one of the few Intel-based MIDs that made it to the US, and with firesale pricing, the $130 for an atom-based handheld looks quite a bit better than the $699 price at launch.

It runs Firefox 3 and includes flash, but flash is of only limited utility. The on-screen keyboard can't detect when it's needed inside of flash. Mouseover doesn't exist.

On the other hand, many sites use mouseover in their (x)html. Facebook, for example, allows one to delete a post or comment. The delete link is hidden until you mouse over the link. For me at least, it's surprisingly intuitive to use with a mouse, but I'm completely lost with a touch-only device.

I find that I spend an excessive amount of time trying to figure my way around the car crash that is the merging of a mouse-centric internet with a device interface that doesn't do enough to cover for the internet's lack of accomodation for the devices interface.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have a ClarionMiND .
It 's one of the few Intel-based MIDs that made it to the US , and with firesale pricing , the $ 130 for an atom-based handheld looks quite a bit better than the $ 699 price at launch .
It runs Firefox 3 and includes flash , but flash is of only limited utility .
The on-screen keyboard ca n't detect when it 's needed inside of flash .
Mouseover does n't exist .
On the other hand , many sites use mouseover in their ( x ) html .
Facebook , for example , allows one to delete a post or comment .
The delete link is hidden until you mouse over the link .
For me at least , it 's surprisingly intuitive to use with a mouse , but I 'm completely lost with a touch-only device .
I find that I spend an excessive amount of time trying to figure my way around the car crash that is the merging of a mouse-centric internet with a device interface that does n't do enough to cover for the internet 's lack of accomodation for the devices interface .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have a ClarionMiND.
It's one of the few Intel-based MIDs that made it to the US, and with firesale pricing, the $130 for an atom-based handheld looks quite a bit better than the $699 price at launch.
It runs Firefox 3 and includes flash, but flash is of only limited utility.
The on-screen keyboard can't detect when it's needed inside of flash.
Mouseover doesn't exist.
On the other hand, many sites use mouseover in their (x)html.
Facebook, for example, allows one to delete a post or comment.
The delete link is hidden until you mouse over the link.
For me at least, it's surprisingly intuitive to use with a mouse, but I'm completely lost with a touch-only device.
I find that I spend an excessive amount of time trying to figure my way around the car crash that is the merging of a mouse-centric internet with a device interface that doesn't do enough to cover for the internet's lack of accomodation for the devices interface.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220838</id>
	<title>Re:Eat my balls!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266782880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>We all know Apple bans Flash because it would allow third party apps that don't have to forfeit 30\% of revenue to Apple. Plain and simple.  All other explanations are just someone's absurd mental gymnastics to justify Apple's stupid and shortsighted iPhone OS policies.</p></div><p>I don't really buy this argument as the sole explanation for Apple not supporting Flash on mobile devices.  Mobile Safari supports enough of HTML 5 that you can re-create most of the flash apps that you suggest would eat into Apple's profit.  There are a lot of iPhone specific web apps that give a lot of functionality.  Sure, not as much as building a native app, but you won't get the same functionality as native apps with Flash either.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>We all know Apple bans Flash because it would allow third party apps that do n't have to forfeit 30 \ % of revenue to Apple .
Plain and simple .
All other explanations are just someone 's absurd mental gymnastics to justify Apple 's stupid and shortsighted iPhone OS policies.I do n't really buy this argument as the sole explanation for Apple not supporting Flash on mobile devices .
Mobile Safari supports enough of HTML 5 that you can re-create most of the flash apps that you suggest would eat into Apple 's profit .
There are a lot of iPhone specific web apps that give a lot of functionality .
Sure , not as much as building a native app , but you wo n't get the same functionality as native apps with Flash either .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We all know Apple bans Flash because it would allow third party apps that don't have to forfeit 30\% of revenue to Apple.
Plain and simple.
All other explanations are just someone's absurd mental gymnastics to justify Apple's stupid and shortsighted iPhone OS policies.I don't really buy this argument as the sole explanation for Apple not supporting Flash on mobile devices.
Mobile Safari supports enough of HTML 5 that you can re-create most of the flash apps that you suggest would eat into Apple's profit.
There are a lot of iPhone specific web apps that give a lot of functionality.
Sure, not as much as building a native app, but you won't get the same functionality as native apps with Flash either.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219496</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31222554</id>
	<title>Re:Not entirely true</title>
	<author>rinoid</author>
	<datestamp>1266750780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"... other technologies"</p><p>Yeah, like plain text and images marked up in html and styled with CSS????? <br>
&nbsp; <br>That's a technology I wish all those flash sites would implement.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" ... other technologies " Yeah , like plain text and images marked up in html and styled with CSS ? ? ? ? ?
  That 's a technology I wish all those flash sites would implement .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"... other technologies"Yeah, like plain text and images marked up in html and styled with CSS?????
  That's a technology I wish all those flash sites would implement.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219992</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219676</id>
	<title>It just takes a properly designed tablet PC</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266777240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Like my old Fujitsu Stylistic LT C-500 (about 8-9 years old I believe).  It has a touch button on the frame to put the pointer in hover mode.  If they figured it out that far back, it would just seem to be a  matter of proper hardware design for a function that has been needed in windowing environments for a long time.</p><p>RO</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Like my old Fujitsu Stylistic LT C-500 ( about 8-9 years old I believe ) .
It has a touch button on the frame to put the pointer in hover mode .
If they figured it out that far back , it would just seem to be a matter of proper hardware design for a function that has been needed in windowing environments for a long time.RO</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Like my old Fujitsu Stylistic LT C-500 (about 8-9 years old I believe).
It has a touch button on the frame to put the pointer in hover mode.
If they figured it out that far back, it would just seem to be a  matter of proper hardware design for a function that has been needed in windowing environments for a long time.RO</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31230302</id>
	<title>Re:Not entirely true</title>
	<author>phlinn</author>
	<datestamp>1266859620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I disagree, it's far more unnatural to treat merely touching something as a click.  Clicks require definite pressure.  When you use a mouse, are your fingers on the buttons, or hovering over them?  The way touchpads handle it makes far more sense.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I disagree , it 's far more unnatural to treat merely touching something as a click .
Clicks require definite pressure .
When you use a mouse , are your fingers on the buttons , or hovering over them ?
The way touchpads handle it makes far more sense .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I disagree, it's far more unnatural to treat merely touching something as a click.
Clicks require definite pressure.
When you use a mouse, are your fingers on the buttons, or hovering over them?
The way touchpads handle it makes far more sense.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220028</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219538</id>
	<title>Flash rethink?</title>
	<author>Orlando</author>
	<datestamp>1266776400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Whatever reason Apple has for not liking Flash (I have yet to see a definitive explanation) all this negative press about Flash, coupled with the Flash/HTML5 debate can only be a good thing.  In my view, Flash has way more things wrong with it (breaking the semantic web) than the benefits it brings to the table.  If all this discussion either prompts Adobe to fix all that, or something better is suggested instead (HTML5?), it can only be a good thing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Whatever reason Apple has for not liking Flash ( I have yet to see a definitive explanation ) all this negative press about Flash , coupled with the Flash/HTML5 debate can only be a good thing .
In my view , Flash has way more things wrong with it ( breaking the semantic web ) than the benefits it brings to the table .
If all this discussion either prompts Adobe to fix all that , or something better is suggested instead ( HTML5 ?
) , it can only be a good thing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Whatever reason Apple has for not liking Flash (I have yet to see a definitive explanation) all this negative press about Flash, coupled with the Flash/HTML5 debate can only be a good thing.
In my view, Flash has way more things wrong with it (breaking the semantic web) than the benefits it brings to the table.
If all this discussion either prompts Adobe to fix all that, or something better is suggested instead (HTML5?
), it can only be a good thing.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219446</id>
	<title>Re:Not entirely true</title>
	<author>Nursie</author>
	<datestamp>1266776040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've been playing with the Nokia N900 recently and it has flash. Works fine *except* when I tried to play a flash game that required click and drag to draw lines. I couldn't find a way to do it that didn't just end up with the page being dragged around rather than the line I was trying to draw.</p><p>It might just be that I don't know how to operate it properly, or it could be that there are a few input-related hurdles to get over, but fundamentally flawed? Don't see why at all.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've been playing with the Nokia N900 recently and it has flash .
Works fine * except * when I tried to play a flash game that required click and drag to draw lines .
I could n't find a way to do it that did n't just end up with the page being dragged around rather than the line I was trying to draw.It might just be that I do n't know how to operate it properly , or it could be that there are a few input-related hurdles to get over , but fundamentally flawed ?
Do n't see why at all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've been playing with the Nokia N900 recently and it has flash.
Works fine *except* when I tried to play a flash game that required click and drag to draw lines.
I couldn't find a way to do it that didn't just end up with the page being dragged around rather than the line I was trying to draw.It might just be that I don't know how to operate it properly, or it could be that there are a few input-related hurdles to get over, but fundamentally flawed?
Don't see why at all.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219340</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31223200</id>
	<title>Re:Agreed, and the mouseover is elsewhere too.</title>
	<author>DeadboltX</author>
	<datestamp>1266754620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If future touch devices are designed to detect pressure then this problem could be easily remedied. Similar to the pen on a Wacom drawing tablet, you could have a light touch &amp; drag be the mouse cursor, and more pressure could indicate a click.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If future touch devices are designed to detect pressure then this problem could be easily remedied .
Similar to the pen on a Wacom drawing tablet , you could have a light touch &amp; drag be the mouse cursor , and more pressure could indicate a click .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If future touch devices are designed to detect pressure then this problem could be easily remedied.
Similar to the pen on a Wacom drawing tablet, you could have a light touch &amp; drag be the mouse cursor, and more pressure could indicate a click.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219422</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220134</id>
	<title>Re:I don't understand the hate.</title>
	<author>Achillez</author>
	<datestamp>1266779460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The primary purpose of the iphone is a *phone*. The primary purpose of the ipad is a *web surfing appliance*. With regards to iphone folks are willing to deal with some limited functionality since that is not it's main goal in life. With the ipad it's unforgivable that it can't surf 70\% of today's web content.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The primary purpose of the iphone is a * phone * .
The primary purpose of the ipad is a * web surfing appliance * .
With regards to iphone folks are willing to deal with some limited functionality since that is not it 's main goal in life .
With the ipad it 's unforgivable that it ca n't surf 70 \ % of today 's web content .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The primary purpose of the iphone is a *phone*.
The primary purpose of the ipad is a *web surfing appliance*.
With regards to iphone folks are willing to deal with some limited functionality since that is not it's main goal in life.
With the ipad it's unforgivable that it can't surf 70\% of today's web content.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219686</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31222756</id>
	<title>Re:Eat my balls!</title>
	<author>ehrichweiss</author>
	<datestamp>1266751980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Just realized.. I meant "touchscreen", not touchpad. (not enough caffeine I guess)</htmltext>
<tokenext>Just realized.. I meant " touchscreen " , not touchpad .
( not enough caffeine I guess )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just realized.. I meant "touchscreen", not touchpad.
(not enough caffeine I guess)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219690</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219686</id>
	<title>I don't understand the hate.</title>
	<author>MrCrassic</author>
	<datestamp>1266777300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't understand the massive criticisms Apple gets for not including Flash on the iPhone/iPad. These are <b>not</b> desktop computers; they are mobile devices with limited resources for limited purposes. If the iPhone came with Flash support, people would be complaining to the hills about their web surfing being SO SLOW and their batteries getting drained to the max.</p><p>Many people (I'd even bet on saying most people) use Flash for viewing video, and HTML5 + H.264 take care of that quite well and much more efficiently.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't understand the massive criticisms Apple gets for not including Flash on the iPhone/iPad .
These are not desktop computers ; they are mobile devices with limited resources for limited purposes .
If the iPhone came with Flash support , people would be complaining to the hills about their web surfing being SO SLOW and their batteries getting drained to the max.Many people ( I 'd even bet on saying most people ) use Flash for viewing video , and HTML5 + H.264 take care of that quite well and much more efficiently .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't understand the massive criticisms Apple gets for not including Flash on the iPhone/iPad.
These are not desktop computers; they are mobile devices with limited resources for limited purposes.
If the iPhone came with Flash support, people would be complaining to the hills about their web surfing being SO SLOW and their batteries getting drained to the max.Many people (I'd even bet on saying most people) use Flash for viewing video, and HTML5 + H.264 take care of that quite well and much more efficiently.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31221118</id>
	<title>Flash means security problems</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266784860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just about every week we see another major security issue caused by a problem with Flash.  Adobe isn't serious about security and doesn't know what to do to fix their products.  For example, Javascript should be off by default in Reader, but it isn't.  Last quarter something like 80\% of serious attacks were through holes in Adobe products and the latest issue is with Downloader.  Why allow a company and set of products that have shown themselves to be insecure onto the next generation of device where hackers can steal more personal data, run up changers and the like. Apple is trying to make our mobile devices more reliable and more secure than our PCs.  It is time to dump Flash.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just about every week we see another major security issue caused by a problem with Flash .
Adobe is n't serious about security and does n't know what to do to fix their products .
For example , Javascript should be off by default in Reader , but it is n't .
Last quarter something like 80 \ % of serious attacks were through holes in Adobe products and the latest issue is with Downloader .
Why allow a company and set of products that have shown themselves to be insecure onto the next generation of device where hackers can steal more personal data , run up changers and the like .
Apple is trying to make our mobile devices more reliable and more secure than our PCs .
It is time to dump Flash .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just about every week we see another major security issue caused by a problem with Flash.
Adobe isn't serious about security and doesn't know what to do to fix their products.
For example, Javascript should be off by default in Reader, but it isn't.
Last quarter something like 80\% of serious attacks were through holes in Adobe products and the latest issue is with Downloader.
Why allow a company and set of products that have shown themselves to be insecure onto the next generation of device where hackers can steal more personal data, run up changers and the like.
Apple is trying to make our mobile devices more reliable and more secure than our PCs.
It is time to dump Flash.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31226860</id>
	<title>Flash is fine on touchscreen.</title>
	<author>SirVival</author>
	<datestamp>1266872160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm a Flash developer and I design for touchscreen kiosks, not everything needs/uses fancy rollovers. Flash runs fine without them.
The real reason Flash isn't available on iPhone/iPad is because it would take a significant chunk out of Apple's app sales. Think about all the flash games/apps that are already available for free.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm a Flash developer and I design for touchscreen kiosks , not everything needs/uses fancy rollovers .
Flash runs fine without them .
The real reason Flash is n't available on iPhone/iPad is because it would take a significant chunk out of Apple 's app sales .
Think about all the flash games/apps that are already available for free .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm a Flash developer and I design for touchscreen kiosks, not everything needs/uses fancy rollovers.
Flash runs fine without them.
The real reason Flash isn't available on iPhone/iPad is because it would take a significant chunk out of Apple's app sales.
Think about all the flash games/apps that are already available for free.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31223394</id>
	<title>Re:Eat my balls!</title>
	<author>guyal</author>
	<datestamp>1266755820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Drakino speaks true.

Despite the implications of Apple's "billions and billions sold" advertising campaign, the contribution to their bottom line is dwarfed by their hardware sales. Apple is - for purposes of this debate - a hardware company, and has been since the 80s. More apps = more attractive hw platforms.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Drakino speaks true .
Despite the implications of Apple 's " billions and billions sold " advertising campaign , the contribution to their bottom line is dwarfed by their hardware sales .
Apple is - for purposes of this debate - a hardware company , and has been since the 80s .
More apps = more attractive hw platforms .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Drakino speaks true.
Despite the implications of Apple's "billions and billions sold" advertising campaign, the contribution to their bottom line is dwarfed by their hardware sales.
Apple is - for purposes of this debate - a hardware company, and has been since the 80s.
More apps = more attractive hw platforms.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220298</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31225244</id>
	<title>Stupid discussion</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266768900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When will people realize that no-one cares about flash and the iPhone/ipad.     The "flash" discussions are all really about tv.   No one could give a flying duck about whether you can effectively hover, people just want hulu, fancast, and the "other" video sites to work.<br>And apple and hulu don't want it to happen until they can find a way to monetize it.    This is truly a situation where the interests of the company are exactly opposite to those of the consumer - guess who loses in that scenario<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:(<br>all we need is for adobe to release a partially ( ie video) working player for jailbroken phones, and the entire game instantly changes.     Then there  suddenly is a completely compelling reason for your average consumer to jailbreak, and apple needs to play catchup.    At the moment they are driving, and have proven themselves over and over to have morals more appropriate to denizens of the seventh level of a much hotter place</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When will people realize that no-one cares about flash and the iPhone/ipad .
The " flash " discussions are all really about tv .
No one could give a flying duck about whether you can effectively hover , people just want hulu , fancast , and the " other " video sites to work.And apple and hulu do n't want it to happen until they can find a way to monetize it .
This is truly a situation where the interests of the company are exactly opposite to those of the consumer - guess who loses in that scenario : ( all we need is for adobe to release a partially ( ie video ) working player for jailbroken phones , and the entire game instantly changes .
Then there suddenly is a completely compelling reason for your average consumer to jailbreak , and apple needs to play catchup .
At the moment they are driving , and have proven themselves over and over to have morals more appropriate to denizens of the seventh level of a much hotter place</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When will people realize that no-one cares about flash and the iPhone/ipad.
The "flash" discussions are all really about tv.
No one could give a flying duck about whether you can effectively hover, people just want hulu, fancast, and the "other" video sites to work.And apple and hulu don't want it to happen until they can find a way to monetize it.
This is truly a situation where the interests of the company are exactly opposite to those of the consumer - guess who loses in that scenario :(all we need is for adobe to release a partially ( ie video) working player for jailbroken phones, and the entire game instantly changes.
Then there  suddenly is a completely compelling reason for your average consumer to jailbreak, and apple needs to play catchup.
At the moment they are driving, and have proven themselves over and over to have morals more appropriate to denizens of the seventh level of a much hotter place</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31231244</id>
	<title>So what does the FSF have to say about this?</title>
	<author>Lars T.</author>
	<datestamp>1266862560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.h-online.com/open/news/item/Free-Software-Foundation-Google-should-free-the-web-from-Flash-and-H-264-936563.html" title="h-online.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.h-online.com/open/news/item/Free-Software-Foundation-Google-should-free-the-web-from-Flash-and-H-264-936563.html</a> [h-online.com] <p><div class="quote"><p> The FSF says to Google that it "can end the web's dependence on patent-encumbered video formats and proprietary software (Flash)". [...] The foundation says "Apple has had the mettle to ditch Flash on the iPhone and the iPad -- albeit for suspect reasons and using abhorrent methods (DRM)". This, they claim, has pushed web developers to create Flash-free alternatives of their pages.</p></div><p>So apart from their usual paranoia (on wich they had to backpedal in the past), the FSF thinks Apple is right on the issue.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.h-online.com/open/news/item/Free-Software-Foundation-Google-should-free-the-web-from-Flash-and-H-264-936563.html [ h-online.com ] The FSF says to Google that it " can end the web 's dependence on patent-encumbered video formats and proprietary software ( Flash ) " .
[ ... ] The foundation says " Apple has had the mettle to ditch Flash on the iPhone and the iPad -- albeit for suspect reasons and using abhorrent methods ( DRM ) " .
This , they claim , has pushed web developers to create Flash-free alternatives of their pages.So apart from their usual paranoia ( on wich they had to backpedal in the past ) , the FSF thinks Apple is right on the issue .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.h-online.com/open/news/item/Free-Software-Foundation-Google-should-free-the-web-from-Flash-and-H-264-936563.html [h-online.com]  The FSF says to Google that it "can end the web's dependence on patent-encumbered video formats and proprietary software (Flash)".
[...] The foundation says "Apple has had the mettle to ditch Flash on the iPhone and the iPad -- albeit for suspect reasons and using abhorrent methods (DRM)".
This, they claim, has pushed web developers to create Flash-free alternatives of their pages.So apart from their usual paranoia (on wich they had to backpedal in the past), the FSF thinks Apple is right on the issue.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220076</id>
	<title>Re:The real reason is flash would cost Apple $</title>
	<author>ink</author>
	<datestamp>1266779220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Additionally, Adobe charges a per-device fee for mobile versions of Flash.  it is even illegal to re-distribute their x86 Flash plugin without such a license.  So Apple would be paying Adobe for the opportunity to collect more money from selling their CS suite.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Additionally , Adobe charges a per-device fee for mobile versions of Flash .
it is even illegal to re-distribute their x86 Flash plugin without such a license .
So Apple would be paying Adobe for the opportunity to collect more money from selling their CS suite .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Additionally, Adobe charges a per-device fee for mobile versions of Flash.
it is even illegal to re-distribute their x86 Flash plugin without such a license.
So Apple would be paying Adobe for the opportunity to collect more money from selling their CS suite.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219516</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31223898</id>
	<title>Flash legacy forcing developers to Silverlight...</title>
	<author>TheNetAvenger</author>
	<datestamp>1266759540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is where even Win7 has impacted Flash developers because of no way to handle the OS's multi-touch API sets 'easily'.</p><p>Silverlight is built to use the Touch APIs since v3 at least, giving it a big heads up of attention for people thinking about touch devices and Win7 over Flash.</p><p>This is also why Silverlight was a natural 'light' choice for UI development for WM Phone Series7, as it knows and handles touch well.</p><p>The shift in concepts are manageable, Flash just doesn't address alternatives. Even the UI on the Zune HD handles MouseOver for example, you can run your finger all over the screen, it is only when you 'press' or place more 'implied pressure' on the screen does it actually click.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is where even Win7 has impacted Flash developers because of no way to handle the OS 's multi-touch API sets 'easily'.Silverlight is built to use the Touch APIs since v3 at least , giving it a big heads up of attention for people thinking about touch devices and Win7 over Flash.This is also why Silverlight was a natural 'light ' choice for UI development for WM Phone Series7 , as it knows and handles touch well.The shift in concepts are manageable , Flash just does n't address alternatives .
Even the UI on the Zune HD handles MouseOver for example , you can run your finger all over the screen , it is only when you 'press ' or place more 'implied pressure ' on the screen does it actually click .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is where even Win7 has impacted Flash developers because of no way to handle the OS's multi-touch API sets 'easily'.Silverlight is built to use the Touch APIs since v3 at least, giving it a big heads up of attention for people thinking about touch devices and Win7 over Flash.This is also why Silverlight was a natural 'light' choice for UI development for WM Phone Series7, as it knows and handles touch well.The shift in concepts are manageable, Flash just doesn't address alternatives.
Even the UI on the Zune HD handles MouseOver for example, you can run your finger all over the screen, it is only when you 'press' or place more 'implied pressure' on the screen does it actually click.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31224108</id>
	<title>Re:Really?</title>
	<author>mjwx</author>
	<datestamp>1266760860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>The FTA's Authors complaints narrow down to one thing.<br> <br>

But there's no mouse.<br> <br>

I'm not a big fan of touchscreens, I'm not against them per se but I don't see them going beyond the phone/kiosk due to the physical limitations of using a touchscreen so they wont supplant the Mouse and Keyboard on the PC, at best they will become another peripheral (mouse, KB, Joystick and now touchpad).<br> <br>

Now correct me if I'm wrong but is it not the job of the operating system to interpret user input from whichever input device into whatever the program expects?<br> <br>

Now I'd say the authors complaints are largely invalid, I like most people only use flash for viewing information (95\% video, if your site is all flash I am half way to just closing the tab). The Author also ignores that flash is already working on mobile devices like the Motorola Milestone, HTC Hero and Google Nexus One, I'd be interested to hear how these devices handle such problems (still on my HTC Dream, cant afford A$700 for a milestone).<br> <br>

The authors only legitimate complaint is mouse-over menus, which need to die anyway. With the vast majority of mouse-over menus I encounter a single click on the menu will either open up that menu or take you to a page which deals with things from that menu, this is a good design thing, so the authors problem is all about deficiencies in design not deficiencies in technology. No advancement in I/O technology will ever overcome a terrible design.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The FTA 's Authors complaints narrow down to one thing .
But there 's no mouse .
I 'm not a big fan of touchscreens , I 'm not against them per se but I do n't see them going beyond the phone/kiosk due to the physical limitations of using a touchscreen so they wont supplant the Mouse and Keyboard on the PC , at best they will become another peripheral ( mouse , KB , Joystick and now touchpad ) .
Now correct me if I 'm wrong but is it not the job of the operating system to interpret user input from whichever input device into whatever the program expects ?
Now I 'd say the authors complaints are largely invalid , I like most people only use flash for viewing information ( 95 \ % video , if your site is all flash I am half way to just closing the tab ) .
The Author also ignores that flash is already working on mobile devices like the Motorola Milestone , HTC Hero and Google Nexus One , I 'd be interested to hear how these devices handle such problems ( still on my HTC Dream , cant afford A $ 700 for a milestone ) .
The authors only legitimate complaint is mouse-over menus , which need to die anyway .
With the vast majority of mouse-over menus I encounter a single click on the menu will either open up that menu or take you to a page which deals with things from that menu , this is a good design thing , so the authors problem is all about deficiencies in design not deficiencies in technology .
No advancement in I/O technology will ever overcome a terrible design .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The FTA's Authors complaints narrow down to one thing.
But there's no mouse.
I'm not a big fan of touchscreens, I'm not against them per se but I don't see them going beyond the phone/kiosk due to the physical limitations of using a touchscreen so they wont supplant the Mouse and Keyboard on the PC, at best they will become another peripheral (mouse, KB, Joystick and now touchpad).
Now correct me if I'm wrong but is it not the job of the operating system to interpret user input from whichever input device into whatever the program expects?
Now I'd say the authors complaints are largely invalid, I like most people only use flash for viewing information (95\% video, if your site is all flash I am half way to just closing the tab).
The Author also ignores that flash is already working on mobile devices like the Motorola Milestone, HTC Hero and Google Nexus One, I'd be interested to hear how these devices handle such problems (still on my HTC Dream, cant afford A$700 for a milestone).
The authors only legitimate complaint is mouse-over menus, which need to die anyway.
With the vast majority of mouse-over menus I encounter a single click on the menu will either open up that menu or take you to a page which deals with things from that menu, this is a good design thing, so the authors problem is all about deficiencies in design not deficiencies in technology.
No advancement in I/O technology will ever overcome a terrible design.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219338</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31224790</id>
	<title>why Flash?</title>
	<author>Punto</author>
	<datestamp>1266765720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>how is this different from any other application that uses a mouse and might need a mouse\_move event when the button is not clicked? if flash is "fundamentally flawed" for this, then so is every other application that uses a mouse. title should be "why is software fundamentally flawed on touchscreen devices" (answer: it's not; just learn how to program without the mouse hover event)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>how is this different from any other application that uses a mouse and might need a mouse \ _move event when the button is not clicked ?
if flash is " fundamentally flawed " for this , then so is every other application that uses a mouse .
title should be " why is software fundamentally flawed on touchscreen devices " ( answer : it 's not ; just learn how to program without the mouse hover event )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>how is this different from any other application that uses a mouse and might need a mouse\_move event when the button is not clicked?
if flash is "fundamentally flawed" for this, then so is every other application that uses a mouse.
title should be "why is software fundamentally flawed on touchscreen devices" (answer: it's not; just learn how to program without the mouse hover event)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31236938</id>
	<title>It's all about video</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266836640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Although there may be some fundamental truths to the argument, I would bet 99\% of iPhone/iTouch/Tampod users out there only want Flash support to view Flash videos.  Hover and mouseover issues (real or not) are completely irrelevant to their needs.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Although there may be some fundamental truths to the argument , I would bet 99 \ % of iPhone/iTouch/Tampod users out there only want Flash support to view Flash videos .
Hover and mouseover issues ( real or not ) are completely irrelevant to their needs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Although there may be some fundamental truths to the argument, I would bet 99\% of iPhone/iTouch/Tampod users out there only want Flash support to view Flash videos.
Hover and mouseover issues (real or not) are completely irrelevant to their needs.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220006</id>
	<title>Re:What???</title>
	<author>J4</author>
	<datestamp>1266778860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You're missing the point. There is a tremendous amount of inertia to overcome. Content costs<br>money to provide and while programmers would delight in all the extra work, the reality is nobody<br>is going to fund what amounts to porting all the existing flash content to a new input paradigm.</p><p>BlindingFlash... Hey.. wait a minute... it could be Obama's WPA for programmers!</p><p>Oh sh*t. Sorry, programmers don't take handouts. Nevermind</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You 're missing the point .
There is a tremendous amount of inertia to overcome .
Content costsmoney to provide and while programmers would delight in all the extra work , the reality is nobodyis going to fund what amounts to porting all the existing flash content to a new input paradigm.BlindingFlash... Hey.. wait a minute... it could be Obama 's WPA for programmers ! Oh sh * t. Sorry , programmers do n't take handouts .
Nevermind</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You're missing the point.
There is a tremendous amount of inertia to overcome.
Content costsmoney to provide and while programmers would delight in all the extra work, the reality is nobodyis going to fund what amounts to porting all the existing flash content to a new input paradigm.BlindingFlash... Hey.. wait a minute... it could be Obama's WPA for programmers!Oh sh*t. Sorry, programmers don't take handouts.
Nevermind</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219388</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31227628</id>
	<title>Re:Eat my balls!</title>
	<author>ytpete</author>
	<datestamp>1266840060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I might accept your argument if you exchange profit for the lock-in angle: Apple wants native apps so people "can't" move to other platforms.</p></div><p>That's <i>exactly</i> Apple's angle. Hardware sales is the cash cow and having the best app store out there is a big competitive advantage for that hardware.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I might accept your argument if you exchange profit for the lock-in angle : Apple wants native apps so people " ca n't " move to other platforms.That 's exactly Apple 's angle .
Hardware sales is the cash cow and having the best app store out there is a big competitive advantage for that hardware .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I might accept your argument if you exchange profit for the lock-in angle: Apple wants native apps so people "can't" move to other platforms.That's exactly Apple's angle.
Hardware sales is the cash cow and having the best app store out there is a big competitive advantage for that hardware.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31222814</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219952</id>
	<title>pfft</title>
	<author>spottedkangaroo</author>
	<datestamp>1266778500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The same is true for any website with mouse rollovers and css<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:hover effects, yet somehow touch screen devices do just fine on the web.  Miracle?  No.  But hover effects don't work and life moves on.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The same is true for any website with mouse rollovers and css : hover effects , yet somehow touch screen devices do just fine on the web .
Miracle ? No .
But hover effects do n't work and life moves on .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The same is true for any website with mouse rollovers and css :hover effects, yet somehow touch screen devices do just fine on the web.
Miracle?  No.
But hover effects don't work and life moves on.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219940</id>
	<title>Some very wrong conclusions, some very right ones.</title>
	<author>Vellmont</author>
	<datestamp>1266778440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's obvious to anyone willing to think about it for more than 30 seconds that a new user interaction requires a new design.  The author of this article starts out first trying to blame "flash" for this, then briefly retracts the statement saying that apps could be designed for touchscreens.  Then he goes through a series of ways to try to map mouse UI design onto touchscreen UI design (which he admits doesn't work).  He's close, but rejecting option one because "it just isn't going to happen" is hasty.</p><p>This isn't a "Flash" problem.  Flash is a programming language and can adapt to any UI if programmer and tool developer choose to.  This is a fundamental UI design problem.  Usability and UI Guru Jakob Nielsen posted an <a href="http://www.useit.com/alertbox/mobile-apps-initial-use.html" title="useit.com">article</a> [useit.com] about this very topic a couple weeks ago.  One of the more interesting points he made was when GUI's first came out, app designers just slapped a GUI on top of the old mainframe app.  A fundamental mistake that we know didn't work.</p><p>The problem is very real, and it's a good thing to point out.  The ONLY solution to this problem (at least if you want to make the apps usable on touchscreens) is to either redesign the UI to work with both mice and touchscreens (likely a bad option), or have to separate versions of the UI for mice and touchscreens.  Depending on how the app was written, this can mean either an entire re-write if the app didn't separate out the UI from the rest of the app, or simply coding up a new UI layer that interacts with the existing layers in the app.</p><p>The one distinction I'd like to make though is this isn't a technological problem at all and can't be solved through technology.  It's a business and re-training problem where re-coding the UI and learning the new UI design skills has to be worth it, business wise.  In the long run, touchscreen are going to be an important part of new UI design.  It's actually the first real competitor since the mouse became common 20 years ago.  20 years is a long time (especially in computing), so it shouldn't be surprising we need to re-think a lot of the UI interaction that's been designed for mice for the last 20 years.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's obvious to anyone willing to think about it for more than 30 seconds that a new user interaction requires a new design .
The author of this article starts out first trying to blame " flash " for this , then briefly retracts the statement saying that apps could be designed for touchscreens .
Then he goes through a series of ways to try to map mouse UI design onto touchscreen UI design ( which he admits does n't work ) .
He 's close , but rejecting option one because " it just is n't going to happen " is hasty.This is n't a " Flash " problem .
Flash is a programming language and can adapt to any UI if programmer and tool developer choose to .
This is a fundamental UI design problem .
Usability and UI Guru Jakob Nielsen posted an article [ useit.com ] about this very topic a couple weeks ago .
One of the more interesting points he made was when GUI 's first came out , app designers just slapped a GUI on top of the old mainframe app .
A fundamental mistake that we know did n't work.The problem is very real , and it 's a good thing to point out .
The ONLY solution to this problem ( at least if you want to make the apps usable on touchscreens ) is to either redesign the UI to work with both mice and touchscreens ( likely a bad option ) , or have to separate versions of the UI for mice and touchscreens .
Depending on how the app was written , this can mean either an entire re-write if the app did n't separate out the UI from the rest of the app , or simply coding up a new UI layer that interacts with the existing layers in the app.The one distinction I 'd like to make though is this is n't a technological problem at all and ca n't be solved through technology .
It 's a business and re-training problem where re-coding the UI and learning the new UI design skills has to be worth it , business wise .
In the long run , touchscreen are going to be an important part of new UI design .
It 's actually the first real competitor since the mouse became common 20 years ago .
20 years is a long time ( especially in computing ) , so it should n't be surprising we need to re-think a lot of the UI interaction that 's been designed for mice for the last 20 years .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's obvious to anyone willing to think about it for more than 30 seconds that a new user interaction requires a new design.
The author of this article starts out first trying to blame "flash" for this, then briefly retracts the statement saying that apps could be designed for touchscreens.
Then he goes through a series of ways to try to map mouse UI design onto touchscreen UI design (which he admits doesn't work).
He's close, but rejecting option one because "it just isn't going to happen" is hasty.This isn't a "Flash" problem.
Flash is a programming language and can adapt to any UI if programmer and tool developer choose to.
This is a fundamental UI design problem.
Usability and UI Guru Jakob Nielsen posted an article [useit.com] about this very topic a couple weeks ago.
One of the more interesting points he made was when GUI's first came out, app designers just slapped a GUI on top of the old mainframe app.
A fundamental mistake that we know didn't work.The problem is very real, and it's a good thing to point out.
The ONLY solution to this problem (at least if you want to make the apps usable on touchscreens) is to either redesign the UI to work with both mice and touchscreens (likely a bad option), or have to separate versions of the UI for mice and touchscreens.
Depending on how the app was written, this can mean either an entire re-write if the app didn't separate out the UI from the rest of the app, or simply coding up a new UI layer that interacts with the existing layers in the app.The one distinction I'd like to make though is this isn't a technological problem at all and can't be solved through technology.
It's a business and re-training problem where re-coding the UI and learning the new UI design skills has to be worth it, business wise.
In the long run, touchscreen are going to be an important part of new UI design.
It's actually the first real competitor since the mouse became common 20 years ago.
20 years is a long time (especially in computing), so it shouldn't be surprising we need to re-think a lot of the UI interaction that's been designed for mice for the last 20 years.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31225584</id>
	<title>New Life Cleanse</title>
	<author>hoiseri</author>
	<datestamp>1266771420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's never easy to repeat, but the Stealer have a solid organization from the top down
they are always in the mix, at the end.
<a href="http://www.articlesbase.com/health-articles/new-life-cleanse-review-risk-free-trial-1878479.html" title="articlesbase.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.articlesbase.com/health-articles/new-life-cleanse-review-risk-free-trial-1878479.html</a> [articlesbase.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's never easy to repeat , but the Stealer have a solid organization from the top down they are always in the mix , at the end .
http : //www.articlesbase.com/health-articles/new-life-cleanse-review-risk-free-trial-1878479.html [ articlesbase.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's never easy to repeat, but the Stealer have a solid organization from the top down
they are always in the mix, at the end.
http://www.articlesbase.com/health-articles/new-life-cleanse-review-risk-free-trial-1878479.html [articlesbase.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219382</id>
	<title>Hovering is not a fundamental feature</title>
	<author>eherot</author>
	<datestamp>1266775800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>While certainly a useful feature, the ability to hover is hardly one of the fundamental reasons why people use Flash to make web sites.  Working around it (or better yet, developing a way to hover on the touch screen) would not be such a difficult hurdle to overcome...</htmltext>
<tokenext>While certainly a useful feature , the ability to hover is hardly one of the fundamental reasons why people use Flash to make web sites .
Working around it ( or better yet , developing a way to hover on the touch screen ) would not be such a difficult hurdle to overcome.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While certainly a useful feature, the ability to hover is hardly one of the fundamental reasons why people use Flash to make web sites.
Working around it (or better yet, developing a way to hover on the touch screen) would not be such a difficult hurdle to overcome...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219908</id>
	<title>Re:Never?</title>
	<author>J4</author>
	<datestamp>1266778260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Rydia sez: "it took me seconds to cobble together"</p><p>You are \_goood\_</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Rydia sez : " it took me seconds to cobble together " You are \ _goood \ _</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Rydia sez: "it took me seconds to cobble together"You are \_goood\_</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219348</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219794</id>
	<title>Article is fundamentally flawed</title>
	<author>MobyDisk</author>
	<datestamp>1266777660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The article boils down to one argument: Many current Flash applications expect mouse hover, and since mouse hover is not supported on the iPad, all Flash applications will not work.  Let me tear this down quite simply.</p><p>1) This problem has nothing to do with Flash.  It applies to all development tools.  By his reasoning, no programming tools should be ported to the iPad.<br>2) This problem has nothing to do with the iPad.  It applies to almost all hand-held, portable, or touch-screen devices.  By his reasoning, no one should ever program for these devices.<br>3) It assumes Flash apps will not be modified for touch screen devices.  They have been, and continue to be.<br>4) It assumes there is no way to do mouseover.  Lots of touch devices actually do support mouseover.  (Ex: Drawing tablets)<br>5) It overinflates the problem to make it seem like a big deal:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>This distinction is not rare. It&rsquo;s pervasive, fundamental to interactive design, and vital to the basic use of Flash content.</p></div><p>No - it's actually rare.  And it is not fundamental to interactive design.  There's touch screens in most Point-of-sale systems.  It's on medical devices.  It's on the Nintendo DS.  It's on almost every mobile phone out there now.  And yet somehow -- they manage to get around this vital thing.  Again, the author seems to think that the programming language has something to do with it.</p><p>I have written code for touch-screen devices, and sometimes I design a screen or a control then go *darnit* No mouseover!  It's not a huge change most of the time.  If the article wasn't so "OMG!" over the top, it might have actually been insightful.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The article boils down to one argument : Many current Flash applications expect mouse hover , and since mouse hover is not supported on the iPad , all Flash applications will not work .
Let me tear this down quite simply.1 ) This problem has nothing to do with Flash .
It applies to all development tools .
By his reasoning , no programming tools should be ported to the iPad.2 ) This problem has nothing to do with the iPad .
It applies to almost all hand-held , portable , or touch-screen devices .
By his reasoning , no one should ever program for these devices.3 ) It assumes Flash apps will not be modified for touch screen devices .
They have been , and continue to be.4 ) It assumes there is no way to do mouseover .
Lots of touch devices actually do support mouseover .
( Ex : Drawing tablets ) 5 ) It overinflates the problem to make it seem like a big deal : This distinction is not rare .
It    s pervasive , fundamental to interactive design , and vital to the basic use of Flash content.No - it 's actually rare .
And it is not fundamental to interactive design .
There 's touch screens in most Point-of-sale systems .
It 's on medical devices .
It 's on the Nintendo DS .
It 's on almost every mobile phone out there now .
And yet somehow -- they manage to get around this vital thing .
Again , the author seems to think that the programming language has something to do with it.I have written code for touch-screen devices , and sometimes I design a screen or a control then go * darnit * No mouseover !
It 's not a huge change most of the time .
If the article was n't so " OMG !
" over the top , it might have actually been insightful .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The article boils down to one argument: Many current Flash applications expect mouse hover, and since mouse hover is not supported on the iPad, all Flash applications will not work.
Let me tear this down quite simply.1) This problem has nothing to do with Flash.
It applies to all development tools.
By his reasoning, no programming tools should be ported to the iPad.2) This problem has nothing to do with the iPad.
It applies to almost all hand-held, portable, or touch-screen devices.
By his reasoning, no one should ever program for these devices.3) It assumes Flash apps will not be modified for touch screen devices.
They have been, and continue to be.4) It assumes there is no way to do mouseover.
Lots of touch devices actually do support mouseover.
(Ex: Drawing tablets)5) It overinflates the problem to make it seem like a big deal:This distinction is not rare.
It’s pervasive, fundamental to interactive design, and vital to the basic use of Flash content.No - it's actually rare.
And it is not fundamental to interactive design.
There's touch screens in most Point-of-sale systems.
It's on medical devices.
It's on the Nintendo DS.
It's on almost every mobile phone out there now.
And yet somehow -- they manage to get around this vital thing.
Again, the author seems to think that the programming language has something to do with it.I have written code for touch-screen devices, and sometimes I design a screen or a control then go *darnit* No mouseover!
It's not a huge change most of the time.
If the article wasn't so "OMG!
" over the top, it might have actually been insightful.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219898</id>
	<title>Opinion of a UI Game Developer who leverages Flash</title>
	<author>Tronster</author>
	<datestamp>1266778200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This entire story is FUD; I took the bite though...</p><p>I'm a user interface lead at a game studio which is leveraging a Flash-based solution that could target consoles.  I already did this once before on CnC3:Kane's Wrath (a title with PC and 360 SKUs), and have done contract work creating a Flash Lite application for the Sony Mylo 2 (touch screen.)  Besides all this I also teach Introduction to Interactive Media at a local college which has a successful curriculum based around Flash, and yet touches on aspects of touch-devices and alternate input (non-browser) environments.</p><p>All that said about my qualifications I make this statement:<br>Flash works in it's existing form on these devices.</p><p>Its my professional opinion that it would work fine on an iPad or iPhone and the non-technical agenda Apple has is what's preventing it from manifesting itself on those platforms.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This entire story is FUD ; I took the bite though...I 'm a user interface lead at a game studio which is leveraging a Flash-based solution that could target consoles .
I already did this once before on CnC3 : Kane 's Wrath ( a title with PC and 360 SKUs ) , and have done contract work creating a Flash Lite application for the Sony Mylo 2 ( touch screen .
) Besides all this I also teach Introduction to Interactive Media at a local college which has a successful curriculum based around Flash , and yet touches on aspects of touch-devices and alternate input ( non-browser ) environments.All that said about my qualifications I make this statement : Flash works in it 's existing form on these devices.Its my professional opinion that it would work fine on an iPad or iPhone and the non-technical agenda Apple has is what 's preventing it from manifesting itself on those platforms .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This entire story is FUD; I took the bite though...I'm a user interface lead at a game studio which is leveraging a Flash-based solution that could target consoles.
I already did this once before on CnC3:Kane's Wrath (a title with PC and 360 SKUs), and have done contract work creating a Flash Lite application for the Sony Mylo 2 (touch screen.
)  Besides all this I also teach Introduction to Interactive Media at a local college which has a successful curriculum based around Flash, and yet touches on aspects of touch-devices and alternate input (non-browser) environments.All that said about my qualifications I make this statement:Flash works in it's existing form on these devices.Its my professional opinion that it would work fine on an iPad or iPhone and the non-technical agenda Apple has is what's preventing it from manifesting itself on those platforms.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31228064</id>
	<title>Re:Never?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266844920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Lol score 5.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Lol score 5 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Lol score 5.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219348</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219498</id>
	<title>Multitouch</title>
	<author>mobby\_6kl</author>
	<datestamp>1266776220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Most new devices with capacitative screens also support multitouch. Interpret touches with two fingers as mouse hover, and one finger as a click/click &amp; hold, or vice versa, depending on what's more intuitive and better for accuracy. There, issue solved, no new hardware required.</p><p>Or switch to digitizing technology for the displays which support better resolution for pressure. Interpret light touches as mouse hover.</p><p>Not to mention that proximity detecting screens that Apple, of all companies, patented a while ago. Interpret fingers hovering close to display as mouse hover. Ta-da!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Most new devices with capacitative screens also support multitouch .
Interpret touches with two fingers as mouse hover , and one finger as a click/click &amp; hold , or vice versa , depending on what 's more intuitive and better for accuracy .
There , issue solved , no new hardware required.Or switch to digitizing technology for the displays which support better resolution for pressure .
Interpret light touches as mouse hover.Not to mention that proximity detecting screens that Apple , of all companies , patented a while ago .
Interpret fingers hovering close to display as mouse hover .
Ta-da !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Most new devices with capacitative screens also support multitouch.
Interpret touches with two fingers as mouse hover, and one finger as a click/click &amp; hold, or vice versa, depending on what's more intuitive and better for accuracy.
There, issue solved, no new hardware required.Or switch to digitizing technology for the displays which support better resolution for pressure.
Interpret light touches as mouse hover.Not to mention that proximity detecting screens that Apple, of all companies, patented a while ago.
Interpret fingers hovering close to display as mouse hover.
Ta-da!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219872</id>
	<title>Flawed Logic in OP</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266778080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I agree. With the OP's logic, half of the internet should be banned from the entire i* line of products. However, there are two hardware solutions that could solve the problem for all touch screen devices.</p><p>1) Add proximity sensing. Not just for your whole face, but to sense when a finger is held near the screen. It is capacitive touch after all.</p><p>2) Add active stylus input. The main thing I miss on my Droid vs my old Palm Handheld is the fine grain control afforded by a stylus. I know Palms were just pressure touch sensitive and so had the same hover issues. But I also have a Table PC and I can hover the stylus over the screen to move the pointer without ever touching the screen. Then a tap on the screen is the same as a click. I don't care what Steve Jobs says, I like having a stylus.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I agree .
With the OP 's logic , half of the internet should be banned from the entire i * line of products .
However , there are two hardware solutions that could solve the problem for all touch screen devices.1 ) Add proximity sensing .
Not just for your whole face , but to sense when a finger is held near the screen .
It is capacitive touch after all.2 ) Add active stylus input .
The main thing I miss on my Droid vs my old Palm Handheld is the fine grain control afforded by a stylus .
I know Palms were just pressure touch sensitive and so had the same hover issues .
But I also have a Table PC and I can hover the stylus over the screen to move the pointer without ever touching the screen .
Then a tap on the screen is the same as a click .
I do n't care what Steve Jobs says , I like having a stylus .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I agree.
With the OP's logic, half of the internet should be banned from the entire i* line of products.
However, there are two hardware solutions that could solve the problem for all touch screen devices.1) Add proximity sensing.
Not just for your whole face, but to sense when a finger is held near the screen.
It is capacitive touch after all.2) Add active stylus input.
The main thing I miss on my Droid vs my old Palm Handheld is the fine grain control afforded by a stylus.
I know Palms were just pressure touch sensitive and so had the same hover issues.
But I also have a Table PC and I can hover the stylus over the screen to move the pointer without ever touching the screen.
Then a tap on the screen is the same as a click.
I don't care what Steve Jobs says, I like having a stylus.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219496</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220172</id>
	<title>COWON S9</title>
	<author>Sciros</author>
	<datestamp>1266779640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I recently bought a Cowon S9, which is a nice little amoled touchscreen PMP that uses a Flash UI. It's decent out of the box, but what makes it extra great is that one can develop and install custom UIs on it (google "cowon s9 Aero Ultimate", "cowon s9 Dark Evolution", and many others) and those happen to be quite good. And half of them are made by high-school students working on their own in their spare time!</p><p>So meh. I think that someone should take a look at actual Flash-based players on the market before coming to the sweeping conclusion that it can't work on touchscreens.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I recently bought a Cowon S9 , which is a nice little amoled touchscreen PMP that uses a Flash UI .
It 's decent out of the box , but what makes it extra great is that one can develop and install custom UIs on it ( google " cowon s9 Aero Ultimate " , " cowon s9 Dark Evolution " , and many others ) and those happen to be quite good .
And half of them are made by high-school students working on their own in their spare time ! So meh .
I think that someone should take a look at actual Flash-based players on the market before coming to the sweeping conclusion that it ca n't work on touchscreens .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I recently bought a Cowon S9, which is a nice little amoled touchscreen PMP that uses a Flash UI.
It's decent out of the box, but what makes it extra great is that one can develop and install custom UIs on it (google "cowon s9 Aero Ultimate", "cowon s9 Dark Evolution", and many others) and those happen to be quite good.
And half of them are made by high-school students working on their own in their spare time!So meh.
I think that someone should take a look at actual Flash-based players on the market before coming to the sweeping conclusion that it can't work on touchscreens.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219428</id>
	<title>android tablet?</title>
	<author>amnezick</author>
	<datestamp>1266775980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>adam has a touchpad on it's back. how 'bout that?<br>
<br>
(for adam's back jokes: chatroulette discussion thread is <a href="http://tech.slashdot.org/story/10/02/21/075223/The-Surreal-World-of-Chatroulette" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">here</a> [slashdot.org])</htmltext>
<tokenext>adam has a touchpad on it 's back .
how 'bout that ?
( for adam 's back jokes : chatroulette discussion thread is here [ slashdot.org ] )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>adam has a touchpad on it's back.
how 'bout that?
(for adam's back jokes: chatroulette discussion thread is here [slashdot.org])</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31221902</id>
	<title>Lets ditch scrolling click-wheel mice, too!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266747000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Finger gymnastics?"  Heck, while we're at it, lets get rid of the click-wheel scrolling mouse, because that's just way too much effort for me to bother integrating it into my browsing behavior.  I need a browser that automatically scrolls just by thinking of the words "up" or "down,"...nothing else will suffice, so don't bother trying to come up with any other solutions. Amazing to me how quickly you can dismiss a hardware solution.  They are the simplest, cheapest, most intuitive options and it can provide a solution to the problem without having to recode anything.  Two stage gestures are an obvious solution.  An additional ergonomically designed thumb-button along the sides of any palm sized device;  Requiring no more effort than the click of a mouse button, when said button is depressed, touch-click is disabled and finger gestures now becomes "mouseovers."  Clicking requires a double tap until the button is released.  Is that really going to complicate your life? This isn't some clumsy, cumbersome gesture, it's an intuitive way to make something work better... and isn't that the point?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Finger gymnastics ?
" Heck , while we 're at it , lets get rid of the click-wheel scrolling mouse , because that 's just way too much effort for me to bother integrating it into my browsing behavior .
I need a browser that automatically scrolls just by thinking of the words " up " or " down , " ...nothing else will suffice , so do n't bother trying to come up with any other solutions .
Amazing to me how quickly you can dismiss a hardware solution .
They are the simplest , cheapest , most intuitive options and it can provide a solution to the problem without having to recode anything .
Two stage gestures are an obvious solution .
An additional ergonomically designed thumb-button along the sides of any palm sized device ; Requiring no more effort than the click of a mouse button , when said button is depressed , touch-click is disabled and finger gestures now becomes " mouseovers .
" Clicking requires a double tap until the button is released .
Is that really going to complicate your life ?
This is n't some clumsy , cumbersome gesture , it 's an intuitive way to make something work better... and is n't that the point ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Finger gymnastics?
"  Heck, while we're at it, lets get rid of the click-wheel scrolling mouse, because that's just way too much effort for me to bother integrating it into my browsing behavior.
I need a browser that automatically scrolls just by thinking of the words "up" or "down,"...nothing else will suffice, so don't bother trying to come up with any other solutions.
Amazing to me how quickly you can dismiss a hardware solution.
They are the simplest, cheapest, most intuitive options and it can provide a solution to the problem without having to recode anything.
Two stage gestures are an obvious solution.
An additional ergonomically designed thumb-button along the sides of any palm sized device;  Requiring no more effort than the click of a mouse button, when said button is depressed, touch-click is disabled and finger gestures now becomes "mouseovers.
"  Clicking requires a double tap until the button is released.
Is that really going to complicate your life?
This isn't some clumsy, cumbersome gesture, it's an intuitive way to make something work better... and isn't that the point?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219576</id>
	<title>The App Store</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266776580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>The real reason why Apple would never allow Flash to work on one of it's mobile devices is simple.  The App Store.  Most of the available apps could easily be mimicked using Flash, and made easily available.  This would not be a good thing for Apple's bottom line.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The real reason why Apple would never allow Flash to work on one of it 's mobile devices is simple .
The App Store .
Most of the available apps could easily be mimicked using Flash , and made easily available .
This would not be a good thing for Apple 's bottom line .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The real reason why Apple would never allow Flash to work on one of it's mobile devices is simple.
The App Store.
Most of the available apps could easily be mimicked using Flash, and made easily available.
This would not be a good thing for Apple's bottom line.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219338</id>
	<title>Really?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266775620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Most flash apps don't do anything interesting with hovering, so it would be perfectly fine if the implementation just did clicking, or hovering with some weird gesture.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Most flash apps do n't do anything interesting with hovering , so it would be perfectly fine if the implementation just did clicking , or hovering with some weird gesture .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Most flash apps don't do anything interesting with hovering, so it would be perfectly fine if the implementation just did clicking, or hovering with some weird gesture.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31221402</id>
	<title>Ignore RoughlyDrafted</title>
	<author>RzUpAnmsCwrds</author>
	<datestamp>1266743520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>RoughlyDrafted is nothing but an Apple apologist site. This is the same site that told us why we didn't want apps on the original iPhone (never mind that apps have now made the iPhone a huge success), how Android was doomed to fail (despite the fact that it's taken a significant share of the smartphone market in under two years), and how the iPad doesn't need HDMI (apparently a VGA output that does 1024x768 is a good substitute).</p><p>To RoughlyDrafted, any problem with an Apple product is a problem with us, not with the product. No apps? We don't really want them. No HDMI? We didn't really need that anyway. No real multitasking? We didn't want that either because it opens the door to "viruses and spyware that run in the background".</p><p>What a bunch of crap. Not even Mossberg is that bad.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>RoughlyDrafted is nothing but an Apple apologist site .
This is the same site that told us why we did n't want apps on the original iPhone ( never mind that apps have now made the iPhone a huge success ) , how Android was doomed to fail ( despite the fact that it 's taken a significant share of the smartphone market in under two years ) , and how the iPad does n't need HDMI ( apparently a VGA output that does 1024x768 is a good substitute ) .To RoughlyDrafted , any problem with an Apple product is a problem with us , not with the product .
No apps ?
We do n't really want them .
No HDMI ?
We did n't really need that anyway .
No real multitasking ?
We did n't want that either because it opens the door to " viruses and spyware that run in the background " .What a bunch of crap .
Not even Mossberg is that bad .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>RoughlyDrafted is nothing but an Apple apologist site.
This is the same site that told us why we didn't want apps on the original iPhone (never mind that apps have now made the iPhone a huge success), how Android was doomed to fail (despite the fact that it's taken a significant share of the smartphone market in under two years), and how the iPad doesn't need HDMI (apparently a VGA output that does 1024x768 is a good substitute).To RoughlyDrafted, any problem with an Apple product is a problem with us, not with the product.
No apps?
We don't really want them.
No HDMI?
We didn't really need that anyway.
No real multitasking?
We didn't want that either because it opens the door to "viruses and spyware that run in the background".What a bunch of crap.
Not even Mossberg is that bad.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31222976</id>
	<title>You just have to RT(correct)FA</title>
	<author>randomaxe</author>
	<datestamp>1266753300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This does get talked about, actually.  The Gadgeteer ran <a href="http://the-gadgeteer.com/2010/02/19/the-ipad-what-it-means-for-you-what-it-means-for-apple/" title="the-gadgeteer.com">an article</a> [the-gadgeteer.com] two days ago (making that one day before this article or its source material) that brings up this exact issue.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This does get talked about , actually .
The Gadgeteer ran an article [ the-gadgeteer.com ] two days ago ( making that one day before this article or its source material ) that brings up this exact issue .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This does get talked about, actually.
The Gadgeteer ran an article [the-gadgeteer.com] two days ago (making that one day before this article or its source material) that brings up this exact issue.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219882</id>
	<title>Roughly Drafted - The Lunatic Fringe of OSX Fandom</title>
	<author>meehawl</author>
	<datestamp>1266778140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Seriously people, this is Roughly Drafted we are talking about here. Sure the zealot in charge has now toned down the abusive comments and graphics on the page and made it look somewhat sanitised, but this is a site that is the Apple equivalent of Little Green Footballs in its heyday. Memorably referred to as the "<a href="http://www.google.com/webhp#hl=en&amp;source=hp&amp;q=roughlydrafted+\%22lunatic+fringe\%22" title="google.com">lunatic fringe of Mac fandom</a> [google.com]". Pretty much any article on that website is guaranteed to be slanted so much in favour of the Apple Party Line that to expect rational, even analysis is pointless. Flash has worked on dozens of touchscreen devices for years now. Many of these devices have come up with UI and/or gesture cues to invoke the rollover/mouseover state that Flash and Javascript like using (often involving a "pointer mode"). Because of Adobe's new push, Flash will soon be working on hundreds of new devices. As a result, I am sure that both the workarounds and new gestures to replace and to augment rollover will become both more usable and more common.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Seriously people , this is Roughly Drafted we are talking about here .
Sure the zealot in charge has now toned down the abusive comments and graphics on the page and made it look somewhat sanitised , but this is a site that is the Apple equivalent of Little Green Footballs in its heyday .
Memorably referred to as the " lunatic fringe of Mac fandom [ google.com ] " .
Pretty much any article on that website is guaranteed to be slanted so much in favour of the Apple Party Line that to expect rational , even analysis is pointless .
Flash has worked on dozens of touchscreen devices for years now .
Many of these devices have come up with UI and/or gesture cues to invoke the rollover/mouseover state that Flash and Javascript like using ( often involving a " pointer mode " ) .
Because of Adobe 's new push , Flash will soon be working on hundreds of new devices .
As a result , I am sure that both the workarounds and new gestures to replace and to augment rollover will become both more usable and more common .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seriously people, this is Roughly Drafted we are talking about here.
Sure the zealot in charge has now toned down the abusive comments and graphics on the page and made it look somewhat sanitised, but this is a site that is the Apple equivalent of Little Green Footballs in its heyday.
Memorably referred to as the "lunatic fringe of Mac fandom [google.com]".
Pretty much any article on that website is guaranteed to be slanted so much in favour of the Apple Party Line that to expect rational, even analysis is pointless.
Flash has worked on dozens of touchscreen devices for years now.
Many of these devices have come up with UI and/or gesture cues to invoke the rollover/mouseover state that Flash and Javascript like using (often involving a "pointer mode").
Because of Adobe's new push, Flash will soon be working on hundreds of new devices.
As a result, I am sure that both the workarounds and new gestures to replace and to augment rollover will become both more usable and more common.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220092</id>
	<title>errorinreport</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266779280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>that's just a lie, I have used flash on touchscreen devices and it is the developers error to expect mouseover and hover events, most sites (or at least good ones) don't RELY on this, obviously this programmer is not very good or experienced.  I have created sites and apps in flash (and a lot of other languages) and the hover/mouseover events should NOT be a main part of a program or control.  This is obviously from an apple fan boy trying to cope with the iphone/ipad not getting flash when all other touchscreen smartphones will be getting it soon.  In my opinion these apple platforms are not "smart" at all by the nature of the OS Apple created/restricts, they are a stripped/dumbed down version of a true smart phone os that makes average people think they are smart and apple wants those non-techies to be deceived so they have created lies regarding flash.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>that 's just a lie , I have used flash on touchscreen devices and it is the developers error to expect mouseover and hover events , most sites ( or at least good ones ) do n't RELY on this , obviously this programmer is not very good or experienced .
I have created sites and apps in flash ( and a lot of other languages ) and the hover/mouseover events should NOT be a main part of a program or control .
This is obviously from an apple fan boy trying to cope with the iphone/ipad not getting flash when all other touchscreen smartphones will be getting it soon .
In my opinion these apple platforms are not " smart " at all by the nature of the OS Apple created/restricts , they are a stripped/dumbed down version of a true smart phone os that makes average people think they are smart and apple wants those non-techies to be deceived so they have created lies regarding flash .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>that's just a lie, I have used flash on touchscreen devices and it is the developers error to expect mouseover and hover events, most sites (or at least good ones) don't RELY on this, obviously this programmer is not very good or experienced.
I have created sites and apps in flash (and a lot of other languages) and the hover/mouseover events should NOT be a main part of a program or control.
This is obviously from an apple fan boy trying to cope with the iphone/ipad not getting flash when all other touchscreen smartphones will be getting it soon.
In my opinion these apple platforms are not "smart" at all by the nature of the OS Apple created/restricts, they are a stripped/dumbed down version of a true smart phone os that makes average people think they are smart and apple wants those non-techies to be deceived so they have created lies regarding flash.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220024</id>
	<title>Re:The App Store</title>
	<author>Coriolis</author>
	<datestamp>1266778920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So, what you're saying is, rather than make money from those apps (or at least offset the cost), developers would prefer to give them away? That argument doesn't convince me. Don't misunderstand me, I'm sure plenty of developers would make free apps in Flash, the same sort of developers who make apps available for free in the App Store right now. They were never going charge for the app in the first place, so Apple loses <em>nothing</em> (by your argument). In fact they gain, because they don't have to host it.</p><p>What Apple wants control over is far more subtle than that. They're selling a brand. In fact, some (including Joel Spolsky and Seth Godin) have argued they are selling nothing less than a philosophy, and they want total control over it. I'm not assigning value to that philosophy here. I'm just saying I agree. So, I think the big problem with Flash (and other frameworks) is that it makes it too easy to step outside of that philosophy, to tell a different story.</p><p>Of course, there have been other reasons proposed for Apple's opposition to Flash, and I think they play a part. Supposedly, Apple detests Flash's crash rate; again, if they let Flash onto the iPhone and it crashes all the time, that contradicts the user experience they're trying to create. And that applies to poor support for touchscreens, too. Everyone who says "Huh, my other phone lets me do this by " are just proving the article's point.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So , what you 're saying is , rather than make money from those apps ( or at least offset the cost ) , developers would prefer to give them away ?
That argument does n't convince me .
Do n't misunderstand me , I 'm sure plenty of developers would make free apps in Flash , the same sort of developers who make apps available for free in the App Store right now .
They were never going charge for the app in the first place , so Apple loses nothing ( by your argument ) .
In fact they gain , because they do n't have to host it.What Apple wants control over is far more subtle than that .
They 're selling a brand .
In fact , some ( including Joel Spolsky and Seth Godin ) have argued they are selling nothing less than a philosophy , and they want total control over it .
I 'm not assigning value to that philosophy here .
I 'm just saying I agree .
So , I think the big problem with Flash ( and other frameworks ) is that it makes it too easy to step outside of that philosophy , to tell a different story.Of course , there have been other reasons proposed for Apple 's opposition to Flash , and I think they play a part .
Supposedly , Apple detests Flash 's crash rate ; again , if they let Flash onto the iPhone and it crashes all the time , that contradicts the user experience they 're trying to create .
And that applies to poor support for touchscreens , too .
Everyone who says " Huh , my other phone lets me do this by " are just proving the article 's point .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So, what you're saying is, rather than make money from those apps (or at least offset the cost), developers would prefer to give them away?
That argument doesn't convince me.
Don't misunderstand me, I'm sure plenty of developers would make free apps in Flash, the same sort of developers who make apps available for free in the App Store right now.
They were never going charge for the app in the first place, so Apple loses nothing (by your argument).
In fact they gain, because they don't have to host it.What Apple wants control over is far more subtle than that.
They're selling a brand.
In fact, some (including Joel Spolsky and Seth Godin) have argued they are selling nothing less than a philosophy, and they want total control over it.
I'm not assigning value to that philosophy here.
I'm just saying I agree.
So, I think the big problem with Flash (and other frameworks) is that it makes it too easy to step outside of that philosophy, to tell a different story.Of course, there have been other reasons proposed for Apple's opposition to Flash, and I think they play a part.
Supposedly, Apple detests Flash's crash rate; again, if they let Flash onto the iPhone and it crashes all the time, that contradicts the user experience they're trying to create.
And that applies to poor support for touchscreens, too.
Everyone who says "Huh, my other phone lets me do this by " are just proving the article's point.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219576</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220986</id>
	<title>Solution</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266783900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>2 IR tracking cameras, with a focal range of about 2cm above the tablet surface.</p><p>This way the touch screen can track "hover".</p><p>Ideally, these cameras would be BEHIND the touchscreen's clear top surface, and would use the refractive properties of that surface as part of it's focus dynamic.</p><p>I am sure somebody would be worried about super low-rez IR cameras being integrated into the display, citing that it was now technically a telescreen, or some such-- but the idea is that you WANT it to be in focus ONLY just above the screen surface, and not further out.  This would make finger tip tracking MUCH easier.</p><p>Still, this solution would fix the cited "Hover" problem, and may also open the door for new forms of gesture input.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>2 IR tracking cameras , with a focal range of about 2cm above the tablet surface.This way the touch screen can track " hover " .Ideally , these cameras would be BEHIND the touchscreen 's clear top surface , and would use the refractive properties of that surface as part of it 's focus dynamic.I am sure somebody would be worried about super low-rez IR cameras being integrated into the display , citing that it was now technically a telescreen , or some such-- but the idea is that you WANT it to be in focus ONLY just above the screen surface , and not further out .
This would make finger tip tracking MUCH easier.Still , this solution would fix the cited " Hover " problem , and may also open the door for new forms of gesture input .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>2 IR tracking cameras, with a focal range of about 2cm above the tablet surface.This way the touch screen can track "hover".Ideally, these cameras would be BEHIND the touchscreen's clear top surface, and would use the refractive properties of that surface as part of it's focus dynamic.I am sure somebody would be worried about super low-rez IR cameras being integrated into the display, citing that it was now technically a telescreen, or some such-- but the idea is that you WANT it to be in focus ONLY just above the screen surface, and not further out.
This would make finger tip tracking MUCH easier.Still, this solution would fix the cited "Hover" problem, and may also open the door for new forms of gesture input.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219732</id>
	<title>Ummmm ... Flash 10.1????</title>
	<author>Favorite Android</author>
	<datestamp>1266777420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Flash player is open source, companies can make it work with their devices<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... and have been doing so.  Flash on Apple won't cost them money, but will take away from their app store when people can play games online.

<a href="http://www.cultofmac.com/adobe-theres-no-flash-on-ipad-because-apple-is-protecting-content-revenue/28564" title="cultofmac.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.cultofmac.com/adobe-theres-no-flash-on-ipad-because-apple-is-protecting-content-revenue/28564</a> [cultofmac.com]

Also Flash CS5 can export to iPhone app, so I guess there will be Flash running on the iPad.

<a href="http://www.adobe.com/devnet/flashplayer/articles/mobile\_demos\_fp10.1.html" title="adobe.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.adobe.com/devnet/flashplayer/articles/mobile\_demos\_fp10.1.html</a> [adobe.com]

Research your topic before you post<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Flash player is open source , companies can make it work with their devices ... and have been doing so .
Flash on Apple wo n't cost them money , but will take away from their app store when people can play games online .
http : //www.cultofmac.com/adobe-theres-no-flash-on-ipad-because-apple-is-protecting-content-revenue/28564 [ cultofmac.com ] Also Flash CS5 can export to iPhone app , so I guess there will be Flash running on the iPad .
http : //www.adobe.com/devnet/flashplayer/articles/mobile \ _demos \ _fp10.1.html [ adobe.com ] Research your topic before you post .. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Flash player is open source, companies can make it work with their devices ... and have been doing so.
Flash on Apple won't cost them money, but will take away from their app store when people can play games online.
http://www.cultofmac.com/adobe-theres-no-flash-on-ipad-because-apple-is-protecting-content-revenue/28564 [cultofmac.com]

Also Flash CS5 can export to iPhone app, so I guess there will be Flash running on the iPad.
http://www.adobe.com/devnet/flashplayer/articles/mobile\_demos\_fp10.1.html [adobe.com]

Research your topic before you post ...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31222814</id>
	<title>Re:Eat my balls!</title>
	<author>koiransuklaa</author>
	<datestamp>1266752340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>We all know Apple bans Flash because it would allow third party apps that don't have to forfeit 30\% of revenue to Apple. Plain and simple. All other explanations are just someone's absurd mental gymnastics to justify Apple's stupid and shortsighted iPhone OS policies.</p></div></blockquote><p>People keep talking like the appstore is hugely profitable for Apple: Do the math, it's quite likely not. I'm not saying it's irrelevant but hardware sales dwarf the appstore revenue by such a wide margin that the appstore just cannot be anything but an additional business for Apple.</p><p>I might accept your argument if you exchange profit for the lock-in angle: Apple wants native apps so people "can't" move to other platforms.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>We all know Apple bans Flash because it would allow third party apps that do n't have to forfeit 30 \ % of revenue to Apple .
Plain and simple .
All other explanations are just someone 's absurd mental gymnastics to justify Apple 's stupid and shortsighted iPhone OS policies.People keep talking like the appstore is hugely profitable for Apple : Do the math , it 's quite likely not .
I 'm not saying it 's irrelevant but hardware sales dwarf the appstore revenue by such a wide margin that the appstore just can not be anything but an additional business for Apple.I might accept your argument if you exchange profit for the lock-in angle : Apple wants native apps so people " ca n't " move to other platforms .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We all know Apple bans Flash because it would allow third party apps that don't have to forfeit 30\% of revenue to Apple.
Plain and simple.
All other explanations are just someone's absurd mental gymnastics to justify Apple's stupid and shortsighted iPhone OS policies.People keep talking like the appstore is hugely profitable for Apple: Do the math, it's quite likely not.
I'm not saying it's irrelevant but hardware sales dwarf the appstore revenue by such a wide margin that the appstore just cannot be anything but an additional business for Apple.I might accept your argument if you exchange profit for the lock-in angle: Apple wants native apps so people "can't" move to other platforms.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219496</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220918</id>
	<title>And hover works fine on Nokia...</title>
	<author>mdwh2</author>
	<datestamp>1266783420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Indeed - I don't know why styluses seemed to go out of fashion. The biggest phone company, Nokia, still uses them however - I like using the one on my 5800.</p><p>And I'm also curious about the point of hover - Nokia have solved this in that if you keep your finger against the screen, it treats it as a hover. You can then either release for a "click", or slide your finger away. It's not ideal, because I don't think there is a fundamental way to solve this (unless screens can literally detect a hover), but it works. But I guess no one is interested when UI issues are solved by, ooh, only the largest phone company in the world. People like the author of this article only care when it's one of the smallest phone companies, i.e., Apple. (No doubt if Apple copied this, we'd be hearing about it all over the press about how wonderful and innovative they were...)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Indeed - I do n't know why styluses seemed to go out of fashion .
The biggest phone company , Nokia , still uses them however - I like using the one on my 5800.And I 'm also curious about the point of hover - Nokia have solved this in that if you keep your finger against the screen , it treats it as a hover .
You can then either release for a " click " , or slide your finger away .
It 's not ideal , because I do n't think there is a fundamental way to solve this ( unless screens can literally detect a hover ) , but it works .
But I guess no one is interested when UI issues are solved by , ooh , only the largest phone company in the world .
People like the author of this article only care when it 's one of the smallest phone companies , i.e. , Apple .
( No doubt if Apple copied this , we 'd be hearing about it all over the press about how wonderful and innovative they were... )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Indeed - I don't know why styluses seemed to go out of fashion.
The biggest phone company, Nokia, still uses them however - I like using the one on my 5800.And I'm also curious about the point of hover - Nokia have solved this in that if you keep your finger against the screen, it treats it as a hover.
You can then either release for a "click", or slide your finger away.
It's not ideal, because I don't think there is a fundamental way to solve this (unless screens can literally detect a hover), but it works.
But I guess no one is interested when UI issues are solved by, ooh, only the largest phone company in the world.
People like the author of this article only care when it's one of the smallest phone companies, i.e., Apple.
(No doubt if Apple copied this, we'd be hearing about it all over the press about how wonderful and innovative they were...)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219872</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31223444</id>
	<title>wth?</title>
	<author>agentarthur</author>
	<datestamp>1266756120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>the original post seems like a big lazy excuse for a designer to not change their UI designs.  Why is 'mouse-overing' integral to Flash? how is that the biggest reason it wont work on touchscreen formats?  doesn't make any sense.  Flash could still be used for touchscreen devices - and will - just don't use bloomin' mouse over buttons?

*designers who cant shift their paradigms aren't really engaging what design actually is.*

IMHO

aa</htmltext>
<tokenext>the original post seems like a big lazy excuse for a designer to not change their UI designs .
Why is 'mouse-overing ' integral to Flash ?
how is that the biggest reason it wont work on touchscreen formats ?
does n't make any sense .
Flash could still be used for touchscreen devices - and will - just do n't use bloomin ' mouse over buttons ?
* designers who cant shift their paradigms are n't really engaging what design actually is .
* IMHO aa</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the original post seems like a big lazy excuse for a designer to not change their UI designs.
Why is 'mouse-overing' integral to Flash?
how is that the biggest reason it wont work on touchscreen formats?
doesn't make any sense.
Flash could still be used for touchscreen devices - and will - just don't use bloomin' mouse over buttons?
*designers who cant shift their paradigms aren't really engaging what design actually is.
*

IMHO

aa</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31225226</id>
	<title>Re:Eat my balls!</title>
	<author>mad.frog</author>
	<datestamp>1266768780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Apple bans Flash because they are tired of dealing with Adobe.  Only now is performance suddenly important to them, over half a decade after buying Macromedia.</p> </div><p>And the response from the minority party, presented by Tinic Uro of Adobe:</p><p><a href="http://www.kaourantin.net/2010/02/core-animation.html" title="kaourantin.net">http://www.kaourantin.net/2010/02/core-animation.html</a> [kaourantin.net]</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Apple bans Flash because they are tired of dealing with Adobe .
Only now is performance suddenly important to them , over half a decade after buying Macromedia .
And the response from the minority party , presented by Tinic Uro of Adobe : http : //www.kaourantin.net/2010/02/core-animation.html [ kaourantin.net ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Apple bans Flash because they are tired of dealing with Adobe.
Only now is performance suddenly important to them, over half a decade after buying Macromedia.
And the response from the minority party, presented by Tinic Uro of Adobe:http://www.kaourantin.net/2010/02/core-animation.html [kaourantin.net]
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220298</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31223182</id>
	<title>Re:Bullshit</title>
	<author>mgblst</author>
	<datestamp>1266754500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>First, the amount of hover usage in flash isn't that great. There are tons of completely static animations that don't have any interaction of any sort.</i></p><p>These two statement have nothing to do with each other. I am sure there are tons of static flash, there are also tons of flash that uses hover. If you look at video controls, a lot more than tons.</p><p>You N900 is an ugly hack.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>First , the amount of hover usage in flash is n't that great .
There are tons of completely static animations that do n't have any interaction of any sort.These two statement have nothing to do with each other .
I am sure there are tons of static flash , there are also tons of flash that uses hover .
If you look at video controls , a lot more than tons.You N900 is an ugly hack .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>First, the amount of hover usage in flash isn't that great.
There are tons of completely static animations that don't have any interaction of any sort.These two statement have nothing to do with each other.
I am sure there are tons of static flash, there are also tons of flash that uses hover.
If you look at video controls, a lot more than tons.You N900 is an ugly hack.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219476</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220048</id>
	<title>And what of other non-traditional pointers?</title>
	<author>Improv</author>
	<datestamp>1266779100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have a Cintiq display, and use it to play flash games - the lack of mouseover support is no big deal. If your application *only* works with traditional mice, then it's simply limited on those platforms, regardless of language. Flash has nothing to do with it, it's just a pointer difference for some of your users.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have a Cintiq display , and use it to play flash games - the lack of mouseover support is no big deal .
If your application * only * works with traditional mice , then it 's simply limited on those platforms , regardless of language .
Flash has nothing to do with it , it 's just a pointer difference for some of your users .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have a Cintiq display, and use it to play flash games - the lack of mouseover support is no big deal.
If your application *only* works with traditional mice, then it's simply limited on those platforms, regardless of language.
Flash has nothing to do with it, it's just a pointer difference for some of your users.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31226436</id>
	<title>Re:Roughly Drafted - The Lunatic Fringe of OSX Fan</title>
	<author>Prometheas</author>
	<datestamp>1266779520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Doesn't mean that this particular point is without (strong) merit, amigo.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Does n't mean that this particular point is without ( strong ) merit , amigo .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Doesn't mean that this particular point is without (strong) merit, amigo.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219882</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31225450</id>
	<title>Re:Eat my balls!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266770400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Great answer! Why don't people whine about Internet Explorer -by far the most used browser- lack of support of HTML5 and CSS3, two technologies that are the future of open Web apps, to force us to use their proprietary Silverlight? Why cry over technology that is old, proprietary, inconsistent, buggy, and 99\% unnecessary? As a developer, I would be crazy to put all my eggs in proprietary baskets. Look at the mess Internet Explorer is today and you'll understand. Someone had to put a nail in Flash's coffin, so the Web can move to better technologies, and Apple is taking the lead, as they always had.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Great answer !
Why do n't people whine about Internet Explorer -by far the most used browser- lack of support of HTML5 and CSS3 , two technologies that are the future of open Web apps , to force us to use their proprietary Silverlight ?
Why cry over technology that is old , proprietary , inconsistent , buggy , and 99 \ % unnecessary ?
As a developer , I would be crazy to put all my eggs in proprietary baskets .
Look at the mess Internet Explorer is today and you 'll understand .
Someone had to put a nail in Flash 's coffin , so the Web can move to better technologies , and Apple is taking the lead , as they always had .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Great answer!
Why don't people whine about Internet Explorer -by far the most used browser- lack of support of HTML5 and CSS3, two technologies that are the future of open Web apps, to force us to use their proprietary Silverlight?
Why cry over technology that is old, proprietary, inconsistent, buggy, and 99\% unnecessary?
As a developer, I would be crazy to put all my eggs in proprietary baskets.
Look at the mess Internet Explorer is today and you'll understand.
Someone had to put a nail in Flash's coffin, so the Web can move to better technologies, and Apple is taking the lead, as they always had.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220298</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31223718</id>
	<title>It is a paradox!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266758040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It is a paradox!</p><p>Many developers choose Flash because Microsoft tried to splinter the Java "movement": write once, play anywhere.  Instead of writing code that detects many different version of browsers, developers choose to just detect the version of Flash installed.</p><p>Now that Apple's iPhone and iPad are blocking the Flash "movement" in the name of supporting an open standard.  What Apple will actually achieve, is causing more browser fragmentation, strengthen the argument for selecting Flash or another technology that is better at cross-platform compatibility.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It is a paradox ! Many developers choose Flash because Microsoft tried to splinter the Java " movement " : write once , play anywhere .
Instead of writing code that detects many different version of browsers , developers choose to just detect the version of Flash installed.Now that Apple 's iPhone and iPad are blocking the Flash " movement " in the name of supporting an open standard .
What Apple will actually achieve , is causing more browser fragmentation , strengthen the argument for selecting Flash or another technology that is better at cross-platform compatibility .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It is a paradox!Many developers choose Flash because Microsoft tried to splinter the Java "movement": write once, play anywhere.
Instead of writing code that detects many different version of browsers, developers choose to just detect the version of Flash installed.Now that Apple's iPhone and iPad are blocking the Flash "movement" in the name of supporting an open standard.
What Apple will actually achieve, is causing more browser fragmentation, strengthen the argument for selecting Flash or another technology that is better at cross-platform compatibility.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31221766</id>
	<title>Re:Not to defend Flash, but...</title>
	<author>ralphthemagician</author>
	<datestamp>1266746040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It actually is a little different because Flash is a plugin that has to first capture inputs.

In order to interact with Flash content you first have to click it so that it can capture the pointer input. Then you have to interact with the content. Then you have to be able to tell Flash to release the pointer so you can move throughout the rest of the page. But if you double-click should it zoom in, capture those inputs in Flash, or zoom out?</htmltext>
<tokenext>It actually is a little different because Flash is a plugin that has to first capture inputs .
In order to interact with Flash content you first have to click it so that it can capture the pointer input .
Then you have to interact with the content .
Then you have to be able to tell Flash to release the pointer so you can move throughout the rest of the page .
But if you double-click should it zoom in , capture those inputs in Flash , or zoom out ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It actually is a little different because Flash is a plugin that has to first capture inputs.
In order to interact with Flash content you first have to click it so that it can capture the pointer input.
Then you have to interact with the content.
Then you have to be able to tell Flash to release the pointer so you can move throughout the rest of the page.
But if you double-click should it zoom in, capture those inputs in Flash, or zoom out?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219426</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31222450</id>
	<title>Re:Opinion of a UI Game Developer who leverages Fl</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266750180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>anytime someone claims they're a 'professional' as a means to back an argument I know to stay far away.  flash is an abomination.  it's slow, buggy, and redundant.  the bit of functionality it does add is abused to all hell with cpu heavy ads and 'flashturbation' sites that are all 'flash' and no substance whatsoever.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>anytime someone claims they 're a 'professional ' as a means to back an argument I know to stay far away .
flash is an abomination .
it 's slow , buggy , and redundant .
the bit of functionality it does add is abused to all hell with cpu heavy ads and 'flashturbation ' sites that are all 'flash ' and no substance whatsoever .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>anytime someone claims they're a 'professional' as a means to back an argument I know to stay far away.
flash is an abomination.
it's slow, buggy, and redundant.
the bit of functionality it does add is abused to all hell with cpu heavy ads and 'flashturbation' sites that are all 'flash' and no substance whatsoever.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219898</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219992</id>
	<title>Re:Not entirely true</title>
	<author>hedwards</author>
	<datestamp>1266778740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Except he's right, in fact we should go a few steps further and get rid of Flash on other platforms for similar reasons. It's buggy, slow, wastes power and isn't available on all platforms. To make matters worse it's typically used for things where javascript and other technologies work just fine.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Except he 's right , in fact we should go a few steps further and get rid of Flash on other platforms for similar reasons .
It 's buggy , slow , wastes power and is n't available on all platforms .
To make matters worse it 's typically used for things where javascript and other technologies work just fine .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Except he's right, in fact we should go a few steps further and get rid of Flash on other platforms for similar reasons.
It's buggy, slow, wastes power and isn't available on all platforms.
To make matters worse it's typically used for things where javascript and other technologies work just fine.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219610</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31221266</id>
	<title>Flash can't perform on anything but Windows</title>
	<author>javacowboy</author>
	<datestamp>1266785820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Flash isn't on the iPhone/iPad because Adobe can't be trusted to deliver an acceptably performing solution for non-Windows users.   The Mac and Linux versions of Flash are CPU-hogging abominations because Flash is spaghetti C++ code that's been optimized solely for Windows.  Apple doesn't want Flash off to protect its App Store profits because there are none.  The App Store is a breakeven or slight profit making business.</p><p>If Adobe can't be trusted to provide a decently performing version of Flash on Mac and Linux after 10 years of trying, what in God's name makes you think they can do it for the iPhone or iPad, let alone Android or any other OS they've "promised" to support?</p><p>Apple wants to provide the best user experience for its mobile users as possible.   It can take full responsibility for the performance of its various apps, including how well websites perform on Mobile Safari.   It has no control over the Flash experience, and if Flash were on the iPhone, Adobe would most certainly drop the ball, but Apple would take the blame for it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Flash is n't on the iPhone/iPad because Adobe ca n't be trusted to deliver an acceptably performing solution for non-Windows users .
The Mac and Linux versions of Flash are CPU-hogging abominations because Flash is spaghetti C + + code that 's been optimized solely for Windows .
Apple does n't want Flash off to protect its App Store profits because there are none .
The App Store is a breakeven or slight profit making business.If Adobe ca n't be trusted to provide a decently performing version of Flash on Mac and Linux after 10 years of trying , what in God 's name makes you think they can do it for the iPhone or iPad , let alone Android or any other OS they 've " promised " to support ? Apple wants to provide the best user experience for its mobile users as possible .
It can take full responsibility for the performance of its various apps , including how well websites perform on Mobile Safari .
It has no control over the Flash experience , and if Flash were on the iPhone , Adobe would most certainly drop the ball , but Apple would take the blame for it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Flash isn't on the iPhone/iPad because Adobe can't be trusted to deliver an acceptably performing solution for non-Windows users.
The Mac and Linux versions of Flash are CPU-hogging abominations because Flash is spaghetti C++ code that's been optimized solely for Windows.
Apple doesn't want Flash off to protect its App Store profits because there are none.
The App Store is a breakeven or slight profit making business.If Adobe can't be trusted to provide a decently performing version of Flash on Mac and Linux after 10 years of trying, what in God's name makes you think they can do it for the iPhone or iPad, let alone Android or any other OS they've "promised" to support?Apple wants to provide the best user experience for its mobile users as possible.
It can take full responsibility for the performance of its various apps, including how well websites perform on Mobile Safari.
It has no control over the Flash experience, and if Flash were on the iPhone, Adobe would most certainly drop the ball, but Apple would take the blame for it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220810</id>
	<title>Re:Flawed Logic in OP</title>
	<author>TehDuffman</author>
	<datestamp>1266782760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This was already solved by the Storm 2, it has a capacitive touchscreen with software that mimics tactile resistance. This means you have to actually "Click" on the screen to "left click." This solves the hover problem on the storms unfortunately the current browser sucks so it doesn't help much but it is doable. I actually prefer to type on it than my iPhone.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This was already solved by the Storm 2 , it has a capacitive touchscreen with software that mimics tactile resistance .
This means you have to actually " Click " on the screen to " left click .
" This solves the hover problem on the storms unfortunately the current browser sucks so it does n't help much but it is doable .
I actually prefer to type on it than my iPhone .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This was already solved by the Storm 2, it has a capacitive touchscreen with software that mimics tactile resistance.
This means you have to actually "Click" on the screen to "left click.
" This solves the hover problem on the storms unfortunately the current browser sucks so it doesn't help much but it is doable.
I actually prefer to type on it than my iPhone.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219872</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219340</id>
	<title>Not entirely true</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266775680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If there's anything I've taken from all the Apple talk on its multitouch technology, it's that gestures are everything. What if when Flash is in use, dragging your finger across the display results in "moving the cursor", while a single touch results in a click? Or why not make it function much the same as how laptop touchpads work, where a double-tap+hold equals a click and drag? I can't see that being terribly difficult for Apple or anyone making a touch-based device to implement, really.</p><p>I mean, perhaps there's more to it than that, but I can't see the concept of mouseover/hover being a huge showstopper for Flash support on touch-based devices. There are definitely ways around it, and for that matter, there's also CSS/JS mouseover/hover that works the same way. How is this handled on devices like the iPad? Is this also unusable?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If there 's anything I 've taken from all the Apple talk on its multitouch technology , it 's that gestures are everything .
What if when Flash is in use , dragging your finger across the display results in " moving the cursor " , while a single touch results in a click ?
Or why not make it function much the same as how laptop touchpads work , where a double-tap + hold equals a click and drag ?
I ca n't see that being terribly difficult for Apple or anyone making a touch-based device to implement , really.I mean , perhaps there 's more to it than that , but I ca n't see the concept of mouseover/hover being a huge showstopper for Flash support on touch-based devices .
There are definitely ways around it , and for that matter , there 's also CSS/JS mouseover/hover that works the same way .
How is this handled on devices like the iPad ?
Is this also unusable ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If there's anything I've taken from all the Apple talk on its multitouch technology, it's that gestures are everything.
What if when Flash is in use, dragging your finger across the display results in "moving the cursor", while a single touch results in a click?
Or why not make it function much the same as how laptop touchpads work, where a double-tap+hold equals a click and drag?
I can't see that being terribly difficult for Apple or anyone making a touch-based device to implement, really.I mean, perhaps there's more to it than that, but I can't see the concept of mouseover/hover being a huge showstopper for Flash support on touch-based devices.
There are definitely ways around it, and for that matter, there's also CSS/JS mouseover/hover that works the same way.
How is this handled on devices like the iPad?
Is this also unusable?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219524</id>
	<title>Fundamentally flawed?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266776340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Nokia N900 has virtual mouse cursor just for those occasions, I do not own one but I have used the included web browser and the virtual mouse cursor does work with both flash and javascript hover. So it basically is all about the software implementation of the browser/device, nothing to with flash or javascript themselves. Of course one needs to take these into account when designing interface that works with all kinds of input devices.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Nokia N900 has virtual mouse cursor just for those occasions , I do not own one but I have used the included web browser and the virtual mouse cursor does work with both flash and javascript hover .
So it basically is all about the software implementation of the browser/device , nothing to with flash or javascript themselves .
Of course one needs to take these into account when designing interface that works with all kinds of input devices .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nokia N900 has virtual mouse cursor just for those occasions, I do not own one but I have used the included web browser and the virtual mouse cursor does work with both flash and javascript hover.
So it basically is all about the software implementation of the browser/device, nothing to with flash or javascript themselves.
Of course one needs to take these into account when designing interface that works with all kinds of input devices.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219354</id>
	<title>Flash Fully Capable</title>
	<author>mastershake82</author>
	<datestamp>1266775680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm no fan of Flash, but there is no denying it's market penetration.<br>
<br>
Sure current flash sites might not work perfect, but if you are developing for the iPhone, Android, Maemo, etc, I'm sure you could take into account the unique interface and make it work properly.<br>
<br>
Saying it's not possible never moved anyone further.  Computer science, especially gaming, is an industry built on finding ways to make things work on resources and interfaces they shouldn't work on.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm no fan of Flash , but there is no denying it 's market penetration .
Sure current flash sites might not work perfect , but if you are developing for the iPhone , Android , Maemo , etc , I 'm sure you could take into account the unique interface and make it work properly .
Saying it 's not possible never moved anyone further .
Computer science , especially gaming , is an industry built on finding ways to make things work on resources and interfaces they should n't work on .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm no fan of Flash, but there is no denying it's market penetration.
Sure current flash sites might not work perfect, but if you are developing for the iPhone, Android, Maemo, etc, I'm sure you could take into account the unique interface and make it work properly.
Saying it's not possible never moved anyone further.
Computer science, especially gaming, is an industry built on finding ways to make things work on resources and interfaces they shouldn't work on.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220318</id>
	<title>Re:The App Store</title>
	<author>randomsearch</author>
	<datestamp>1266780360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You're right, Apple is concerned about Flash being used to replace purchased Apps, which is surely the reason they are refusing to support it.  They could lose money from App sales.</p><p>Worth noting in addition that they would also lose control over deployed software, as Flash could act as an alternative platform to target that does not belong to Apple.  So, Flash applications could duplicate Apple's software, but more importantly offer music streaming and video services, e-book readers etc.  That could give consumers choice that would potentially lead to much larger losses for Apple.</p><p>I guess Apple won't admit the motivation for avoiding Flash, they're probably concerned they could fall foul of anti-competitive legislation.</p><p>On the positive side, less Flash on the web in general is probably a good thing.</p><p>RS</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You 're right , Apple is concerned about Flash being used to replace purchased Apps , which is surely the reason they are refusing to support it .
They could lose money from App sales.Worth noting in addition that they would also lose control over deployed software , as Flash could act as an alternative platform to target that does not belong to Apple .
So , Flash applications could duplicate Apple 's software , but more importantly offer music streaming and video services , e-book readers etc .
That could give consumers choice that would potentially lead to much larger losses for Apple.I guess Apple wo n't admit the motivation for avoiding Flash , they 're probably concerned they could fall foul of anti-competitive legislation.On the positive side , less Flash on the web in general is probably a good thing.RS</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You're right, Apple is concerned about Flash being used to replace purchased Apps, which is surely the reason they are refusing to support it.
They could lose money from App sales.Worth noting in addition that they would also lose control over deployed software, as Flash could act as an alternative platform to target that does not belong to Apple.
So, Flash applications could duplicate Apple's software, but more importantly offer music streaming and video services, e-book readers etc.
That could give consumers choice that would potentially lead to much larger losses for Apple.I guess Apple won't admit the motivation for avoiding Flash, they're probably concerned they could fall foul of anti-competitive legislation.On the positive side, less Flash on the web in general is probably a good thing.RS</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219576</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31222910</id>
	<title>Hacky solution</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266752820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You could use two fingers to navigate, first finger that touches the screen becomes the cursor, tap the screen (anywhere) with your second finger to click.<br>This will be hacky, though, since you'll have a finger obstructing your view.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You could use two fingers to navigate , first finger that touches the screen becomes the cursor , tap the screen ( anywhere ) with your second finger to click.This will be hacky , though , since you 'll have a finger obstructing your view .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You could use two fingers to navigate, first finger that touches the screen becomes the cursor, tap the screen (anywhere) with your second finger to click.This will be hacky, though, since you'll have a finger obstructing your view.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31222742</id>
	<title>Re:Really?</title>
	<author>King InuYasha</author>
	<datestamp>1266751860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I've seen a few Japanese sites that use Flash to make hover menus embedded with CJK text in order to escape the font problem. They could probably do it with JavaScript and images, but Flash seems to be the popular solution right now...</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've seen a few Japanese sites that use Flash to make hover menus embedded with CJK text in order to escape the font problem .
They could probably do it with JavaScript and images , but Flash seems to be the popular solution right now.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've seen a few Japanese sites that use Flash to make hover menus embedded with CJK text in order to escape the font problem.
They could probably do it with JavaScript and images, but Flash seems to be the popular solution right now...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219338</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31223952</id>
	<title>Re:Eat my balls!</title>
	<author>nine-times</author>
	<datestamp>1266759960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Apple bans Flash because they are tired of dealing with Adobe.</p></div><p>This seems more likely to me.  The Apple/Adobe relationship has seemed a bit strained lately.  Adobe often provides better and more support to Windows users, and they've been very slow to move to Cocoa.  Meanwhile, Apple has been competing with Adobe in the audio/video realm.
</p><p>Plus, Steve Jobs has been reported as saying that Flash sucks, is too slow and unstable, and takes up battery life.  This is true.  It's annoying on Windows, but on OSX, Flash is a disaster.  It seems like this should be a case where Slashdotters could support Apple; they're essentially saying, "This stuff should be done according to more open standards like HTML.  Let's work on HTML5 to get it to do the things we need and get rid of Flash."</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Apple bans Flash because they are tired of dealing with Adobe.This seems more likely to me .
The Apple/Adobe relationship has seemed a bit strained lately .
Adobe often provides better and more support to Windows users , and they 've been very slow to move to Cocoa .
Meanwhile , Apple has been competing with Adobe in the audio/video realm .
Plus , Steve Jobs has been reported as saying that Flash sucks , is too slow and unstable , and takes up battery life .
This is true .
It 's annoying on Windows , but on OSX , Flash is a disaster .
It seems like this should be a case where Slashdotters could support Apple ; they 're essentially saying , " This stuff should be done according to more open standards like HTML .
Let 's work on HTML5 to get it to do the things we need and get rid of Flash .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Apple bans Flash because they are tired of dealing with Adobe.This seems more likely to me.
The Apple/Adobe relationship has seemed a bit strained lately.
Adobe often provides better and more support to Windows users, and they've been very slow to move to Cocoa.
Meanwhile, Apple has been competing with Adobe in the audio/video realm.
Plus, Steve Jobs has been reported as saying that Flash sucks, is too slow and unstable, and takes up battery life.
This is true.
It's annoying on Windows, but on OSX, Flash is a disaster.
It seems like this should be a case where Slashdotters could support Apple; they're essentially saying, "This stuff should be done according to more open standards like HTML.
Let's work on HTML5 to get it to do the things we need and get rid of Flash.
"
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220298</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219456</id>
	<title>Would these solve the problem?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266776100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>http://kottke.org/10/02/meat-stylus-for-the-iphone</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //kottke.org/10/02/meat-stylus-for-the-iphone</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://kottke.org/10/02/meat-stylus-for-the-iphone</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219534</id>
	<title>Re:Never?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266776400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Really? Never? Just off the top of my head, I could envision a button that put the device in "pointer" mode, maybe with scroll buttons where appropriate, and then used the movement of your finger on the touchscreen as either 1:1 or some kind of relative movement of the pointer. There are probably issues with this approach, yes, but it took me <i>seconds</i> to cobble together. Saying that something is impossible as a matter of user interface is silly. You can always change the UI in some way to make it possible, or even good.</p></div><p>N900 has this pointer mode and it works just fine. You activate the mode by a dragging gesture from left to right. (start outside the screen)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Really ?
Never ? Just off the top of my head , I could envision a button that put the device in " pointer " mode , maybe with scroll buttons where appropriate , and then used the movement of your finger on the touchscreen as either 1 : 1 or some kind of relative movement of the pointer .
There are probably issues with this approach , yes , but it took me seconds to cobble together .
Saying that something is impossible as a matter of user interface is silly .
You can always change the UI in some way to make it possible , or even good.N900 has this pointer mode and it works just fine .
You activate the mode by a dragging gesture from left to right .
( start outside the screen )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Really?
Never? Just off the top of my head, I could envision a button that put the device in "pointer" mode, maybe with scroll buttons where appropriate, and then used the movement of your finger on the touchscreen as either 1:1 or some kind of relative movement of the pointer.
There are probably issues with this approach, yes, but it took me seconds to cobble together.
Saying that something is impossible as a matter of user interface is silly.
You can always change the UI in some way to make it possible, or even good.N900 has this pointer mode and it works just fine.
You activate the mode by a dragging gesture from left to right.
(start outside the screen)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219348</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220542</id>
	<title>Re:What???</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266781380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We have lots of kiosks that are touch screen only that are written in Flash.  They work fine.  So, the position of the article is wrong, it is possible and we've had them in production for years.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We have lots of kiosks that are touch screen only that are written in Flash .
They work fine .
So , the position of the article is wrong , it is possible and we 've had them in production for years .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We have lots of kiosks that are touch screen only that are written in Flash.
They work fine.
So, the position of the article is wrong, it is possible and we've had them in production for years.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219388</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219762</id>
	<title>Re:Never?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266777480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Only someone on slashdot could consider a terrible hack like this to be something that "works well"...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Only someone on slashdot could consider a terrible hack like this to be something that " works well " .. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Only someone on slashdot could consider a terrible hack like this to be something that "works well"...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219348</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219388</id>
	<title>What???</title>
	<author>MTO\_B.</author>
	<datestamp>1266775860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Just because some flash sites are not developing flash taking into account touchscreen devices (it's a new thing!) does not mean it cant be done.
The whole thing seems stupid to me. It really scares me to think this person makes money developing flash sites. It seems he is totally unable to adapt, change his methods or do things better than he does. Come on! Sure there are flash files that would create problems and would need to be further developed, but to say it's fundamentally flawed because of that is bullshit.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Just because some flash sites are not developing flash taking into account touchscreen devices ( it 's a new thing !
) does not mean it cant be done .
The whole thing seems stupid to me .
It really scares me to think this person makes money developing flash sites .
It seems he is totally unable to adapt , change his methods or do things better than he does .
Come on !
Sure there are flash files that would create problems and would need to be further developed , but to say it 's fundamentally flawed because of that is bullshit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just because some flash sites are not developing flash taking into account touchscreen devices (it's a new thing!
) does not mean it cant be done.
The whole thing seems stupid to me.
It really scares me to think this person makes money developing flash sites.
It seems he is totally unable to adapt, change his methods or do things better than he does.
Come on!
Sure there are flash files that would create problems and would need to be further developed, but to say it's fundamentally flawed because of that is bullshit.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31227528</id>
	<title>Re:Eat my balls!</title>
	<author>ytpete</author>
	<datestamp>1266838860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's not about profit from the app store itself &ndash; it's more about how the app store can drive hardware sales.  If you write a native iPhone app in iPhone-specific Objective C, your app is only available on Apple hardware.  If most of the hot apps are only available for the iPhone platform, then it's a big win for iPhone/iPod/etc. sales &ndash; duh. So yes, it <i>is</i> all about the money.</p><p>Flash aims to give developers an easy way to write once, run anywhere for mobile &ndash; iPhone, Android, Palm, BlackBerry, more. That puts a big hole in Apple's "app store superiority" angle.  And that's why they see it as a danger. IMHO.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's not about profit from the app store itself    it 's more about how the app store can drive hardware sales .
If you write a native iPhone app in iPhone-specific Objective C , your app is only available on Apple hardware .
If most of the hot apps are only available for the iPhone platform , then it 's a big win for iPhone/iPod/etc .
sales    duh .
So yes , it is all about the money.Flash aims to give developers an easy way to write once , run anywhere for mobile    iPhone , Android , Palm , BlackBerry , more .
That puts a big hole in Apple 's " app store superiority " angle .
And that 's why they see it as a danger .
IMHO .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's not about profit from the app store itself – it's more about how the app store can drive hardware sales.
If you write a native iPhone app in iPhone-specific Objective C, your app is only available on Apple hardware.
If most of the hot apps are only available for the iPhone platform, then it's a big win for iPhone/iPod/etc.
sales – duh.
So yes, it is all about the money.Flash aims to give developers an easy way to write once, run anywhere for mobile – iPhone, Android, Palm, BlackBerry, more.
That puts a big hole in Apple's "app store superiority" angle.
And that's why they see it as a danger.
IMHO.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220298</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31221180</id>
	<title>Re:Not entirely true</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266785280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That depends on the device. RIM's BlackBerry Storm and Storm 2 have haptic feedback, in addition to the "normal" capacitive touchscreen for sensing the position. Behind the display is a button, or in the Storm 2's case, 4 piezoelectric sensors for registering the pressing of the display. Thus, point, hover and click gestures are fully possible if implemented correctly by software.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That depends on the device .
RIM 's BlackBerry Storm and Storm 2 have haptic feedback , in addition to the " normal " capacitive touchscreen for sensing the position .
Behind the display is a button , or in the Storm 2 's case , 4 piezoelectric sensors for registering the pressing of the display .
Thus , point , hover and click gestures are fully possible if implemented correctly by software .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That depends on the device.
RIM's BlackBerry Storm and Storm 2 have haptic feedback, in addition to the "normal" capacitive touchscreen for sensing the position.
Behind the display is a button, or in the Storm 2's case, 4 piezoelectric sensors for registering the pressing of the display.
Thus, point, hover and click gestures are fully possible if implemented correctly by software.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219494</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31224268</id>
	<title>Forced into compliance</title>
	<author>Waccoon</author>
	<datestamp>1266761880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>People should not be allowed to figure out solutions for themselves, and learn to use technology in an appropriate manner.  There's no need to design sites in Flash that are compatible with touch displays when the technology can just be forbidden.  Graceful degradation is a myth.  Flash is evil because it is a closed source application and not a platform spec, which is why the open source community cannot supplant it.  Steve Jobs is always right.</p><p>etc., etc., etc...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>People should not be allowed to figure out solutions for themselves , and learn to use technology in an appropriate manner .
There 's no need to design sites in Flash that are compatible with touch displays when the technology can just be forbidden .
Graceful degradation is a myth .
Flash is evil because it is a closed source application and not a platform spec , which is why the open source community can not supplant it .
Steve Jobs is always right.etc. , etc. , etc.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>People should not be allowed to figure out solutions for themselves, and learn to use technology in an appropriate manner.
There's no need to design sites in Flash that are compatible with touch displays when the technology can just be forbidden.
Graceful degradation is a myth.
Flash is evil because it is a closed source application and not a platform spec, which is why the open source community cannot supplant it.
Steve Jobs is always right.etc., etc., etc...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31221954</id>
	<title>Flash Is Fundamentally Flawed Period</title>
	<author>Snaller</author>
	<datestamp>1266747420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Once when the web was new, websites were scalable and all could read - then the incompetent twits from the publishing business started to muscle their way in with their notion of WYSIWYG - not one of them understood 'resolution independent' and they started locking pages down into tiny font sizes only readable to teenagers. And Flash is just an extension of that a lot of unnecessary, size hard coded rubbish - or FLASH - which is ironic since it could be vector graphics.</p><p>SO hurrah for the death of Flash - lets hope it comes!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Once when the web was new , websites were scalable and all could read - then the incompetent twits from the publishing business started to muscle their way in with their notion of WYSIWYG - not one of them understood 'resolution independent ' and they started locking pages down into tiny font sizes only readable to teenagers .
And Flash is just an extension of that a lot of unnecessary , size hard coded rubbish - or FLASH - which is ironic since it could be vector graphics.SO hurrah for the death of Flash - lets hope it comes !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Once when the web was new, websites were scalable and all could read - then the incompetent twits from the publishing business started to muscle their way in with their notion of WYSIWYG - not one of them understood 'resolution independent' and they started locking pages down into tiny font sizes only readable to teenagers.
And Flash is just an extension of that a lot of unnecessary, size hard coded rubbish - or FLASH - which is ironic since it could be vector graphics.SO hurrah for the death of Flash - lets hope it comes!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219558</id>
	<title>Re:Not entirely true</title>
	<author>jx100</author>
	<datestamp>1266776520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I haven't tried this myself, but the spacebar should give you a click when the browser is in hover-mode.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have n't tried this myself , but the spacebar should give you a click when the browser is in hover-mode .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I haven't tried this myself, but the spacebar should give you a click when the browser is in hover-mode.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219446</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219398</id>
	<title>Stupid explanation from someone with no creativity</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266775860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is the dumbest thing I've ever heard. This guy lacks the intelligence to understand what an adaptor is. This guy lacks the common sense to understand abstraction. Does he even understand how the virtual keyboard on the iPhone works?</p><p>This is a non-story and people should stop pushing. Anyone could emulate a mouse and then suddenly all the mouse stuff would work. This guy is trying to second guess what is bloody fucking obvious to anyone who works on flash.</p><p>Dumb post, uncreative dumb poster.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is the dumbest thing I 've ever heard .
This guy lacks the intelligence to understand what an adaptor is .
This guy lacks the common sense to understand abstraction .
Does he even understand how the virtual keyboard on the iPhone works ? This is a non-story and people should stop pushing .
Anyone could emulate a mouse and then suddenly all the mouse stuff would work .
This guy is trying to second guess what is bloody fucking obvious to anyone who works on flash.Dumb post , uncreative dumb poster .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is the dumbest thing I've ever heard.
This guy lacks the intelligence to understand what an adaptor is.
This guy lacks the common sense to understand abstraction.
Does he even understand how the virtual keyboard on the iPhone works?This is a non-story and people should stop pushing.
Anyone could emulate a mouse and then suddenly all the mouse stuff would work.
This guy is trying to second guess what is bloody fucking obvious to anyone who works on flash.Dumb post, uncreative dumb poster.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220290</id>
	<title>Re:could you be any more dramatic?</title>
	<author>T Murphy</author>
	<datestamp>1266780240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>an opportunity to make a ton of money instead of a crisis.</p></div><p>I thought that was the definition of crisis.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>an opportunity to make a ton of money instead of a crisis.I thought that was the definition of crisis .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>an opportunity to make a ton of money instead of a crisis.I thought that was the definition of crisis.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219438</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31222674</id>
	<title>flash needs to be included first</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266751500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The reason why flash isn't included on these devices isn't necessarily because of the power it takes to run flash, which also contributes to another problem of battery life, but the main reason why flash isn't included is because Apple doesn't want to loose sales on apps it sells in the app store. However, if the problem on the Ipad is the fact that you're having an issue supporting the touch screen, the solution would be to maybe include the new gestureworks framework and allow it to be supported on the Ipad. Unfortunately before that could ever happen, you would have to get Apple to support flash on there devices first. This could and should be turned into a lawsuit against apple monopolizing the market with its phones and the ipad. I don't know why they haven't been sued yet</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The reason why flash is n't included on these devices is n't necessarily because of the power it takes to run flash , which also contributes to another problem of battery life , but the main reason why flash is n't included is because Apple does n't want to loose sales on apps it sells in the app store .
However , if the problem on the Ipad is the fact that you 're having an issue supporting the touch screen , the solution would be to maybe include the new gestureworks framework and allow it to be supported on the Ipad .
Unfortunately before that could ever happen , you would have to get Apple to support flash on there devices first .
This could and should be turned into a lawsuit against apple monopolizing the market with its phones and the ipad .
I do n't know why they have n't been sued yet</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The reason why flash isn't included on these devices isn't necessarily because of the power it takes to run flash, which also contributes to another problem of battery life, but the main reason why flash isn't included is because Apple doesn't want to loose sales on apps it sells in the app store.
However, if the problem on the Ipad is the fact that you're having an issue supporting the touch screen, the solution would be to maybe include the new gestureworks framework and allow it to be supported on the Ipad.
Unfortunately before that could ever happen, you would have to get Apple to support flash on there devices first.
This could and should be turned into a lawsuit against apple monopolizing the market with its phones and the ipad.
I don't know why they haven't been sued yet</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31225824</id>
	<title>Re:Eat my balls!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266773580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Reconcile your run on sentence. Grammar still means something. I had to do a little mental gymnastics to interpret what I think you're trying to say. Now I hate you for being stupid on top of irrelevant.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Reconcile your run on sentence .
Grammar still means something .
I had to do a little mental gymnastics to interpret what I think you 're trying to say .
Now I hate you for being stupid on top of irrelevant .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Reconcile your run on sentence.
Grammar still means something.
I had to do a little mental gymnastics to interpret what I think you're trying to say.
Now I hate you for being stupid on top of irrelevant.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219714</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31221396</id>
	<title>Re:Never?</title>
	<author>maitai</author>
	<datestamp>1266743460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Also note that the Blackberry Storms (which are touchscreen) have no problem with mouse over/hover since you need to physically "press" the screen to register a click (simply touching the screen just registers pointer position, performs gestures, etc).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Also note that the Blackberry Storms ( which are touchscreen ) have no problem with mouse over/hover since you need to physically " press " the screen to register a click ( simply touching the screen just registers pointer position , performs gestures , etc ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Also note that the Blackberry Storms (which are touchscreen) have no problem with mouse over/hover since you need to physically "press" the screen to register a click (simply touching the screen just registers pointer position, performs gestures, etc).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219348</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31222412</id>
	<title>Archos</title>
	<author>riboch</author>
	<datestamp>1266750000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Can I recommend you look at the Archos.  Flash works very well.  I can play games, watch videos, etc., on my Archos.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Can I recommend you look at the Archos .
Flash works very well .
I can play games , watch videos , etc. , on my Archos .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can I recommend you look at the Archos.
Flash works very well.
I can play games, watch videos, etc., on my Archos.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219714</id>
	<title>Re:Eat my balls!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266777360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>We all know Apple bans Flash because it would allow third party apps that don't have to forfeit 30\% of revenue to Apple. Plain and simple. All other explanations are just someone's absurd mental gymnastics to justify Apple's stupid and shortsighted iPhone OS policies.</i></p><p>And how do you reconcile this opinion with all the effort that Apple has put into making it possible for offline HTML5 apps to act indistinguishably from native code apps<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... and, indeed, for the first year after the iPhone's unveiling, it being Apple's official line that HTML5 apps would be the *only* third party development route available?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We all know Apple bans Flash because it would allow third party apps that do n't have to forfeit 30 \ % of revenue to Apple .
Plain and simple .
All other explanations are just someone 's absurd mental gymnastics to justify Apple 's stupid and shortsighted iPhone OS policies.And how do you reconcile this opinion with all the effort that Apple has put into making it possible for offline HTML5 apps to act indistinguishably from native code apps ... and , indeed , for the first year after the iPhone 's unveiling , it being Apple 's official line that HTML5 apps would be the * only * third party development route available ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We all know Apple bans Flash because it would allow third party apps that don't have to forfeit 30\% of revenue to Apple.
Plain and simple.
All other explanations are just someone's absurd mental gymnastics to justify Apple's stupid and shortsighted iPhone OS policies.And how do you reconcile this opinion with all the effort that Apple has put into making it possible for offline HTML5 apps to act indistinguishably from native code apps ... and, indeed, for the first year after the iPhone's unveiling, it being Apple's official line that HTML5 apps would be the *only* third party development route available?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219496</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220614</id>
	<title>Re:The App Store</title>
	<author>louarnkoz</author>
	<datestamp>1266781680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's not just Flash. You will not find Microsoft's Silverlight support in Safari either -- and Silverlight does support touch on Windows Mobile. And you will not see Apple putting Google's Chrome on the IPhone. That's because Silverlight supports C#, and Chrome supports very efficient scripting, and either would allow web sites to deliver apps without paying due taxes to Apple.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's not just Flash .
You will not find Microsoft 's Silverlight support in Safari either -- and Silverlight does support touch on Windows Mobile .
And you will not see Apple putting Google 's Chrome on the IPhone .
That 's because Silverlight supports C # , and Chrome supports very efficient scripting , and either would allow web sites to deliver apps without paying due taxes to Apple .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's not just Flash.
You will not find Microsoft's Silverlight support in Safari either -- and Silverlight does support touch on Windows Mobile.
And you will not see Apple putting Google's Chrome on the IPhone.
That's because Silverlight supports C#, and Chrome supports very efficient scripting, and either would allow web sites to deliver apps without paying due taxes to Apple.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219576</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31224186</id>
	<title>Re:Multiple Interfaces?</title>
	<author>mjwx</author>
	<datestamp>1266761400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>So as site developers we have to:<br>
- build a flash site for those who have flash.<br>
- an html site for those who don't.<br>
- and an alternate flash site for people with touch screen UI.</p></div>
</blockquote><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr>/puts on cockney accent and takes sledgehammer to kneecap.<br> <br>

If you can use HTML my sahn, why are you doing it in flash.<br> <br><nobr> <wbr></nobr>/brings sledgehammer down on other kneecap.<br> <br>

Twice.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>So as site developers we have to : - build a flash site for those who have flash .
- an html site for those who do n't .
- and an alternate flash site for people with touch screen UI .
/puts on cockney accent and takes sledgehammer to kneecap .
If you can use HTML my sahn , why are you doing it in flash .
/brings sledgehammer down on other kneecap .
Twice .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So as site developers we have to:
- build a flash site for those who have flash.
- an html site for those who don't.
- and an alternate flash site for people with touch screen UI.
/puts on cockney accent and takes sledgehammer to kneecap.
If you can use HTML my sahn, why are you doing it in flash.
/brings sledgehammer down on other kneecap.
Twice.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219652</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219690</id>
	<title>Re:Eat my balls!</title>
	<author>ehrichweiss</author>
	<datestamp>1266777300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I converted one of my old laptops to have a touchpad and quickly realized that what one needs is modifier keys on the keyboard to determine whether you're moving the mouse or actually clicking on something. I used a program like AutoIt/Autohotkeys(I was using XP at the time) and it worked fine. Problem solved for me. Of course without some form of external button that can be made into a modifier key, the iPad will be fucked in that regard.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I converted one of my old laptops to have a touchpad and quickly realized that what one needs is modifier keys on the keyboard to determine whether you 're moving the mouse or actually clicking on something .
I used a program like AutoIt/Autohotkeys ( I was using XP at the time ) and it worked fine .
Problem solved for me .
Of course without some form of external button that can be made into a modifier key , the iPad will be fucked in that regard .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I converted one of my old laptops to have a touchpad and quickly realized that what one needs is modifier keys on the keyboard to determine whether you're moving the mouse or actually clicking on something.
I used a program like AutoIt/Autohotkeys(I was using XP at the time) and it worked fine.
Problem solved for me.
Of course without some form of external button that can be made into a modifier key, the iPad will be fucked in that regard.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219496</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31236602</id>
	<title>I can Debunk this in 5 seconds</title>
	<author>TomXP411</author>
	<datestamp>1266835800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Simple: if a control handles hover and click events separately, let the user tap once to hover, twice to "click." The Flash viewer could even give the user feedback by way of a draggable mouse cursor on the screen.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Simple : if a control handles hover and click events separately , let the user tap once to hover , twice to " click .
" The Flash viewer could even give the user feedback by way of a draggable mouse cursor on the screen .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Simple: if a control handles hover and click events separately, let the user tap once to hover, twice to "click.
" The Flash viewer could even give the user feedback by way of a draggable mouse cursor on the screen.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220072</id>
	<title>markthis</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266779220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My first comment ever on slashdot, can't stand the ignorance.</p><p>Flash/AS3 is the fastest development language for building multi touch applications. Before Iphone was out, flash supported multitouch and was used for various presentations.</p><p>Whole opensource NUI / multitouch market is build around it. Even Microsoft (NUI conference 2009) said, that Flash did a good job on integrating touch with developers.</p><p>Apple doesn't want flash, to bad for them. Doesn't change a thing - more apps for other companies.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My first comment ever on slashdot , ca n't stand the ignorance.Flash/AS3 is the fastest development language for building multi touch applications .
Before Iphone was out , flash supported multitouch and was used for various presentations.Whole opensource NUI / multitouch market is build around it .
Even Microsoft ( NUI conference 2009 ) said , that Flash did a good job on integrating touch with developers.Apple does n't want flash , to bad for them .
Does n't change a thing - more apps for other companies .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My first comment ever on slashdot, can't stand the ignorance.Flash/AS3 is the fastest development language for building multi touch applications.
Before Iphone was out, flash supported multitouch and was used for various presentations.Whole opensource NUI / multitouch market is build around it.
Even Microsoft (NUI conference 2009) said, that Flash did a good job on integrating touch with developers.Apple doesn't want flash, to bad for them.
Doesn't change a thing - more apps for other companies.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220390</id>
	<title>Fix the Root of the Problem - the Touchscreen</title>
	<author>silvermorph</author>
	<datestamp>1266780660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>The mouseover problem isn't a flash-on-touchscreen problem, it's a touchscreen problem. Anyone who's used a touchscreen with fat fingers knows that touchscreens are flawed - they all suffer from a lack of focus awareness. But putting a cursor on the screen that you drag around with your finger is a step backward, not forward.
<br>
<br>
The cursor exists for two reasons: to give the computer an idea of what your eye is focused on, and give you an idea of what the computer thinks you're focused on. On a touchscreen, the machine has no information until you actually mash your finger in the general vicinity of several potential inputs - forcing it to do heuristic gymnastics to figure out which one you really meant. And if it gets it wrong, you are angry, because it didn't warn you that you were clicking the wrong thing.
<br> <br>
The iphone keyboard tries to fix this in a sad and lonely way: it makes the button you're "clicking" bigger, as you're clicking on it. This slows typing to a crawl, but combined with auto-complete and auto-suggest it's a reasonable facsimile of an effective input method. But since there's no auto-complete when you're navigating a website (except googling the specific page, maybe), that's not going to solve the "flash problem".
<br> <br>
On the bright side this will all be resolved just as soon as eye-tracking is solved. Whatever you're looking at will be "your focus" - dropping a focus indicator whenever you're looking at a clickable object (existing mouseover highlights would work fine). Then you tap it with your finger (because blinking is too hard to control and saying "click" makes you sound ridiculous) and presto: the computer knows where you're looking and you know where the computer thinks you're looking, and you've finally replicated the functionality of a 40-year-old technology,<i> but on a touchscreen.</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>The mouseover problem is n't a flash-on-touchscreen problem , it 's a touchscreen problem .
Anyone who 's used a touchscreen with fat fingers knows that touchscreens are flawed - they all suffer from a lack of focus awareness .
But putting a cursor on the screen that you drag around with your finger is a step backward , not forward .
The cursor exists for two reasons : to give the computer an idea of what your eye is focused on , and give you an idea of what the computer thinks you 're focused on .
On a touchscreen , the machine has no information until you actually mash your finger in the general vicinity of several potential inputs - forcing it to do heuristic gymnastics to figure out which one you really meant .
And if it gets it wrong , you are angry , because it did n't warn you that you were clicking the wrong thing .
The iphone keyboard tries to fix this in a sad and lonely way : it makes the button you 're " clicking " bigger , as you 're clicking on it .
This slows typing to a crawl , but combined with auto-complete and auto-suggest it 's a reasonable facsimile of an effective input method .
But since there 's no auto-complete when you 're navigating a website ( except googling the specific page , maybe ) , that 's not going to solve the " flash problem " .
On the bright side this will all be resolved just as soon as eye-tracking is solved .
Whatever you 're looking at will be " your focus " - dropping a focus indicator whenever you 're looking at a clickable object ( existing mouseover highlights would work fine ) .
Then you tap it with your finger ( because blinking is too hard to control and saying " click " makes you sound ridiculous ) and presto : the computer knows where you 're looking and you know where the computer thinks you 're looking , and you 've finally replicated the functionality of a 40-year-old technology , but on a touchscreen .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The mouseover problem isn't a flash-on-touchscreen problem, it's a touchscreen problem.
Anyone who's used a touchscreen with fat fingers knows that touchscreens are flawed - they all suffer from a lack of focus awareness.
But putting a cursor on the screen that you drag around with your finger is a step backward, not forward.
The cursor exists for two reasons: to give the computer an idea of what your eye is focused on, and give you an idea of what the computer thinks you're focused on.
On a touchscreen, the machine has no information until you actually mash your finger in the general vicinity of several potential inputs - forcing it to do heuristic gymnastics to figure out which one you really meant.
And if it gets it wrong, you are angry, because it didn't warn you that you were clicking the wrong thing.
The iphone keyboard tries to fix this in a sad and lonely way: it makes the button you're "clicking" bigger, as you're clicking on it.
This slows typing to a crawl, but combined with auto-complete and auto-suggest it's a reasonable facsimile of an effective input method.
But since there's no auto-complete when you're navigating a website (except googling the specific page, maybe), that's not going to solve the "flash problem".
On the bright side this will all be resolved just as soon as eye-tracking is solved.
Whatever you're looking at will be "your focus" - dropping a focus indicator whenever you're looking at a clickable object (existing mouseover highlights would work fine).
Then you tap it with your finger (because blinking is too hard to control and saying "click" makes you sound ridiculous) and presto: the computer knows where you're looking and you know where the computer thinks you're looking, and you've finally replicated the functionality of a 40-year-old technology, but on a touchscreen.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31221210</id>
	<title>True but...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266785520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There are things in the article that are true. There are always a few things in an article by Daniel Eran Dilger of Roughly Drafted (or Prince Mclean of Apple Insider or whatever his fake name in vogue for the week is) that are true. But Dilger doesn't stay with his feet on the ground for very long - his articles are largely self-referenced because he makes a lot of shit up. If you ask him for citations to verify his sometimes wild claims, he simply refers you back to other equally wild articles he's written previously. That dude is seriously mental. And if you look closely at the comments here, you'll see him astro-turfing his own thread (with what seem to be several fake<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. accounts).</p><p>There's a good reason Daniel Eran Dilger was banned from Digg. The same reason they're so sick of him at Apple Insider and everywhere else as well.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There are things in the article that are true .
There are always a few things in an article by Daniel Eran Dilger of Roughly Drafted ( or Prince Mclean of Apple Insider or whatever his fake name in vogue for the week is ) that are true .
But Dilger does n't stay with his feet on the ground for very long - his articles are largely self-referenced because he makes a lot of shit up .
If you ask him for citations to verify his sometimes wild claims , he simply refers you back to other equally wild articles he 's written previously .
That dude is seriously mental .
And if you look closely at the comments here , you 'll see him astro-turfing his own thread ( with what seem to be several fake / .
accounts ) .There 's a good reason Daniel Eran Dilger was banned from Digg .
The same reason they 're so sick of him at Apple Insider and everywhere else as well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are things in the article that are true.
There are always a few things in an article by Daniel Eran Dilger of Roughly Drafted (or Prince Mclean of Apple Insider or whatever his fake name in vogue for the week is) that are true.
But Dilger doesn't stay with his feet on the ground for very long - his articles are largely self-referenced because he makes a lot of shit up.
If you ask him for citations to verify his sometimes wild claims, he simply refers you back to other equally wild articles he's written previously.
That dude is seriously mental.
And if you look closely at the comments here, you'll see him astro-turfing his own thread (with what seem to be several fake /.
accounts).There's a good reason Daniel Eran Dilger was banned from Digg.
The same reason they're so sick of him at Apple Insider and everywhere else as well.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219780</id>
	<title>That's not why iDevices don't support flash</title>
	<author>Spykk</author>
	<datestamp>1266777600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Apple does not allow any software on these devices that could be used to develop an application. They would not even allow a basic interpreter. If flash worked people would be able to develop applications for the iPhone without Apple's blessing.
Chances are they won't support things like the Canvas element in HTML5 either. Expect your browsing experience to become more limited in the future.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Apple does not allow any software on these devices that could be used to develop an application .
They would not even allow a basic interpreter .
If flash worked people would be able to develop applications for the iPhone without Apple 's blessing .
Chances are they wo n't support things like the Canvas element in HTML5 either .
Expect your browsing experience to become more limited in the future .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Apple does not allow any software on these devices that could be used to develop an application.
They would not even allow a basic interpreter.
If flash worked people would be able to develop applications for the iPhone without Apple's blessing.
Chances are they won't support things like the Canvas element in HTML5 either.
Expect your browsing experience to become more limited in the future.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220770</id>
	<title>tech arrogance</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266782580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>While the tech community hates on flash, forecasts an early death to 3D, and spends too much time dabbling in political commentary - the rest of the real world likes flash, can't wait for 3D, and don't care who you support politically.   So fix your little squabbles with the man behind the curtain.  The rest of us dont give a mouse-gesture.  fixit.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>While the tech community hates on flash , forecasts an early death to 3D , and spends too much time dabbling in political commentary - the rest of the real world likes flash , ca n't wait for 3D , and do n't care who you support politically .
So fix your little squabbles with the man behind the curtain .
The rest of us dont give a mouse-gesture .
fixit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While the tech community hates on flash, forecasts an early death to 3D, and spends too much time dabbling in political commentary - the rest of the real world likes flash, can't wait for 3D, and don't care who you support politically.
So fix your little squabbles with the man behind the curtain.
The rest of us dont give a mouse-gesture.
fixit.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31230532</id>
	<title>Flash works just fine on my iMac and Vista boxes.</title>
	<author>Viewsonic</author>
	<datestamp>1266860580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>People keep parroting how Flash is a nightmare, it's slow, buggy, crashes their browser. I've own a Mac with OSX since the day the iMac G5 came out, and I have never had a single instance of Flash misbehaving. I've used Flash on my PC almost since the day it came out a decade ago, again, never had a single issue. The only time I have ever noticed that a web site was even using Flash was when it required a newer version that I had installed and it prompted me to upgrade. That's it. Even if it WERE buggy, so what? I have PLENTY of buggy iTouch apps that freeze up, or just dont function properly. It's not Apples job to keep something like this off their devices, let users choose to install it or not.</p><p>All this negative talk about Flash makes me wonder if everyone has it confused with Java.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>People keep parroting how Flash is a nightmare , it 's slow , buggy , crashes their browser .
I 've own a Mac with OSX since the day the iMac G5 came out , and I have never had a single instance of Flash misbehaving .
I 've used Flash on my PC almost since the day it came out a decade ago , again , never had a single issue .
The only time I have ever noticed that a web site was even using Flash was when it required a newer version that I had installed and it prompted me to upgrade .
That 's it .
Even if it WERE buggy , so what ?
I have PLENTY of buggy iTouch apps that freeze up , or just dont function properly .
It 's not Apples job to keep something like this off their devices , let users choose to install it or not.All this negative talk about Flash makes me wonder if everyone has it confused with Java .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>People keep parroting how Flash is a nightmare, it's slow, buggy, crashes their browser.
I've own a Mac with OSX since the day the iMac G5 came out, and I have never had a single instance of Flash misbehaving.
I've used Flash on my PC almost since the day it came out a decade ago, again, never had a single issue.
The only time I have ever noticed that a web site was even using Flash was when it required a newer version that I had installed and it prompted me to upgrade.
That's it.
Even if it WERE buggy, so what?
I have PLENTY of buggy iTouch apps that freeze up, or just dont function properly.
It's not Apples job to keep something like this off their devices, let users choose to install it or not.All this negative talk about Flash makes me wonder if everyone has it confused with Java.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31223952</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31223640</id>
	<title>N900 microbe pointer solution</title>
	<author>dfries</author>
	<datestamp>1266757560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I really hate to defend flash, but then again most of what he brought up isn't even flash specific, it applies just as well to javascript, take Google maps for example.  It does mouse hover, left click, drag, and right click to name a few.  Saying you can't do flash on a tablet touchscreen because it's missing the hover etc, will also eliminate some very useful non-flash sites as well.

</p><p>The N900 microbe browser address most of those.  By default in the N900 press and drag will scroll the page up, down, left, or right, it doesn't pass that on to javascript as a mouse drag.  The N900 has a mouse over/hover mode, swipe from the left at nearly the bottom and a pointer appears where your finger/styless is.  That works as long as you keep dragging your finger around without letting up.  To click, or click and drag press or hold the shift key (or space).  That's enough to get around in google maps, but in agreeing with the author it's slow and awkward, I mean just trying to hold the device with your left hand and sometimes press shift while pressing and moving with your right.  It's almost enough to want to find a hard surface to set the device on.

</p><p>As far as I know there isn't a right or middle click, if it's there I haven't discovered it.  Though, they could easily assign another two keys for them.  That makes some of the google map functions unreachable.  So yes, a good part of what he mentioned is supported, it's just slow to do, but so is doing about anything on such a small device.  If you are wanting to play a fast action game that needs three buttons and keyboard chording, use a full sized computer, but most of it is there if a N900 is all you have at the time.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I really hate to defend flash , but then again most of what he brought up is n't even flash specific , it applies just as well to javascript , take Google maps for example .
It does mouse hover , left click , drag , and right click to name a few .
Saying you ca n't do flash on a tablet touchscreen because it 's missing the hover etc , will also eliminate some very useful non-flash sites as well .
The N900 microbe browser address most of those .
By default in the N900 press and drag will scroll the page up , down , left , or right , it does n't pass that on to javascript as a mouse drag .
The N900 has a mouse over/hover mode , swipe from the left at nearly the bottom and a pointer appears where your finger/styless is .
That works as long as you keep dragging your finger around without letting up .
To click , or click and drag press or hold the shift key ( or space ) .
That 's enough to get around in google maps , but in agreeing with the author it 's slow and awkward , I mean just trying to hold the device with your left hand and sometimes press shift while pressing and moving with your right .
It 's almost enough to want to find a hard surface to set the device on .
As far as I know there is n't a right or middle click , if it 's there I have n't discovered it .
Though , they could easily assign another two keys for them .
That makes some of the google map functions unreachable .
So yes , a good part of what he mentioned is supported , it 's just slow to do , but so is doing about anything on such a small device .
If you are wanting to play a fast action game that needs three buttons and keyboard chording , use a full sized computer , but most of it is there if a N900 is all you have at the time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I really hate to defend flash, but then again most of what he brought up isn't even flash specific, it applies just as well to javascript, take Google maps for example.
It does mouse hover, left click, drag, and right click to name a few.
Saying you can't do flash on a tablet touchscreen because it's missing the hover etc, will also eliminate some very useful non-flash sites as well.
The N900 microbe browser address most of those.
By default in the N900 press and drag will scroll the page up, down, left, or right, it doesn't pass that on to javascript as a mouse drag.
The N900 has a mouse over/hover mode, swipe from the left at nearly the bottom and a pointer appears where your finger/styless is.
That works as long as you keep dragging your finger around without letting up.
To click, or click and drag press or hold the shift key (or space).
That's enough to get around in google maps, but in agreeing with the author it's slow and awkward, I mean just trying to hold the device with your left hand and sometimes press shift while pressing and moving with your right.
It's almost enough to want to find a hard surface to set the device on.
As far as I know there isn't a right or middle click, if it's there I haven't discovered it.
Though, they could easily assign another two keys for them.
That makes some of the google map functions unreachable.
So yes, a good part of what he mentioned is supported, it's just slow to do, but so is doing about anything on such a small device.
If you are wanting to play a fast action game that needs three buttons and keyboard chording, use a full sized computer, but most of it is there if a N900 is all you have at the time.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31221040</id>
	<title>Re:Ummmm ... Flash 10.1????</title>
	<author>Jorl17</author>
	<datestamp>1266784380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Flash player is OPEN-SOURCE?!?!?!?! AHHAAAAAAAAAAAA, THE Sky IS ON FUCKING FIRE!!!!!!! COME, LORD, SAVE ME FROM THE INFIDEL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11111111onetakular!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Flash player is OPEN-SOURCE ? ! ? ! ? ! ? !
AHHAAAAAAAAAAAA , THE Sky IS ON FUCKING FIRE ! ! ! ! ! ! !
COME , LORD , SAVE ME FROM THE INFIDEL ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
! 11111111onetakular !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Flash player is OPEN-SOURCE?!?!?!?!
AHHAAAAAAAAAAAA, THE Sky IS ON FUCKING FIRE!!!!!!!
COME, LORD, SAVE ME FROM THE INFIDEL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!11111111onetakular!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219732</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219470</id>
	<title>hes saying this</title>
	<author>luther349</author>
	<datestamp>1266776160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>its not mouse jestures that are the issue. jailbroken ipods can do flash video on many sites using the media plugin. hes talking abought flash that uses keystrokes to work and hes correct in saying theirs no fixing that at least with no current stuff out there. the content would need to have both touch and keystroke support.</htmltext>
<tokenext>its not mouse jestures that are the issue .
jailbroken ipods can do flash video on many sites using the media plugin .
hes talking abought flash that uses keystrokes to work and hes correct in saying theirs no fixing that at least with no current stuff out there .
the content would need to have both touch and keystroke support .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>its not mouse jestures that are the issue.
jailbroken ipods can do flash video on many sites using the media plugin.
hes talking abought flash that uses keystrokes to work and hes correct in saying theirs no fixing that at least with no current stuff out there.
the content would need to have both touch and keystroke support.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219812</id>
	<title>Re:The App Store</title>
	<author>RulerOf</author>
	<datestamp>1266777720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Most of the available apps could easily be mimicked using Flash</p></div><p>Indeed.  I'm shocked at how frequently Slashdotters will offer technical reasons as to why Flash isn't on the iPhone, without realizing this.  It makes me wonder if there was ever an article posted here on this.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Most of the available apps could easily be mimicked using FlashIndeed .
I 'm shocked at how frequently Slashdotters will offer technical reasons as to why Flash is n't on the iPhone , without realizing this .
It makes me wonder if there was ever an article posted here on this .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Most of the available apps could easily be mimicked using FlashIndeed.
I'm shocked at how frequently Slashdotters will offer technical reasons as to why Flash isn't on the iPhone, without realizing this.
It makes me wonder if there was ever an article posted here on this.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219576</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219790</id>
	<title>Re:Not entirely true</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266777660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Flash is one of the main languages used to develop Surface tables-- and those are nothing but giant touchscreens.</p><p>I think the real point here doesn't have anything to do with Flash itself, it's just "applications built for a mouse won't necessarily work on a touchscreen." Which is... duh. (Also true of DHTML applications that make use of rollovers.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Flash is one of the main languages used to develop Surface tables-- and those are nothing but giant touchscreens.I think the real point here does n't have anything to do with Flash itself , it 's just " applications built for a mouse wo n't necessarily work on a touchscreen .
" Which is... duh. ( Also true of DHTML applications that make use of rollovers .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Flash is one of the main languages used to develop Surface tables-- and those are nothing but giant touchscreens.I think the real point here doesn't have anything to do with Flash itself, it's just "applications built for a mouse won't necessarily work on a touchscreen.
" Which is... duh. (Also true of DHTML applications that make use of rollovers.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219340</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31227132</id>
	<title>Remove FLASH from surface of the earth</title>
	<author>olahaye74</author>
	<datestamp>1266833400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Flash MUST DISAPEAR. This technology is bloated.<br>
<br>
After more than a year of 64bits beta testing under linux, there is still no 64 bit support available while all CPUs on the market ARE 64bits.<br>
This technology is memory hungry, CPU power hungry. IT MUST DISAPEAR. There are far better standard today and I hope that Flash will never run on iPhone like devices.<br>
My Core 2 Duo P8400 uses 100\% CPU where a few (1 to 3) sites using flash are running. A SHAME.<br> <br>

IMHO, removing flash from the surface of the earth could lead to stop 10th of power plants.<br>

As for the hover/click problem, the solution already exists on the iphone. for videos, 1st click brings a GUI, then you can play/stop/rewind.<br> <br>
for menus:<br>
one click sends an hover (menu popup or drop down) second click on the same object sends a click. Second click on another object sends an hover. And so-one.<br>
another solution (more compatible) could be to handle that just like the Amiga: press screen: hover, release screen click. (that would require to reduce the scroll areas on the screen borders (just like on modern laptops touch pads)

There are plenty of solutions for replacing flash (like sylverlight, html5 and so that runs on 64bits BTW), but right now, the best one is to refuse flash.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Flash MUST DISAPEAR .
This technology is bloated .
After more than a year of 64bits beta testing under linux , there is still no 64 bit support available while all CPUs on the market ARE 64bits .
This technology is memory hungry , CPU power hungry .
IT MUST DISAPEAR .
There are far better standard today and I hope that Flash will never run on iPhone like devices .
My Core 2 Duo P8400 uses 100 \ % CPU where a few ( 1 to 3 ) sites using flash are running .
A SHAME .
IMHO , removing flash from the surface of the earth could lead to stop 10th of power plants .
As for the hover/click problem , the solution already exists on the iphone .
for videos , 1st click brings a GUI , then you can play/stop/rewind .
for menus : one click sends an hover ( menu popup or drop down ) second click on the same object sends a click .
Second click on another object sends an hover .
And so-one .
another solution ( more compatible ) could be to handle that just like the Amiga : press screen : hover , release screen click .
( that would require to reduce the scroll areas on the screen borders ( just like on modern laptops touch pads ) There are plenty of solutions for replacing flash ( like sylverlight , html5 and so that runs on 64bits BTW ) , but right now , the best one is to refuse flash .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Flash MUST DISAPEAR.
This technology is bloated.
After more than a year of 64bits beta testing under linux, there is still no 64 bit support available while all CPUs on the market ARE 64bits.
This technology is memory hungry, CPU power hungry.
IT MUST DISAPEAR.
There are far better standard today and I hope that Flash will never run on iPhone like devices.
My Core 2 Duo P8400 uses 100\% CPU where a few (1 to 3) sites using flash are running.
A SHAME.
IMHO, removing flash from the surface of the earth could lead to stop 10th of power plants.
As for the hover/click problem, the solution already exists on the iphone.
for videos, 1st click brings a GUI, then you can play/stop/rewind.
for menus:
one click sends an hover (menu popup or drop down) second click on the same object sends a click.
Second click on another object sends an hover.
And so-one.
another solution (more compatible) could be to handle that just like the Amiga: press screen: hover, release screen click.
(that would require to reduce the scroll areas on the screen borders (just like on modern laptops touch pads)

There are plenty of solutions for replacing flash (like sylverlight, html5 and so that runs on 64bits BTW), but right now, the best one is to refuse flash.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31221064</id>
	<title>Well duh</title>
	<author>NoSleepDemon</author>
	<datestamp>1266784500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Wow, how is this news? I acquired a touch screen phone yesterday, and being a flash developer myself, gave consideration to how I might design a touch screen enabled flash game for it, the issue of mouse over was the first thing I thought about, and I quickly decided that I would have to code around it, and not use mouse over events. Adobe wants existing applications to run on a touch screen that use mouse over? One tap is mouse over, the other tap is a click. Wow, that was hard. Then you throw up a post on Adobe.com "hey guyz, if you want to make apps for touch screen, take this into consideration".

If you want a real doozey to consider for flash programming for phones, how about the wonky resolutions most of them run at? And the fact that a lot of flash apps do not scale well to low resolutions. Most of the flash stuff I design for landing pages requires a minimum resolution of 1024x768, you know what? I make sure that those landing pages will scale down to something a lot smaller, just in case, y'know?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Wow , how is this news ?
I acquired a touch screen phone yesterday , and being a flash developer myself , gave consideration to how I might design a touch screen enabled flash game for it , the issue of mouse over was the first thing I thought about , and I quickly decided that I would have to code around it , and not use mouse over events .
Adobe wants existing applications to run on a touch screen that use mouse over ?
One tap is mouse over , the other tap is a click .
Wow , that was hard .
Then you throw up a post on Adobe.com " hey guyz , if you want to make apps for touch screen , take this into consideration " .
If you want a real doozey to consider for flash programming for phones , how about the wonky resolutions most of them run at ?
And the fact that a lot of flash apps do not scale well to low resolutions .
Most of the flash stuff I design for landing pages requires a minimum resolution of 1024x768 , you know what ?
I make sure that those landing pages will scale down to something a lot smaller , just in case , y'know ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wow, how is this news?
I acquired a touch screen phone yesterday, and being a flash developer myself, gave consideration to how I might design a touch screen enabled flash game for it, the issue of mouse over was the first thing I thought about, and I quickly decided that I would have to code around it, and not use mouse over events.
Adobe wants existing applications to run on a touch screen that use mouse over?
One tap is mouse over, the other tap is a click.
Wow, that was hard.
Then you throw up a post on Adobe.com "hey guyz, if you want to make apps for touch screen, take this into consideration".
If you want a real doozey to consider for flash programming for phones, how about the wonky resolutions most of them run at?
And the fact that a lot of flash apps do not scale well to low resolutions.
Most of the flash stuff I design for landing pages requires a minimum resolution of 1024x768, you know what?
I make sure that those landing pages will scale down to something a lot smaller, just in case, y'know?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219570</id>
	<title>To many free flash games??</title>
	<author>Joe The Dragon</author>
	<datestamp>1266776580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The free games take away from the locked in app store.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The free games take away from the locked in app store .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The free games take away from the locked in app store.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31221528</id>
	<title>the real reason</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266744540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>the reason we will never see flash on apple touch devices is because flash websites and apps would be in competition with the app store...</p><p>its a simple money decision, forget all this silly rhetoric</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>the reason we will never see flash on apple touch devices is because flash websites and apps would be in competition with the app store...its a simple money decision , forget all this silly rhetoric</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the reason we will never see flash on apple touch devices is because flash websites and apps would be in competition with the app store...its a simple money decision, forget all this silly rhetoric</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219438</id>
	<title>could you be any more dramatic?</title>
	<author>ppetrakis</author>
	<datestamp>1266776040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Thank you for spelling out the conclusions Apple likely made (internally) leading up to the decision not to support flash on<br>it's initial release and brain storming some possible solutions. I don't see why the problem you've defined is anything more<br>than just another engineering challenge. The web is a pretty elastic place, I'm sure it'll evolve as touch screen interfaces<br>become more mainstream. I encourage you to view this as an opportunity to make a ton of money instead of a crisis.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Thank you for spelling out the conclusions Apple likely made ( internally ) leading up to the decision not to support flash onit 's initial release and brain storming some possible solutions .
I do n't see why the problem you 've defined is anything morethan just another engineering challenge .
The web is a pretty elastic place , I 'm sure it 'll evolve as touch screen interfacesbecome more mainstream .
I encourage you to view this as an opportunity to make a ton of money instead of a crisis .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Thank you for spelling out the conclusions Apple likely made (internally) leading up to the decision not to support flash onit's initial release and brain storming some possible solutions.
I don't see why the problem you've defined is anything morethan just another engineering challenge.
The web is a pretty elastic place, I'm sure it'll evolve as touch screen interfacesbecome more mainstream.
I encourage you to view this as an opportunity to make a ton of money instead of a crisis.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219494</id>
	<title>Re:Not entirely true</title>
	<author>ink</author>
	<datestamp>1266776220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How would you distinguish between <i>drag</i> and <i>hover</i> in that case?  A touchpad has no buttons; it's not a trackpad.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How would you distinguish between drag and hover in that case ?
A touchpad has no buttons ; it 's not a trackpad .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How would you distinguish between drag and hover in that case?
A touchpad has no buttons; it's not a trackpad.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219340</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31222112</id>
	<title>Re:Never?</title>
	<author>noidentity</author>
	<datestamp>1266748440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yay, let's add a mode over the entire UI. Modes are bad, mm'kay?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yay , let 's add a mode over the entire UI .
Modes are bad , mm'kay ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yay, let's add a mode over the entire UI.
Modes are bad, mm'kay?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219348</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219424</id>
	<title>andylim</title>
	<author>andylim</author>
	<datestamp>1266775980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I agree with this article but I wonder if Flash could be changed to work differently on mobile devices - an auto-detect mode for mobile phones, for example.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I agree with this article but I wonder if Flash could be changed to work differently on mobile devices - an auto-detect mode for mobile phones , for example .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I agree with this article but I wonder if Flash could be changed to work differently on mobile devices - an auto-detect mode for mobile phones, for example.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219516</id>
	<title>The real reason is flash would cost Apple $</title>
	<author>bigbigbison</author>
	<datestamp>1266776280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>No matter what excuses Apple comes out with or what other people say, the real reason is that having flash on the ipad or iphone would cost apple money. What is the main thing people use flash for? Watching video and playing games. What does Apple want to sell you through itunes? videos and games.</htmltext>
<tokenext>No matter what excuses Apple comes out with or what other people say , the real reason is that having flash on the ipad or iphone would cost apple money .
What is the main thing people use flash for ?
Watching video and playing games .
What does Apple want to sell you through itunes ?
videos and games .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No matter what excuses Apple comes out with or what other people say, the real reason is that having flash on the ipad or iphone would cost apple money.
What is the main thing people use flash for?
Watching video and playing games.
What does Apple want to sell you through itunes?
videos and games.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220266</id>
	<title>Re:Eat my balls!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266780120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Apple wouldn't be forfeiting anything because developers still want to make money off their work.  No one pays money to use flash apps, and relying on advertising for revenue, especially in a recession, doesn't make anyone except the biggest players rich.  Getting 70\% of $1 app sales is really good if you sell 1 million copies.  It's even better if it's selling well at $5.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Apple would n't be forfeiting anything because developers still want to make money off their work .
No one pays money to use flash apps , and relying on advertising for revenue , especially in a recession , does n't make anyone except the biggest players rich .
Getting 70 \ % of $ 1 app sales is really good if you sell 1 million copies .
It 's even better if it 's selling well at $ 5 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Apple wouldn't be forfeiting anything because developers still want to make money off their work.
No one pays money to use flash apps, and relying on advertising for revenue, especially in a recession, doesn't make anyone except the biggest players rich.
Getting 70\% of $1 app sales is really good if you sell 1 million copies.
It's even better if it's selling well at $5.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219496</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219348</id>
	<title>Never?</title>
	<author>Rydia</author>
	<datestamp>1266775680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"current Flash sites could never be made to work well on any touchscreen device"</p><p>Really? Never? Just off the top of my head, I could envision a button that put the device in "pointer" mode, maybe with scroll buttons where appropriate, and then used the movement of your finger on the touchscreen as either 1:1 or some kind of relative movement of the pointer. There are probably issues with this approach, yes, but it took me <i>seconds</i> to cobble together. Saying that something is impossible as a matter of user interface is silly. You can always change the UI in some way to make it possible, or even good.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" current Flash sites could never be made to work well on any touchscreen device " Really ?
Never ? Just off the top of my head , I could envision a button that put the device in " pointer " mode , maybe with scroll buttons where appropriate , and then used the movement of your finger on the touchscreen as either 1 : 1 or some kind of relative movement of the pointer .
There are probably issues with this approach , yes , but it took me seconds to cobble together .
Saying that something is impossible as a matter of user interface is silly .
You can always change the UI in some way to make it possible , or even good .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"current Flash sites could never be made to work well on any touchscreen device"Really?
Never? Just off the top of my head, I could envision a button that put the device in "pointer" mode, maybe with scroll buttons where appropriate, and then used the movement of your finger on the touchscreen as either 1:1 or some kind of relative movement of the pointer.
There are probably issues with this approach, yes, but it took me seconds to cobble together.
Saying that something is impossible as a matter of user interface is silly.
You can always change the UI in some way to make it possible, or even good.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220112</id>
	<title>Re:The App Store</title>
	<author>ink</author>
	<datestamp>1266779400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Adobe also charges for mobile/embedded/redistributed Flash runtimes.  Apple would have to <i>pay</i> Adobe for the privilege of allowing them selling more CS dev tools.  It's messed up from both sides.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Adobe also charges for mobile/embedded/redistributed Flash runtimes .
Apple would have to pay Adobe for the privilege of allowing them selling more CS dev tools .
It 's messed up from both sides .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Adobe also charges for mobile/embedded/redistributed Flash runtimes.
Apple would have to pay Adobe for the privilege of allowing them selling more CS dev tools.
It's messed up from both sides.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219576</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219448</id>
	<title>WTF</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266776040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why is it that all of you faggots usually whine about Flash (IT ISN'T SUPPORTED WELL ON LINUX LOL WE SHOULD GET RID OF IT) until Steve Jobs says no Flash on iPad - now, all of a sudden you're the biggest defenders of it? It's fine to be a contrarian but... seriously... would it be that difficult to be consistent?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why is it that all of you faggots usually whine about Flash ( IT IS N'T SUPPORTED WELL ON LINUX LOL WE SHOULD GET RID OF IT ) until Steve Jobs says no Flash on iPad - now , all of a sudden you 're the biggest defenders of it ?
It 's fine to be a contrarian but... seriously... would it be that difficult to be consistent ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why is it that all of you faggots usually whine about Flash (IT ISN'T SUPPORTED WELL ON LINUX LOL WE SHOULD GET RID OF IT) until Steve Jobs says no Flash on iPad - now, all of a sudden you're the biggest defenders of it?
It's fine to be a contrarian but... seriously... would it be that difficult to be consistent?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219652</id>
	<title>Multiple Interfaces?</title>
	<author>cyrus0101</author>
	<datestamp>1266777060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>So as site developers we have to: <br>
- build a flash site for those who have flash.<br>
- an html site for those who don't.<br>
- and an alternate flash site for people with touch screen UI.<br> <br>
Excuse me while a find a bucket into which I can vomit.</htmltext>
<tokenext>So as site developers we have to : - build a flash site for those who have flash .
- an html site for those who do n't .
- and an alternate flash site for people with touch screen UI .
Excuse me while a find a bucket into which I can vomit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So as site developers we have to: 
- build a flash site for those who have flash.
- an html site for those who don't.
- and an alternate flash site for people with touch screen UI.
Excuse me while a find a bucket into which I can vomit.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220034</id>
	<title>The strange thing is...</title>
	<author>IrrepressibleMonkey</author>
	<datestamp>1266779040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I didn't know anyone who felt that they needed Flash on their mobile phone until Apple made it clear that the iPhone wouldn't support it.<br> <br>

Flash is still mainly used for adverts, right? (Even the article in question comes with a Flash banner ad...)<br> <br>

I like my iPhone (3G), but in truth it's started to struggle under recent updates. Apple seem to be pushing the device harder, I'm encoding my music at higher bit-rates and websites seem to want to do more. The net result is that the iPod now often skips when I browse 'heavy' websites (including this one). I genuinely don't think that the poor thing would handle Flash with any grace at all. <br> <br> So maybe Apple's reasoning is motivated by revenue streams, but I'm not missing Flash on the iPhone.<br> <br>
(And Flash games...? Really? I've obviously never played the right ones. The Flash games I've played have been very limited.)</htmltext>
<tokenext>I did n't know anyone who felt that they needed Flash on their mobile phone until Apple made it clear that the iPhone would n't support it .
Flash is still mainly used for adverts , right ?
( Even the article in question comes with a Flash banner ad... ) I like my iPhone ( 3G ) , but in truth it 's started to struggle under recent updates .
Apple seem to be pushing the device harder , I 'm encoding my music at higher bit-rates and websites seem to want to do more .
The net result is that the iPod now often skips when I browse 'heavy ' websites ( including this one ) .
I genuinely do n't think that the poor thing would handle Flash with any grace at all .
So maybe Apple 's reasoning is motivated by revenue streams , but I 'm not missing Flash on the iPhone .
( And Flash games... ?
Really ? I 've obviously never played the right ones .
The Flash games I 've played have been very limited .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I didn't know anyone who felt that they needed Flash on their mobile phone until Apple made it clear that the iPhone wouldn't support it.
Flash is still mainly used for adverts, right?
(Even the article in question comes with a Flash banner ad...) 

I like my iPhone (3G), but in truth it's started to struggle under recent updates.
Apple seem to be pushing the device harder, I'm encoding my music at higher bit-rates and websites seem to want to do more.
The net result is that the iPod now often skips when I browse 'heavy' websites (including this one).
I genuinely don't think that the poor thing would handle Flash with any grace at all.
So maybe Apple's reasoning is motivated by revenue streams, but I'm not missing Flash on the iPhone.
(And Flash games...?
Really? I've obviously never played the right ones.
The Flash games I've played have been very limited.
)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31222758</id>
	<title>Re:Eat my balls!</title>
	<author>mgblst</author>
	<datestamp>1266751980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>We all know Apple bans Flash because it would allow third party apps that don't have to forfeit 30\% of revenue to Apple. </i><br>No, we don't all know that, because it is completely wrong. You can already release apps for the iphone/ipad FOR FREE, where apple gets $0. In fact, the lose money, from the hosting costs. You can even put in ads, where you get ALL THE MONEY.</p><p>So, can we please stop this bullshit.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We all know Apple bans Flash because it would allow third party apps that do n't have to forfeit 30 \ % of revenue to Apple .
No , we do n't all know that , because it is completely wrong .
You can already release apps for the iphone/ipad FOR FREE , where apple gets $ 0 .
In fact , the lose money , from the hosting costs .
You can even put in ads , where you get ALL THE MONEY.So , can we please stop this bullshit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We all know Apple bans Flash because it would allow third party apps that don't have to forfeit 30\% of revenue to Apple.
No, we don't all know that, because it is completely wrong.
You can already release apps for the iphone/ipad FOR FREE, where apple gets $0.
In fact, the lose money, from the hosting costs.
You can even put in ads, where you get ALL THE MONEY.So, can we please stop this bullshit.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219496</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220020</id>
	<title>A world without Flash</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266778920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There does seem to be much (anecdotal) evidence that Flash has problems; all of them commented on repeatedly. Just as the tech world has moved on from DOS, 5.24 inch floppies, 3.5 inch floppies, SCSI, and CRTs, it will someday move on without Flash. The only question is "how soon?" Apple. for its own reasons, is interested in seeing this happen sooner rather than later. They have actually already moved on when it comes to their mobile devices. Apple is big enough and also enough of a leader in tech innovation, that they could hasten Flash's demise. All the rest of us can do is watch it happen, and comment seemingly endlessly.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There does seem to be much ( anecdotal ) evidence that Flash has problems ; all of them commented on repeatedly .
Just as the tech world has moved on from DOS , 5.24 inch floppies , 3.5 inch floppies , SCSI , and CRTs , it will someday move on without Flash .
The only question is " how soon ?
" Apple .
for its own reasons , is interested in seeing this happen sooner rather than later .
They have actually already moved on when it comes to their mobile devices .
Apple is big enough and also enough of a leader in tech innovation , that they could hasten Flash 's demise .
All the rest of us can do is watch it happen , and comment seemingly endlessly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There does seem to be much (anecdotal) evidence that Flash has problems; all of them commented on repeatedly.
Just as the tech world has moved on from DOS, 5.24 inch floppies, 3.5 inch floppies, SCSI, and CRTs, it will someday move on without Flash.
The only question is "how soon?
" Apple.
for its own reasons, is interested in seeing this happen sooner rather than later.
They have actually already moved on when it comes to their mobile devices.
Apple is big enough and also enough of a leader in tech innovation, that they could hasten Flash's demise.
All the rest of us can do is watch it happen, and comment seemingly endlessly.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31221752</id>
	<title>Middle finger to Flash</title>
	<author>MillionthMonkey</author>
	<datestamp>1266745920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's only a matter of time until these devices have fingerprint sensor capability, so Apple gets the index finger, and Adobe gets the middle finger.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's only a matter of time until these devices have fingerprint sensor capability , so Apple gets the index finger , and Adobe gets the middle finger .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's only a matter of time until these devices have fingerprint sensor capability, so Apple gets the index finger, and Adobe gets the middle finger.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219872</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220666</id>
	<title>Re:Eat my balls!</title>
	<author>peragrin</author>
	<datestamp>1266781980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>why can't it be the simple two dimensional mouse input that is flawed?</p><p>a mouse is only good for X, y and targets.  a multi point touchscreen is good for x,y  coordinates many times over.  I take it you have never really used a decent multi touch device before?  Windows tablets don't count as the interface is still the same desktop Interface.  Touch screens need something different.</p><p>Besides Flash uses 70\% of both my cores on my macbook.  using just one flash based game drains my battery down to 1.5 hours of use, instead of 4 of just basic web surfing.  and 10.1?  yea that is what I am running now for flash.  I can't imagine what it would do to my iphone which has a much smaller battery.  of course Adobe is just like MSFT The next version will cure all woes, is more secure, faster, and still has all the same bugs as the original.</p><p>Apple may have alternative motives about revenue streams.  However things like hover menus can be modified easily enough with CSS, and browser detection.  Changes that would work better with all touch screen devices.  unlike flash were adobe only supports certain features, and the OSX and Linux versions lag behind the windows version by a year or so feature wise, and 3-4 years speed wise.  If Adobe doesn't want to provide proper support to Mac users why should they support adobe?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>why ca n't it be the simple two dimensional mouse input that is flawed ? a mouse is only good for X , y and targets .
a multi point touchscreen is good for x,y coordinates many times over .
I take it you have never really used a decent multi touch device before ?
Windows tablets do n't count as the interface is still the same desktop Interface .
Touch screens need something different.Besides Flash uses 70 \ % of both my cores on my macbook .
using just one flash based game drains my battery down to 1.5 hours of use , instead of 4 of just basic web surfing .
and 10.1 ?
yea that is what I am running now for flash .
I ca n't imagine what it would do to my iphone which has a much smaller battery .
of course Adobe is just like MSFT The next version will cure all woes , is more secure , faster , and still has all the same bugs as the original.Apple may have alternative motives about revenue streams .
However things like hover menus can be modified easily enough with CSS , and browser detection .
Changes that would work better with all touch screen devices .
unlike flash were adobe only supports certain features , and the OSX and Linux versions lag behind the windows version by a year or so feature wise , and 3-4 years speed wise .
If Adobe does n't want to provide proper support to Mac users why should they support adobe ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>why can't it be the simple two dimensional mouse input that is flawed?a mouse is only good for X, y and targets.
a multi point touchscreen is good for x,y  coordinates many times over.
I take it you have never really used a decent multi touch device before?
Windows tablets don't count as the interface is still the same desktop Interface.
Touch screens need something different.Besides Flash uses 70\% of both my cores on my macbook.
using just one flash based game drains my battery down to 1.5 hours of use, instead of 4 of just basic web surfing.
and 10.1?
yea that is what I am running now for flash.
I can't imagine what it would do to my iphone which has a much smaller battery.
of course Adobe is just like MSFT The next version will cure all woes, is more secure, faster, and still has all the same bugs as the original.Apple may have alternative motives about revenue streams.
However things like hover menus can be modified easily enough with CSS, and browser detection.
Changes that would work better with all touch screen devices.
unlike flash were adobe only supports certain features, and the OSX and Linux versions lag behind the windows version by a year or so feature wise, and 3-4 years speed wise.
If Adobe doesn't want to provide proper support to Mac users why should they support adobe?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219496</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220058</id>
	<title>Re:Eat my balls!</title>
	<author>T-Bone-T</author>
	<datestamp>1266779100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The only problem I've had with menus is when each menu level is also a link. I could navigate Fry's website just fine with their menus but the also turned each item into a link. So instead of moving through a few menu items I now have to load a few pages to get to what I want.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The only problem I 've had with menus is when each menu level is also a link .
I could navigate Fry 's website just fine with their menus but the also turned each item into a link .
So instead of moving through a few menu items I now have to load a few pages to get to what I want .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The only problem I've had with menus is when each menu level is also a link.
I could navigate Fry's website just fine with their menus but the also turned each item into a link.
So instead of moving through a few menu items I now have to load a few pages to get to what I want.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219496</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219604</id>
	<title>Translation</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266776760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"I'm a Mac fanboy who also does some extremely bad flash design (http://adamsi.com/). I can't figure out how to make the silly, and unnecessary, rollovers on my site work on an iPad. I'm believe everything Apple does is brilliant so their decision to exclude Flash must also be brilliant. Therefore I have to conclude that Flash could never, ever, work on a touchscreen device."</p><p>Serious bunch of BS in my opinion. For one, a large number of Flash sites, like the author's, seem to use mouse over for nothing more than effects. Fine, but hardly essential. If all that is transmitted is clicks, they still function ok. Second, the big reason people are up about Flash these days is videos and the like. For better or worse, Flash has become THE web video standard. That may eventually change, but no time soon. As we all know, standards change extremely slowly when there's something works and, well, Flash works. It's not perfect but on most computers, it works just fine for seeing a video of a silly cat jump in a box. Finally, if a site didn't work properly, oh well, shit happens. As it stands all Flash sites are GUARANTEED not to work at all.</p><p>I don't buy this as a legit argument at all.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" I 'm a Mac fanboy who also does some extremely bad flash design ( http : //adamsi.com/ ) .
I ca n't figure out how to make the silly , and unnecessary , rollovers on my site work on an iPad .
I 'm believe everything Apple does is brilliant so their decision to exclude Flash must also be brilliant .
Therefore I have to conclude that Flash could never , ever , work on a touchscreen device .
" Serious bunch of BS in my opinion .
For one , a large number of Flash sites , like the author 's , seem to use mouse over for nothing more than effects .
Fine , but hardly essential .
If all that is transmitted is clicks , they still function ok. Second , the big reason people are up about Flash these days is videos and the like .
For better or worse , Flash has become THE web video standard .
That may eventually change , but no time soon .
As we all know , standards change extremely slowly when there 's something works and , well , Flash works .
It 's not perfect but on most computers , it works just fine for seeing a video of a silly cat jump in a box .
Finally , if a site did n't work properly , oh well , shit happens .
As it stands all Flash sites are GUARANTEED not to work at all.I do n't buy this as a legit argument at all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"I'm a Mac fanboy who also does some extremely bad flash design (http://adamsi.com/).
I can't figure out how to make the silly, and unnecessary, rollovers on my site work on an iPad.
I'm believe everything Apple does is brilliant so their decision to exclude Flash must also be brilliant.
Therefore I have to conclude that Flash could never, ever, work on a touchscreen device.
"Serious bunch of BS in my opinion.
For one, a large number of Flash sites, like the author's, seem to use mouse over for nothing more than effects.
Fine, but hardly essential.
If all that is transmitted is clicks, they still function ok. Second, the big reason people are up about Flash these days is videos and the like.
For better or worse, Flash has become THE web video standard.
That may eventually change, but no time soon.
As we all know, standards change extremely slowly when there's something works and, well, Flash works.
It's not perfect but on most computers, it works just fine for seeing a video of a silly cat jump in a box.
Finally, if a site didn't work properly, oh well, shit happens.
As it stands all Flash sites are GUARANTEED not to work at all.I don't buy this as a legit argument at all.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219348</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219766</id>
	<title>Re:The real reason is flash would cost Apple $</title>
	<author>Coriolis</author>
	<datestamp>1266777540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>So, um, why does it have a Youtube app? Hell, if that's their only motivation, why do they allow streaming music services like Spotify?</htmltext>
<tokenext>So , um , why does it have a Youtube app ?
Hell , if that 's their only motivation , why do they allow streaming music services like Spotify ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So, um, why does it have a Youtube app?
Hell, if that's their only motivation, why do they allow streaming music services like Spotify?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219516</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219628</id>
	<title>Adobe has already addressed the issue</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266776880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I guess the author didn't see this video:</p><p>http://tv.adobe.com/watch/adc-presents/flash-player-101-on-google-nexus-one/</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I guess the author did n't see this video : http : //tv.adobe.com/watch/adc-presents/flash-player-101-on-google-nexus-one/</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I guess the author didn't see this video:http://tv.adobe.com/watch/adc-presents/flash-player-101-on-google-nexus-one/</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220298</id>
	<title>Re:Eat my balls!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266780240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Apple doesn't make much money off that 30\% cut.  The iTunes store brings in just enough money to cover their expenses on it, as reported every quarter in their results.  They make their real profit off the hardware they sell.  So I doubt Apple is blocking Flash just to keep that 30\% coming in.  Flash apps (if they were really all that important) would be helping to sell more hardware for Apple, without the overhead of hosting peoples apps.</p><p>Apple bans Flash because they are tired of dealing with Adobe.  Only now is performance suddenly important to them, over half a decade after buying Macromedia.  Only now is it critical for Adobe to try and bring real Flash to the mobile space (and not the crippled/useless Flash Lite), even though smartphones have been around a while.  And Adobe is the only company that can make Flash better, since it's not an open internet specification.</p><p>Javascript/HTML rendering on the other hand was something Apple could improve without having to wait on some other company.  So Apple was able to launch their iPhone product years ago with a great browser, and bring in more hardware revenue.  Had they also wanted to include Flash and held back the device till it was ready, the iPhone still wouldn't have shipped.  Why?  Because Adobe still hasn't made a mobile release (not beta/alpha/whatever) version of Flash for any mobile device/platform.  The only way real, true proper, non lite flash works on phones now is with browsers dependent on a server somewhere doing the heavy lifting.</p><p>This may just be "absurd mental gymnastics" to you, but I've at least backed part of my comment here with actual information on what Apple does with their 30\% (IE, not make money with it, just using it to cover expenses), instead of speculating it's some big important thing for Apple's bottom line.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Apple does n't make much money off that 30 \ % cut .
The iTunes store brings in just enough money to cover their expenses on it , as reported every quarter in their results .
They make their real profit off the hardware they sell .
So I doubt Apple is blocking Flash just to keep that 30 \ % coming in .
Flash apps ( if they were really all that important ) would be helping to sell more hardware for Apple , without the overhead of hosting peoples apps.Apple bans Flash because they are tired of dealing with Adobe .
Only now is performance suddenly important to them , over half a decade after buying Macromedia .
Only now is it critical for Adobe to try and bring real Flash to the mobile space ( and not the crippled/useless Flash Lite ) , even though smartphones have been around a while .
And Adobe is the only company that can make Flash better , since it 's not an open internet specification.Javascript/HTML rendering on the other hand was something Apple could improve without having to wait on some other company .
So Apple was able to launch their iPhone product years ago with a great browser , and bring in more hardware revenue .
Had they also wanted to include Flash and held back the device till it was ready , the iPhone still would n't have shipped .
Why ? Because Adobe still has n't made a mobile release ( not beta/alpha/whatever ) version of Flash for any mobile device/platform .
The only way real , true proper , non lite flash works on phones now is with browsers dependent on a server somewhere doing the heavy lifting.This may just be " absurd mental gymnastics " to you , but I 've at least backed part of my comment here with actual information on what Apple does with their 30 \ % ( IE , not make money with it , just using it to cover expenses ) , instead of speculating it 's some big important thing for Apple 's bottom line .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Apple doesn't make much money off that 30\% cut.
The iTunes store brings in just enough money to cover their expenses on it, as reported every quarter in their results.
They make their real profit off the hardware they sell.
So I doubt Apple is blocking Flash just to keep that 30\% coming in.
Flash apps (if they were really all that important) would be helping to sell more hardware for Apple, without the overhead of hosting peoples apps.Apple bans Flash because they are tired of dealing with Adobe.
Only now is performance suddenly important to them, over half a decade after buying Macromedia.
Only now is it critical for Adobe to try and bring real Flash to the mobile space (and not the crippled/useless Flash Lite), even though smartphones have been around a while.
And Adobe is the only company that can make Flash better, since it's not an open internet specification.Javascript/HTML rendering on the other hand was something Apple could improve without having to wait on some other company.
So Apple was able to launch their iPhone product years ago with a great browser, and bring in more hardware revenue.
Had they also wanted to include Flash and held back the device till it was ready, the iPhone still wouldn't have shipped.
Why?  Because Adobe still hasn't made a mobile release (not beta/alpha/whatever) version of Flash for any mobile device/platform.
The only way real, true proper, non lite flash works on phones now is with browsers dependent on a server somewhere doing the heavy lifting.This may just be "absurd mental gymnastics" to you, but I've at least backed part of my comment here with actual information on what Apple does with their 30\% (IE, not make money with it, just using it to cover expenses), instead of speculating it's some big important thing for Apple's bottom line.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219496</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219852</id>
	<title>Re:Eat my balls!</title>
	<author>Evil Shabazz</author>
	<datestamp>1266777960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I think what my friend here is trying to say is that perhaps it is the touchscreen input that is "fundamentally flawed." The same argument could be applied to CSS hover and javascript mouseovers. Should Apple simply dispose of Safari on the iPad, because it is "fundamentally flawed?" There are lots of sites that use css hover menus. Poor iPad users will have a bad experience with those sites, so should we then remove the browser?</p></div><p>Well, clearly its not Safari that's flawed - it's the CSS and javascript!<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)  Banning those seems a much more intuitive move, as that wouldn't involve banning an Apple product.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think what my friend here is trying to say is that perhaps it is the touchscreen input that is " fundamentally flawed .
" The same argument could be applied to CSS hover and javascript mouseovers .
Should Apple simply dispose of Safari on the iPad , because it is " fundamentally flawed ?
" There are lots of sites that use css hover menus .
Poor iPad users will have a bad experience with those sites , so should we then remove the browser ? Well , clearly its not Safari that 's flawed - it 's the CSS and javascript !
: ) Banning those seems a much more intuitive move , as that would n't involve banning an Apple product .
; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think what my friend here is trying to say is that perhaps it is the touchscreen input that is "fundamentally flawed.
" The same argument could be applied to CSS hover and javascript mouseovers.
Should Apple simply dispose of Safari on the iPad, because it is "fundamentally flawed?
" There are lots of sites that use css hover menus.
Poor iPad users will have a bad experience with those sites, so should we then remove the browser?Well, clearly its not Safari that's flawed - it's the CSS and javascript!
:)  Banning those seems a much more intuitive move, as that wouldn't involve banning an Apple product.
;)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219496</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219360</id>
	<title>Flash? Who Gives A SHit?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266775740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Seriously, my crotch itches. That bothers me a lot more than Flash.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Seriously , my crotch itches .
That bothers me a lot more than Flash .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seriously, my crotch itches.
That bothers me a lot more than Flash.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220830</id>
	<title>Notion Ink Adam</title>
	<author>Alaren</author>
	<datestamp>1266782880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Another approach is to put a touchpad on the device.  <a href="http://www.notionink.in/" title="notionink.in">Notion Ink's Adam</a> [notionink.in] does just this, placing a touchpad on the back of the device.  This in addition to a Pixel Qi screen and HDMI and USB ports.

</p><p>Everyone is talking about the iPad because Apple has so much mindshare, but in this case there are several competitors whose products address the problems that are obvious in the iPad.  This article strikes me as especially myopic; the fact that <i>Apple's</i> touch device can't handle mouseovers properly does not mean it is impossible to do on a touch device.  In this thread alone we've come up with two functional alternatives <i>that already exist!</i></p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Another approach is to put a touchpad on the device .
Notion Ink 's Adam [ notionink.in ] does just this , placing a touchpad on the back of the device .
This in addition to a Pixel Qi screen and HDMI and USB ports .
Everyone is talking about the iPad because Apple has so much mindshare , but in this case there are several competitors whose products address the problems that are obvious in the iPad .
This article strikes me as especially myopic ; the fact that Apple 's touch device ca n't handle mouseovers properly does not mean it is impossible to do on a touch device .
In this thread alone we 've come up with two functional alternatives that already exist !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Another approach is to put a touchpad on the device.
Notion Ink's Adam [notionink.in] does just this, placing a touchpad on the back of the device.
This in addition to a Pixel Qi screen and HDMI and USB ports.
Everyone is talking about the iPad because Apple has so much mindshare, but in this case there are several competitors whose products address the problems that are obvious in the iPad.
This article strikes me as especially myopic; the fact that Apple's touch device can't handle mouseovers properly does not mean it is impossible to do on a touch device.
In this thread alone we've come up with two functional alternatives that already exist!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219348</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220406</id>
	<title>It's not new...</title>
	<author>Belial6</author>
	<datestamp>1266780720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The thing is, it is not new.<br> <br>

The <a href="http://www.leapfrog.com/en/families/leapster/bundle/cars\_gift\_pack.html" title="leapfrog.com">Leapster by Leapfrog</a> [leapfrog.com] is a Flash only device. You can buy it in any Toys R Us, and has been very successful. It works just fine.
<br> <br>
Touchscreen flash is over half a decade old.  Claiming that flash is impossible on a touch screen is like claiming 64bit is impossible on the desktop.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The thing is , it is not new .
The Leapster by Leapfrog [ leapfrog.com ] is a Flash only device .
You can buy it in any Toys R Us , and has been very successful .
It works just fine .
Touchscreen flash is over half a decade old .
Claiming that flash is impossible on a touch screen is like claiming 64bit is impossible on the desktop .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The thing is, it is not new.
The Leapster by Leapfrog [leapfrog.com] is a Flash only device.
You can buy it in any Toys R Us, and has been very successful.
It works just fine.
Touchscreen flash is over half a decade old.
Claiming that flash is impossible on a touch screen is like claiming 64bit is impossible on the desktop.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219388</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220314</id>
	<title>Re:Translation</title>
	<author>Belial6</author>
	<datestamp>1266780300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>More to the point.  The author is not only an idiot because he isn't smart enough to think of how to make flash work with a touch screen... He is an idiot because there has already been a very successful touchscreen device that is 100\% flash.  The <a href="http://www.leapfrog.com/en/families/leapster/bundle/cars\_gift\_pack.html" title="leapfrog.com">Leapster by Leapfrog</a> [leapfrog.com] is a <a href="http://www.adobe.com/cfusion/showcase/index.cfm?event=casestudyprint&amp;casestudyid=21019&amp;loc=en\_us" title="adobe.com">Flash only device</a> [adobe.com].  You can buy it in any Toys R Us, and has been very successful.  It works just fine.
<br> <br>
It seems that the current trend by Apple fanboys is to claim that Apple engineers are completely incompetent.  Not long ago, it was the claim that Apple engineers were too incompetent to fit a microSD and battery door in an iPod sized device, while basement budget Emprex could fit them in a device half the iPod's size.  Obviously this not extends to the iPad.  At 50x the size, the Apple fanboys must still believe the Apple engineers are even too incompetent to fit them in that huge device.
<br> <br>
Now, we get an article claiming that Apple engineers are so incompetent that it would be IMPOSSIBLE for them to accomplish a task that has been widely available in a child's toy for over half a decade.</htmltext>
<tokenext>More to the point .
The author is not only an idiot because he is n't smart enough to think of how to make flash work with a touch screen... He is an idiot because there has already been a very successful touchscreen device that is 100 \ % flash .
The Leapster by Leapfrog [ leapfrog.com ] is a Flash only device [ adobe.com ] .
You can buy it in any Toys R Us , and has been very successful .
It works just fine .
It seems that the current trend by Apple fanboys is to claim that Apple engineers are completely incompetent .
Not long ago , it was the claim that Apple engineers were too incompetent to fit a microSD and battery door in an iPod sized device , while basement budget Emprex could fit them in a device half the iPod 's size .
Obviously this not extends to the iPad .
At 50x the size , the Apple fanboys must still believe the Apple engineers are even too incompetent to fit them in that huge device .
Now , we get an article claiming that Apple engineers are so incompetent that it would be IMPOSSIBLE for them to accomplish a task that has been widely available in a child 's toy for over half a decade .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>More to the point.
The author is not only an idiot because he isn't smart enough to think of how to make flash work with a touch screen... He is an idiot because there has already been a very successful touchscreen device that is 100\% flash.
The Leapster by Leapfrog [leapfrog.com] is a Flash only device [adobe.com].
You can buy it in any Toys R Us, and has been very successful.
It works just fine.
It seems that the current trend by Apple fanboys is to claim that Apple engineers are completely incompetent.
Not long ago, it was the claim that Apple engineers were too incompetent to fit a microSD and battery door in an iPod sized device, while basement budget Emprex could fit them in a device half the iPod's size.
Obviously this not extends to the iPad.
At 50x the size, the Apple fanboys must still believe the Apple engineers are even too incompetent to fit them in that huge device.
Now, we get an article claiming that Apple engineers are so incompetent that it would be IMPOSSIBLE for them to accomplish a task that has been widely available in a child's toy for over half a decade.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219604</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220776</id>
	<title>I don't see what the problem is.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266782640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Want a menu to pop up?  Touch the menu name, and hold your finger there.  The menu comes up.  Drag your finger down to select the menu item you want.  Release. Item is selected.</p><p>All you need to do is make the release the mouse click.  Touching and dragging would only update the mouse position.</p><p>And if you want buttons to look like they're depressed when the user clicks them then instead of making them go down and pop back up immediately when the user touches them, you make them go down when the user has their finger over them and up when they remove it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Want a menu to pop up ?
Touch the menu name , and hold your finger there .
The menu comes up .
Drag your finger down to select the menu item you want .
Release. Item is selected.All you need to do is make the release the mouse click .
Touching and dragging would only update the mouse position.And if you want buttons to look like they 're depressed when the user clicks them then instead of making them go down and pop back up immediately when the user touches them , you make them go down when the user has their finger over them and up when they remove it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Want a menu to pop up?
Touch the menu name, and hold your finger there.
The menu comes up.
Drag your finger down to select the menu item you want.
Release. Item is selected.All you need to do is make the release the mouse click.
Touching and dragging would only update the mouse position.And if you want buttons to look like they're depressed when the user clicks them then instead of making them go down and pop back up immediately when the user touches them, you make them go down when the user has their finger over them and up when they remove it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219496</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219818</id>
	<title>Really?</title>
	<author>damn\_registrars</author>
	<datestamp>1266777720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Come on, is that really the only thing that this person could think of that is fundamentally flawed with flash?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Come on , is that really the only thing that this person could think of that is fundamentally flawed with flash ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Come on, is that really the only thing that this person could think of that is fundamentally flawed with flash?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219384</id>
	<title>oh my god the world is ending</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266775860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The author is a retard. So a tiny tweak (clicking on the video pauses and brings up the bar) or, more simply, compile flash so that a touch and slide is a "mouseover" and "double click" is a click event. I don't think I've ever seen a flash program that wanted a double-click. I'm sure they exist.</p><p>Oh yeah, sites like starfall.com (recommended if you have preschool kids) would work just fine. It's 100\% a question of Apple being unwilling to allow unauthorized code to run on their devices. There's nothing to see here.</p><p>oh yeah, you could use multi-touch when you write the program. Oops. Lazy programmer writes a blog post. big deal.</p><p>John</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The author is a retard .
So a tiny tweak ( clicking on the video pauses and brings up the bar ) or , more simply , compile flash so that a touch and slide is a " mouseover " and " double click " is a click event .
I do n't think I 've ever seen a flash program that wanted a double-click .
I 'm sure they exist.Oh yeah , sites like starfall.com ( recommended if you have preschool kids ) would work just fine .
It 's 100 \ % a question of Apple being unwilling to allow unauthorized code to run on their devices .
There 's nothing to see here.oh yeah , you could use multi-touch when you write the program .
Oops. Lazy programmer writes a blog post .
big deal.John</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The author is a retard.
So a tiny tweak (clicking on the video pauses and brings up the bar) or, more simply, compile flash so that a touch and slide is a "mouseover" and "double click" is a click event.
I don't think I've ever seen a flash program that wanted a double-click.
I'm sure they exist.Oh yeah, sites like starfall.com (recommended if you have preschool kids) would work just fine.
It's 100\% a question of Apple being unwilling to allow unauthorized code to run on their devices.
There's nothing to see here.oh yeah, you could use multi-touch when you write the program.
Oops. Lazy programmer writes a blog post.
big deal.John</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31241162</id>
	<title>Isn't that title. . .</title>
	<author>MagusSlurpy</author>
	<datestamp>1266864840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>. . . three words too long?</htmltext>
<tokenext>.
. .
three words too long ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>.
. .
three words too long?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220324</id>
	<title>What he is saying...</title>
	<author>sam0737</author>
	<datestamp>1266780360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What he is saying is that there is basically no way Apple or Adobe could do anything to automatically translate a Flash site designed for desktop/laptop to be usable on touch only device like iPad.</p><p>What he is NOT saying is that "Flash is not usable on iPad even with careful, dedicated design"</p><p>I agree with what his points, but I don't get it - what's the big deal!?</p><p>Just like for website to be usable for visual impaired, you better pay good attention to the design instead of relying on the screen reader to do its job. The layout and flow optimized for sighted people is very different from those visual impaired, it's not just about putting "img alt" or correct use of "table" and "ul".<br>Same applies for touchable device, it's not just about Flash...but you need to rethink how user will use it. Or else you will be repeating what MSFT did for Windows Mobile 5, 6, 6.5...</p><p>So is that a big deal? I don't think so. Popular websites already created a dedicated version for iPhone. For those who don't really care about customizing the content dedicated for some devices but would like to create a generic "one size fit all" content, a few tips of "best practices" are all we needed.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What he is saying is that there is basically no way Apple or Adobe could do anything to automatically translate a Flash site designed for desktop/laptop to be usable on touch only device like iPad.What he is NOT saying is that " Flash is not usable on iPad even with careful , dedicated design " I agree with what his points , but I do n't get it - what 's the big deal !
? Just like for website to be usable for visual impaired , you better pay good attention to the design instead of relying on the screen reader to do its job .
The layout and flow optimized for sighted people is very different from those visual impaired , it 's not just about putting " img alt " or correct use of " table " and " ul " .Same applies for touchable device , it 's not just about Flash...but you need to rethink how user will use it .
Or else you will be repeating what MSFT did for Windows Mobile 5 , 6 , 6.5...So is that a big deal ?
I do n't think so .
Popular websites already created a dedicated version for iPhone .
For those who do n't really care about customizing the content dedicated for some devices but would like to create a generic " one size fit all " content , a few tips of " best practices " are all we needed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What he is saying is that there is basically no way Apple or Adobe could do anything to automatically translate a Flash site designed for desktop/laptop to be usable on touch only device like iPad.What he is NOT saying is that "Flash is not usable on iPad even with careful, dedicated design"I agree with what his points, but I don't get it - what's the big deal!
?Just like for website to be usable for visual impaired, you better pay good attention to the design instead of relying on the screen reader to do its job.
The layout and flow optimized for sighted people is very different from those visual impaired, it's not just about putting "img alt" or correct use of "table" and "ul".Same applies for touchable device, it's not just about Flash...but you need to rethink how user will use it.
Or else you will be repeating what MSFT did for Windows Mobile 5, 6, 6.5...So is that a big deal?
I don't think so.
Popular websites already created a dedicated version for iPhone.
For those who don't really care about customizing the content dedicated for some devices but would like to create a generic "one size fit all" content, a few tips of "best practices" are all we needed.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31223268</id>
	<title>Re:Never?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266755040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>"current Flash sites could never be made to work well on any touchscreen device"</p><p>Really? Never? Just off the top of my head, I could envision a button that put the device in "pointer" mode, maybe with scroll buttons where appropriate, and then used the movement of your finger on the touchscreen as either 1:1 or some kind of relative movement of the pointer. There are probably issues with this approach, yes, but it took me <i>seconds</i> to cobble together. Saying that something is impossible as a matter of user interface is silly. You can always change the UI in some way to make it possible, or even good.</p></div><p>Imagine a touch screen that can sense a real hover - as in your finger positioned slightly above the surface<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... how's that for a solution?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" current Flash sites could never be made to work well on any touchscreen device " Really ?
Never ? Just off the top of my head , I could envision a button that put the device in " pointer " mode , maybe with scroll buttons where appropriate , and then used the movement of your finger on the touchscreen as either 1 : 1 or some kind of relative movement of the pointer .
There are probably issues with this approach , yes , but it took me seconds to cobble together .
Saying that something is impossible as a matter of user interface is silly .
You can always change the UI in some way to make it possible , or even good.Imagine a touch screen that can sense a real hover - as in your finger positioned slightly above the surface ... how 's that for a solution ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"current Flash sites could never be made to work well on any touchscreen device"Really?
Never? Just off the top of my head, I could envision a button that put the device in "pointer" mode, maybe with scroll buttons where appropriate, and then used the movement of your finger on the touchscreen as either 1:1 or some kind of relative movement of the pointer.
There are probably issues with this approach, yes, but it took me seconds to cobble together.
Saying that something is impossible as a matter of user interface is silly.
You can always change the UI in some way to make it possible, or even good.Imagine a touch screen that can sense a real hover - as in your finger positioned slightly above the surface ... how's that for a solution?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219348</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219486</id>
	<title>simple solution</title>
	<author>designlabz</author>
	<datestamp>1266776160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>touch to hover, tap or hold to click.</htmltext>
<tokenext>touch to hover , tap or hold to click .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>touch to hover, tap or hold to click.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31223502</id>
	<title>Flash is Fundimentally Flawed. Period.</title>
	<author>pubwvj</author>
	<datestamp>1266756480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Flash is Fundamentally Flawed. Period.<br>It isn't just that Flash is a resource hog.<br>Flash is overwhelmingly used for ads and glitz.<br>Useless.<br>I run with plugins turned off.<br>No Flash.<br>Much pleasanter.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Flash is Fundamentally Flawed .
Period.It is n't just that Flash is a resource hog.Flash is overwhelmingly used for ads and glitz.Useless.I run with plugins turned off.No Flash.Much pleasanter .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Flash is Fundamentally Flawed.
Period.It isn't just that Flash is a resource hog.Flash is overwhelmingly used for ads and glitz.Useless.I run with plugins turned off.No Flash.Much pleasanter.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219508</id>
	<title>Touchscreen is limited</title>
	<author>Spy Handler</author>
	<datestamp>1266776280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Reading TFA and the author's description of the mouseover/click problem, I get the sense that it's not a Flash problem per se but actually a fundamental limitation of the touchscreen interface. Simply put, the mouse/keyboard combination is a vastly more efficient and powerful way of accepting user input than a touchscreen.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Reading TFA and the author 's description of the mouseover/click problem , I get the sense that it 's not a Flash problem per se but actually a fundamental limitation of the touchscreen interface .
Simply put , the mouse/keyboard combination is a vastly more efficient and powerful way of accepting user input than a touchscreen .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Reading TFA and the author's description of the mouseover/click problem, I get the sense that it's not a Flash problem per se but actually a fundamental limitation of the touchscreen interface.
Simply put, the mouse/keyboard combination is a vastly more efficient and powerful way of accepting user input than a touchscreen.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220888</id>
	<title>Re:Ummmm ... Flash 10.1????</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266783240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>What world are you living in.  Flash player will never be open source.  Gnash is the closest you'll get to that, and it can barely even handle Youtube.</htmltext>
<tokenext>What world are you living in .
Flash player will never be open source .
Gnash is the closest you 'll get to that , and it can barely even handle Youtube .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What world are you living in.
Flash player will never be open source.
Gnash is the closest you'll get to that, and it can barely even handle Youtube.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219732</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220496</id>
	<title>Not really an issue</title>
	<author>Cyberllama</author>
	<datestamp>1266781140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Few sites are done *entirely* in flash like this, most of them are promotional sites for Movies and TV shows.  While people do want flash games, most of us really just want flash video content to work on the iPhone.</p><p>The truth of the matter is this: Despite what Steve Jobs wants you to believe, HTML5 will *NOT* replace flash as the video standard on the internet anytime soon.  Let's assume the whole Ogg vs h.264 debate gets settled, there's still the larger issue of there being *no* DRM whatsoever supported within html5.  Does anyone honestly think there's a snowball's chance in hell that the movie studios will allow Hulu to move to a distribution method where it's trivial for ANYONE to simply download content off hulu and watch it whenever without advertisements? It's just not gonna happen.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Few sites are done * entirely * in flash like this , most of them are promotional sites for Movies and TV shows .
While people do want flash games , most of us really just want flash video content to work on the iPhone.The truth of the matter is this : Despite what Steve Jobs wants you to believe , HTML5 will * NOT * replace flash as the video standard on the internet anytime soon .
Let 's assume the whole Ogg vs h.264 debate gets settled , there 's still the larger issue of there being * no * DRM whatsoever supported within html5 .
Does anyone honestly think there 's a snowball 's chance in hell that the movie studios will allow Hulu to move to a distribution method where it 's trivial for ANYONE to simply download content off hulu and watch it whenever without advertisements ?
It 's just not gon na happen .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Few sites are done *entirely* in flash like this, most of them are promotional sites for Movies and TV shows.
While people do want flash games, most of us really just want flash video content to work on the iPhone.The truth of the matter is this: Despite what Steve Jobs wants you to believe, HTML5 will *NOT* replace flash as the video standard on the internet anytime soon.
Let's assume the whole Ogg vs h.264 debate gets settled, there's still the larger issue of there being *no* DRM whatsoever supported within html5.
Does anyone honestly think there's a snowball's chance in hell that the movie studios will allow Hulu to move to a distribution method where it's trivial for ANYONE to simply download content off hulu and watch it whenever without advertisements?
It's just not gonna happen.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31222182</id>
	<title>Re:Bullshit</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266748920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Look at most any Flash video.  The controls only show up on hover.  Look at most games, they involve a hover for tracking (like a crosshairs) &amp; a click to fire.  While hover is being used more in Web 2.0 apps now, it was most certainly more common in Flash apps for much longer.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Look at most any Flash video .
The controls only show up on hover .
Look at most games , they involve a hover for tracking ( like a crosshairs ) &amp; a click to fire .
While hover is being used more in Web 2.0 apps now , it was most certainly more common in Flash apps for much longer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Look at most any Flash video.
The controls only show up on hover.
Look at most games, they involve a hover for tracking (like a crosshairs) &amp; a click to fire.
While hover is being used more in Web 2.0 apps now, it was most certainly more common in Flash apps for much longer.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219476</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31226582</id>
	<title>Re:Flawed Logic in OP</title>
	<author>mysidia</author>
	<datestamp>1266781560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
Actually... i'd go for differentiating between <b>touching</b> the screen and <b>pressing</b> the screen.
</p><p>
In other words... just touch the display to hover, push down a little bit and lift up, if you want to "click"
</p><p>
Or perhaps just lifting up indicates a click.. and as long as your hand is still in contact with the display, you haven't clicked yet<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually... i 'd go for differentiating between touching the screen and pressing the screen .
In other words... just touch the display to hover , push down a little bit and lift up , if you want to " click " Or perhaps just lifting up indicates a click.. and as long as your hand is still in contact with the display , you have n't clicked yet : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
Actually... i'd go for differentiating between touching the screen and pressing the screen.
In other words... just touch the display to hover, push down a little bit and lift up, if you want to "click"

Or perhaps just lifting up indicates a click.. and as long as your hand is still in contact with the display, you haven't clicked yet :)
</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219872</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31226424</id>
	<title>Re:The App Store</title>
	<author>Prometheas</author>
	<datestamp>1266779460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Who ever said there needs to be just one reason? Your proposed reason is an excellent one (from the business perspective), no doubt, but banning Flash is just a Great Idea for a metric ton of reasons<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</htmltext>
<tokenext>Who ever said there needs to be just one reason ?
Your proposed reason is an excellent one ( from the business perspective ) , no doubt , but banning Flash is just a Great Idea for a metric ton of reasons ; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Who ever said there needs to be just one reason?
Your proposed reason is an excellent one (from the business perspective), no doubt, but banning Flash is just a Great Idea for a metric ton of reasons ;)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219576</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220420</id>
	<title>Re:Not entirely true</title>
	<author>CortoMaltese</author>
	<datestamp>1266780840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://maemo.nokia.com/features/maemo-browser/gestures/" title="nokia.com">http://maemo.nokia.com/features/maemo-browser/gestures/</a> [nokia.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //maemo.nokia.com/features/maemo-browser/gestures/ [ nokia.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://maemo.nokia.com/features/maemo-browser/gestures/ [nokia.com]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219446</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220720</id>
	<title>Re:Eat my balls!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266782280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>I think what my friend here is trying to say is that perhaps it is the touchscreen input that is "fundamentally flawed."</i></p><p>I don't know how you get that out of "Eat my balls" and "cock-chugging mac faggot"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think what my friend here is trying to say is that perhaps it is the touchscreen input that is " fundamentally flawed .
" I do n't know how you get that out of " Eat my balls " and " cock-chugging mac faggot "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think what my friend here is trying to say is that perhaps it is the touchscreen input that is "fundamentally flawed.
"I don't know how you get that out of "Eat my balls" and "cock-chugging mac faggot"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219496</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31221524</id>
	<title>Re:I don't understand the hate.</title>
	<author>farble1670</author>
	<datestamp>1266744480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>because the average person doesn't know or care that flash is resource intensive. they just want a way to access all of those videos and silly games. they know their phone can already play videos and games. why can't it play flash videos and games?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>because the average person does n't know or care that flash is resource intensive .
they just want a way to access all of those videos and silly games .
they know their phone can already play videos and games .
why ca n't it play flash videos and games ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>because the average person doesn't know or care that flash is resource intensive.
they just want a way to access all of those videos and silly games.
they know their phone can already play videos and games.
why can't it play flash videos and games?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219686</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31226592</id>
	<title>DUh duh Duh</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266781740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The guy who wrote the rant isn't a very good Flash dev, otherwise he/she'd know what can be done:</p><p>onPress = function() { }</p><p>can be used to show stuff based on a finger (pointer) being held, and moved.... (ie: say you used to show a menu on "mouseOver", just change it to show on press)</p><p>onRelease = function() { }</p><p>Is traditionally used for the "click", so no difference here. It gets triggered when the finger lifts up.</p><p>Yeah I know, everyone would have to to make 5 minute edits to their Flash? Gee whiz. Welcome to the march of progress. Besides, I'd rather have SOME Flash functionality than NO Flash functionality. Of for that matter, detect the browsing agent and redirect to an appropriate page for that device/browser?</p><p>OH here's another thought for the genius in the OP's blog: Since Adobe would be making a special plugin for the Iphone OS version of Safari, isn't it safe to assume that Adobe would make some concessions, such as making "onPress" and "mouseOver" BOTH trigger?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The guy who wrote the rant is n't a very good Flash dev , otherwise he/she 'd know what can be done : onPress = function ( ) { } can be used to show stuff based on a finger ( pointer ) being held , and moved.... ( ie : say you used to show a menu on " mouseOver " , just change it to show on press ) onRelease = function ( ) { } Is traditionally used for the " click " , so no difference here .
It gets triggered when the finger lifts up.Yeah I know , everyone would have to to make 5 minute edits to their Flash ?
Gee whiz .
Welcome to the march of progress .
Besides , I 'd rather have SOME Flash functionality than NO Flash functionality .
Of for that matter , detect the browsing agent and redirect to an appropriate page for that device/browser ? OH here 's another thought for the genius in the OP 's blog : Since Adobe would be making a special plugin for the Iphone OS version of Safari , is n't it safe to assume that Adobe would make some concessions , such as making " onPress " and " mouseOver " BOTH trigger ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The guy who wrote the rant isn't a very good Flash dev, otherwise he/she'd know what can be done:onPress = function() { }can be used to show stuff based on a finger (pointer) being held, and moved.... (ie: say you used to show a menu on "mouseOver", just change it to show on press)onRelease = function() { }Is traditionally used for the "click", so no difference here.
It gets triggered when the finger lifts up.Yeah I know, everyone would have to to make 5 minute edits to their Flash?
Gee whiz.
Welcome to the march of progress.
Besides, I'd rather have SOME Flash functionality than NO Flash functionality.
Of for that matter, detect the browsing agent and redirect to an appropriate page for that device/browser?OH here's another thought for the genius in the OP's blog: Since Adobe would be making a special plugin for the Iphone OS version of Safari, isn't it safe to assume that Adobe would make some concessions, such as making "onPress" and "mouseOver" BOTH trigger?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31221006</id>
	<title>check out the dudes vid</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266784080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>what a pathetic figure.</p><p>macfags get more slavish in their devotion every time i look.</p><p>scary and sad at the same time!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>what a pathetic figure.macfags get more slavish in their devotion every time i look.scary and sad at the same time !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>what a pathetic figure.macfags get more slavish in their devotion every time i look.scary and sad at the same time!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220444</id>
	<title>Re:I don't understand the hate.</title>
	<author>bemymonkey</author>
	<datestamp>1266780900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Now if only you could go to any video site that works fine in Flash and get videos in H264... If that were the case, nobody would be complaining.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Now if only you could go to any video site that works fine in Flash and get videos in H264... If that were the case , nobody would be complaining .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now if only you could go to any video site that works fine in Flash and get videos in H264... If that were the case, nobody would be complaining.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219686</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219924</id>
	<title>Re:Translation</title>
	<author>trapnest</author>
	<datestamp>1266778320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>That site is absolutely terrible.<br>
Whoever thought that jarring piano beatings should accompany mouse-overs should be shot.<br>
Not to mention the effects on the square menu thing.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:(</htmltext>
<tokenext>That site is absolutely terrible .
Whoever thought that jarring piano beatings should accompany mouse-overs should be shot .
Not to mention the effects on the square menu thing .
: (</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That site is absolutely terrible.
Whoever thought that jarring piano beatings should accompany mouse-overs should be shot.
Not to mention the effects on the square menu thing.
:(</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219604</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31223954</id>
	<title>um, how about a virtual mouse pointer?</title>
	<author>Nyder</author>
	<datestamp>1266760020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Don't see what the problem is.  For flash, all you'd have to do is make a "virtual mouse pointer" which you control with your finger, for mouseovers and what not.</p><p>Guess they don't pay ya for your creative thinking.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't see what the problem is .
For flash , all you 'd have to do is make a " virtual mouse pointer " which you control with your finger , for mouseovers and what not.Guess they do n't pay ya for your creative thinking .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't see what the problem is.
For flash, all you'd have to do is make a "virtual mouse pointer" which you control with your finger, for mouseovers and what not.Guess they don't pay ya for your creative thinking.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219868</id>
	<title>Hovering is overused</title>
	<author>fm6</author>
	<datestamp>1266778020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hovering can be helpful for providing a little supplemental information. But if your UI relies on it for basic functionality, there's probably a better way to do things. Designers love to use hovering when clicking would actually make more sense. Coolness factor, I guess</p><p>What drives me crazy is drop-down menus that are triggered by hovering. I have some neurological issues that mess with my hand-eye coordination, so I'm always triggering them by accident.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hovering can be helpful for providing a little supplemental information .
But if your UI relies on it for basic functionality , there 's probably a better way to do things .
Designers love to use hovering when clicking would actually make more sense .
Coolness factor , I guessWhat drives me crazy is drop-down menus that are triggered by hovering .
I have some neurological issues that mess with my hand-eye coordination , so I 'm always triggering them by accident .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hovering can be helpful for providing a little supplemental information.
But if your UI relies on it for basic functionality, there's probably a better way to do things.
Designers love to use hovering when clicking would actually make more sense.
Coolness factor, I guessWhat drives me crazy is drop-down menus that are triggered by hovering.
I have some neurological issues that mess with my hand-eye coordination, so I'm always triggering them by accident.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219536</id>
	<title>But ummm....</title>
	<author>Maury Markowitz</author>
	<datestamp>1266776400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>One is tempted to divide the flash world in two -- the majority of the flash apps are advertising plug-ins, while a minority are useful applications like games and such.</p><p>The former should simply not be used on mobile devices. Most web pages are too filled with crud as it is, flashing ads that I don't ever look at are nothing more than a waste of space, time and power. On a mobile device this moves from annoying to a real problem.</p><p>The games, on the other hand, I'd love to have. Sadly, in this case I agree fully with Jobs - Flash is a buggy pile of shod. Something close to 100\% of the crashes I have on my Macs are Flash related.</p><p>Adobe has a long history of doing nothing and then complaining when someone else gets fed up and does it for them -- TrueType, Color PS, PDF and other examples come to mind. When this happens, they get scared and fix whatever the problems were. So the good news is that I expect Flash will get a whole lot better in the near future. The bad news is that I still don't want it in most cases.</p><p>Maury</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>One is tempted to divide the flash world in two -- the majority of the flash apps are advertising plug-ins , while a minority are useful applications like games and such.The former should simply not be used on mobile devices .
Most web pages are too filled with crud as it is , flashing ads that I do n't ever look at are nothing more than a waste of space , time and power .
On a mobile device this moves from annoying to a real problem.The games , on the other hand , I 'd love to have .
Sadly , in this case I agree fully with Jobs - Flash is a buggy pile of shod .
Something close to 100 \ % of the crashes I have on my Macs are Flash related.Adobe has a long history of doing nothing and then complaining when someone else gets fed up and does it for them -- TrueType , Color PS , PDF and other examples come to mind .
When this happens , they get scared and fix whatever the problems were .
So the good news is that I expect Flash will get a whole lot better in the near future .
The bad news is that I still do n't want it in most cases.Maury</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One is tempted to divide the flash world in two -- the majority of the flash apps are advertising plug-ins, while a minority are useful applications like games and such.The former should simply not be used on mobile devices.
Most web pages are too filled with crud as it is, flashing ads that I don't ever look at are nothing more than a waste of space, time and power.
On a mobile device this moves from annoying to a real problem.The games, on the other hand, I'd love to have.
Sadly, in this case I agree fully with Jobs - Flash is a buggy pile of shod.
Something close to 100\% of the crashes I have on my Macs are Flash related.Adobe has a long history of doing nothing and then complaining when someone else gets fed up and does it for them -- TrueType, Color PS, PDF and other examples come to mind.
When this happens, they get scared and fix whatever the problems were.
So the good news is that I expect Flash will get a whole lot better in the near future.
The bad news is that I still don't want it in most cases.Maury</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220900</id>
	<title>Re:Flawed Logic in OP</title>
	<author>toadlife</author>
	<datestamp>1266783300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>HTC recently took out <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2009/08/14/htc-files-patent-for-capacitive-stylus-with-resistive-accuracy/" title="engadget.com">a patent for a stylus</a> [engadget.com] design that works on a capacitive screen, but with "resistive accuracy", so I'm sure that the future of (non iphone?) touchscreen phones is capacitive screens with stylus support. The proximity sensor idea is great. My touch Pro 2 already has <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6xakUmz1zwc" title="youtube.com">one</a> [youtube.com] that can detect something as little as a finger.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>HTC recently took out a patent for a stylus [ engadget.com ] design that works on a capacitive screen , but with " resistive accuracy " , so I 'm sure that the future of ( non iphone ?
) touchscreen phones is capacitive screens with stylus support .
The proximity sensor idea is great .
My touch Pro 2 already has one [ youtube.com ] that can detect something as little as a finger .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>HTC recently took out a patent for a stylus [engadget.com] design that works on a capacitive screen, but with "resistive accuracy", so I'm sure that the future of (non iphone?
) touchscreen phones is capacitive screens with stylus support.
The proximity sensor idea is great.
My touch Pro 2 already has one [youtube.com] that can detect something as little as a finger.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219872</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31223158</id>
	<title>Re:That's not why iDevices don't support flash</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266754380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Because the number of people using html5 is like 10 or 20X that of Flash. Oh wait Never mind! I have that backwards. Are you dense or something? The whole point is that there is a huge base of Flash programmers out there who could compete with Apple apps if Flash was allowed to have been used on the device. This is all about the $$ as usual, and not about user choice at all. I can't wait to see this tablet fail.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Because the number of people using html5 is like 10 or 20X that of Flash .
Oh wait Never mind !
I have that backwards .
Are you dense or something ?
The whole point is that there is a huge base of Flash programmers out there who could compete with Apple apps if Flash was allowed to have been used on the device .
This is all about the $ $ as usual , and not about user choice at all .
I ca n't wait to see this tablet fail .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because the number of people using html5 is like 10 or 20X that of Flash.
Oh wait Never mind!
I have that backwards.
Are you dense or something?
The whole point is that there is a huge base of Flash programmers out there who could compete with Apple apps if Flash was allowed to have been used on the device.
This is all about the $$ as usual, and not about user choice at all.
I can't wait to see this tablet fail.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219780</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219614</id>
	<title>Re:Not entirely true</title>
	<author>Runefox</author>
	<datestamp>1266776760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, you can actually use a trackpad without buttons, too. A quick tap is a single click, a double-tap+hold is a click and drag.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , you can actually use a trackpad without buttons , too .
A quick tap is a single click , a double-tap + hold is a click and drag .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, you can actually use a trackpad without buttons, too.
A quick tap is a single click, a double-tap+hold is a click and drag.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219494</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31221102</id>
	<title>Re:Agreed, and the mouseover is elsewhere too.</title>
	<author>slashkitty</author>
	<datestamp>1266784740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I came here to say just that.  There is a lot of javascript / dhtml sites that use it.  There was an advanced html 5 image editor, that was shown as an example of why you don't need flash.  The thing is, it just doesn't work well on iphone.   Touch and drag on the iphone tries to move the page, it doesn't allow lines drawn or drag and drop things to be moved.   Until there is a way to "page lock" or other solution so that drag works, many functions on the iphone or any touch device will not work.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I came here to say just that .
There is a lot of javascript / dhtml sites that use it .
There was an advanced html 5 image editor , that was shown as an example of why you do n't need flash .
The thing is , it just does n't work well on iphone .
Touch and drag on the iphone tries to move the page , it does n't allow lines drawn or drag and drop things to be moved .
Until there is a way to " page lock " or other solution so that drag works , many functions on the iphone or any touch device will not work .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I came here to say just that.
There is a lot of javascript / dhtml sites that use it.
There was an advanced html 5 image editor, that was shown as an example of why you don't need flash.
The thing is, it just doesn't work well on iphone.
Touch and drag on the iphone tries to move the page, it doesn't allow lines drawn or drag and drop things to be moved.
Until there is a way to "page lock" or other solution so that drag works, many functions on the iphone or any touch device will not work.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219422</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219600</id>
	<title>Re:Not entirely true</title>
	<author>Jeff DeMaagd</author>
	<datestamp>1266776700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>From my understanding of Apple's capacitive sensing, it should be able to simulate variations in pressure by reading the rough diameter of touch.  A light touch would have a small contact area for mouseover, a "click" could be a somewhat heavier touch or tap.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>From my understanding of Apple 's capacitive sensing , it should be able to simulate variations in pressure by reading the rough diameter of touch .
A light touch would have a small contact area for mouseover , a " click " could be a somewhat heavier touch or tap .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From my understanding of Apple's capacitive sensing, it should be able to simulate variations in pressure by reading the rough diameter of touch.
A light touch would have a small contact area for mouseover, a "click" could be a somewhat heavier touch or tap.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219340</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220686</id>
	<title>Huh?</title>
	<author>nnnnnnn</author>
	<datestamp>1266782100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I can't stand this Steve Jobs perpetuated nonsense anymore. Flash is perfectly fine on touch devices. It's fine on Nokia n900, its fine on HP tx2000, and all other touch devices not blessed by the almighty Jobs. I would rather be able to see a video and not have hover, than have nothing. And if the "best browsing experience" iPad had a stylus, it could have had hover. Yes, you can have hover on capacitive displays. http://www.n-trig.com/Content.aspx?Page=DualModeTechnology Either people are misinformed or they refuse to listen. And I will proudly wear my Flamebait score on this post.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I ca n't stand this Steve Jobs perpetuated nonsense anymore .
Flash is perfectly fine on touch devices .
It 's fine on Nokia n900 , its fine on HP tx2000 , and all other touch devices not blessed by the almighty Jobs .
I would rather be able to see a video and not have hover , than have nothing .
And if the " best browsing experience " iPad had a stylus , it could have had hover .
Yes , you can have hover on capacitive displays .
http : //www.n-trig.com/Content.aspx ? Page = DualModeTechnology Either people are misinformed or they refuse to listen .
And I will proudly wear my Flamebait score on this post .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can't stand this Steve Jobs perpetuated nonsense anymore.
Flash is perfectly fine on touch devices.
It's fine on Nokia n900, its fine on HP tx2000, and all other touch devices not blessed by the almighty Jobs.
I would rather be able to see a video and not have hover, than have nothing.
And if the "best browsing experience" iPad had a stylus, it could have had hover.
Yes, you can have hover on capacitive displays.
http://www.n-trig.com/Content.aspx?Page=DualModeTechnology Either people are misinformed or they refuse to listen.
And I will proudly wear my Flamebait score on this post.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219478</id>
	<title>How did this reach main page?</title>
	<author>Jorl17</author>
	<datestamp>1266776160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I find this article just nothing at all. It is an opinion -- an incomplete and pretty obvious one. How did it get to<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/.'s main page?</htmltext>
<tokenext>I find this article just nothing at all .
It is an opinion -- an incomplete and pretty obvious one .
How did it get to / .
's main page ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I find this article just nothing at all.
It is an opinion -- an incomplete and pretty obvious one.
How did it get to /.
's main page?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31226508</id>
	<title>Re:Opinion of a UI Game Developer who leverages Fl</title>
	<author>Prometheas</author>
	<datestamp>1266780420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm a web professional of 13 years experience... and it's my professional opinion that websites ought to be built with open standards and web technologies<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p><p>On the UX tip, it's certainly <em>possible</em> to design and implement Flash content that doesn't <em>rely</em> on hover states, but the story's main point is that a great number of existing websites would have to be rewritten to do so... the thing is, while you're rewriting, you may as well just go standards.</p><p>I presently work at a major media company in NYC that has websites that use plenty of Flash (including a number of children's sites that are WAY flash heavy); my team produces both HTML and Flash-based sites. And, being that I'd get paid either way (forgive me for raising that point, but it does seem like your viewpoint is likely to suffer from no small amount bias, since your livelihood is presently tied to Flash development), I'd still always recommend going HTML.</p><p>That said, Flash does offer a great "fallback" solution for rendering SVG, Canvas content, and audio / video media in browsers that don't yet support HTML 5<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm a web professional of 13 years experience... and it 's my professional opinion that websites ought to be built with open standards and web technologies ; ) On the UX tip , it 's certainly possible to design and implement Flash content that does n't rely on hover states , but the story 's main point is that a great number of existing websites would have to be rewritten to do so... the thing is , while you 're rewriting , you may as well just go standards.I presently work at a major media company in NYC that has websites that use plenty of Flash ( including a number of children 's sites that are WAY flash heavy ) ; my team produces both HTML and Flash-based sites .
And , being that I 'd get paid either way ( forgive me for raising that point , but it does seem like your viewpoint is likely to suffer from no small amount bias , since your livelihood is presently tied to Flash development ) , I 'd still always recommend going HTML.That said , Flash does offer a great " fallback " solution for rendering SVG , Canvas content , and audio / video media in browsers that do n't yet support HTML 5 : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm a web professional of 13 years experience... and it's my professional opinion that websites ought to be built with open standards and web technologies ;)On the UX tip, it's certainly possible to design and implement Flash content that doesn't rely on hover states, but the story's main point is that a great number of existing websites would have to be rewritten to do so... the thing is, while you're rewriting, you may as well just go standards.I presently work at a major media company in NYC that has websites that use plenty of Flash (including a number of children's sites that are WAY flash heavy); my team produces both HTML and Flash-based sites.
And, being that I'd get paid either way (forgive me for raising that point, but it does seem like your viewpoint is likely to suffer from no small amount bias, since your livelihood is presently tied to Flash development), I'd still always recommend going HTML.That said, Flash does offer a great "fallback" solution for rendering SVG, Canvas content, and audio / video media in browsers that don't yet support HTML 5 :)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219898</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220060</id>
	<title>The title of this article is wrong</title>
	<author>Achillez</author>
	<datestamp>1266779160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I find it interesting that the title is why "Flash is fundamentally flawed on touchscreen devices" and not "Why Certain Touchscreen Devices (aka iPad) are limited and will not work with Flash". This is obviously an attack on the Flash framework as a way to redirect criticism away from the iPad. Apple has clearly mistepped here and now they are trying to do damage control. My understanding is that other touchscreen devices that are coming out in the market place will support Flash (e.g., HP Slate), and it will probably be seamless. I was quite interested in the iPad when the news came out but now that it won't support Flash, and locks users into the monopolistic "App Store" I am no longer interested.  Only Apple would try something like this... they seem to be stuck in the monopolistic 90s.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I find it interesting that the title is why " Flash is fundamentally flawed on touchscreen devices " and not " Why Certain Touchscreen Devices ( aka iPad ) are limited and will not work with Flash " .
This is obviously an attack on the Flash framework as a way to redirect criticism away from the iPad .
Apple has clearly mistepped here and now they are trying to do damage control .
My understanding is that other touchscreen devices that are coming out in the market place will support Flash ( e.g. , HP Slate ) , and it will probably be seamless .
I was quite interested in the iPad when the news came out but now that it wo n't support Flash , and locks users into the monopolistic " App Store " I am no longer interested .
Only Apple would try something like this... they seem to be stuck in the monopolistic 90s .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I find it interesting that the title is why "Flash is fundamentally flawed on touchscreen devices" and not "Why Certain Touchscreen Devices (aka iPad) are limited and will not work with Flash".
This is obviously an attack on the Flash framework as a way to redirect criticism away from the iPad.
Apple has clearly mistepped here and now they are trying to do damage control.
My understanding is that other touchscreen devices that are coming out in the market place will support Flash (e.g., HP Slate), and it will probably be seamless.
I was quite interested in the iPad when the news came out but now that it won't support Flash, and locks users into the monopolistic "App Store" I am no longer interested.
Only Apple would try something like this... they seem to be stuck in the monopolistic 90s.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220706</id>
	<title>Re:Flawed Logic in OP</title>
	<author>peragrin</author>
	<datestamp>1266782220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So use a stylus they make them for such screens.  however you can't use three stylus's at the same time.  however if you have menus you can't work without a stylus then that is a fault of the designer of the interface.  The touchscreen windows desktop is about as touch friendly as plugging a mouse into a Unix or dos command line.  Sure if you load the right app it works, but it is useless for the majority of the time.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So use a stylus they make them for such screens .
however you ca n't use three stylus 's at the same time .
however if you have menus you ca n't work without a stylus then that is a fault of the designer of the interface .
The touchscreen windows desktop is about as touch friendly as plugging a mouse into a Unix or dos command line .
Sure if you load the right app it works , but it is useless for the majority of the time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So use a stylus they make them for such screens.
however you can't use three stylus's at the same time.
however if you have menus you can't work without a stylus then that is a fault of the designer of the interface.
The touchscreen windows desktop is about as touch friendly as plugging a mouse into a Unix or dos command line.
Sure if you load the right app it works, but it is useless for the majority of the time.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219872</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31224734</id>
	<title>Re:Eat my balls!</title>
	<author>Tempete</author>
	<datestamp>1266765240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>The App Store is a selling point for Apple. If they allowed Flash Apple would lose this as a reason for people to choose the iPhone over any other phone.<br> <br>
It does effect their bottom line, it doesn't really matter how much the store itself brings in.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The App Store is a selling point for Apple .
If they allowed Flash Apple would lose this as a reason for people to choose the iPhone over any other phone .
It does effect their bottom line , it does n't really matter how much the store itself brings in .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The App Store is a selling point for Apple.
If they allowed Flash Apple would lose this as a reason for people to choose the iPhone over any other phone.
It does effect their bottom line, it doesn't really matter how much the store itself brings in.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220298</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31226372</id>
	<title>Re:Translation</title>
	<author>Prometheas</author>
	<datestamp>1266778980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>He's talking about <em>existing</em> sites. Sure, one could rewrite existing sites so that there is no reliance on hovers, but at that point you really ought to be considering web standards.</htmltext>
<tokenext>He 's talking about existing sites .
Sure , one could rewrite existing sites so that there is no reliance on hovers , but at that point you really ought to be considering web standards .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>He's talking about existing sites.
Sure, one could rewrite existing sites so that there is no reliance on hovers, but at that point you really ought to be considering web standards.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219604</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219476</id>
	<title>Bullshit</title>
	<author>vadim\_t</author>
	<datestamp>1266776160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>First, the amount of hover usage in flash isn't that great. There are tons of completely static animations that don't have any interaction of any sort. And there are plenty games that just require clicking in place. A lot of flash content that gets passed around is stuff like the Kenya and Magical Trevor animations.</p><p>Second, the lack of hover is simply a lack of imagination on Apple's part. On my N900 for instance, I can have a pointer that works for flash by starting to drag from the border of the screen. Now, it's not 100\% perfect and could be done better, but it works, and I played <a href="http://www.ferryhalim.com/orisinal/g3/bells.htm" title="ferryhalim.com">Winter Bells</a> [ferryhalim.com] quite successfully on my N900.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>First , the amount of hover usage in flash is n't that great .
There are tons of completely static animations that do n't have any interaction of any sort .
And there are plenty games that just require clicking in place .
A lot of flash content that gets passed around is stuff like the Kenya and Magical Trevor animations.Second , the lack of hover is simply a lack of imagination on Apple 's part .
On my N900 for instance , I can have a pointer that works for flash by starting to drag from the border of the screen .
Now , it 's not 100 \ % perfect and could be done better , but it works , and I played Winter Bells [ ferryhalim.com ] quite successfully on my N900 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>First, the amount of hover usage in flash isn't that great.
There are tons of completely static animations that don't have any interaction of any sort.
And there are plenty games that just require clicking in place.
A lot of flash content that gets passed around is stuff like the Kenya and Magical Trevor animations.Second, the lack of hover is simply a lack of imagination on Apple's part.
On my N900 for instance, I can have a pointer that works for flash by starting to drag from the border of the screen.
Now, it's not 100\% perfect and could be done better, but it works, and I played Winter Bells [ferryhalim.com] quite successfully on my N900.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220004</id>
	<title>Re:What???</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266778860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>He's not saying that it can't be done.  In fact, he states quite clearly in TFA that it CAN be done.</p><p>His argument is that when people say they want to see the iPad "support flash" what they mean is "support flash applications that already exist".  And his point is that without recoding those applications to work with the assumption that people using them might be using touchscreens, that desire isn't doable.</p><p>He outlines a number of generic ways that existing applications might be "forced" to work with touchscreens even if they weren't coded with touchscreens in mind and gives reasons why he thinks those ways wouldn't work.  Or would just piss people off more than they would help.</p><p>I'm not sure that I agree with all of his points, but his argument isn't the strawman that you make it out to be.  It's more subtle than that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>He 's not saying that it ca n't be done .
In fact , he states quite clearly in TFA that it CAN be done.His argument is that when people say they want to see the iPad " support flash " what they mean is " support flash applications that already exist " .
And his point is that without recoding those applications to work with the assumption that people using them might be using touchscreens , that desire is n't doable.He outlines a number of generic ways that existing applications might be " forced " to work with touchscreens even if they were n't coded with touchscreens in mind and gives reasons why he thinks those ways would n't work .
Or would just piss people off more than they would help.I 'm not sure that I agree with all of his points , but his argument is n't the strawman that you make it out to be .
It 's more subtle than that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>He's not saying that it can't be done.
In fact, he states quite clearly in TFA that it CAN be done.His argument is that when people say they want to see the iPad "support flash" what they mean is "support flash applications that already exist".
And his point is that without recoding those applications to work with the assumption that people using them might be using touchscreens, that desire isn't doable.He outlines a number of generic ways that existing applications might be "forced" to work with touchscreens even if they weren't coded with touchscreens in mind and gives reasons why he thinks those ways wouldn't work.
Or would just piss people off more than they would help.I'm not sure that I agree with all of his points, but his argument isn't the strawman that you make it out to be.
It's more subtle than that.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219388</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31225936</id>
	<title>Re:Translation</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266774420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Finally, if a site didn't work properly, oh well, shit happens. As it stands all Flash sites are GUARANTEED not to work at all.</p></div><p>This is all well and fine for the Windows and Linux world, but Apple doesn't want to tarnish the mantra of "It just works" by supporting the already crummy Flash.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Finally , if a site did n't work properly , oh well , shit happens .
As it stands all Flash sites are GUARANTEED not to work at all.This is all well and fine for the Windows and Linux world , but Apple does n't want to tarnish the mantra of " It just works " by supporting the already crummy Flash .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Finally, if a site didn't work properly, oh well, shit happens.
As it stands all Flash sites are GUARANTEED not to work at all.This is all well and fine for the Windows and Linux world, but Apple doesn't want to tarnish the mantra of "It just works" by supporting the already crummy Flash.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219604</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31226518</id>
	<title>Re:The title of this article is wrong</title>
	<author>Prometheas</author>
	<datestamp>1266780480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>How exactly is this a misstep? Are we talking from a market success perspective, or from a Flash developers' perspective?</htmltext>
<tokenext>How exactly is this a misstep ?
Are we talking from a market success perspective , or from a Flash developers ' perspective ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How exactly is this a misstep?
Are we talking from a market success perspective, or from a Flash developers' perspective?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220060</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31222104</id>
	<title>Re:Opinion of a UI Game Developer who leverages Fl</title>
	<author>martinX</author>
	<datestamp>1266748380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>How on earth did this get modded +4 Funny? This place cracks me up sometimes.</htmltext>
<tokenext>How on earth did this get modded + 4 Funny ?
This place cracks me up sometimes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How on earth did this get modded +4 Funny?
This place cracks me up sometimes.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219898</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220160</id>
	<title>Re:The real reason is flash would cost Apple $</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266779580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Bullshit.  The real reason is that Steve Jobs will never ship code that Apple doesn't own on the iPad/iPhone.<br> <br>Code you don't own results in bugs you can't fix (and Flash has oh so many bugs), resulting in Apple having to rely on another company, Adobe.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Bullshit .
The real reason is that Steve Jobs will never ship code that Apple does n't own on the iPad/iPhone .
Code you do n't own results in bugs you ca n't fix ( and Flash has oh so many bugs ) , resulting in Apple having to rely on another company , Adobe .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bullshit.
The real reason is that Steve Jobs will never ship code that Apple doesn't own on the iPad/iPhone.
Code you don't own results in bugs you can't fix (and Flash has oh so many bugs), resulting in Apple having to rely on another company, Adobe.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219516</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31225098</id>
	<title>Re:And hover works fine on Nokia...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266768060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Agreed. As a fellow 5800 user, I actually like the resistive touchscreen much more than the capacitive one on my friends' iPhones. It seems much more precise and for finer stuff I can use the stylus instead of a finger that blocks 90\% of what I'm pressing. On an iPhone I have to guess at the centroid of my fingerprint (which varies based on how hard I press, huzzah!) whereas I can use a corner of a fingernail on my 5800 and press exactly where I intended to. I do wish I had multitouch, though, because that multiple-sliding-blocks game is cool.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:P
<br>- fractoid-with-mod-points</htmltext>
<tokenext>Agreed .
As a fellow 5800 user , I actually like the resistive touchscreen much more than the capacitive one on my friends ' iPhones .
It seems much more precise and for finer stuff I can use the stylus instead of a finger that blocks 90 \ % of what I 'm pressing .
On an iPhone I have to guess at the centroid of my fingerprint ( which varies based on how hard I press , huzzah !
) whereas I can use a corner of a fingernail on my 5800 and press exactly where I intended to .
I do wish I had multitouch , though , because that multiple-sliding-blocks game is cool .
: P - fractoid-with-mod-points</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Agreed.
As a fellow 5800 user, I actually like the resistive touchscreen much more than the capacitive one on my friends' iPhones.
It seems much more precise and for finer stuff I can use the stylus instead of a finger that blocks 90\% of what I'm pressing.
On an iPhone I have to guess at the centroid of my fingerprint (which varies based on how hard I press, huzzah!
) whereas I can use a corner of a fingernail on my 5800 and press exactly where I intended to.
I do wish I had multitouch, though, because that multiple-sliding-blocks game is cool.
:P
- fractoid-with-mod-points</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220918</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220104</id>
	<title>Re:Not entirely true</title>
	<author>Sir\_Lewk</author>
	<datestamp>1266779340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Honestly, it is not very hard to be smarter than the engineers at Adobe.  Have you ever read the blog Adobe's single flash linux developer has?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Honestly , it is not very hard to be smarter than the engineers at Adobe .
Have you ever read the blog Adobe 's single flash linux developer has ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Honestly, it is not very hard to be smarter than the engineers at Adobe.
Have you ever read the blog Adobe's single flash linux developer has?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219610</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31221644</id>
	<title>Touchscreen+</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266745140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sounds like the BlackBerry Storm touchscreen with press would work.....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sounds like the BlackBerry Storm touchscreen with press would work.... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sounds like the BlackBerry Storm touchscreen with press would work.....</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219496</id>
	<title>Re:Eat my balls!</title>
	<author>MacDork</author>
	<datestamp>1266776220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think what my friend here is trying to say is that perhaps it is the touchscreen input that is "fundamentally flawed." The same argument could be applied to CSS hover and javascript mouseovers.  Should Apple simply dispose of Safari on the iPad, because it is "fundamentally flawed?"  There are lots of sites that use css hover menus.  Poor iPad users will have a bad experience with those sites, so should we then remove the browser? </p><p>We all know Apple bans Flash because it would allow third party apps that don't have to forfeit 30\% of revenue to Apple. Plain and simple.  All other explanations are just someone's absurd mental gymnastics to justify Apple's stupid and shortsighted iPhone OS policies.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think what my friend here is trying to say is that perhaps it is the touchscreen input that is " fundamentally flawed .
" The same argument could be applied to CSS hover and javascript mouseovers .
Should Apple simply dispose of Safari on the iPad , because it is " fundamentally flawed ?
" There are lots of sites that use css hover menus .
Poor iPad users will have a bad experience with those sites , so should we then remove the browser ?
We all know Apple bans Flash because it would allow third party apps that do n't have to forfeit 30 \ % of revenue to Apple .
Plain and simple .
All other explanations are just someone 's absurd mental gymnastics to justify Apple 's stupid and shortsighted iPhone OS policies .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think what my friend here is trying to say is that perhaps it is the touchscreen input that is "fundamentally flawed.
" The same argument could be applied to CSS hover and javascript mouseovers.
Should Apple simply dispose of Safari on the iPad, because it is "fundamentally flawed?
"  There are lots of sites that use css hover menus.
Poor iPad users will have a bad experience with those sites, so should we then remove the browser?
We all know Apple bans Flash because it would allow third party apps that don't have to forfeit 30\% of revenue to Apple.
Plain and simple.
All other explanations are just someone's absurd mental gymnastics to justify Apple's stupid and shortsighted iPhone OS policies.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219286</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220860</id>
	<title>flash</title>
	<author>suzieque</author>
	<datestamp>1266783060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Most of my devices tend to crash with flash..either says something about flash, or about me..!!<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;-)</htmltext>
<tokenext>Most of my devices tend to crash with flash..either says something about flash , or about me.. ! !
; - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Most of my devices tend to crash with flash..either says something about flash, or about me..!!
;-)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219426</id>
	<title>Not to defend Flash, but...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266775980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm in no way a supporter of Flash, but how is this any different than anything else in the browser with a<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:hover state?  With the advent of HTML5 and the Canvas element, which does work on the iPad et al, you're going to run into the same issues if you program them the same way.  Now I get his concern that Flash devs would have to rewrite a lot of their already written stuff to work on the iPad if it allowed Flash, but I fail to see how this is any different from the multitude of websites that use hover drop downs for navigation and the like.</p><p>The point that we shouldn't be relying on hover states because of the push towards touch devices is a good one but it's not an exclusive problem to Flash.  The reason Flash shouldn't be on the iPad, etc, is because it's a horrible bloated and proprietary plugin, and Canvas, HTML5 video, etc can do the same thing.  Flash is now a dead end technology.  It's only a matter of time before it's phased out altogether.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm in no way a supporter of Flash , but how is this any different than anything else in the browser with a : hover state ?
With the advent of HTML5 and the Canvas element , which does work on the iPad et al , you 're going to run into the same issues if you program them the same way .
Now I get his concern that Flash devs would have to rewrite a lot of their already written stuff to work on the iPad if it allowed Flash , but I fail to see how this is any different from the multitude of websites that use hover drop downs for navigation and the like.The point that we should n't be relying on hover states because of the push towards touch devices is a good one but it 's not an exclusive problem to Flash .
The reason Flash should n't be on the iPad , etc , is because it 's a horrible bloated and proprietary plugin , and Canvas , HTML5 video , etc can do the same thing .
Flash is now a dead end technology .
It 's only a matter of time before it 's phased out altogether .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm in no way a supporter of Flash, but how is this any different than anything else in the browser with a :hover state?
With the advent of HTML5 and the Canvas element, which does work on the iPad et al, you're going to run into the same issues if you program them the same way.
Now I get his concern that Flash devs would have to rewrite a lot of their already written stuff to work on the iPad if it allowed Flash, but I fail to see how this is any different from the multitude of websites that use hover drop downs for navigation and the like.The point that we shouldn't be relying on hover states because of the push towards touch devices is a good one but it's not an exclusive problem to Flash.
The reason Flash shouldn't be on the iPad, etc, is because it's a horrible bloated and proprietary plugin, and Canvas, HTML5 video, etc can do the same thing.
Flash is now a dead end technology.
It's only a matter of time before it's phased out altogether.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220268</id>
	<title>Re:Not entirely true</title>
	<author>T Murphy</author>
	<datestamp>1266780120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Easy. Use an optional peripheral that acts as a "virtual hand"- it controls where the "virtual finger" is at all times, so the cursor always has position information. This "virtual hand" could have buttons on it to perform "virtual clicks", and with multiple buttons it could perform both "virtual left clicks" and "virtual right clicks". The simplest implementation would track movement by having a ball on the bottom, so that it must be dragged on a surface to move it. With the right technology, an optical version might be feasible, reducing the number of moving parts.<br> <br>

This is all theoretical of course. I doubt there would actually be any demand for these "virtual hand" devices.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Easy .
Use an optional peripheral that acts as a " virtual hand " - it controls where the " virtual finger " is at all times , so the cursor always has position information .
This " virtual hand " could have buttons on it to perform " virtual clicks " , and with multiple buttons it could perform both " virtual left clicks " and " virtual right clicks " .
The simplest implementation would track movement by having a ball on the bottom , so that it must be dragged on a surface to move it .
With the right technology , an optical version might be feasible , reducing the number of moving parts .
This is all theoretical of course .
I doubt there would actually be any demand for these " virtual hand " devices .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Easy.
Use an optional peripheral that acts as a "virtual hand"- it controls where the "virtual finger" is at all times, so the cursor always has position information.
This "virtual hand" could have buttons on it to perform "virtual clicks", and with multiple buttons it could perform both "virtual left clicks" and "virtual right clicks".
The simplest implementation would track movement by having a ball on the bottom, so that it must be dragged on a surface to move it.
With the right technology, an optical version might be feasible, reducing the number of moving parts.
This is all theoretical of course.
I doubt there would actually be any demand for these "virtual hand" devices.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219494</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220736</id>
	<title>Notion Ink Adam--Back Side Touchpad</title>
	<author>Alaren</author>
	<datestamp>1266782340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Have you seen the <a href="http://www.notionink.in/" title="notionink.in">Notion Ink Adam</a> [notionink.in]?

</p><p>Some folks have been asking why there is a touchpad on the back.  This article is the answer.  The Adam supports Flash 10 and in general is more feature-rich than the iPad (camera, USB ports, HDMI outputting at 1080p).  The touchpad exists specifically to address this sort of problem.

</p><p>Anyway, this article seems to be an argument that touch devices can't handle mouseovers, so that's the end of the conversation; Notion Ink shuts that concept down pretty fast.  Of course the proof is in the pudding, but supposedly we'll have the real thing later this year.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Have you seen the Notion Ink Adam [ notionink.in ] ?
Some folks have been asking why there is a touchpad on the back .
This article is the answer .
The Adam supports Flash 10 and in general is more feature-rich than the iPad ( camera , USB ports , HDMI outputting at 1080p ) .
The touchpad exists specifically to address this sort of problem .
Anyway , this article seems to be an argument that touch devices ca n't handle mouseovers , so that 's the end of the conversation ; Notion Ink shuts that concept down pretty fast .
Of course the proof is in the pudding , but supposedly we 'll have the real thing later this year .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Have you seen the Notion Ink Adam [notionink.in]?
Some folks have been asking why there is a touchpad on the back.
This article is the answer.
The Adam supports Flash 10 and in general is more feature-rich than the iPad (camera, USB ports, HDMI outputting at 1080p).
The touchpad exists specifically to address this sort of problem.
Anyway, this article seems to be an argument that touch devices can't handle mouseovers, so that's the end of the conversation; Notion Ink shuts that concept down pretty fast.
Of course the proof is in the pudding, but supposedly we'll have the real thing later this year.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219422</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220128</id>
	<title>Re:Eat my balls!</title>
	<author>bemymonkey</author>
	<datestamp>1266779460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And this even though probably 3/4 of the people who want Flash on their mobiles only want it for embedded Flash video...</p><p>Of course this is just speculation, but that's what it feels like as a smartphone user.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And this even though probably 3/4 of the people who want Flash on their mobiles only want it for embedded Flash video...Of course this is just speculation , but that 's what it feels like as a smartphone user .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And this even though probably 3/4 of the people who want Flash on their mobiles only want it for embedded Flash video...Of course this is just speculation, but that's what it feels like as a smartphone user.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219496</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31221928</id>
	<title>Hogwash....</title>
	<author>PortHaven</author>
	<datestamp>1266747180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You're talking application design.</p><p>You could design an application to take account of touch, movement and tracking. In fact, I believe Flash has already been used on touch screens.</p><p>So I really question the merit of this guy's post.</p><p>- The Saj</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You 're talking application design.You could design an application to take account of touch , movement and tracking .
In fact , I believe Flash has already been used on touch screens.So I really question the merit of this guy 's post.- The Saj</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You're talking application design.You could design an application to take account of touch, movement and tracking.
In fact, I believe Flash has already been used on touch screens.So I really question the merit of this guy's post.- The Saj</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220690</id>
	<title>The android-style "Long Press"</title>
	<author>Shikala of KoLari</author>
	<datestamp>1266782100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My android phone supports the concept of "long press" for opening contextual menus.  Maybe flash could support press or press-drag as mouse-overs and long press as click.  Or, visa-versa....long-press + drag is mouse over and press is click.  (Of course, this thought came to me last week while playing an old licensed copy of Sam and Max hit the road on ScummVM on my phone.)</p><p>It's certainly a solvable problem.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My android phone supports the concept of " long press " for opening contextual menus .
Maybe flash could support press or press-drag as mouse-overs and long press as click .
Or , visa-versa....long-press + drag is mouse over and press is click .
( Of course , this thought came to me last week while playing an old licensed copy of Sam and Max hit the road on ScummVM on my phone .
) It 's certainly a solvable problem .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My android phone supports the concept of "long press" for opening contextual menus.
Maybe flash could support press or press-drag as mouse-overs and long press as click.
Or, visa-versa....long-press + drag is mouse over and press is click.
(Of course, this thought came to me last week while playing an old licensed copy of Sam and Max hit the road on ScummVM on my phone.
)It's certainly a solvable problem.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219894</id>
	<title>Re:Not entirely true</title>
	<author>c\_forq</author>
	<datestamp>1266778200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Except there is not a good way to implement what you are talking about.  Dragging my finger is already used for scrolling.  The thing Apple always nails is consistency.  I don't want my device to not scroll because where I started my finger was in a flash area of the screen.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Except there is not a good way to implement what you are talking about .
Dragging my finger is already used for scrolling .
The thing Apple always nails is consistency .
I do n't want my device to not scroll because where I started my finger was in a flash area of the screen .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Except there is not a good way to implement what you are talking about.
Dragging my finger is already used for scrolling.
The thing Apple always nails is consistency.
I don't want my device to not scroll because where I started my finger was in a flash area of the screen.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219340</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31221076</id>
	<title>Oh please</title>
	<author>sunking2</author>
	<datestamp>1266784560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Because some sort of virtual pointer that appears in a flash app is just way too crazy of an idea to work. I can tell why this guy is a flash developer and not a real one.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Because some sort of virtual pointer that appears in a flash app is just way too crazy of an idea to work .
I can tell why this guy is a flash developer and not a real one .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because some sort of virtual pointer that appears in a flash app is just way too crazy of an idea to work.
I can tell why this guy is a flash developer and not a real one.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219880</id>
	<title>This is an accessibility problem, not an iPad one.</title>
	<author>dmomo</author>
	<datestamp>1266778140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>(if it's a problem at all...)</p><p>I have trouble digesting this logic:</p><p>1) Flash allows mouse-overs, which a lit of apps take advantage of<br>2) Mouse-overs don't make much sense with a touch screen<br>3) Flash will not work on a touch screen.</p><p>Do we even know if the iPad is intended to be a "generic web-stuff-doer?" Or will apps be designed with the ipad in mind?  If the latter, there's no reason the interface cannot be designed around touch-screen use.</p><p>An accessible app wouldn't have this issue in the first place.  If a designer wants their flash app to be accessible, they shouldn't be thinking mouse-centrically. An interface should be semantically clear, allowing the client to make any necessary interpretations.</p><p>This isn't to say "all flash apps will work on the iPad", but ones designed with accessibility in mind shouldn't be an issue.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>( if it 's a problem at all... ) I have trouble digesting this logic : 1 ) Flash allows mouse-overs , which a lit of apps take advantage of2 ) Mouse-overs do n't make much sense with a touch screen3 ) Flash will not work on a touch screen.Do we even know if the iPad is intended to be a " generic web-stuff-doer ?
" Or will apps be designed with the ipad in mind ?
If the latter , there 's no reason the interface can not be designed around touch-screen use.An accessible app would n't have this issue in the first place .
If a designer wants their flash app to be accessible , they should n't be thinking mouse-centrically .
An interface should be semantically clear , allowing the client to make any necessary interpretations.This is n't to say " all flash apps will work on the iPad " , but ones designed with accessibility in mind should n't be an issue .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>(if it's a problem at all...)I have trouble digesting this logic:1) Flash allows mouse-overs, which a lit of apps take advantage of2) Mouse-overs don't make much sense with a touch screen3) Flash will not work on a touch screen.Do we even know if the iPad is intended to be a "generic web-stuff-doer?
" Or will apps be designed with the ipad in mind?
If the latter, there's no reason the interface cannot be designed around touch-screen use.An accessible app wouldn't have this issue in the first place.
If a designer wants their flash app to be accessible, they shouldn't be thinking mouse-centrically.
An interface should be semantically clear, allowing the client to make any necessary interpretations.This isn't to say "all flash apps will work on the iPad", but ones designed with accessibility in mind shouldn't be an issue.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220658</id>
	<title>Re:Article is fundamentally flawed</title>
	<author>Jesus\_666</author>
	<datestamp>1266781920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>4) It assumes there is no way to do mouseover. Lots of touch devices actually do support mouseover. (Ex: Drawing tablets)</p></div></blockquote><p>You are aware that drawing tablets are traditionally not touch devices? The stylus you use with a drawing tablet is more than an inert chunk of plastic. I know that some sort of hybrid has been announced recently but we can't expect that kind of technology to cover most or all of the market shortly - and hovering with your finger probably still wouldn't work.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>4 ) It assumes there is no way to do mouseover .
Lots of touch devices actually do support mouseover .
( Ex : Drawing tablets ) You are aware that drawing tablets are traditionally not touch devices ?
The stylus you use with a drawing tablet is more than an inert chunk of plastic .
I know that some sort of hybrid has been announced recently but we ca n't expect that kind of technology to cover most or all of the market shortly - and hovering with your finger probably still would n't work .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>4) It assumes there is no way to do mouseover.
Lots of touch devices actually do support mouseover.
(Ex: Drawing tablets)You are aware that drawing tablets are traditionally not touch devices?
The stylus you use with a drawing tablet is more than an inert chunk of plastic.
I know that some sort of hybrid has been announced recently but we can't expect that kind of technology to cover most or all of the market shortly - and hovering with your finger probably still wouldn't work.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219794</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220536</id>
	<title>Re:Never?</title>
	<author>dfghjk</author>
	<datestamp>1266781320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Prior to the iPhone, many touchscreen devices had complete compatibility with a traditional desktop.  Apple chose to introduce a device that broke this horribly and authors such as this one now accept that whatever Apple has done defines how a touchscreen works.</p><p>Apple is accountable for this problem.  They won't be held to it and they won't fix it yet they will still be applauded as an innovator.  Touchscreen machines, even finger-only ones, could behave differently and they all used to.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Prior to the iPhone , many touchscreen devices had complete compatibility with a traditional desktop .
Apple chose to introduce a device that broke this horribly and authors such as this one now accept that whatever Apple has done defines how a touchscreen works.Apple is accountable for this problem .
They wo n't be held to it and they wo n't fix it yet they will still be applauded as an innovator .
Touchscreen machines , even finger-only ones , could behave differently and they all used to .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Prior to the iPhone, many touchscreen devices had complete compatibility with a traditional desktop.
Apple chose to introduce a device that broke this horribly and authors such as this one now accept that whatever Apple has done defines how a touchscreen works.Apple is accountable for this problem.
They won't be held to it and they won't fix it yet they will still be applauded as an innovator.
Touchscreen machines, even finger-only ones, could behave differently and they all used to.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219348</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220368</id>
	<title>Re:What???</title>
	<author>MTO\_B.</author>
	<datestamp>1266780540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>To me it's like:
The iphone and other mobile devices shouldn't have browsers, since they would be fundamentally flawed: "sites are developed for bigger screens, with a larger resolution, it would be troublesome for users to see those sites in a mobile device, so it's better to not support browsers and html at all".</htmltext>
<tokenext>To me it 's like : The iphone and other mobile devices should n't have browsers , since they would be fundamentally flawed : " sites are developed for bigger screens , with a larger resolution , it would be troublesome for users to see those sites in a mobile device , so it 's better to not support browsers and html at all " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To me it's like:
The iphone and other mobile devices shouldn't have browsers, since they would be fundamentally flawed: "sites are developed for bigger screens, with a larger resolution, it would be troublesome for users to see those sites in a mobile device, so it's better to not support browsers and html at all".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220006</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220022</id>
	<title>Re:Not entirely true</title>
	<author>Ihmhi</author>
	<datestamp>1266778920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Drag your finger over the button and then remove your finger from the touchscreen?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Drag your finger over the button and then remove your finger from the touchscreen ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Drag your finger over the button and then remove your finger from the touchscreen?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219494</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219596</id>
	<title>Re:Not entirely true</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1266776700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The N900 has a mouse mode in its browser. You can enable it by swiping onto the screen from the left.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The N900 has a mouse mode in its browser .
You can enable it by swiping onto the screen from the left .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The N900 has a mouse mode in its browser.
You can enable it by swiping onto the screen from the left.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219446</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219898
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31222450
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219388
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220004
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_85</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219348
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31223268
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_76</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219340
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219494
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219614
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219340
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219494
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31221180
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219348
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220750
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219732
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31221040
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_75</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219286
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219496
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220298
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31223394
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_66</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219286
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219496
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220298
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31225450
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219340
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219610
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220104
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_80</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219686
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220134
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219340
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219446
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220420
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219286
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219496
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31226548
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219286
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219496
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219872
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220900
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219422
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31226914
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_95</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219286
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219496
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220058
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219476
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31222182
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_69</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219576
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220614
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_72</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219286
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219496
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31222814
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31227628
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_74</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219426
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31223878
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_88</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219576
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31226424
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219898
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31222104
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_59</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31223846
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_62</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219348
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219534
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_64</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219348
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219604
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219924
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_108</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219348
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31228064
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219898
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31243346
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219286
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219496
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31224846
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219340
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219494
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220022
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219338
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31222742
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_89</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219732
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220888
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_103</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219508
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31223462
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219340
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219790
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219286
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219496
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219714
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31221314
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_93</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219286
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219496
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220298
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31227528
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_67</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219286
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219496
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219872
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220810
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219686
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31221524
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219340
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219446
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219558
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_70</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219348
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219762
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_61</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219388
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220542
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219780
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31223158
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_84</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219408
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219980
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_86</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219286
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219496
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220298
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31224734
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219340
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219894
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_60</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219338
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31224108
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219348
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31222410
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219340
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219494
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220268
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219348
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219908
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219576
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220000
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_102</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219340
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219446
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219596
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_99</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219794
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220658
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219286
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219496
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220776
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219286
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219496
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219872
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220918
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31225098
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_90</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219286
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219496
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219690
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31222756
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_101</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219348
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220830
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_78</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219286
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219496
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219872
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220856
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219348
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219604
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220314
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219686
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219956
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_83</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219780
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31224520
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219286
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219496
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220666
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219576
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220024
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_79</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219516
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219766
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_82</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219476
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31223182
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_73</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219576
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31222014
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219340
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219610
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219992
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31222554
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_98</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219286
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219496
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220838
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219286
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219496
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219872
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220706
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219286
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219496
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220298
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31225226
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_107</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219286
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219496
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219852
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219286
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219496
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31221688
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_100</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219438
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220290
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_97</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219348
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31221396
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219652
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31224186
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219286
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219496
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219872
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31221752
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219348
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219604
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31226372
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219286
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219496
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220298
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31229728
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_65</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219576
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220112
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219426
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31221766
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_81</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31228406
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_68</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219286
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219496
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220298
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31223952
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31227750
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219286
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219496
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219714
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31225824
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_71</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219286
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219496
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220266
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219286
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219496
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220128
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_106</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220740
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31221458
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219422
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220736
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219340
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31221740
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_94</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219516
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220076
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_96</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219348
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31222112
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219686
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220444
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_105</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219286
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219496
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31221194
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219516
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220160
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219388
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220518
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_87</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220060
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31226518
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219286
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219496
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219872
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31226582
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219882
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31226436
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_63</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219576
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220318
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_91</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219286
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219496
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31222758
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219422
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31223200
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_77</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219388
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220006
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220368
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219576
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219812
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219340
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219600
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219348
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220536
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219286
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219496
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220298
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31223952
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31230532
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219422
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31221102
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219388
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220406
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_104</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219340
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220028
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31230302
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219348
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219604
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31225936
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219286
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219496
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220720
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_21_1529202_92</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219898
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31226508
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_1529202.23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31226860
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_1529202.32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219940
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_1529202.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220740
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31221458
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_1529202.35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220060
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31226518
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_1529202.29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219652
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31224186
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_1529202.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220496
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_1529202.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219338
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31222742
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31224108
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_1529202.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219576
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31222014
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219812
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220112
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31226424
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220614
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220024
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220000
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220318
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_1529202.24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219732
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220888
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31221040
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_1529202.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219686
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219956
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220134
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31221524
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220444
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_1529202.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219532
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_1529202.34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219448
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_1529202.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31221118
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_1529202.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219780
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31224520
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31223158
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_1529202.25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219384
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_1529202.31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219398
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_1529202.37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219538
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_1529202.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219516
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220160
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220076
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219766
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_1529202.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219438
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220290
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_1529202.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219794
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220658
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_1529202.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219388
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220542
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220518
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220406
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220004
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220006
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220368
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_1529202.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219348
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220750
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220830
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220536
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31222112
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219604
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31226372
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220314
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219924
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31225936
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219534
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219762
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31222410
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31223268
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219908
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31221396
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31228064
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_1529202.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219422
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31226914
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220736
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31221102
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31223200
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_1529202.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219436
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31228406
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31223846
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_1529202.26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219882
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31226436
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_1529202.21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219570
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_1529202.36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219340
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219446
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220420
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219596
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219558
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31221740
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219790
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220028
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31230302
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219600
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219894
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219610
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220104
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219992
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31222554
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219494
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31221180
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220268
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219614
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220022
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_1529202.30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31221064
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_1529202.33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219286
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219496
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220720
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219690
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31222756
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220128
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219852
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31224846
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220298
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31225226
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31225450
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31223952
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31230532
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31227750
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31227528
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31229728
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31223394
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31224734
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31222814
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31227628
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220058
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31226548
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220776
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31221688
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219714
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31225824
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31221314
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31221194
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220838
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220666
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220266
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219872
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220918
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31225098
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31226582
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220810
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220900
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31221752
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220706
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220856
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31222758
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_1529202.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219426
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31221766
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31223878
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_1529202.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31220382
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_1529202.27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219628
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_1529202.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219898
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31222104
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31222450
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31226508
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31243346
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_1529202.22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219408
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219980
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_1529202.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219476
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31222182
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31223182
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_1529202.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219478
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_1529202.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219498
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_21_1529202.28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31219508
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_21_1529202.31223462
</commentlist>
</conversation>
