<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_02_24_1353205</id>
	<title>YouTube To Kill IE6 Support On March 13</title>
	<author>CmdrTaco</author>
	<datestamp>1267024260000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>Joel writes <i>"<a href="http://tech.slashdot.org/story/09/07/14/1813200/YouTube-Phasing-Out-Support-For-IE6">Over six months ago</a>, Google announced it would start phasing out support for Internet Explorer 6 on Orkut and YouTube, and started pushing its users to modern browsers. <a href="http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/news/2010/02/youtube-to-kill-ie6-support-on-march-13.ars">The search giant has now given a specific kill date for old browser support</a> on the video website: 'Support stops on March 13th. Stopped support essentially means that some future features on YouTube will be rolled out that won't work in older browsers.'"</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>Joel writes " Over six months ago , Google announced it would start phasing out support for Internet Explorer 6 on Orkut and YouTube , and started pushing its users to modern browsers .
The search giant has now given a specific kill date for old browser support on the video website : 'Support stops on March 13th .
Stopped support essentially means that some future features on YouTube will be rolled out that wo n't work in older browsers .
' "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Joel writes "Over six months ago, Google announced it would start phasing out support for Internet Explorer 6 on Orkut and YouTube, and started pushing its users to modern browsers.
The search giant has now given a specific kill date for old browser support on the video website: 'Support stops on March 13th.
Stopped support essentially means that some future features on YouTube will be rolled out that won't work in older browsers.
'"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259730</id>
	<title>Re:One has to wonder</title>
	<author>datapharmer</author>
	<datestamp>1265128140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>well, yes you could do that but it is kind of mean. I prefer to give them a straight forward message with choices, such as this one: <a href="http://haystacksofgainesville.com/" title="haystackso...sville.com">http://haystacksofgainesville.com/</a> [haystackso...sville.com] (you will need to set your user agent to IE6 or use IE6 to see the message of course)</htmltext>
<tokenext>well , yes you could do that but it is kind of mean .
I prefer to give them a straight forward message with choices , such as this one : http : //haystacksofgainesville.com/ [ haystackso...sville.com ] ( you will need to set your user agent to IE6 or use IE6 to see the message of course )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>well, yes you could do that but it is kind of mean.
I prefer to give them a straight forward message with choices, such as this one: http://haystacksofgainesville.com/ [haystackso...sville.com] (you will need to set your user agent to IE6 or use IE6 to see the message of course)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259586</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259576</id>
	<title>Dead at last!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265127600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>IE6 does not even deserve a funeral, so why mention it's death?  Let this browser die and be forgotten forever.</htmltext>
<tokenext>IE6 does not even deserve a funeral , so why mention it 's death ?
Let this browser die and be forgotten forever .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>IE6 does not even deserve a funeral, so why mention it's death?
Let this browser die and be forgotten forever.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260454</id>
	<title>Re:IE 6 Not dead in the workplace, doesn't matter</title>
	<author>farlukar</author>
	<datestamp>1265131320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>In fact many companies are also breathing a sigh of relief along with us techies, but for different reasons.  They don't want their users watching videos while they should be working.</p></div><p>Um, no. What part of </p><p><div class="quote"><p>&ldquo;On March 13, we are dropping support for your browser. You&rsquo;ll still be able to watch videos after that date, but new features may not work properly.&rdquo;</p></div><p> don't you understand?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>In fact many companies are also breathing a sigh of relief along with us techies , but for different reasons .
They do n't want their users watching videos while they should be working.Um , no .
What part of    On March 13 , we are dropping support for your browser .
You    ll still be able to watch videos after that date , but new features may not work properly.    do n't you understand ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In fact many companies are also breathing a sigh of relief along with us techies, but for different reasons.
They don't want their users watching videos while they should be working.Um, no.
What part of “On March 13, we are dropping support for your browser.
You’ll still be able to watch videos after that date, but new features may not work properly.” don't you understand?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259598</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259880</id>
	<title>Re:One has to wonder</title>
	<author>gmuslera</author>
	<datestamp>1265128740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If IE6 weren't from Microsoft, but still had the same endemic big security problems, being actively exploited from everywhere, not interest in fixes from the making company  and being used still by 10-20\% of internet, specially in the corporate world, probably Google would phase out the support anyway.

</p><p>Regarding Microsoft/Bing, Firefox never had so big holes, and so actively exploited, like IE6. And anyway old versions have very low usage, and odds are high that that users dont visit bing (most of its niceties are based on silverlight, they are excluding browsers/OS already)

</p><p>Also matter how much used is an old, insecure version, compared with another "players" of internet, like <a href="http://www.netmarketshare.com/browser-market-share.aspx?qprid=2" title="netmarketshare.com">other browsers versions</a> [netmarketshare.com], or even <a href="http://www.statowl.com/flash.php" title="statowl.com">old flash player versions</a> [statowl.com]. Only in IE the old, insecure and unmaintained version is widely used, in the others the most used versions are the latest or close enough, and without very big vulnerabilities anyway (ok, maybe with the exception of flash)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If IE6 were n't from Microsoft , but still had the same endemic big security problems , being actively exploited from everywhere , not interest in fixes from the making company and being used still by 10-20 \ % of internet , specially in the corporate world , probably Google would phase out the support anyway .
Regarding Microsoft/Bing , Firefox never had so big holes , and so actively exploited , like IE6 .
And anyway old versions have very low usage , and odds are high that that users dont visit bing ( most of its niceties are based on silverlight , they are excluding browsers/OS already ) Also matter how much used is an old , insecure version , compared with another " players " of internet , like other browsers versions [ netmarketshare.com ] , or even old flash player versions [ statowl.com ] .
Only in IE the old , insecure and unmaintained version is widely used , in the others the most used versions are the latest or close enough , and without very big vulnerabilities anyway ( ok , maybe with the exception of flash )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If IE6 weren't from Microsoft, but still had the same endemic big security problems, being actively exploited from everywhere, not interest in fixes from the making company  and being used still by 10-20\% of internet, specially in the corporate world, probably Google would phase out the support anyway.
Regarding Microsoft/Bing, Firefox never had so big holes, and so actively exploited, like IE6.
And anyway old versions have very low usage, and odds are high that that users dont visit bing (most of its niceties are based on silverlight, they are excluding browsers/OS already)

Also matter how much used is an old, insecure version, compared with another "players" of internet, like other browsers versions [netmarketshare.com], or even old flash player versions [statowl.com].
Only in IE the old, insecure and unmaintained version is widely used, in the others the most used versions are the latest or close enough, and without very big vulnerabilities anyway (ok, maybe with the exception of flash)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259482</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31262136</id>
	<title>Re:Google IS dumping older versions of FF</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265137980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And while IE6 was released in 2001, they are dropping support for firefox 2.0, released in 2006, and chrome 3.0, released in 2009.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And while IE6 was released in 2001 , they are dropping support for firefox 2.0 , released in 2006 , and chrome 3.0 , released in 2009 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And while IE6 was released in 2001, they are dropping support for firefox 2.0, released in 2006, and chrome 3.0, released in 2009.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260238</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260468</id>
	<title>Re:IE 6 Not dead in the workplace, doesn't matter</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265131380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So corporate environments could encourage using IE6 since it's becoming more and more "work safe"! Imagine a sudden rise of IE6 browsers! Don't you dare!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So corporate environments could encourage using IE6 since it 's becoming more and more " work safe " !
Imagine a sudden rise of IE6 browsers !
Do n't you dare !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So corporate environments could encourage using IE6 since it's becoming more and more "work safe"!
Imagine a sudden rise of IE6 browsers!
Don't you dare!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259598</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259982</id>
	<title>Re:One has to wonder</title>
	<author>nagnamer</author>
	<datestamp>1265129280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>It's time to drag corporations* into the modern age, even if they're kicking and screaming the entire way.</p></div><p>It's just that the users will be the one that will be kicking and screaming. One of my colleagues was unable to play videos from YouTube, was frustrated, but assumed that there's no way of doing that. She didn't notice the (a) continue to video link, (b) upgrade to one of these comment. Someone should upgrade the users first.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:D</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's time to drag corporations * into the modern age , even if they 're kicking and screaming the entire way.It 's just that the users will be the one that will be kicking and screaming .
One of my colleagues was unable to play videos from YouTube , was frustrated , but assumed that there 's no way of doing that .
She did n't notice the ( a ) continue to video link , ( b ) upgrade to one of these comment .
Someone should upgrade the users first .
: D</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's time to drag corporations* into the modern age, even if they're kicking and screaming the entire way.It's just that the users will be the one that will be kicking and screaming.
One of my colleagues was unable to play videos from YouTube, was frustrated, but assumed that there's no way of doing that.
She didn't notice the (a) continue to video link, (b) upgrade to one of these comment.
Someone should upgrade the users first.
:D
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259636</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31261200</id>
	<title>Re:IE 6 Not dead in the workplace, doesn't matter</title>
	<author>bluegrassbeer</author>
	<datestamp>1265134440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I agree. We just redesigned our website and categorizing users/browsers (with analog) I found 70\% of our IE users running IE6 (John Deere, Walgreens, Walmarts of the world surf our site). Given a choice many IT managers might have the users run Mosaic.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I agree .
We just redesigned our website and categorizing users/browsers ( with analog ) I found 70 \ % of our IE users running IE6 ( John Deere , Walgreens , Walmarts of the world surf our site ) .
Given a choice many IT managers might have the users run Mosaic .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I agree.
We just redesigned our website and categorizing users/browsers (with analog) I found 70\% of our IE users running IE6 (John Deere, Walgreens, Walmarts of the world surf our site).
Given a choice many IT managers might have the users run Mosaic.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259598</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260416</id>
	<title>Re:One has to wonder</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265131200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>IE7, IE8. Yep 4-5 generations old.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>IE7 , IE8 .
Yep 4-5 generations old .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>IE7, IE8.
Yep 4-5 generations old.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259636</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260074</id>
	<title>Re:Important Clarification:</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265129580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>It should be noted that Google is not breaking youtube for IE6 users(the poor bastards). Doing so would be pretty stupid<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</i></p><p>Correct on both counts.  From the fine article:</p><blockquote><div><p>YouTube will have an interstitial appear when users on older browser try to watch a video on YouTube. Google says the interstitial will show up indefinitely every two weeks until the user upgrades to the most recent version of their browser.</p></div></blockquote><p>Implicit in the approach is an attempt to shame the user.  That, combined with the presentation of a list of options (supported browsers) will go a long way to dispel the erroneous notions of folks who associate the internet with the Big Blue "e", or otherwise think the world begins and ends with Microsoft products.  Overstated?  Perhaps, but if I was Microsoft, I'd prefer not having one of the world's best known companies reminding my customers that my products suck.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It should be noted that Google is not breaking youtube for IE6 users ( the poor bastards ) .
Doing so would be pretty stupid ...Correct on both counts .
From the fine article : YouTube will have an interstitial appear when users on older browser try to watch a video on YouTube .
Google says the interstitial will show up indefinitely every two weeks until the user upgrades to the most recent version of their browser.Implicit in the approach is an attempt to shame the user .
That , combined with the presentation of a list of options ( supported browsers ) will go a long way to dispel the erroneous notions of folks who associate the internet with the Big Blue " e " , or otherwise think the world begins and ends with Microsoft products .
Overstated ? Perhaps , but if I was Microsoft , I 'd prefer not having one of the world 's best known companies reminding my customers that my products suck .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It should be noted that Google is not breaking youtube for IE6 users(the poor bastards).
Doing so would be pretty stupid ...Correct on both counts.
From the fine article:YouTube will have an interstitial appear when users on older browser try to watch a video on YouTube.
Google says the interstitial will show up indefinitely every two weeks until the user upgrades to the most recent version of their browser.Implicit in the approach is an attempt to shame the user.
That, combined with the presentation of a list of options (supported browsers) will go a long way to dispel the erroneous notions of folks who associate the internet with the Big Blue "e", or otherwise think the world begins and ends with Microsoft products.
Overstated?  Perhaps, but if I was Microsoft, I'd prefer not having one of the world's best known companies reminding my customers that my products suck.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259642</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31261160</id>
	<title>Re:IE7</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1265134200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Depends on if the person you are asking knows <em>anything</em> about browsers.</p><p>IE7 and 8, and in fact every software with the Trident engine, is not considered a browser <em>at all</em> by professional web developers.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p><p>The Trident &ldquo;engine&rdquo; &rdquo; or rather &ldquo;upside-down pyramid architecture&rdquo; &mdash; in the deciding factor.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Depends on if the person you are asking knows anything about browsers.IE7 and 8 , and in fact every software with the Trident engine , is not considered a browser at all by professional web developers .
; ) The Trident    engine       or rather    upside-down pyramid architecture       in the deciding factor .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Depends on if the person you are asking knows anything about browsers.IE7 and 8, and in fact every software with the Trident engine, is not considered a browser at all by professional web developers.
;)The Trident “engine” ” or rather “upside-down pyramid architecture” — in the deciding factor.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260156</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31262260</id>
	<title>Re:One has to wonder</title>
	<author>TavisJohn</author>
	<datestamp>1265138400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You sir have not been paying attention.  There are MANY people who have stuck with IE6.  It is sad, but true.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You sir have not been paying attention .
There are MANY people who have stuck with IE6 .
It is sad , but true .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You sir have not been paying attention.
There are MANY people who have stuck with IE6.
It is sad, but true.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259636</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31270018</id>
	<title>Re:I think I'll cut support too.</title>
	<author>bigman2003</author>
	<datestamp>1267094880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, that makes sense...since IE6, IE7 AND IE8 have more market share than Firefox, Safari, Opera and Chrome combined.</p><p>Not saying it is right, just saying it makes sense.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , that makes sense...since IE6 , IE7 AND IE8 have more market share than Firefox , Safari , Opera and Chrome combined.Not saying it is right , just saying it makes sense .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, that makes sense...since IE6, IE7 AND IE8 have more market share than Firefox, Safari, Opera and Chrome combined.Not saying it is right, just saying it makes sense.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260822</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31261354</id>
	<title>Re:IE 6 Not dead in the workplace, doesn't matter</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265135040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>On a technical and personal usage basis I agree with the decision.<br>Working on a helldesk of a large government organisation in Australia, this is going to cause pain.</p><p>'Unsupported' Firefox recommendations are probably going to be the main 'workaround', since it plays nicer with internal 'IE6' apps than IE8.<br>I have chrome and opera installed on my work PC, but from personal experience FF plays nicer with dregs of web design than the others.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>On a technical and personal usage basis I agree with the decision.Working on a helldesk of a large government organisation in Australia , this is going to cause pain .
'Unsupported ' Firefox recommendations are probably going to be the main 'workaround ' , since it plays nicer with internal 'IE6 ' apps than IE8.I have chrome and opera installed on my work PC , but from personal experience FF plays nicer with dregs of web design than the others .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>On a technical and personal usage basis I agree with the decision.Working on a helldesk of a large government organisation in Australia, this is going to cause pain.
'Unsupported' Firefox recommendations are probably going to be the main 'workaround', since it plays nicer with internal 'IE6' apps than IE8.I have chrome and opera installed on my work PC, but from personal experience FF plays nicer with dregs of web design than the others.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259598</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260640</id>
	<title>Re:Good Riddance!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265132220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>As a designer who has been leaping through hoops the past couple weeks getting a website IE6 compliant because the client insists on still using the browser, I say GOOD RIDDANCE!! The sooner we can drive IE6 from the corporate landscape and force people to upgrade to a browser that isn't a decade old and out of date, all the better.</p></div><p>Then you will be jumping through hoops for another 4 or 5 years while accretion kills brand new XP machines.  Nothing else big enough is stating that your browser must be upgraded; most of the internet fails silently (if your browser is Netscape 4, you actually see text that is supposed to be commented scripts.) and if it doesn't, it certainly won't tell Joe User where to download newer browsers. I believe bank sites and webmail (including even MS Outlook webmail) is guilty of not putting links at all.</p><p>Now, in the user world, PC purchases, accretion and old PC deaths requiring replacements will drive down XP installs, with IE6 dragging right along. Once corporations spend more and more time seeing Windows 7 and adopting it as an OS, due to the above or to the need to support new corporate hardware (a la USB support for Windows 98) then the need to dump that rusty XP image will increase exponentially.</p><p>Youtube doesn't mean crap; it is nothing to the American corporate world because it's one of the first things proxies block. You can't miss what you never "met" and corporate drones will keep working on their rusty IE6 apps till Windows 7 or 8 pulls the plug on allowing an outdated browser to be installed. Hell, Vista has IE7 by default, but it was never adopted. My long estimate above is because it will take long before corporations and users start realizing that Flash 2015 or some other year coming soon will follow suit and phase out support for IE6, which came out in 2001 anyway. Mind you, we'll have IE10 by then, and corporations will have started to move on to<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET or some similar app reconfiguration since the economic crisis will be a thing of the past.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>As a designer who has been leaping through hoops the past couple weeks getting a website IE6 compliant because the client insists on still using the browser , I say GOOD RIDDANCE ! !
The sooner we can drive IE6 from the corporate landscape and force people to upgrade to a browser that is n't a decade old and out of date , all the better.Then you will be jumping through hoops for another 4 or 5 years while accretion kills brand new XP machines .
Nothing else big enough is stating that your browser must be upgraded ; most of the internet fails silently ( if your browser is Netscape 4 , you actually see text that is supposed to be commented scripts .
) and if it does n't , it certainly wo n't tell Joe User where to download newer browsers .
I believe bank sites and webmail ( including even MS Outlook webmail ) is guilty of not putting links at all.Now , in the user world , PC purchases , accretion and old PC deaths requiring replacements will drive down XP installs , with IE6 dragging right along .
Once corporations spend more and more time seeing Windows 7 and adopting it as an OS , due to the above or to the need to support new corporate hardware ( a la USB support for Windows 98 ) then the need to dump that rusty XP image will increase exponentially.Youtube does n't mean crap ; it is nothing to the American corporate world because it 's one of the first things proxies block .
You ca n't miss what you never " met " and corporate drones will keep working on their rusty IE6 apps till Windows 7 or 8 pulls the plug on allowing an outdated browser to be installed .
Hell , Vista has IE7 by default , but it was never adopted .
My long estimate above is because it will take long before corporations and users start realizing that Flash 2015 or some other year coming soon will follow suit and phase out support for IE6 , which came out in 2001 anyway .
Mind you , we 'll have IE10 by then , and corporations will have started to move on to .NET or some similar app reconfiguration since the economic crisis will be a thing of the past .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As a designer who has been leaping through hoops the past couple weeks getting a website IE6 compliant because the client insists on still using the browser, I say GOOD RIDDANCE!!
The sooner we can drive IE6 from the corporate landscape and force people to upgrade to a browser that isn't a decade old and out of date, all the better.Then you will be jumping through hoops for another 4 or 5 years while accretion kills brand new XP machines.
Nothing else big enough is stating that your browser must be upgraded; most of the internet fails silently (if your browser is Netscape 4, you actually see text that is supposed to be commented scripts.
) and if it doesn't, it certainly won't tell Joe User where to download newer browsers.
I believe bank sites and webmail (including even MS Outlook webmail) is guilty of not putting links at all.Now, in the user world, PC purchases, accretion and old PC deaths requiring replacements will drive down XP installs, with IE6 dragging right along.
Once corporations spend more and more time seeing Windows 7 and adopting it as an OS, due to the above or to the need to support new corporate hardware (a la USB support for Windows 98) then the need to dump that rusty XP image will increase exponentially.Youtube doesn't mean crap; it is nothing to the American corporate world because it's one of the first things proxies block.
You can't miss what you never "met" and corporate drones will keep working on their rusty IE6 apps till Windows 7 or 8 pulls the plug on allowing an outdated browser to be installed.
Hell, Vista has IE7 by default, but it was never adopted.
My long estimate above is because it will take long before corporations and users start realizing that Flash 2015 or some other year coming soon will follow suit and phase out support for IE6, which came out in 2001 anyway.
Mind you, we'll have IE10 by then, and corporations will have started to move on to .NET or some similar app reconfiguration since the economic crisis will be a thing of the past.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259578</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31262692</id>
	<title>Re:Next up, IE7</title>
	<author>nine-times</author>
	<datestamp>1265140260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Is IE8 much better?  I haven't done any meaningful web design in the past several years, so I really don't know.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is IE8 much better ?
I have n't done any meaningful web design in the past several years , so I really do n't know .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is IE8 much better?
I haven't done any meaningful web design in the past several years, so I really don't know.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259596</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260218</id>
	<title>Re:Interesting precedent, content imposing softwar</title>
	<author>natehoy</author>
	<datestamp>1265130120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Websites have been "imposing" browser limitations for years, largely because browser interoperability was a huge issue just a few years ago.</p><p>Granted, IE6 was a significant contributor to that mess, since IE6 was Microsoft's "extinguish" phase of their attempt to "embrace, extend, extinguish" the Web a decade ago. They provided inexpensive and well-designed web development tools that put out code that only their own web browser could read, then upgraded both the tools and the browser once they realized the whole IE6 debacle was a mistake, but provided no migration path for the code originally created by their own tools.  Refactoring code for homebuilt applications to fit web standards is expensive and timeconsuming and really offers no "cost justification" benefits to the CFO, so a lot of companies still have intranets and other homebrew web applications that were built to the IE6 spec and will not function under any other browser.</p><p>But IE6 is certainly not the only issue.  As newer, better, faster, or just more convenient tools get integrated into web browsers and the sites that feed them, their older brethren have trouble keeping up.  If you want to visit a site that uses newer technology, you have to use a newer browser that supports that technology.  Fortunately, IE6 compatibility is really the only "backward incompatible" example, so if you stick to a relatively recent version of {IE, Firefox, Safari, Chrome, Opera, (other)}, you'll be fine.  Keep more than one of them around, and you can always experiment to see which browser works best.</p><p>There ARE still specific platform-dependent plugins that specific web sites choose to use, such as Silverlight (the major reason why I cannot watch the Olympics this year - Linux Users Need Not Apply).   But thankfully they are in the minority.  Most recent browsers can support most recent technologies, and HTML5 is only going to make that picture better by eliminating the barriers imposed by platform-specific plugins.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Websites have been " imposing " browser limitations for years , largely because browser interoperability was a huge issue just a few years ago.Granted , IE6 was a significant contributor to that mess , since IE6 was Microsoft 's " extinguish " phase of their attempt to " embrace , extend , extinguish " the Web a decade ago .
They provided inexpensive and well-designed web development tools that put out code that only their own web browser could read , then upgraded both the tools and the browser once they realized the whole IE6 debacle was a mistake , but provided no migration path for the code originally created by their own tools .
Refactoring code for homebuilt applications to fit web standards is expensive and timeconsuming and really offers no " cost justification " benefits to the CFO , so a lot of companies still have intranets and other homebrew web applications that were built to the IE6 spec and will not function under any other browser.But IE6 is certainly not the only issue .
As newer , better , faster , or just more convenient tools get integrated into web browsers and the sites that feed them , their older brethren have trouble keeping up .
If you want to visit a site that uses newer technology , you have to use a newer browser that supports that technology .
Fortunately , IE6 compatibility is really the only " backward incompatible " example , so if you stick to a relatively recent version of { IE , Firefox , Safari , Chrome , Opera , ( other ) } , you 'll be fine .
Keep more than one of them around , and you can always experiment to see which browser works best.There ARE still specific platform-dependent plugins that specific web sites choose to use , such as Silverlight ( the major reason why I can not watch the Olympics this year - Linux Users Need Not Apply ) .
But thankfully they are in the minority .
Most recent browsers can support most recent technologies , and HTML5 is only going to make that picture better by eliminating the barriers imposed by platform-specific plugins .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Websites have been "imposing" browser limitations for years, largely because browser interoperability was a huge issue just a few years ago.Granted, IE6 was a significant contributor to that mess, since IE6 was Microsoft's "extinguish" phase of their attempt to "embrace, extend, extinguish" the Web a decade ago.
They provided inexpensive and well-designed web development tools that put out code that only their own web browser could read, then upgraded both the tools and the browser once they realized the whole IE6 debacle was a mistake, but provided no migration path for the code originally created by their own tools.
Refactoring code for homebuilt applications to fit web standards is expensive and timeconsuming and really offers no "cost justification" benefits to the CFO, so a lot of companies still have intranets and other homebrew web applications that were built to the IE6 spec and will not function under any other browser.But IE6 is certainly not the only issue.
As newer, better, faster, or just more convenient tools get integrated into web browsers and the sites that feed them, their older brethren have trouble keeping up.
If you want to visit a site that uses newer technology, you have to use a newer browser that supports that technology.
Fortunately, IE6 compatibility is really the only "backward incompatible" example, so if you stick to a relatively recent version of {IE, Firefox, Safari, Chrome, Opera, (other)}, you'll be fine.
Keep more than one of them around, and you can always experiment to see which browser works best.There ARE still specific platform-dependent plugins that specific web sites choose to use, such as Silverlight (the major reason why I cannot watch the Olympics this year - Linux Users Need Not Apply).
But thankfully they are in the minority.
Most recent browsers can support most recent technologies, and HTML5 is only going to make that picture better by eliminating the barriers imposed by platform-specific plugins.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259712</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259598</id>
	<title>IE 6 Not dead in the workplace, doesn't matter</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265127660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>IE 6 will still be alive (and unfortunately not so well) in the corporate workplace all over the nation.  In fact many companies are also breathing a sigh of relief along with us techies, but for different reasons.  They don't want their users watching videos while they should be working.  They are very likely happy that YouTube won't be supporting a browser that many of their critical one off, undersupported, buggy, POS (both versions of the acronym apply) IE 6 only apps do.</htmltext>
<tokenext>IE 6 will still be alive ( and unfortunately not so well ) in the corporate workplace all over the nation .
In fact many companies are also breathing a sigh of relief along with us techies , but for different reasons .
They do n't want their users watching videos while they should be working .
They are very likely happy that YouTube wo n't be supporting a browser that many of their critical one off , undersupported , buggy , POS ( both versions of the acronym apply ) IE 6 only apps do .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>IE 6 will still be alive (and unfortunately not so well) in the corporate workplace all over the nation.
In fact many companies are also breathing a sigh of relief along with us techies, but for different reasons.
They don't want their users watching videos while they should be working.
They are very likely happy that YouTube won't be supporting a browser that many of their critical one off, undersupported, buggy, POS (both versions of the acronym apply) IE 6 only apps do.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260196</id>
	<title>Re:Next up, IE7</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265130060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>IE7 is almost as much of an albatross as IE6 was.</p></div><p>The benefit of IE7 is that it doesn't support IE6 apps, and there are no IE7-specific apps like with IE6. So upgrading to IE8 or IE9 etc won't be such a problem.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>IE7 is almost as much of an albatross as IE6 was.The benefit of IE7 is that it does n't support IE6 apps , and there are no IE7-specific apps like with IE6 .
So upgrading to IE8 or IE9 etc wo n't be such a problem .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>IE7 is almost as much of an albatross as IE6 was.The benefit of IE7 is that it doesn't support IE6 apps, and there are no IE7-specific apps like with IE6.
So upgrading to IE8 or IE9 etc won't be such a problem.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259596</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260270</id>
	<title>orkut?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265130480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>they could phase out support for everything and nobody would give a shit.</htmltext>
<tokenext>they could phase out support for everything and nobody would give a shit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>they could phase out support for everything and nobody would give a shit.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260882</id>
	<title>IE8 sucks too.</title>
	<author>MikeFM</author>
	<datestamp>1265133000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>For that matter IE8 sucks too. I wish Microsoft would just get it together and use webkit or gecko as their rendering engine. They could keep the familiar IE interface and whatever extras they wanted without forcing this load of crap on all us poor developers that just want standards support.</htmltext>
<tokenext>For that matter IE8 sucks too .
I wish Microsoft would just get it together and use webkit or gecko as their rendering engine .
They could keep the familiar IE interface and whatever extras they wanted without forcing this load of crap on all us poor developers that just want standards support .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For that matter IE8 sucks too.
I wish Microsoft would just get it together and use webkit or gecko as their rendering engine.
They could keep the familiar IE interface and whatever extras they wanted without forcing this load of crap on all us poor developers that just want standards support.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259596</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31262834</id>
	<title>Yeah, just wait</title>
	<author>MiniMike</author>
	<datestamp>1265141040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just wait until IE6 support is dropped by AOL, then you'll see some complaints.  If you pick up a Readers Digest, that is...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just wait until IE6 support is dropped by AOL , then you 'll see some complaints .
If you pick up a Readers Digest , that is.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just wait until IE6 support is dropped by AOL, then you'll see some complaints.
If you pick up a Readers Digest, that is...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259456</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31264234</id>
	<title>Re:IE 6 Not dead in the workplace, doesn't matter</title>
	<author>Foolicious</author>
	<datestamp>1265103960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>In fact many companies are also breathing a sigh of relief along with us techies, but for different reasons.  They don't want their users watching videos while they should be working.</p></div><p>Yeah - because it would be so hard for them to block sites like YouTube via a proxy or other means.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>In fact many companies are also breathing a sigh of relief along with us techies , but for different reasons .
They do n't want their users watching videos while they should be working.Yeah - because it would be so hard for them to block sites like YouTube via a proxy or other means .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In fact many companies are also breathing a sigh of relief along with us techies, but for different reasons.
They don't want their users watching videos while they should be working.Yeah - because it would be so hard for them to block sites like YouTube via a proxy or other means.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259598</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259622</id>
	<title>Re:Finally</title>
	<author>iloveterminals</author>
	<datestamp>1265127780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>about time support for this browser stops</htmltext>
<tokenext>about time support for this browser stops</tokentext>
<sentencetext>about time support for this browser stops</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259456</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260064</id>
	<title>Re:Next up, IE7</title>
	<author>bigblackcar</author>
	<datestamp>1265129580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Try using a reset stylesheet, it helps a lot with IE7. I've recently crosstested a site created with a reset stylesheet and the customizations for IE7 were negligible...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Try using a reset stylesheet , it helps a lot with IE7 .
I 've recently crosstested a site created with a reset stylesheet and the customizations for IE7 were negligible.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Try using a reset stylesheet, it helps a lot with IE7.
I've recently crosstested a site created with a reset stylesheet and the customizations for IE7 were negligible...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259596</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259794</id>
	<title>Re:One has to wonder</title>
	<author>fuzzyfuzzyfungus</author>
	<datestamp>1265128380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Given that, with the version of Outlook Web Access that shipped with Exchange 2007, all browsers other than IE6+(including most recent versions of Firefox and Safari) are forced to use "Outlook Web Access Light", while IE has access to "Outlook Web Access Premium", I'm going to assume that MS is willing to risk it.<br> <br>

From a market perspective, they would be morons to lock out any potential customers; but you'd probably have to prove pretty deliberate malfeasance in order to get anything legally actionable, particularly if it involves support for browsers that aren't supported by their own producers anymore...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Given that , with the version of Outlook Web Access that shipped with Exchange 2007 , all browsers other than IE6 + ( including most recent versions of Firefox and Safari ) are forced to use " Outlook Web Access Light " , while IE has access to " Outlook Web Access Premium " , I 'm going to assume that MS is willing to risk it .
From a market perspective , they would be morons to lock out any potential customers ; but you 'd probably have to prove pretty deliberate malfeasance in order to get anything legally actionable , particularly if it involves support for browsers that are n't supported by their own producers anymore.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Given that, with the version of Outlook Web Access that shipped with Exchange 2007, all browsers other than IE6+(including most recent versions of Firefox and Safari) are forced to use "Outlook Web Access Light", while IE has access to "Outlook Web Access Premium", I'm going to assume that MS is willing to risk it.
From a market perspective, they would be morons to lock out any potential customers; but you'd probably have to prove pretty deliberate malfeasance in order to get anything legally actionable, particularly if it involves support for browsers that aren't supported by their own producers anymore...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259482</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259994</id>
	<title>Helping hand...</title>
	<author>mauhiz</author>
	<datestamp>1265129340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>In fact this could be helping their rival Microsoft, who has trouble advocating for global upgrades in corporations.</htmltext>
<tokenext>In fact this could be helping their rival Microsoft , who has trouble advocating for global upgrades in corporations .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In fact this could be helping their rival Microsoft, who has trouble advocating for global upgrades in corporations.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260572</id>
	<title>Re:Finally</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265131920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Finally, but in replacement, Youtube is likely upgrading to their new "beta" interface they've been testing for quite some time, which has (IMO) really poor functionality, and looks like the Hulu.com's interface designer's scrappy younger brother designed (which is totally unusable, btw). No wonder they're dropping IE6 support; the new interface is such shit IE6 probably can't handle it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Finally , but in replacement , Youtube is likely upgrading to their new " beta " interface they 've been testing for quite some time , which has ( IMO ) really poor functionality , and looks like the Hulu.com 's interface designer 's scrappy younger brother designed ( which is totally unusable , btw ) .
No wonder they 're dropping IE6 support ; the new interface is such shit IE6 probably ca n't handle it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Finally, but in replacement, Youtube is likely upgrading to their new "beta" interface they've been testing for quite some time, which has (IMO) really poor functionality, and looks like the Hulu.com's interface designer's scrappy younger brother designed (which is totally unusable, btw).
No wonder they're dropping IE6 support; the new interface is such shit IE6 probably can't handle it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259456</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31263566</id>
	<title>Re:One has to wonder</title>
	<author>Jedi Alec</author>
	<datestamp>1265144040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, because god forbid people that use another browser but have their userstring set to IE6 to appease *insert legacy app here* could visit your website...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , because god forbid people that use another browser but have their userstring set to IE6 to appease * insert legacy app here * could visit your website.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, because god forbid people that use another browser but have their userstring set to IE6 to appease *insert legacy app here* could visit your website...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259586</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259970</id>
	<title>Re:One has to wonder</title>
	<author>rmadmin</author>
	<datestamp>1265129220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>No one in their right mind, except all the clueless users out there that haven't been forced into upgrades.  I find customers running ie6 all the time, and I promptly run updates.</htmltext>
<tokenext>No one in their right mind , except all the clueless users out there that have n't been forced into upgrades .
I find customers running ie6 all the time , and I promptly run updates .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No one in their right mind, except all the clueless users out there that haven't been forced into upgrades.
I find customers running ie6 all the time, and I promptly run updates.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259636</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31269630</id>
	<title>Re:IE 6 Not dead in the workplace, doesn't matter</title>
	<author>trawg</author>
	<datestamp>1267089060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>heh, but in the real world, one of the bosses will suddenly find he can't watch youtube in his corner office, and complain about it to IT, who will then probably have a better opportunity to get rid of IE6 than they've had before</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>heh , but in the real world , one of the bosses will suddenly find he ca n't watch youtube in his corner office , and complain about it to IT , who will then probably have a better opportunity to get rid of IE6 than they 've had before</tokentext>
<sentencetext>heh, but in the real world, one of the bosses will suddenly find he can't watch youtube in his corner office, and complain about it to IT, who will then probably have a better opportunity to get rid of IE6 than they've had before</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259598</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259602</id>
	<title>Re:Finally</title>
	<author>Yvan256</author>
	<datestamp>1265127660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>FINALLY</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>FINALLY</tokentext>
<sentencetext>FINALLY</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259456</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31262376</id>
	<title>Re:Next up, IE7</title>
	<author>Randle\_Revar</author>
	<datestamp>1265138880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But IE7 started shrinking fast almost as soon as IE8 came out.Those people who where willing and able to move to IE7 are apparently are willing and able to move to IE8.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But IE7 started shrinking fast almost as soon as IE8 came out.Those people who where willing and able to move to IE7 are apparently are willing and able to move to IE8 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But IE7 started shrinking fast almost as soon as IE8 came out.Those people who where willing and able to move to IE7 are apparently are willing and able to move to IE8.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259596</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260180</id>
	<title>But in the break room</title>
	<author>tepples</author>
	<datestamp>1265129940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>They don't want their users watching videos while they should be working.</p></div><p>Yet some companies still keep IE 6 on the PC in the break room.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>They do n't want their users watching videos while they should be working.Yet some companies still keep IE 6 on the PC in the break room .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They don't want their users watching videos while they should be working.Yet some companies still keep IE 6 on the PC in the break room.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259598</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260120</id>
	<title>Re:One has to wonder</title>
	<author>nedlohs</author>
	<datestamp>1265129760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No, there would be no outcry if Microsoft Bing does not support Netscape 6. In fact, does it now?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No , there would be no outcry if Microsoft Bing does not support Netscape 6 .
In fact , does it now ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, there would be no outcry if Microsoft Bing does not support Netscape 6.
In fact, does it now?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259482</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259596</id>
	<title>Next up, IE7</title>
	<author>sakdoctor</author>
	<datestamp>1265127660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>IE7 is almost as much of an albatross as IE6 was.<br>CSS support is such, that if you want pixel perfect layout, you are looking at a seperate style sheet; and if you just serve the standards compliant sheet, your page will look like ass.</p><p>Update all "ie6 must die" campaigns, to "ie7 must die".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>IE7 is almost as much of an albatross as IE6 was.CSS support is such , that if you want pixel perfect layout , you are looking at a seperate style sheet ; and if you just serve the standards compliant sheet , your page will look like ass.Update all " ie6 must die " campaigns , to " ie7 must die " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>IE7 is almost as much of an albatross as IE6 was.CSS support is such, that if you want pixel perfect layout, you are looking at a seperate style sheet; and if you just serve the standards compliant sheet, your page will look like ass.Update all "ie6 must die" campaigns, to "ie7 must die".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31261964</id>
	<title>Re:Next up, IE7</title>
	<author>BenoitRen</author>
	<datestamp>1265137260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>pixel perfect layout</p></div> </blockquote><p>If you want to be standards compliant, you'll throw away the outdated notion of a pixel-perfect lay-out. It's all about flexible lay-outs.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>pixel perfect layout If you want to be standards compliant , you 'll throw away the outdated notion of a pixel-perfect lay-out .
It 's all about flexible lay-outs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>pixel perfect layout If you want to be standards compliant, you'll throw away the outdated notion of a pixel-perfect lay-out.
It's all about flexible lay-outs.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259596</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31261092</id>
	<title>Re:Good Riddance!</title>
	<author>Jugalator</author>
	<datestamp>1265133900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Good riddance? Sounds like you assume this means more than it does. Google won't stop IE6 users on YouTube. It's about future features that may not work.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Good riddance ?
Sounds like you assume this means more than it does .
Google wo n't stop IE6 users on YouTube .
It 's about future features that may not work .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Good riddance?
Sounds like you assume this means more than it does.
Google won't stop IE6 users on YouTube.
It's about future features that may not work.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259578</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31265730</id>
	<title>Re:IE8 sucks too.</title>
	<author>shutdown -p now</author>
	<datestamp>1265110080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Can you give specific examples of where IE8 sucks at implementing the final (non-draft) W3C standards, such as HTML 4.01 and CSS 2.1?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Can you give specific examples of where IE8 sucks at implementing the final ( non-draft ) W3C standards , such as HTML 4.01 and CSS 2.1 ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can you give specific examples of where IE8 sucks at implementing the final (non-draft) W3C standards, such as HTML 4.01 and CSS 2.1?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260882</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260488</id>
	<title>Re:One has to wonder</title>
	<author>newdsfornerds</author>
	<datestamp>1265131500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Lots of people are lazy enough (and hate their computers enough) to ignore and reject all the updates offered. I see it all the time.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Lots of people are lazy enough ( and hate their computers enough ) to ignore and reject all the updates offered .
I see it all the time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Lots of people are lazy enough (and hate their computers enough) to ignore and reject all the updates offered.
I see it all the time.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259636</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31262784</id>
	<title>Re:IE 6 Not dead in the workplace, doesn't matter</title>
	<author>businessnerd</author>
	<datestamp>1265140800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>They don't want their users watching videos while they should be working</p></div></blockquote><p>

Except part of your work may be using YouTube or other sites "non-productive" sites.  More and more companies are starting realize that they need to have a presence on YouTube, Facebook, etc.  In fact, many companies have their own channels on YouTube.  So how about all of those people responsible for maintaining their company's YouTube channel?  If the company is still standardized on IE6 and doesn't have a plan to upgrade any time soon, then this is also unlikely to speed up the upgrade.  What will likely happen, and I think this is what Google secretly wants, is that people will install alternative browsers in order to use the IE6 incompatible sites.  You know, like the alternative browser made by Google, or that other alternative browser that defaults the home page and search bar to Google.  People are going to still use IE6 for all of the work stuff that needs it and for everything else, Firefox or Chrome.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>They do n't want their users watching videos while they should be working Except part of your work may be using YouTube or other sites " non-productive " sites .
More and more companies are starting realize that they need to have a presence on YouTube , Facebook , etc .
In fact , many companies have their own channels on YouTube .
So how about all of those people responsible for maintaining their company 's YouTube channel ?
If the company is still standardized on IE6 and does n't have a plan to upgrade any time soon , then this is also unlikely to speed up the upgrade .
What will likely happen , and I think this is what Google secretly wants , is that people will install alternative browsers in order to use the IE6 incompatible sites .
You know , like the alternative browser made by Google , or that other alternative browser that defaults the home page and search bar to Google .
People are going to still use IE6 for all of the work stuff that needs it and for everything else , Firefox or Chrome .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They don't want their users watching videos while they should be working

Except part of your work may be using YouTube or other sites "non-productive" sites.
More and more companies are starting realize that they need to have a presence on YouTube, Facebook, etc.
In fact, many companies have their own channels on YouTube.
So how about all of those people responsible for maintaining their company's YouTube channel?
If the company is still standardized on IE6 and doesn't have a plan to upgrade any time soon, then this is also unlikely to speed up the upgrade.
What will likely happen, and I think this is what Google secretly wants, is that people will install alternative browsers in order to use the IE6 incompatible sites.
You know, like the alternative browser made by Google, or that other alternative browser that defaults the home page and search bar to Google.
People are going to still use IE6 for all of the work stuff that needs it and for everything else, Firefox or Chrome.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259598</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260464</id>
	<title>An enterprise-ready turd</title>
	<author>Doug Neal</author>
	<datestamp>1265131380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The various coverage of the absurd longevity of IE6 recently has made me feel pretty good about my decision to move my career away from things Web-related. The pain of trying to make a modern website work with a 9 year old &amp; buggy-as-shit browser is something I never wish to go through. IE6 is something I would maybe fire up for a bit of ironic nostalgia, typing in various URLs, giggling at how badly it renders and remembering that this is what the internet used to be like, before remembering that people are <i>actually still using</i> this software on a daily basis, and being very glad I'm not one of them.</p><p>Here's an idea for Mozilla and Google. Make your browsers configurable by Active Directory Group Policy Objects so that they can be locked down in "enterprise" environments like IE can be. This is surely the biggest barrier to corporate uptake of Firefox, Chrome, etc?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The various coverage of the absurd longevity of IE6 recently has made me feel pretty good about my decision to move my career away from things Web-related .
The pain of trying to make a modern website work with a 9 year old &amp; buggy-as-shit browser is something I never wish to go through .
IE6 is something I would maybe fire up for a bit of ironic nostalgia , typing in various URLs , giggling at how badly it renders and remembering that this is what the internet used to be like , before remembering that people are actually still using this software on a daily basis , and being very glad I 'm not one of them.Here 's an idea for Mozilla and Google .
Make your browsers configurable by Active Directory Group Policy Objects so that they can be locked down in " enterprise " environments like IE can be .
This is surely the biggest barrier to corporate uptake of Firefox , Chrome , etc ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The various coverage of the absurd longevity of IE6 recently has made me feel pretty good about my decision to move my career away from things Web-related.
The pain of trying to make a modern website work with a 9 year old &amp; buggy-as-shit browser is something I never wish to go through.
IE6 is something I would maybe fire up for a bit of ironic nostalgia, typing in various URLs, giggling at how badly it renders and remembering that this is what the internet used to be like, before remembering that people are actually still using this software on a daily basis, and being very glad I'm not one of them.Here's an idea for Mozilla and Google.
Make your browsers configurable by Active Directory Group Policy Objects so that they can be locked down in "enterprise" environments like IE can be.
This is surely the biggest barrier to corporate uptake of Firefox, Chrome, etc?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259920</id>
	<title>Re:Finally</title>
	<author>tsa</author>
	<datestamp>1265128980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>FINALLY!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>FINALLY !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>FINALLY!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259456</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31263092</id>
	<title>Re:One has to wonder</title>
	<author>thetoadwarrior</author>
	<datestamp>1265142120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Poor people can't afford free browsers?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Poor people ca n't afford free browsers ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Poor people can't afford free browsers?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260406</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31261220</id>
	<title>Re:Bah</title>
	<author>thePowerOfGrayskull</author>
	<datestamp>1265134500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Yeah, youtube wouldn't stop bitching about me using an older version of firefox (to escape the craptastic "awesome bar") on <i>every. single. fucking. page</i>.

I finally had to resort to changing the general.useragent.extra.firefox to 3.6.</p></div><p>There are <a href="http://lmgtfy.com/?q=disable+firefox+awesome+bar" title="lmgtfy.com">better options</a> [lmgtfy.com].</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , youtube would n't stop bitching about me using an older version of firefox ( to escape the craptastic " awesome bar " ) on every .
single. fucking .
page . I finally had to resort to changing the general.useragent.extra.firefox to 3.6.There are better options [ lmgtfy.com ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, youtube wouldn't stop bitching about me using an older version of firefox (to escape the craptastic "awesome bar") on every.
single. fucking.
page.

I finally had to resort to changing the general.useragent.extra.firefox to 3.6.There are better options [lmgtfy.com].
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259844</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259844</id>
	<title>Bah</title>
	<author>Therilith</author>
	<datestamp>1265128560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yeah, youtube wouldn't stop bitching about me using an older version of firefox (to escape the craptastic "awesome bar") on <i>every. single. fucking. page</i>.<br>
I finally had to resort to changing the general.useragent.extra.firefox to 3.6.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , youtube would n't stop bitching about me using an older version of firefox ( to escape the craptastic " awesome bar " ) on every .
single. fucking .
page . I finally had to resort to changing the general.useragent.extra.firefox to 3.6 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, youtube wouldn't stop bitching about me using an older version of firefox (to escape the craptastic "awesome bar") on every.
single. fucking.
page.
I finally had to resort to changing the general.useragent.extra.firefox to 3.6.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259456</id>
	<title>Finally</title>
	<author>Dyinobal</author>
	<datestamp>1265127180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>And everyone lets out a collective exhale "Finally".</htmltext>
<tokenext>And everyone lets out a collective exhale " Finally " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And everyone lets out a collective exhale "Finally".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31262642</id>
	<title>Re:Finally</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265140020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>THINK ABOUT YOUR BREATHING</p><p>Yes that's right, THINK ABOUT YOUR BREATHING. Why you might ask? Well it's simple!</p><p>Your brain usually takes care of breathing FOR you, but whenever you remember this, YOU MUST MANUALLY BREATH! If you don't you will DIE.</p><p>There are also MANY variations of this. For example, think about:</p><p>BLINKING!</p><p>SWALLOWING SALIVA!</p><p>HOW YOUR FEET FEEL IN YOUR SOCKS!</p><p>In conclusion, the THINK ABOUT YOUR BREATHING troll is simply unbeatable. These 4 words can be thrown randomly into article text trolls, into sigs, into anything, and once seen, WILL FORCE THE VICTIM TO TAKE CARE OF HIS BREATHING MANUALLY! This goes far beyond the simple annoying or insulting trolls of yesteryear.</p><p>In fact, by EVEN RESPONDING to this troll, you are proving that IT HAS CLAIMED ANOTHER VICTIM -- YOU!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>THINK ABOUT YOUR BREATHINGYes that 's right , THINK ABOUT YOUR BREATHING .
Why you might ask ?
Well it 's simple ! Your brain usually takes care of breathing FOR you , but whenever you remember this , YOU MUST MANUALLY BREATH !
If you do n't you will DIE.There are also MANY variations of this .
For example , think about : BLINKING ! SWALLOWING SALIVA ! HOW YOUR FEET FEEL IN YOUR SOCKS ! In conclusion , the THINK ABOUT YOUR BREATHING troll is simply unbeatable .
These 4 words can be thrown randomly into article text trolls , into sigs , into anything , and once seen , WILL FORCE THE VICTIM TO TAKE CARE OF HIS BREATHING MANUALLY !
This goes far beyond the simple annoying or insulting trolls of yesteryear.In fact , by EVEN RESPONDING to this troll , you are proving that IT HAS CLAIMED ANOTHER VICTIM -- YOU !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>THINK ABOUT YOUR BREATHINGYes that's right, THINK ABOUT YOUR BREATHING.
Why you might ask?
Well it's simple!Your brain usually takes care of breathing FOR you, but whenever you remember this, YOU MUST MANUALLY BREATH!
If you don't you will DIE.There are also MANY variations of this.
For example, think about:BLINKING!SWALLOWING SALIVA!HOW YOUR FEET FEEL IN YOUR SOCKS!In conclusion, the THINK ABOUT YOUR BREATHING troll is simply unbeatable.
These 4 words can be thrown randomly into article text trolls, into sigs, into anything, and once seen, WILL FORCE THE VICTIM TO TAKE CARE OF HIS BREATHING MANUALLY!
This goes far beyond the simple annoying or insulting trolls of yesteryear.In fact, by EVEN RESPONDING to this troll, you are proving that IT HAS CLAIMED ANOTHER VICTIM -- YOU!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259456</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31261072</id>
	<title>Re:One has to wonder</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265133840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Redirecting me to a browser choice website for choosing IE 8 will simply result in me not using your website.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Redirecting me to a browser choice website for choosing IE 8 will simply result in me not using your website .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Redirecting me to a browser choice website for choosing IE 8 will simply result in me not using your website.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259586</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260386</id>
	<title>Re:Next up, IE7</title>
	<author>newdsfornerds</author>
	<datestamp>1265131020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>How about, "IE must die?" I know I'm being silly but still. All I ever use IE for is updating my WinXP virtual machine, which I keep around just in case my next gig requires it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>How about , " IE must die ?
" I know I 'm being silly but still .
All I ever use IE for is updating my WinXP virtual machine , which I keep around just in case my next gig requires it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How about, "IE must die?
" I know I'm being silly but still.
All I ever use IE for is updating my WinXP virtual machine, which I keep around just in case my next gig requires it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259596</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259610</id>
	<title>Hooray!</title>
	<author>headkase</author>
	<datestamp>1265127720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>The thing about supporting obsolete technology forever is that the people who want the support <i>will always <b>want</b> the support forever</i>.  Sometimes, you just have to cut them loose because that is the only way to get them to move to something better.  And once they are on something better they'll wonder how they got along without it - with the cycle repeating.  Of course some of their outdated applications will need to be updated but really does it always have to get to the point where you insist you need "Windows 95" forever?</htmltext>
<tokenext>The thing about supporting obsolete technology forever is that the people who want the support will always want the support forever .
Sometimes , you just have to cut them loose because that is the only way to get them to move to something better .
And once they are on something better they 'll wonder how they got along without it - with the cycle repeating .
Of course some of their outdated applications will need to be updated but really does it always have to get to the point where you insist you need " Windows 95 " forever ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The thing about supporting obsolete technology forever is that the people who want the support will always want the support forever.
Sometimes, you just have to cut them loose because that is the only way to get them to move to something better.
And once they are on something better they'll wonder how they got along without it - with the cycle repeating.
Of course some of their outdated applications will need to be updated but really does it always have to get to the point where you insist you need "Windows 95" forever?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260070</id>
	<title>Re:One has to wonder</title>
	<author>Archangel Michael</author>
	<datestamp>1265129580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>It's time to drag corporations* into the modern age, even if they're kicking and screaming the entire way.</i></p><p>Actually, this will most likely not have ANY affect on Corporate use of IE6, as most Corporation Masters hate things like YouTube as Time wasters. So it is with great glee that they will continue to demand using IE 6 for as long as they can.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's time to drag corporations * into the modern age , even if they 're kicking and screaming the entire way.Actually , this will most likely not have ANY affect on Corporate use of IE6 , as most Corporation Masters hate things like YouTube as Time wasters .
So it is with great glee that they will continue to demand using IE 6 for as long as they can .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's time to drag corporations* into the modern age, even if they're kicking and screaming the entire way.Actually, this will most likely not have ANY affect on Corporate use of IE6, as most Corporation Masters hate things like YouTube as Time wasters.
So it is with great glee that they will continue to demand using IE 6 for as long as they can.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259636</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31281006</id>
	<title>Re:One has to wonder</title>
	<author>indi0144</author>
	<datestamp>1267113780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Seconded, useragent does not work in that page, actually crashed svchost.dll on my win2k machine (looking for an infection now just because I'm too paranoid).. red background and all, less effective than ie6update. Why I use win2k? You want a more realistic test machine for a website? the only good browser in 2k it's Opera it can tame slashdot full javascrapt on a P3.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Seconded , useragent does not work in that page , actually crashed svchost.dll on my win2k machine ( looking for an infection now just because I 'm too paranoid ) .. red background and all , less effective than ie6update .
Why I use win2k ?
You want a more realistic test machine for a website ?
the only good browser in 2k it 's Opera it can tame slashdot full javascrapt on a P3 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seconded, useragent does not work in that page, actually crashed svchost.dll on my win2k machine (looking for an infection now just because I'm too paranoid).. red background and all, less effective than ie6update.
Why I use win2k?
You want a more realistic test machine for a website?
the only good browser in 2k it's Opera it can tame slashdot full javascrapt on a P3.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259730</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259956</id>
	<title>Yay, but</title>
	<author>wisnoskij</author>
	<datestamp>1265129160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It is great that they are doing this, but I really do not see this convincing all that many people to upgrade.<br>
Most of the people using IE6 are corporations, and not allowing their workers/students to watch youtube would most likely be a feature for them anyways.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It is great that they are doing this , but I really do not see this convincing all that many people to upgrade .
Most of the people using IE6 are corporations , and not allowing their workers/students to watch youtube would most likely be a feature for them anyways .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It is great that they are doing this, but I really do not see this convincing all that many people to upgrade.
Most of the people using IE6 are corporations, and not allowing their workers/students to watch youtube would most likely be a feature for them anyways.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260002</id>
	<title>Re:One has to wonder</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265129340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I do IT support for a state govt.  We have tons of people still on IE6 and can't get permission to force everyone to 7 because of antiquated internal web apps that break.  And no, we can't force them to fix it.</p><p>I'd like to see IE6 break in a major way just so we'd have a bigger stick to use in trying to get them to upgrade.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do IT support for a state govt .
We have tons of people still on IE6 and ca n't get permission to force everyone to 7 because of antiquated internal web apps that break .
And no , we ca n't force them to fix it.I 'd like to see IE6 break in a major way just so we 'd have a bigger stick to use in trying to get them to upgrade .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I do IT support for a state govt.
We have tons of people still on IE6 and can't get permission to force everyone to 7 because of antiquated internal web apps that break.
And no, we can't force them to fix it.I'd like to see IE6 break in a major way just so we'd have a bigger stick to use in trying to get them to upgrade.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259636</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259482</id>
	<title>One has to wonder</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265127240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>What if Microsoft was to phase out support on Bing for an old version of Firefox.  Would that be MS abusing it's monopoly?</htmltext>
<tokenext>What if Microsoft was to phase out support on Bing for an old version of Firefox .
Would that be MS abusing it 's monopoly ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What if Microsoft was to phase out support on Bing for an old version of Firefox.
Would that be MS abusing it's monopoly?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259722</id>
	<title>Re:Finally</title>
	<author>piripiri</author>
	<datestamp>1265128140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Well I'll say "Finally" only when no one is using IE6 anymore.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well I 'll say " Finally " only when no one is using IE6 anymore .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well I'll say "Finally" only when no one is using IE6 anymore.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259456</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31261388</id>
	<title>Re:Next up, IE7</title>
	<author>Just Some Guy</author>
	<datestamp>1265135160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>IE7 is almost as much of an albatross as IE6 was.</p></div><p>Yeah, but it's chained much more lightly. Upgrading from IE7 to IE8+ or Firefox or Chrome or Safari is <em>much</em> easier than upgrading from IE6 to IE7. Once you've gotten over breaking backward compatibility, the options are a lot better.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>IE7 is almost as much of an albatross as IE6 was.Yeah , but it 's chained much more lightly .
Upgrading from IE7 to IE8 + or Firefox or Chrome or Safari is much easier than upgrading from IE6 to IE7 .
Once you 've gotten over breaking backward compatibility , the options are a lot better .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>IE7 is almost as much of an albatross as IE6 was.Yeah, but it's chained much more lightly.
Upgrading from IE7 to IE8+ or Firefox or Chrome or Safari is much easier than upgrading from IE6 to IE7.
Once you've gotten over breaking backward compatibility, the options are a lot better.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259596</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31261506</id>
	<title>Re:Next up, IE7</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265135580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Might amuse you to know dean edwards has an updated version of IE8.js -  IE9.js</p><p>Fixes things still missing in IE8 like, for example,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:last-child and<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:nth-child</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Might amuse you to know dean edwards has an updated version of IE8.js - IE9.jsFixes things still missing in IE8 like , for example , : last-child and : nth-child</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Might amuse you to know dean edwards has an updated version of IE8.js -  IE9.jsFixes things still missing in IE8 like, for example, :last-child and :nth-child</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259596</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31263144</id>
	<title>Re:IE 6 Not dead in the workplace, doesn't matter</title>
	<author>gregmac</author>
	<datestamp>1265142300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Interesting experiment:</p><p>Find a site that exploits IE6 to install something highly irritating but otherwise mostly harmless (eg.. randomly flips the monitor upside down, or keeps showing a message "Rebooting in 30 seconds, click here to cancel.." or randomly open websites every few minutes). Preferably you have nothing to do with the creation, hosting, or anything else of this site -- you just found it somewhere.</p><p>Find a large-ish company, mandated to use IE6.. preferably one where the IT department says it's because it's "more secure" than other browsers (and yes, I know places like that - it's mind boggling).</p><p>Put an ad up on a billboard nearby (that many of their offices/breakroom overlook, or employees drive by, etc) that says "Hey (company name), do NOT go to www.badsite.com!"</p><p>Technically, you were doing a public service, warning them not to go there. All I'm saying.. it would be interesting to watch the fallout (knowing an insider in the company would make this more interesting).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Interesting experiment : Find a site that exploits IE6 to install something highly irritating but otherwise mostly harmless ( eg.. randomly flips the monitor upside down , or keeps showing a message " Rebooting in 30 seconds , click here to cancel.. " or randomly open websites every few minutes ) .
Preferably you have nothing to do with the creation , hosting , or anything else of this site -- you just found it somewhere.Find a large-ish company , mandated to use IE6.. preferably one where the IT department says it 's because it 's " more secure " than other browsers ( and yes , I know places like that - it 's mind boggling ) .Put an ad up on a billboard nearby ( that many of their offices/breakroom overlook , or employees drive by , etc ) that says " Hey ( company name ) , do NOT go to www.badsite.com !
" Technically , you were doing a public service , warning them not to go there .
All I 'm saying.. it would be interesting to watch the fallout ( knowing an insider in the company would make this more interesting ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Interesting experiment:Find a site that exploits IE6 to install something highly irritating but otherwise mostly harmless (eg.. randomly flips the monitor upside down, or keeps showing a message "Rebooting in 30 seconds, click here to cancel.." or randomly open websites every few minutes).
Preferably you have nothing to do with the creation, hosting, or anything else of this site -- you just found it somewhere.Find a large-ish company, mandated to use IE6.. preferably one where the IT department says it's because it's "more secure" than other browsers (and yes, I know places like that - it's mind boggling).Put an ad up on a billboard nearby (that many of their offices/breakroom overlook, or employees drive by, etc) that says "Hey (company name), do NOT go to www.badsite.com!
"Technically, you were doing a public service, warning them not to go there.
All I'm saying.. it would be interesting to watch the fallout (knowing an insider in the company would make this more interesting).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260912</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260238</id>
	<title>Google IS dumping older versions of FF</title>
	<author>argent</author>
	<datestamp>1265130240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>RTFA</p><p>Google IS dumping older versions of Firefox as well.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>RTFAGoogle IS dumping older versions of Firefox as well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>RTFAGoogle IS dumping older versions of Firefox as well.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259482</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259736</id>
	<title>And businesses rejoice!!!</title>
	<author>OzPeter</author>
	<datestamp>1265128140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This is one reason for businesses to keep IE6 - no more time wasting employees watching YouTube!!  Hooray!!</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is one reason for businesses to keep IE6 - no more time wasting employees watching YouTube ! !
Hooray ! !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is one reason for businesses to keep IE6 - no more time wasting employees watching YouTube!!
Hooray!!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260406</id>
	<title>Re:One has to wonder</title>
	<author>Anonymusing</author>
	<datestamp>1265131140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I work with a number of international nonprofits. Tracking data from their sites indicates that IE6 is still in use for 20-25\% of their traffic. Admittedly, some of these sites get traffic from poorer countries where the technology is not at par with the U.S., but still... on those sites, we need to continue IE6 compatability.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I work with a number of international nonprofits .
Tracking data from their sites indicates that IE6 is still in use for 20-25 \ % of their traffic .
Admittedly , some of these sites get traffic from poorer countries where the technology is not at par with the U.S. , but still... on those sites , we need to continue IE6 compatability .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I work with a number of international nonprofits.
Tracking data from their sites indicates that IE6 is still in use for 20-25\% of their traffic.
Admittedly, some of these sites get traffic from poorer countries where the technology is not at par with the U.S., but still... on those sites, we need to continue IE6 compatability.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259636</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259712</id>
	<title>Interesting precedent, content imposing software</title>
	<author>h00manist</author>
	<datestamp>1265128080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I wonder what consequences will website-imposed browsers have.  Perhaps we're heading towards some kind of content - terminal matching OS, where all content will come with terminal specs, and you basically install a dozen terminal emulators on your systems.  Kind of like <a href="http://www.thinstation.org/" title="thinstation.org">thinstation</a> [thinstation.org]. x86 is pretty much becoming a kind of terminal, with hypervisors. And win32 or Linux a kind of content-packager-gui or something.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I wonder what consequences will website-imposed browsers have .
Perhaps we 're heading towards some kind of content - terminal matching OS , where all content will come with terminal specs , and you basically install a dozen terminal emulators on your systems .
Kind of like thinstation [ thinstation.org ] .
x86 is pretty much becoming a kind of terminal , with hypervisors .
And win32 or Linux a kind of content-packager-gui or something .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wonder what consequences will website-imposed browsers have.
Perhaps we're heading towards some kind of content - terminal matching OS, where all content will come with terminal specs, and you basically install a dozen terminal emulators on your systems.
Kind of like thinstation [thinstation.org].
x86 is pretty much becoming a kind of terminal, with hypervisors.
And win32 or Linux a kind of content-packager-gui or something.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260156</id>
	<title>IE7</title>
	<author>joeyblades</author>
	<datestamp>1265129880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>So apparently IE7 is considered a "modern browser"???</htmltext>
<tokenext>So apparently IE7 is considered a " modern browser " ? ?
?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So apparently IE7 is considered a "modern browser"??
?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260544</id>
	<title>Re:One has to wonder</title>
	<author>Crudely\_Indecent</author>
	<datestamp>1265131800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Those kicking and screaming will be the employees at the corporations who're surfing YouTube instead of doing their work.</p><p>When the uproar finally reaches a volume that upper management can hear it, the first question will be "Why are you watching YouTube videos on our time?"  That might be enough for the decision to be made that IE6 stays in order to make the employees more productive.</p><p>Seriously, if you're a corporate exec making the technology decisions and you're faced with the choice:<br>Upgrade the browsers and pay for development updates on an app that was designed for IE6.<br>or<br>Keep IE6, increase productivity and leave the technology in its current state.</p><p>I don't see this as being a good thing unless Microsoft does it.  When the vendor says "we won't support it anymore, and you cannot buy a contract to extend support" more companies will upgrade.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Those kicking and screaming will be the employees at the corporations who 're surfing YouTube instead of doing their work.When the uproar finally reaches a volume that upper management can hear it , the first question will be " Why are you watching YouTube videos on our time ?
" That might be enough for the decision to be made that IE6 stays in order to make the employees more productive.Seriously , if you 're a corporate exec making the technology decisions and you 're faced with the choice : Upgrade the browsers and pay for development updates on an app that was designed for IE6.orKeep IE6 , increase productivity and leave the technology in its current state.I do n't see this as being a good thing unless Microsoft does it .
When the vendor says " we wo n't support it anymore , and you can not buy a contract to extend support " more companies will upgrade .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Those kicking and screaming will be the employees at the corporations who're surfing YouTube instead of doing their work.When the uproar finally reaches a volume that upper management can hear it, the first question will be "Why are you watching YouTube videos on our time?
"  That might be enough for the decision to be made that IE6 stays in order to make the employees more productive.Seriously, if you're a corporate exec making the technology decisions and you're faced with the choice:Upgrade the browsers and pay for development updates on an app that was designed for IE6.orKeep IE6, increase productivity and leave the technology in its current state.I don't see this as being a good thing unless Microsoft does it.
When the vendor says "we won't support it anymore, and you cannot buy a contract to extend support" more companies will upgrade.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259636</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260790</id>
	<title>Re:Next up, IE7</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1265132700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Exactly my thought. Just that I include every IE ever with the Trident engine.</p><p>I will only let MS off the hook, if they do a complete rewrite of that mess.</p><p>The reason? Because Trident is a MS-typical upside-down pyramid. You know, like Windows ME. Or MS Office.<br>It desperately needs a redesign of the core architecture.</p><p>But I&rsquo;m fair. If MS really does that, they will get my respect. As that new engine would most likely blow even Firefox out of the water. (Gecko still is way too close to Netscape Navigator 4, for my taste.)</p><p>(Disclaimer: I use Firefox, Opera, and sometimes have to use IE for testing.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Exactly my thought .
Just that I include every IE ever with the Trident engine.I will only let MS off the hook , if they do a complete rewrite of that mess.The reason ?
Because Trident is a MS-typical upside-down pyramid .
You know , like Windows ME .
Or MS Office.It desperately needs a redesign of the core architecture.But I    m fair .
If MS really does that , they will get my respect .
As that new engine would most likely blow even Firefox out of the water .
( Gecko still is way too close to Netscape Navigator 4 , for my taste .
) ( Disclaimer : I use Firefox , Opera , and sometimes have to use IE for testing .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Exactly my thought.
Just that I include every IE ever with the Trident engine.I will only let MS off the hook, if they do a complete rewrite of that mess.The reason?
Because Trident is a MS-typical upside-down pyramid.
You know, like Windows ME.
Or MS Office.It desperately needs a redesign of the core architecture.But I’m fair.
If MS really does that, they will get my respect.
As that new engine would most likely blow even Firefox out of the water.
(Gecko still is way too close to Netscape Navigator 4, for my taste.
)(Disclaimer: I use Firefox, Opera, and sometimes have to use IE for testing.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259596</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260104</id>
	<title>Re:One has to wonder</title>
	<author>tepples</author>
	<datestamp>1265129700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>What if Microsoft was to phase out support on Bing for an old version of Firefox.</p></div><p>That wouldn't be monopoly abuse. Firefox 3 is distributed for free as free software, and it runs even on Windows 2000 that can't run IE 7 or 8.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>What if Microsoft was to phase out support on Bing for an old version of Firefox.That would n't be monopoly abuse .
Firefox 3 is distributed for free as free software , and it runs even on Windows 2000 that ca n't run IE 7 or 8 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What if Microsoft was to phase out support on Bing for an old version of Firefox.That wouldn't be monopoly abuse.
Firefox 3 is distributed for free as free software, and it runs even on Windows 2000 that can't run IE 7 or 8.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259482</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259652</id>
	<title>Re:One has to wonder</title>
	<author>fatherjoecode</author>
	<datestamp>1265127900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>That would depend on the circumstances, but generally I'd say no. It would not be an abuse of its monopoly power. IE6 has been around since 2001 and the first version of FF was released in 2004. If Bing decided to drop support for FF v1.0 I don't see how that would be a problem.</htmltext>
<tokenext>That would depend on the circumstances , but generally I 'd say no .
It would not be an abuse of its monopoly power .
IE6 has been around since 2001 and the first version of FF was released in 2004 .
If Bing decided to drop support for FF v1.0 I do n't see how that would be a problem .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That would depend on the circumstances, but generally I'd say no.
It would not be an abuse of its monopoly power.
IE6 has been around since 2001 and the first version of FF was released in 2004.
If Bing decided to drop support for FF v1.0 I don't see how that would be a problem.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259482</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259716</id>
	<title>Re:Finally</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265128080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Isn't youtube a little late to the celebration, does it warrant special news...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is n't youtube a little late to the celebration , does it warrant special news.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Isn't youtube a little late to the celebration, does it warrant special news...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259456</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259988</id>
	<title>Firefox 2</title>
	<author>Leolo</author>
	<datestamp>1265129280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They are also going to drop support for Firefox 2.  Which I still use because Firefox 3 requires a newer version of GTK.  Which I don't have because I'm using FC5 on my desktop computer.  And I haven't upgraded it because I can't be without a working desktop computer for the length of time an upgrade would take.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They are also going to drop support for Firefox 2 .
Which I still use because Firefox 3 requires a newer version of GTK .
Which I do n't have because I 'm using FC5 on my desktop computer .
And I have n't upgraded it because I ca n't be without a working desktop computer for the length of time an upgrade would take .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They are also going to drop support for Firefox 2.
Which I still use because Firefox 3 requires a newer version of GTK.
Which I don't have because I'm using FC5 on my desktop computer.
And I haven't upgraded it because I can't be without a working desktop computer for the length of time an upgrade would take.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260268</id>
	<title>Re:IE 6 Not dead in the workplace, doesn't matter</title>
	<author>Yvanhoe</author>
	<datestamp>1265130480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Then they should mandate Lynx</htmltext>
<tokenext>Then they should mandate Lynx</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Then they should mandate Lynx</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259598</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259642</id>
	<title>Important Clarification:</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265127900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>It should be noted that Google is not <i>breaking</i> youtube for IE6 users(the poor bastards). Doing so would be pretty stupid, especially since most of the heavy lifting goes on inside the flash blob, and people slacking at work are probably a decent sized audience.<br> <br>

They are just declaring their intention to no longer subject new features to the "can it be made to work with IE6?" test.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It should be noted that Google is not breaking youtube for IE6 users ( the poor bastards ) .
Doing so would be pretty stupid , especially since most of the heavy lifting goes on inside the flash blob , and people slacking at work are probably a decent sized audience .
They are just declaring their intention to no longer subject new features to the " can it be made to work with IE6 ?
" test .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It should be noted that Google is not breaking youtube for IE6 users(the poor bastards).
Doing so would be pretty stupid, especially since most of the heavy lifting goes on inside the flash blob, and people slacking at work are probably a decent sized audience.
They are just declaring their intention to no longer subject new features to the "can it be made to work with IE6?
" test.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259842</id>
	<title>Re:Finally</title>
	<author>Gruff1002</author>
	<datestamp>1265128560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>RIP IE6</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>RIP IE6</tokentext>
<sentencetext>RIP IE6</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259456</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260648</id>
	<title>Re:Google IS dumping older versions of FF</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265132280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As long as youtube still supports lynx I'll be happy</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As long as youtube still supports lynx I 'll be happy</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As long as youtube still supports lynx I'll be happy</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260238</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260946</id>
	<title>Re:Google IS dumping older versions of FF</title>
	<author>berashith</author>
	<datestamp>1265133300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>yup, my eeepc 901 is as updated as the base distro will let me be, and youtube is about to drop support for that also. If I cared I would put a different linux on it, but loss of youtube access just isnt going to kill me. Many current flash sites wont work at all, without a big declaration of non-support, the boxes just dont do anything.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>yup , my eeepc 901 is as updated as the base distro will let me be , and youtube is about to drop support for that also .
If I cared I would put a different linux on it , but loss of youtube access just isnt going to kill me .
Many current flash sites wont work at all , without a big declaration of non-support , the boxes just dont do anything .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>yup, my eeepc 901 is as updated as the base distro will let me be, and youtube is about to drop support for that also.
If I cared I would put a different linux on it, but loss of youtube access just isnt going to kill me.
Many current flash sites wont work at all, without a big declaration of non-support, the boxes just dont do anything.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260238</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31263012</id>
	<title>Re:One has to wonder</title>
	<author>thetoadwarrior</author>
	<datestamp>1265141760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You can still use Firefox and aren't tied to a MS browser so no. It's just sensible to force the tight ward companies and jerk too afraid of changing their computer to move forward and stop holding us back.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You can still use Firefox and are n't tied to a MS browser so no .
It 's just sensible to force the tight ward companies and jerk too afraid of changing their computer to move forward and stop holding us back .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can still use Firefox and aren't tied to a MS browser so no.
It's just sensible to force the tight ward companies and jerk too afraid of changing their computer to move forward and stop holding us back.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259482</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260682</id>
	<title>DIE! DIE! DIE!</title>
	<author>Hasai</author>
	<datestamp>1265132280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>'Nuff said.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>'Nuff said .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>'Nuff said.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260188</id>
	<title>STW</title>
	<author>tsa</author>
	<datestamp>1265130000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I worked as a researcher at the University of Twente for a project that was funded by <a href="http://www.stw.nl/" title="www.stw.nl">STW</a> [www.stw.nl], the Dutch funding agency for applied physics reseach. In 2007 STW forced us to use their new online database which turned out to be powered by MS crapware. It was completely unusable when you tried to approach it with Firefox, and even with IE6 it generated massive amounts of the most horrible error messages when you uploaded a file. After two hours on the phone with one of their 'supporters' who kept telling us to use IE, even when we had said multiple times that that didn't work, he advised me to install an 'IE plugin' into FF. Then I hung up and wrote a letter together with my professor to tell their boss that we would hand in our reports and articles in the old way because of their incompetent IT staff.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I worked as a researcher at the University of Twente for a project that was funded by STW [ www.stw.nl ] , the Dutch funding agency for applied physics reseach .
In 2007 STW forced us to use their new online database which turned out to be powered by MS crapware .
It was completely unusable when you tried to approach it with Firefox , and even with IE6 it generated massive amounts of the most horrible error messages when you uploaded a file .
After two hours on the phone with one of their 'supporters ' who kept telling us to use IE , even when we had said multiple times that that did n't work , he advised me to install an 'IE plugin ' into FF .
Then I hung up and wrote a letter together with my professor to tell their boss that we would hand in our reports and articles in the old way because of their incompetent IT staff .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I worked as a researcher at the University of Twente for a project that was funded by STW [www.stw.nl], the Dutch funding agency for applied physics reseach.
In 2007 STW forced us to use their new online database which turned out to be powered by MS crapware.
It was completely unusable when you tried to approach it with Firefox, and even with IE6 it generated massive amounts of the most horrible error messages when you uploaded a file.
After two hours on the phone with one of their 'supporters' who kept telling us to use IE, even when we had said multiple times that that didn't work, he advised me to install an 'IE plugin' into FF.
Then I hung up and wrote a letter together with my professor to tell their boss that we would hand in our reports and articles in the old way because of their incompetent IT staff.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31265848</id>
	<title>Re:It's about goddamned time</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265110500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What pray tell is so niggardly (stingy, miserly, whatever) about offering a free service in a half-assed manner? Is the vast majority of open source also niggardly? I do acknowledge that not keeping IE6 updated was problematic. So I would understand if say a government body ordered Microsoft to release the code to third parties so it's holes could be patched, or if third party browsers got funding to oust IE6, or heck if IE6 was outright banned legally, but forcing anybody (even Microsoft) to augment a freely offered service for the good of the community doesn't strike me as a good thing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What pray tell is so niggardly ( stingy , miserly , whatever ) about offering a free service in a half-assed manner ?
Is the vast majority of open source also niggardly ?
I do acknowledge that not keeping IE6 updated was problematic .
So I would understand if say a government body ordered Microsoft to release the code to third parties so it 's holes could be patched , or if third party browsers got funding to oust IE6 , or heck if IE6 was outright banned legally , but forcing anybody ( even Microsoft ) to augment a freely offered service for the good of the community does n't strike me as a good thing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What pray tell is so niggardly (stingy, miserly, whatever) about offering a free service in a half-assed manner?
Is the vast majority of open source also niggardly?
I do acknowledge that not keeping IE6 updated was problematic.
So I would understand if say a government body ordered Microsoft to release the code to third parties so it's holes could be patched, or if third party browsers got funding to oust IE6, or heck if IE6 was outright banned legally, but forcing anybody (even Microsoft) to augment a freely offered service for the good of the community doesn't strike me as a good thing.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259474</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31265784</id>
	<title>Re:Hooray!</title>
	<author>shutdown -p now</author>
	<datestamp>1265110260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>At this point, frankly, the vast majority of people involved want IE6 to go away. It's not just Google and other web devs - it's Microsoft itself, as well (then again, MS also has quite a few web apps of its own, and naturally also runs into problems with IE6 there).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>At this point , frankly , the vast majority of people involved want IE6 to go away .
It 's not just Google and other web devs - it 's Microsoft itself , as well ( then again , MS also has quite a few web apps of its own , and naturally also runs into problems with IE6 there ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At this point, frankly, the vast majority of people involved want IE6 to go away.
It's not just Google and other web devs - it's Microsoft itself, as well (then again, MS also has quite a few web apps of its own, and naturally also runs into problems with IE6 there).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259610</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260912</id>
	<title>Re:IE 6 Not dead in the workplace, doesn't matter</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1265133120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Seriously, what workplace do you work in, that hasn&rsquo;t done any Windows Updates for a couple of years, putting the company as a whole at huge risks?</p><p>Even without talking about Firefox... WTF?<br>I mean all I would need to wreck your whole company to bankrupcy, would be someone from your company surfing on my prepared site...<br>The holes are well-known. And IE6 won&rsquo;t be fixed anymore.<br>That&rsquo;s all it would take for you to lose your job!!</p><p>Now of course I wouldn&rsquo;d do that to you, as I&rsquo;m not a dick. But... aaahhhh!</p><p>I can only say: Get outta there as fast as you can!</p><p>Damn, if I could, I&rsquo;d hire you, just to get you out of there!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Seriously , what workplace do you work in , that hasn    t done any Windows Updates for a couple of years , putting the company as a whole at huge risks ? Even without talking about Firefox... WTF ? I mean all I would need to wreck your whole company to bankrupcy , would be someone from your company surfing on my prepared site...The holes are well-known .
And IE6 won    t be fixed anymore.That    s all it would take for you to lose your job !
! Now of course I wouldn    d do that to you , as I    m not a dick .
But... aaahhhh ! I can only say : Get outta there as fast as you can ! Damn , if I could , I    d hire you , just to get you out of there !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seriously, what workplace do you work in, that hasn’t done any Windows Updates for a couple of years, putting the company as a whole at huge risks?Even without talking about Firefox... WTF?I mean all I would need to wreck your whole company to bankrupcy, would be someone from your company surfing on my prepared site...The holes are well-known.
And IE6 won’t be fixed anymore.That’s all it would take for you to lose your job!
!Now of course I wouldn’d do that to you, as I’m not a dick.
But... aaahhhh!I can only say: Get outta there as fast as you can!Damn, if I could, I’d hire you, just to get you out of there!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259598</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260412</id>
	<title>Re:It's about goddamned time</title>
	<author>Stormwatch</author>
	<datestamp>1265131140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>People modded this down? What a bunch of naggers.</htmltext>
<tokenext>People modded this down ?
What a bunch of naggers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>People modded this down?
What a bunch of naggers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259474</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260776</id>
	<title>Re:One has to wonder</title>
	<author>cbhacking</author>
	<datestamp>1265132640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>For the next version of Exchange supports the full OWA on all modern browsers (and IE6 for good measure). Pretty sure it doesn't actually work with Firefox 1.0, although I haven't tried.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For the next version of Exchange supports the full OWA on all modern browsers ( and IE6 for good measure ) .
Pretty sure it does n't actually work with Firefox 1.0 , although I have n't tried .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For the next version of Exchange supports the full OWA on all modern browsers (and IE6 for good measure).
Pretty sure it doesn't actually work with Firefox 1.0, although I haven't tried.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259794</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259638</id>
	<title>Re:One has to wonder</title>
	<author>morari</author>
	<datestamp>1265127840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No. If it's an old version, chances are that the creators themselves aren't actively supporting or updating it anymore. If that's the case, why should everyone else continue to support it at their expense?</p><p>Besides, no one would actually miss Bing.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:P</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No .
If it 's an old version , chances are that the creators themselves are n't actively supporting or updating it anymore .
If that 's the case , why should everyone else continue to support it at their expense ? Besides , no one would actually miss Bing .
: P</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No.
If it's an old version, chances are that the creators themselves aren't actively supporting or updating it anymore.
If that's the case, why should everyone else continue to support it at their expense?Besides, no one would actually miss Bing.
:P</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259482</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31267102</id>
	<title>Re:Next up, IE7</title>
	<author>whovian</author>
	<datestamp>1265118180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If you want to be standards compliant, you'll throw away the outdated notion of a pixel-perfect lay-out. It's all about flexible lay-outs.</p></div><p>Unfortunately some web authors base their layout on the full screen width rather than on the browser's usable window width, thereby causing us to widen the browser window.</p><p>
&nbsp;</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you want to be standards compliant , you 'll throw away the outdated notion of a pixel-perfect lay-out .
It 's all about flexible lay-outs.Unfortunately some web authors base their layout on the full screen width rather than on the browser 's usable window width , thereby causing us to widen the browser window .
 </tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you want to be standards compliant, you'll throw away the outdated notion of a pixel-perfect lay-out.
It's all about flexible lay-outs.Unfortunately some web authors base their layout on the full screen width rather than on the browser's usable window width, thereby causing us to widen the browser window.
 
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31261964</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259874</id>
	<title>Great...</title>
	<author>Shinobi</author>
	<datestamp>1265128740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Now we'll never get rid of it in corporate IT...</p><p>PHB: I hear IE6 can no longer be used for viewing Youtube. IE6 is now mandatory for all employees.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Now we 'll never get rid of it in corporate IT...PHB : I hear IE6 can no longer be used for viewing Youtube .
IE6 is now mandatory for all employees .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Now we'll never get rid of it in corporate IT...PHB: I hear IE6 can no longer be used for viewing Youtube.
IE6 is now mandatory for all employees.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260716</id>
	<title>Beware the Ides of March</title>
	<author>ei4anb</author>
	<datestamp>1265132460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Ides of March being the following Monday could be a busy day for some sysadmins, "hey my youtubes don't work"<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-)</htmltext>
<tokenext>Ides of March being the following Monday could be a busy day for some sysadmins , " hey my youtubes do n't work " : - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ides of March being the following Monday could be a busy day for some sysadmins, "hey my youtubes don't work" :-)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31277830</id>
	<title>Re:IE8 sucks too.</title>
	<author>Simetrical</author>
	<datestamp>1267093260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>For that matter IE8 sucks too. I wish Microsoft would just get it together and use webkit or gecko as their rendering engine. They could keep the familiar IE interface and whatever extras they wanted without forcing this load of crap on all us poor developers that just want standards support.</p></div><p>IE8's CSS2.1 support is excellent, on par with any other browser.  Its major problem is that it doesn't implement many of the standards that all other browsers do these days, like CSS3 Selectors, SVG, or certain parts of HTML5 (like &lt;canvas&gt;).  But it's livable.

</p><p>The awful thing about IE6 and IE7 is how they implement CSS <em>incorrectly</em> in a big way, so you have to figure out their crazy version of CSS and serve separate stylesheets.  (There are probably JS problems too, but I don't do much JS, so I dunno.)  IE8 isn't a big problem, you just can't use some features in it.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>For that matter IE8 sucks too .
I wish Microsoft would just get it together and use webkit or gecko as their rendering engine .
They could keep the familiar IE interface and whatever extras they wanted without forcing this load of crap on all us poor developers that just want standards support.IE8 's CSS2.1 support is excellent , on par with any other browser .
Its major problem is that it does n't implement many of the standards that all other browsers do these days , like CSS3 Selectors , SVG , or certain parts of HTML5 ( like ) .
But it 's livable .
The awful thing about IE6 and IE7 is how they implement CSS incorrectly in a big way , so you have to figure out their crazy version of CSS and serve separate stylesheets .
( There are probably JS problems too , but I do n't do much JS , so I dunno .
) IE8 is n't a big problem , you just ca n't use some features in it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For that matter IE8 sucks too.
I wish Microsoft would just get it together and use webkit or gecko as their rendering engine.
They could keep the familiar IE interface and whatever extras they wanted without forcing this load of crap on all us poor developers that just want standards support.IE8's CSS2.1 support is excellent, on par with any other browser.
Its major problem is that it doesn't implement many of the standards that all other browsers do these days, like CSS3 Selectors, SVG, or certain parts of HTML5 (like ).
But it's livable.
The awful thing about IE6 and IE7 is how they implement CSS incorrectly in a big way, so you have to figure out their crazy version of CSS and serve separate stylesheets.
(There are probably JS problems too, but I don't do much JS, so I dunno.
)  IE8 isn't a big problem, you just can't use some features in it.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260882</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31262322</id>
	<title>Re:One has to wonder</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265138640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>"What if Microsoft was to phase out support on Bing for an old version of Firefox."</i></p><p>What is Bing?  Is that a website?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" What if Microsoft was to phase out support on Bing for an old version of Firefox .
" What is Bing ?
Is that a website ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"What if Microsoft was to phase out support on Bing for an old version of Firefox.
"What is Bing?
Is that a website?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259482</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260822</id>
	<title>I think I'll cut support too.</title>
	<author>MikeFM</author>
	<datestamp>1265132820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think I'll cut IE6 support from all my websites on March 13 too. People that haven't upgraded will no longer be pampered but will simply see a screen telling them they need to upgrade. We waste a huge amount of time trying to keep everything working on IE6, IE7, and IE8. More than we spend on Firefox, Safari, Opera, and Chrome combined.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think I 'll cut IE6 support from all my websites on March 13 too .
People that have n't upgraded will no longer be pampered but will simply see a screen telling them they need to upgrade .
We waste a huge amount of time trying to keep everything working on IE6 , IE7 , and IE8 .
More than we spend on Firefox , Safari , Opera , and Chrome combined .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think I'll cut IE6 support from all my websites on March 13 too.
People that haven't upgraded will no longer be pampered but will simply see a screen telling them they need to upgrade.
We waste a huge amount of time trying to keep everything working on IE6, IE7, and IE8.
More than we spend on Firefox, Safari, Opera, and Chrome combined.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259456</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31263350</id>
	<title>Re:IE 6 Not dead in the workplace, doesn't matter</title>
	<author>HyperQuantum</author>
	<datestamp>1265143080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>They don't want their users watching videos while they should be working. They are very likely happy (...)</p></div><p>They won't be as happy if they see that their employees start bringing a portable Firefox (or maybe another portable browser?) to work, just so they can enjoy 'the full potential' of the internet.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>They do n't want their users watching videos while they should be working .
They are very likely happy ( ... ) They wo n't be as happy if they see that their employees start bringing a portable Firefox ( or maybe another portable browser ?
) to work , just so they can enjoy 'the full potential ' of the internet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They don't want their users watching videos while they should be working.
They are very likely happy (...)They won't be as happy if they see that their employees start bringing a portable Firefox (or maybe another portable browser?
) to work, just so they can enjoy 'the full potential' of the internet.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259598</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31262312</id>
	<title>Re:Next up, IE7</title>
	<author>TavisJohn</author>
	<datestamp>1265138580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wanting to kill IE6 makes sense..  However wanting to kill IE7 is just short sighted.  There are several apps that are not compatable with IE8.  Pro Tools for example will not function if IE8 is installed.  But works fine when the system has IE7.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wanting to kill IE6 makes sense.. However wanting to kill IE7 is just short sighted .
There are several apps that are not compatable with IE8 .
Pro Tools for example will not function if IE8 is installed .
But works fine when the system has IE7 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wanting to kill IE6 makes sense..  However wanting to kill IE7 is just short sighted.
There are several apps that are not compatable with IE8.
Pro Tools for example will not function if IE8 is installed.
But works fine when the system has IE7.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259596</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31262854</id>
	<title>Re:One has to wonder</title>
	<author>SoupIsGoodFood\_42</author>
	<datestamp>1265141220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If that old version of Firefox happened to have particularly bad support for web standards which caused developers problems to no end, then such a decision would sound OK to me.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If that old version of Firefox happened to have particularly bad support for web standards which caused developers problems to no end , then such a decision would sound OK to me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If that old version of Firefox happened to have particularly bad support for web standards which caused developers problems to no end, then such a decision would sound OK to me.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259482</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31266462</id>
	<title>perfection vs precision</title>
	<author>epine</author>
	<datestamp>1265113800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Those two concepts are far from mutually exclusive. Pixel perfect means you can have flexible layouts that don't do unpredictable things because the rendering engine's calculations were off.</p></div><p>If that's what you mean, the term should be <b>pixel precise</b>.  TeX has pixel precise layout, the calculations are well defined, and the web should, too.</p><p>Perfection sets off my warning bells.  There's always a contingent occupying the high ground of right-thinking simplicity known as "one size fits all".  These traitors to the crown are surely rallying under the banner of pixel perfect, regardless of any ostensible definition among those in the know.</p><p>Precision is a shared value (a precise system delivers precision to everyone), whereas perfection is a social construct, sometimes an entirely personal construct, which can be OK if the individual has the exquisite taste of a Michelangelo and the ascendant heights of the human spirit shine through.</p><p>One of my most heavily used Firefox plug-ins is NoSquint, by means of which I dispense with as much of a site's dress code as possible, optimizing the mental process of unpacking the text to determine whether the site is burbling gibberish or not.  When I'm reading for critical faculty, my fonts are rarely set at less than 10 cpi, even the proportional fonts.</p><p>Right now, an article sitting open on my other screen on AI, augmented intelligence, and alternative intelligence is magnified to 10 cpi / 4 lpi, and I suspect that's barely enough for the landmines within.  My landmine detection fonts tend to rupture the aesthetics of the presentation, which is just as well, since there is delicate thinking required.</p><p>In the ideal world, perfection is subordinate to purpose.  My sole purpose for visiting most web sites is to determine if what they've written there is larded or illuminating.  The fashion boutique strip malls at the top, right, and bottom of most web pages interest me not.</p><p>Perfection without purpose frightens me.  It usually means there will be another force of will present, which I will likely end up battling with.  If the user isn't going to supply force of will, it might be good if the operating environment does so on the user's behalf, which is the Apple model.  When I use Apple products, I inevitably brush shoulders rather violently with the Apple aesthetic, which does not mirror my own.  For every case where it facilitates my goal, there's another where it chafes ingrained preference.</p><p>Returning to original sin, my mortal enemy of imprecision is Microsoft Word.  You can't assert your will against that thing for any reasonable investment of time or anger.  However hard you tug the laces, it manages to squirt sideways at an inconvenient juncture in the middle of getting real work done.  Soon one pines for the PDF straight-jacket.  The very thought of pining for PDF induces black-leather nightmares straight out of Pan's Labyrinth.</p><p>I sincerely hope switching off IE6 marks the beginning of the end for <b>all</b> software that subordinates culture to quirk.  In a different life line, I could imagine having this conversation:</p><p><b>Precocious grandchild</b>: Grandpa, what does "imprecise" mean?</p><p><b>Greybeard self</b>: Well, imprecision has been part of civilization since the beginning of time, but it was Bill Gates who made it famous.  Ever heard of Bill Gates?  No?  Have you ever played holographic pinball?  It's like that, only the pinball table is hidden inside a machine you depend upon to get things done, so you never know what's going to happen next.</p><p><b>Grandchild (perplexed)</b>: Why would he <i>do</i> that?  Why would he make a machine like that?</p><p><b>Greybeard self</b>: Well, it never made any sense to me.  History is interesting that way.  Every society seems to do something that makes no sense, and it's usually the children who figure it out first.  Smart children like you.  That's why the UN is presently debating a ban on life-extension research.</p><p><b>Grandchild</b>: But then how do we live forever?</p><p><b>Greybeard self</b>: Hmmm, but what if you make crazy mistakes like Bill Gates?  It wouldn't be <i>good</i> to live forever.</p><p><b>Grandchild</b>: <i>I</i> won't make those mistakes.</p><p><b>Greybeard self</b>: Of course not, that's how I know you're mine.  Now give grandpa a tug, I feel for a shot of embalming fluid.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Those two concepts are far from mutually exclusive .
Pixel perfect means you can have flexible layouts that do n't do unpredictable things because the rendering engine 's calculations were off.If that 's what you mean , the term should be pixel precise .
TeX has pixel precise layout , the calculations are well defined , and the web should , too.Perfection sets off my warning bells .
There 's always a contingent occupying the high ground of right-thinking simplicity known as " one size fits all " .
These traitors to the crown are surely rallying under the banner of pixel perfect , regardless of any ostensible definition among those in the know.Precision is a shared value ( a precise system delivers precision to everyone ) , whereas perfection is a social construct , sometimes an entirely personal construct , which can be OK if the individual has the exquisite taste of a Michelangelo and the ascendant heights of the human spirit shine through.One of my most heavily used Firefox plug-ins is NoSquint , by means of which I dispense with as much of a site 's dress code as possible , optimizing the mental process of unpacking the text to determine whether the site is burbling gibberish or not .
When I 'm reading for critical faculty , my fonts are rarely set at less than 10 cpi , even the proportional fonts.Right now , an article sitting open on my other screen on AI , augmented intelligence , and alternative intelligence is magnified to 10 cpi / 4 lpi , and I suspect that 's barely enough for the landmines within .
My landmine detection fonts tend to rupture the aesthetics of the presentation , which is just as well , since there is delicate thinking required.In the ideal world , perfection is subordinate to purpose .
My sole purpose for visiting most web sites is to determine if what they 've written there is larded or illuminating .
The fashion boutique strip malls at the top , right , and bottom of most web pages interest me not.Perfection without purpose frightens me .
It usually means there will be another force of will present , which I will likely end up battling with .
If the user is n't going to supply force of will , it might be good if the operating environment does so on the user 's behalf , which is the Apple model .
When I use Apple products , I inevitably brush shoulders rather violently with the Apple aesthetic , which does not mirror my own .
For every case where it facilitates my goal , there 's another where it chafes ingrained preference.Returning to original sin , my mortal enemy of imprecision is Microsoft Word .
You ca n't assert your will against that thing for any reasonable investment of time or anger .
However hard you tug the laces , it manages to squirt sideways at an inconvenient juncture in the middle of getting real work done .
Soon one pines for the PDF straight-jacket .
The very thought of pining for PDF induces black-leather nightmares straight out of Pan 's Labyrinth.I sincerely hope switching off IE6 marks the beginning of the end for all software that subordinates culture to quirk .
In a different life line , I could imagine having this conversation : Precocious grandchild : Grandpa , what does " imprecise " mean ? Greybeard self : Well , imprecision has been part of civilization since the beginning of time , but it was Bill Gates who made it famous .
Ever heard of Bill Gates ?
No ? Have you ever played holographic pinball ?
It 's like that , only the pinball table is hidden inside a machine you depend upon to get things done , so you never know what 's going to happen next.Grandchild ( perplexed ) : Why would he do that ?
Why would he make a machine like that ? Greybeard self : Well , it never made any sense to me .
History is interesting that way .
Every society seems to do something that makes no sense , and it 's usually the children who figure it out first .
Smart children like you .
That 's why the UN is presently debating a ban on life-extension research.Grandchild : But then how do we live forever ? Greybeard self : Hmmm , but what if you make crazy mistakes like Bill Gates ?
It would n't be good to live forever.Grandchild : I wo n't make those mistakes.Greybeard self : Of course not , that 's how I know you 're mine .
Now give grandpa a tug , I feel for a shot of embalming fluid .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Those two concepts are far from mutually exclusive.
Pixel perfect means you can have flexible layouts that don't do unpredictable things because the rendering engine's calculations were off.If that's what you mean, the term should be pixel precise.
TeX has pixel precise layout, the calculations are well defined, and the web should, too.Perfection sets off my warning bells.
There's always a contingent occupying the high ground of right-thinking simplicity known as "one size fits all".
These traitors to the crown are surely rallying under the banner of pixel perfect, regardless of any ostensible definition among those in the know.Precision is a shared value (a precise system delivers precision to everyone), whereas perfection is a social construct, sometimes an entirely personal construct, which can be OK if the individual has the exquisite taste of a Michelangelo and the ascendant heights of the human spirit shine through.One of my most heavily used Firefox plug-ins is NoSquint, by means of which I dispense with as much of a site's dress code as possible, optimizing the mental process of unpacking the text to determine whether the site is burbling gibberish or not.
When I'm reading for critical faculty, my fonts are rarely set at less than 10 cpi, even the proportional fonts.Right now, an article sitting open on my other screen on AI, augmented intelligence, and alternative intelligence is magnified to 10 cpi / 4 lpi, and I suspect that's barely enough for the landmines within.
My landmine detection fonts tend to rupture the aesthetics of the presentation, which is just as well, since there is delicate thinking required.In the ideal world, perfection is subordinate to purpose.
My sole purpose for visiting most web sites is to determine if what they've written there is larded or illuminating.
The fashion boutique strip malls at the top, right, and bottom of most web pages interest me not.Perfection without purpose frightens me.
It usually means there will be another force of will present, which I will likely end up battling with.
If the user isn't going to supply force of will, it might be good if the operating environment does so on the user's behalf, which is the Apple model.
When I use Apple products, I inevitably brush shoulders rather violently with the Apple aesthetic, which does not mirror my own.
For every case where it facilitates my goal, there's another where it chafes ingrained preference.Returning to original sin, my mortal enemy of imprecision is Microsoft Word.
You can't assert your will against that thing for any reasonable investment of time or anger.
However hard you tug the laces, it manages to squirt sideways at an inconvenient juncture in the middle of getting real work done.
Soon one pines for the PDF straight-jacket.
The very thought of pining for PDF induces black-leather nightmares straight out of Pan's Labyrinth.I sincerely hope switching off IE6 marks the beginning of the end for all software that subordinates culture to quirk.
In a different life line, I could imagine having this conversation:Precocious grandchild: Grandpa, what does "imprecise" mean?Greybeard self: Well, imprecision has been part of civilization since the beginning of time, but it was Bill Gates who made it famous.
Ever heard of Bill Gates?
No?  Have you ever played holographic pinball?
It's like that, only the pinball table is hidden inside a machine you depend upon to get things done, so you never know what's going to happen next.Grandchild (perplexed): Why would he do that?
Why would he make a machine like that?Greybeard self: Well, it never made any sense to me.
History is interesting that way.
Every society seems to do something that makes no sense, and it's usually the children who figure it out first.
Smart children like you.
That's why the UN is presently debating a ban on life-extension research.Grandchild: But then how do we live forever?Greybeard self: Hmmm, but what if you make crazy mistakes like Bill Gates?
It wouldn't be good to live forever.Grandchild: I won't make those mistakes.Greybeard self: Of course not, that's how I know you're mine.
Now give grandpa a tug, I feel for a shot of embalming fluid.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31262890</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31262890</id>
	<title>Re:Next up, IE7</title>
	<author>SoupIsGoodFood\_42</author>
	<datestamp>1265141340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Those two concepts are far from mutually exclusive. Pixel perfect means you can have flexible layouts that don't do unpredictable things because the rendering engine's calculations were off.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Those two concepts are far from mutually exclusive .
Pixel perfect means you can have flexible layouts that do n't do unpredictable things because the rendering engine 's calculations were off .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Those two concepts are far from mutually exclusive.
Pixel perfect means you can have flexible layouts that don't do unpredictable things because the rendering engine's calculations were off.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31261964</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31261852</id>
	<title>Re:One has to wonder</title>
	<author>Richy\_T</author>
	<datestamp>1265136900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I use IE tab in Firefox for owa. I'm sure I used to get the full version of owa but recently it has only been offering me the light version. It's definitely an IE tab though. This is with IE6 on Win2k.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I use IE tab in Firefox for owa .
I 'm sure I used to get the full version of owa but recently it has only been offering me the light version .
It 's definitely an IE tab though .
This is with IE6 on Win2k .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I use IE tab in Firefox for owa.
I'm sure I used to get the full version of owa but recently it has only been offering me the light version.
It's definitely an IE tab though.
This is with IE6 on Win2k.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259794</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259578</id>
	<title>Good Riddance!</title>
	<author>whisper\_jeff</author>
	<datestamp>1265127600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>As a designer who has been leaping through hoops the past couple weeks getting a website IE6 compliant because the client insists on still using the browser, I say GOOD RIDDANCE!! The sooner we can drive IE6 from the corporate landscape and force people to upgrade to a browser that isn't a decade old and out of date, all the better.</htmltext>
<tokenext>As a designer who has been leaping through hoops the past couple weeks getting a website IE6 compliant because the client insists on still using the browser , I say GOOD RIDDANCE ! !
The sooner we can drive IE6 from the corporate landscape and force people to upgrade to a browser that is n't a decade old and out of date , all the better .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As a designer who has been leaping through hoops the past couple weeks getting a website IE6 compliant because the client insists on still using the browser, I say GOOD RIDDANCE!!
The sooner we can drive IE6 from the corporate landscape and force people to upgrade to a browser that isn't a decade old and out of date, all the better.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31261114</id>
	<title>Most Workplaces Block YouTube</title>
	<author>WebmasterNeal</author>
	<datestamp>1265134020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Most companies I've worked at block access to YouTube so there really isn't much incentive to convert companies from IE6 to something else. Some of the other Google apps may have more of an effect on this though. I feel that most IE users only upgrade their personal PCs when they buy a new computer so it's only a matter of time until we have all of those updated as most of the computers in the last several years probably haven't come with IE6 installed.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Most companies I 've worked at block access to YouTube so there really is n't much incentive to convert companies from IE6 to something else .
Some of the other Google apps may have more of an effect on this though .
I feel that most IE users only upgrade their personal PCs when they buy a new computer so it 's only a matter of time until we have all of those updated as most of the computers in the last several years probably have n't come with IE6 installed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Most companies I've worked at block access to YouTube so there really isn't much incentive to convert companies from IE6 to something else.
Some of the other Google apps may have more of an effect on this though.
I feel that most IE users only upgrade their personal PCs when they buy a new computer so it's only a matter of time until we have all of those updated as most of the computers in the last several years probably haven't come with IE6 installed.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31261360</id>
	<title>Re:Google IS dumping older versions of FF</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1265135040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, but no-one cares, since Firefox users already switched on their brain, to install FF in the first place. So they are usually already using the latest version.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , but no-one cares , since Firefox users already switched on their brain , to install FF in the first place .
So they are usually already using the latest version .
: )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, but no-one cares, since Firefox users already switched on their brain, to install FF in the first place.
So they are usually already using the latest version.
:)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260238</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31261088</id>
	<title>Re:Important Clarification:</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1265133900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Doing so would be pretty stupid.</p></div><p>Sorry, but <em>that</em> is very stupid. (Especially since you brought no base argument why.)</p><p>People like you always assume doing that would cause raging torch-carrying mobs on the streets, because people are completely unable/unwilling to change anything in their life. (Which is already flawed logic, since becoming a raging mob is already a change.)</p><p>Repeat this with me: The only reason people are unwilling to change things, is because you trained them to expect it in the first place!</p><p>You know what would happen in reality, if Google would just block IE (Trident) as a whole, from now on?<br>It would take any random user about five minutes, to search for &ldquo;browser alternative&rdquo;, download and install it. Done.<br>There would be one week of media bullshit panic FUD. (With everyone already using an alternate browser, mind you!)<br>Then it would get back to business as usual. With MS bitching a bit every now and then. And buying or licensing some other small browser.<br>They would tell us all that their new Internet Explorer X &ldquo;a browser for a new generation&rdquo; would come soon... for a couple of months... and then deliver it as a standard update. Done.</p><p>That&rsquo;s what would really happen.</p><p>The &ldquo;companies still use IE6&rdquo; excuse is a lie. I mean what company does not even do official MS updates with a huge &ldquo;WARNING! UPDATE TO IE8 OR BE HACKED!!!&rdquo; sign attached to it? I tell you what company: A soon cracked and bankrupt one!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Doing so would be pretty stupid.Sorry , but that is very stupid .
( Especially since you brought no base argument why .
) People like you always assume doing that would cause raging torch-carrying mobs on the streets , because people are completely unable/unwilling to change anything in their life .
( Which is already flawed logic , since becoming a raging mob is already a change .
) Repeat this with me : The only reason people are unwilling to change things , is because you trained them to expect it in the first place ! You know what would happen in reality , if Google would just block IE ( Trident ) as a whole , from now on ? It would take any random user about five minutes , to search for    browser alternative    , download and install it .
Done.There would be one week of media bullshit panic FUD .
( With everyone already using an alternate browser , mind you !
) Then it would get back to business as usual .
With MS bitching a bit every now and then .
And buying or licensing some other small browser.They would tell us all that their new Internet Explorer X    a browser for a new generation    would come soon... for a couple of months... and then deliver it as a standard update .
Done.That    s what would really happen.The    companies still use IE6    excuse is a lie .
I mean what company does not even do official MS updates with a huge    WARNING !
UPDATE TO IE8 OR BE HACKED ! !
!    sign attached to it ?
I tell you what company : A soon cracked and bankrupt one !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Doing so would be pretty stupid.Sorry, but that is very stupid.
(Especially since you brought no base argument why.
)People like you always assume doing that would cause raging torch-carrying mobs on the streets, because people are completely unable/unwilling to change anything in their life.
(Which is already flawed logic, since becoming a raging mob is already a change.
)Repeat this with me: The only reason people are unwilling to change things, is because you trained them to expect it in the first place!You know what would happen in reality, if Google would just block IE (Trident) as a whole, from now on?It would take any random user about five minutes, to search for “browser alternative”, download and install it.
Done.There would be one week of media bullshit panic FUD.
(With everyone already using an alternate browser, mind you!
)Then it would get back to business as usual.
With MS bitching a bit every now and then.
And buying or licensing some other small browser.They would tell us all that their new Internet Explorer X “a browser for a new generation” would come soon... for a couple of months... and then deliver it as a standard update.
Done.That’s what would really happen.The “companies still use IE6” excuse is a lie.
I mean what company does not even do official MS updates with a huge “WARNING!
UPDATE TO IE8 OR BE HACKED!!
!” sign attached to it?
I tell you what company: A soon cracked and bankrupt one!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259642</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260334</id>
	<title>Re:IE 6 Not dead in the workplace, doesn't matter</title>
	<author>chill</author>
	<datestamp>1265130840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not really.  I've recently worked for/with a couple of large companies (100,000+ employees) that still included IE6 on XP SP 3 to support some legacy apps. They *ALSO* included Firefox -- or a link to download it internally -- for everything else.</p><p>I've seen very few places in the last couple of years that mandated IE6 and IE6 ONLY.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not really .
I 've recently worked for/with a couple of large companies ( 100,000 + employees ) that still included IE6 on XP SP 3 to support some legacy apps .
They * ALSO * included Firefox -- or a link to download it internally -- for everything else.I 've seen very few places in the last couple of years that mandated IE6 and IE6 ONLY .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not really.
I've recently worked for/with a couple of large companies (100,000+ employees) that still included IE6 on XP SP 3 to support some legacy apps.
They *ALSO* included Firefox -- or a link to download it internally -- for everything else.I've seen very few places in the last couple of years that mandated IE6 and IE6 ONLY.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259598</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259636</id>
	<title>Re:One has to wonder</title>
	<author>whisper\_jeff</author>
	<datestamp>1265127840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>I doubt anyone would be able to form a convincing argument that Google dropping support for a decade-old browser is any form of abuse of monopoly. They aren't forcing people to upgrade to \_their\_ browser - just a newer browser. IE7 or IE8 is fine with them.<br> <br>
Seriously, IE6 is a decade old. In internet years, that's about four or five generations old. It's time to drag corporations* into the modern age, even if they're kicking and screaming the entire way.<br> <br>
*After all, we know it's only corporations that still use IE6 because nobody in their right mind \_chooses\_ to remain with IE6 on their personal computers.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I doubt anyone would be able to form a convincing argument that Google dropping support for a decade-old browser is any form of abuse of monopoly .
They are n't forcing people to upgrade to \ _their \ _ browser - just a newer browser .
IE7 or IE8 is fine with them .
Seriously , IE6 is a decade old .
In internet years , that 's about four or five generations old .
It 's time to drag corporations * into the modern age , even if they 're kicking and screaming the entire way .
* After all , we know it 's only corporations that still use IE6 because nobody in their right mind \ _chooses \ _ to remain with IE6 on their personal computers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I doubt anyone would be able to form a convincing argument that Google dropping support for a decade-old browser is any form of abuse of monopoly.
They aren't forcing people to upgrade to \_their\_ browser - just a newer browser.
IE7 or IE8 is fine with them.
Seriously, IE6 is a decade old.
In internet years, that's about four or five generations old.
It's time to drag corporations* into the modern age, even if they're kicking and screaming the entire way.
*After all, we know it's only corporations that still use IE6 because nobody in their right mind \_chooses\_ to remain with IE6 on their personal computers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259482</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31271552</id>
	<title>Re:Finally</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267110300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Finally is right.<br>Even my grandmother, who needs Post Its stuck to her monitor to remember how to do things on her computer, has the most recent IE.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Finally is right.Even my grandmother , who needs Post Its stuck to her monitor to remember how to do things on her computer , has the most recent IE .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Finally is right.Even my grandmother, who needs Post Its stuck to her monitor to remember how to do things on her computer, has the most recent IE.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259456</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259590</id>
	<title>Re:One has to wonder</title>
	<author>SlothDead</author>
	<datestamp>1265127660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>bing does not have a monopoly</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>bing does not have a monopoly</tokentext>
<sentencetext>bing does not have a monopoly</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259482</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259812</id>
	<title>Re:One has to wonder</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265128440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Whether any whackjob would call it abuse or not, it raises the question: would anyone notice?</p><p>Bing has relatively few users.  Likewise, old FF versions have relatively few users.  And there's further selection bias against the intersection of those two small groups.</p><p>Nobody has made the horrifically stupid and fiduciarily irresponsible decision to pay extra in order to create intranet web apps that require users to use an old version of Firefox.  The situation for IE6 is fundamentally different than every other browser in the history and breadth of the web.  IE is one of Microsoft's lock-'em-into-a-legacy solutions, and a lot of incompetent planners happened to fall for that one.</p><p>We can only hope that <em>someone</em> learned the painfully obvious lesson.  Of course, not everyone did.  My own state government is spending tax dollars to develop <strong>NEW</strong> systems that are dependent on proprietary Microsoft locks, and it's pretty sad that no one is able to stop them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Whether any whackjob would call it abuse or not , it raises the question : would anyone notice ? Bing has relatively few users .
Likewise , old FF versions have relatively few users .
And there 's further selection bias against the intersection of those two small groups.Nobody has made the horrifically stupid and fiduciarily irresponsible decision to pay extra in order to create intranet web apps that require users to use an old version of Firefox .
The situation for IE6 is fundamentally different than every other browser in the history and breadth of the web .
IE is one of Microsoft 's lock-'em-into-a-legacy solutions , and a lot of incompetent planners happened to fall for that one.We can only hope that someone learned the painfully obvious lesson .
Of course , not everyone did .
My own state government is spending tax dollars to develop NEW systems that are dependent on proprietary Microsoft locks , and it 's pretty sad that no one is able to stop them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Whether any whackjob would call it abuse or not, it raises the question: would anyone notice?Bing has relatively few users.
Likewise, old FF versions have relatively few users.
And there's further selection bias against the intersection of those two small groups.Nobody has made the horrifically stupid and fiduciarily irresponsible decision to pay extra in order to create intranet web apps that require users to use an old version of Firefox.
The situation for IE6 is fundamentally different than every other browser in the history and breadth of the web.
IE is one of Microsoft's lock-'em-into-a-legacy solutions, and a lot of incompetent planners happened to fall for that one.We can only hope that someone learned the painfully obvious lesson.
Of course, not everyone did.
My own state government is spending tax dollars to develop NEW systems that are dependent on proprietary Microsoft locks, and it's pretty sad that no one is able to stop them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259482</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259984</id>
	<title>Re:One has to wonder</title>
	<author>danbert8</author>
	<datestamp>1265129280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Oh yes, because Youtube working properly is a high priority at corporations.  At my company we are forced to use IE6 (actually I use firefox portable with IEtab) because most of the internal websites don't render or work properly on any other browser.  And they hate us using youtube anyway.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh yes , because Youtube working properly is a high priority at corporations .
At my company we are forced to use IE6 ( actually I use firefox portable with IEtab ) because most of the internal websites do n't render or work properly on any other browser .
And they hate us using youtube anyway .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh yes, because Youtube working properly is a high priority at corporations.
At my company we are forced to use IE6 (actually I use firefox portable with IEtab) because most of the internal websites don't render or work properly on any other browser.
And they hate us using youtube anyway.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259636</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31261186</id>
	<title>Re:Important Clarification:</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265134320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>It should be noted that Google is not <i>breaking</i> youtube for IE6 users(the poor bastards). Doing so would be pretty stupid, especially since most of the heavy lifting goes on inside the flash blob, and <strong>people slacking at work are probably a decent sized audience.</strong></p><p>Sure, but a healthy diet and a little bit of exercise can help trim that size. Perhaps Youtube should also include a diet plan option when the "interstitial [that] appears when users on older browser try to watch a video on YouTube."</p></div></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It should be noted that Google is not breaking youtube for IE6 users ( the poor bastards ) .
Doing so would be pretty stupid , especially since most of the heavy lifting goes on inside the flash blob , and people slacking at work are probably a decent sized audience.Sure , but a healthy diet and a little bit of exercise can help trim that size .
Perhaps Youtube should also include a diet plan option when the " interstitial [ that ] appears when users on older browser try to watch a video on YouTube .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It should be noted that Google is not breaking youtube for IE6 users(the poor bastards).
Doing so would be pretty stupid, especially since most of the heavy lifting goes on inside the flash blob, and people slacking at work are probably a decent sized audience.Sure, but a healthy diet and a little bit of exercise can help trim that size.
Perhaps Youtube should also include a diet plan option when the "interstitial [that] appears when users on older browser try to watch a video on YouTube.
"
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259642</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259616</id>
	<title>Re:Finally</title>
	<author>shentino</author>
	<datestamp>1265127780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>\_\_try\_finally</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>\ _ \ _try \ _finally</tokentext>
<sentencetext>\_\_try\_finally</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259456</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259474</id>
	<title>It's about goddamned time</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265127240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Why'd they wait this long?  Stupid niggardly corporations can't even update a free browser and the rest of the world is supposed to accomodate them?  Yeah right.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why 'd they wait this long ?
Stupid niggardly corporations ca n't even update a free browser and the rest of the world is supposed to accomodate them ?
Yeah right .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why'd they wait this long?
Stupid niggardly corporations can't even update a free browser and the rest of the world is supposed to accomodate them?
Yeah right.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259998</id>
	<title>March 14th Might Have Been More Appropriate</title>
	<author>mano.m</author>
	<datestamp>1265129340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>What better way to celebrate Pi day/Einstein's birthday?</htmltext>
<tokenext>What better way to celebrate Pi day/Einstein 's birthday ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What better way to celebrate Pi day/Einstein's birthday?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260666</id>
	<title>Not quite Friday the 13th</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265132280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>March 13th is a Saturday, but there's a nice gray area for a 'soft' Friday the 13th.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>March 13th is a Saturday , but there 's a nice gray area for a 'soft ' Friday the 13th .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>March 13th is a Saturday, but there's a nice gray area for a 'soft' Friday the 13th.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260720</id>
	<title>Re:Finally</title>
	<author>drej</author>
	<datestamp>1265132460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>EXACTLY<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...d'oh!</htmltext>
<tokenext>EXACTLY ...d'oh !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>EXACTLY ...d'oh!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259456</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31261802</id>
	<title>Re:One has to wonder</title>
	<author>Richy\_T</author>
	<datestamp>1265136660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If it's anything like here, it's the upper management who are the first to scream when IT implements any content restrictions (Facebook, Youtube, ESPN) that IT implements (usually initiated by the request of, yes, upper management)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If it 's anything like here , it 's the upper management who are the first to scream when IT implements any content restrictions ( Facebook , Youtube , ESPN ) that IT implements ( usually initiated by the request of , yes , upper management )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If it's anything like here, it's the upper management who are the first to scream when IT implements any content restrictions (Facebook, Youtube, ESPN) that IT implements (usually initiated by the request of, yes, upper management)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260544</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260942</id>
	<title>Great now Companies will stay on IE6 longer</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265133240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Companies have even more reason to stay on IE6 now.  They know their employees won't be on youtube!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Companies have even more reason to stay on IE6 now .
They know their employees wo n't be on youtube !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Companies have even more reason to stay on IE6 now.
They know their employees won't be on youtube!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259464</id>
	<title>w00t!</title>
	<author>somersault</author>
	<datestamp>1265127180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>With Youtube comes great power<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>With Youtube comes great power : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>With Youtube comes great power :)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260202</id>
	<title>and great lock-in</title>
	<author>BhaKi</author>
	<datestamp>1265130060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>with their requirement on proprietary Adobe Flash.</htmltext>
<tokenext>with their requirement on proprietary Adobe Flash .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>with their requirement on proprietary Adobe Flash.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259464</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259586</id>
	<title>Re:One has to wonder</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265127660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Microsoft does not support Opera.</p><p>Nevertheless, I wonder if there is some cut and paste code to automatically ban ie6 users from your website and redirect them to a browser choice website.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Microsoft does not support Opera.Nevertheless , I wonder if there is some cut and paste code to automatically ban ie6 users from your website and redirect them to a browser choice website .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Microsoft does not support Opera.Nevertheless, I wonder if there is some cut and paste code to automatically ban ie6 users from your website and redirect them to a browser choice website.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259482</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31266102</id>
	<title>Re:Next up, IE7</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265111940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's easy to say until you work for a salty old hag who goes ballistic because the layout fluidly stretches across the page, and DEMANDS it look exactly like the pdf source file regardless of resolution.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's easy to say until you work for a salty old hag who goes ballistic because the layout fluidly stretches across the page , and DEMANDS it look exactly like the pdf source file regardless of resolution .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's easy to say until you work for a salty old hag who goes ballistic because the layout fluidly stretches across the page, and DEMANDS it look exactly like the pdf source file regardless of resolution.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31261964</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_1353205_71</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259482
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259586
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259730
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31281006
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_1353205_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259456
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259622
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_1353205_59</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259596
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31261964
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31266102
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_1353205_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259456
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260720
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_1353205_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259482
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259794
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31261852
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_1353205_62</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259482
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259586
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31263566
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_1353205_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259596
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260386
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_1353205_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259598
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260268
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_1353205_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259598
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31264234
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_1353205_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259482
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260120
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_1353205_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259482
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259636
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260070
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_1353205_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259482
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31263012
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_1353205_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259578
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31261092
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_1353205_77</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259596
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260064
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_1353205_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259596
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31261506
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_1353205_76</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259482
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259636
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259970
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_1353205_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259598
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260180
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_1353205_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259482
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260238
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31262136
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_1353205_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259596
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31261964
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31262890
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31266462
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_1353205_69</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259482
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259794
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260776
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_1353205_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259598
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31263350
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_1353205_60</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259482
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259636
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31262260
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_1353205_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259482
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31262854
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_1353205_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259482
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259636
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260544
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31261802
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_1353205_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259456
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31262642
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_1353205_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259482
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259880
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_1353205_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259482
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260238
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260648
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_1353205_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259456
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260822
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31270018
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_1353205_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259596
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260882
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31265730
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_1353205_75</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259456
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259602
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_1353205_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259598
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31261354
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_1353205_66</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259642
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31261088
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_1353205_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259598
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31269630
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_1353205_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259482
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259636
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259984
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_1353205_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259598
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260912
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31263144
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_1353205_70</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259474
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260412
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_1353205_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259596
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260790
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_1353205_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259482
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259636
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259982
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_1353205_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259844
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31261220
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_1353205_63</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259482
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259812
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_1353205_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259482
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260238
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260946
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_1353205_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259598
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260454
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_1353205_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259482
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259586
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31261072
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_1353205_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259456
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31271552
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_1353205_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259598
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31262784
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_1353205_64</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259456
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259616
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_1353205_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259642
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31261186
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_1353205_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259598
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260468
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_1353205_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259596
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260882
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31277830
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_1353205_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259482
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259590
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_1353205_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259596
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31262376
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_1353205_79</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259596
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31261964
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31267102
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_1353205_61</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259456
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31262834
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_1353205_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259456
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259842
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_1353205_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259598
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31261200
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_1353205_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259482
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259652
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_1353205_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259464
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260202
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_1353205_74</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259642
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260074
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_1353205_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259482
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259636
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260002
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_1353205_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259482
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259636
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260488
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_1353205_67</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259596
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260196
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_1353205_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259482
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259638
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_1353205_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259456
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260572
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_1353205_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259456
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259716
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_1353205_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259598
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260334
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_1353205_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259712
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260218
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_1353205_73</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260156
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31261160
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_1353205_68</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259596
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31262312
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_1353205_72</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259456
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259920
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_1353205_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259482
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31262322
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_1353205_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259456
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259722
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_1353205_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259596
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31261388
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_1353205_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259482
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260238
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31261360
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_1353205_65</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259482
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260104
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_1353205_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259474
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31265848
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_1353205_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259596
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31262692
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_1353205_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259610
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31265784
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_1353205_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259482
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259636
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260406
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31263092
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_1353205_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259578
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260640
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_24_1353205_78</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259482
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259636
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260416
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_24_1353205.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259474
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31265848
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260412
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_24_1353205.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260270
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_24_1353205.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259578
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31261092
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260640
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_24_1353205.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259642
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260074
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31261088
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31261186
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_24_1353205.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259598
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31269630
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31264234
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260912
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31263144
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31261354
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260180
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31263350
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260468
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260334
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260268
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260454
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31261200
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31262784
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_24_1353205.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259610
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31265784
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_24_1353205.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259988
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_24_1353205.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260464
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_24_1353205.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259844
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31261220
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_24_1353205.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259576
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_24_1353205.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259456
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259920
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260572
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259602
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259722
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31262834
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260720
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259842
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31271552
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259622
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31262642
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259616
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260822
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31270018
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259716
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_24_1353205.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259712
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260218
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_24_1353205.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259736
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_24_1353205.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259482
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31262322
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259586
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31263566
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31261072
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259730
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31281006
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260238
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31261360
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31262136
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260648
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260946
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259590
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259638
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259812
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259880
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31262854
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31263012
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260120
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259652
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260104
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259636
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260488
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260002
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259970
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31262260
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260544
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31261802
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259984
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260416
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260070
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259982
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260406
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31263092
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259794
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260776
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31261852
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_24_1353205.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259596
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260386
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260196
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31262312
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260790
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260882
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31265730
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31277830
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31262376
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31261964
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31266102
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31262890
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31266462
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31267102
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31261388
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31261506
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260064
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31262692
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_24_1353205.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260156
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31261160
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_24_1353205.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260942
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_24_1353205.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260716
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_24_1353205.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259464
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31260202
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_24_1353205.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_24_1353205.31259874
</commentlist>
</conversation>
