<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_03_05_0124215</id>
	<title>Apple Removes Wi-Fi Finders From App Store</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1267795800000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>jasonbrown writes <i>"Apple on Thursday began removing another category of apps from its iPhone App Store. <a href="http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579\_3-10464021-37.html">This time, it's not porn, it's Wi-Fi</a>. Apple removed several Wi-Fi apps commonly referred to as stumblers, or apps that seek out available Wi-Fi networks near your location. According to a story on Cult of Mac, apps removed by Apple include WiFi-Where, WiFiFoFum, and yFy Network Finder."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>jasonbrown writes " Apple on Thursday began removing another category of apps from its iPhone App Store .
This time , it 's not porn , it 's Wi-Fi .
Apple removed several Wi-Fi apps commonly referred to as stumblers , or apps that seek out available Wi-Fi networks near your location .
According to a story on Cult of Mac , apps removed by Apple include WiFi-Where , WiFiFoFum , and yFy Network Finder .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>jasonbrown writes "Apple on Thursday began removing another category of apps from its iPhone App Store.
This time, it's not porn, it's Wi-Fi.
Apple removed several Wi-Fi apps commonly referred to as stumblers, or apps that seek out available Wi-Fi networks near your location.
According to a story on Cult of Mac, apps removed by Apple include WiFi-Where, WiFiFoFum, and yFy Network Finder.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365862</id>
	<title>Fouling the well</title>
	<author>garethw</author>
	<datestamp>1267713480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think this is called pissing in the well from which you drink.

I really don't get why Apple is trying so hard to alienate developers.

/ Android user</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think this is called pissing in the well from which you drink .
I really do n't get why Apple is trying so hard to alienate developers .
/ Android user</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think this is called pissing in the well from which you drink.
I really don't get why Apple is trying so hard to alienate developers.
/ Android user</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31369554</id>
	<title>Re:Can Apples Wifi chipset work in adhoc mode?</title>
	<author>CharlyFoxtrot</author>
	<datestamp>1267794420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's technically possibly to develop an app to do this, like <a href="http://www.tuaw.com/2010/02/10/iphone-hacksugar-creating-a-mywi-wifi-hotspot-for-use-with-ipod/" title="tuaw.com">MyFi</a> [tuaw.com] (for jailbroken phones.) It is strictly Verboten though. I can see why too, imagine an iphone app that lets you send/receive mp3's to/from nearby iPhone users. The music industry's worst nightmare.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's technically possibly to develop an app to do this , like MyFi [ tuaw.com ] ( for jailbroken phones .
) It is strictly Verboten though .
I can see why too , imagine an iphone app that lets you send/receive mp3 's to/from nearby iPhone users .
The music industry 's worst nightmare .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's technically possibly to develop an app to do this, like MyFi [tuaw.com] (for jailbroken phones.
) It is strictly Verboten though.
I can see why too, imagine an iphone app that lets you send/receive mp3's to/from nearby iPhone users.
The music industry's worst nightmare.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366036</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366826</id>
	<title>Been trying to get Apple to make this API public</title>
	<author>tylersoze</author>
	<datestamp>1267721100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah I'm a game developer and have been trying to get Apple to make this API public to no avail. We have a game on the DS that uses wifi hotspots as part of the gameplay. We really wanted to do an iPhone version but weren't able to because the API to find hotspots is private.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah I 'm a game developer and have been trying to get Apple to make this API public to no avail .
We have a game on the DS that uses wifi hotspots as part of the gameplay .
We really wanted to do an iPhone version but were n't able to because the API to find hotspots is private .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah I'm a game developer and have been trying to get Apple to make this API public to no avail.
We have a game on the DS that uses wifi hotspots as part of the gameplay.
We really wanted to do an iPhone version but weren't able to because the API to find hotspots is private.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31384614</id>
	<title>Re:We Don't Know a Thing</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267879320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You must be new here.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You must be new here .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You must be new here.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366106</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31386262</id>
	<title>Need some app management?</title>
	<author>pomerane</author>
	<datestamp>1267893960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Need to delete apps? There's an app for that. It's called my Trash bin.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Need to delete apps ?
There 's an app for that .
It 's called my Trash bin .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Need to delete apps?
There's an app for that.
It's called my Trash bin.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31370466</id>
	<title>Wi-Fi Could Lead Thieves Right to Your Laptop</title>
	<author>i621148</author>
	<datestamp>1267801920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I love WiFiFoFum.  I use it all the time because I don't have a data plan.  I think the reason they are removing them is there is recently some news story about how people are using wifi finders to find laptops located in cars and steal them.  <a href="http://www.pcworld.com/article/190674/wifi\_could\_lead\_thieves\_right\_to\_your\_laptop.html" title="pcworld.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.pcworld.com/article/190674/wifi\_could\_lead\_thieves\_right\_to\_your\_laptop.html</a> [pcworld.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>I love WiFiFoFum .
I use it all the time because I do n't have a data plan .
I think the reason they are removing them is there is recently some news story about how people are using wifi finders to find laptops located in cars and steal them .
http : //www.pcworld.com/article/190674/wifi \ _could \ _lead \ _thieves \ _right \ _to \ _your \ _laptop.html [ pcworld.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I love WiFiFoFum.
I use it all the time because I don't have a data plan.
I think the reason they are removing them is there is recently some news story about how people are using wifi finders to find laptops located in cars and steal them.
http://www.pcworld.com/article/190674/wifi\_could\_lead\_thieves\_right\_to\_your\_laptop.html [pcworld.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31368510</id>
	<title>Re:Why?</title>
	<author>TRRosen</author>
	<datestamp>1267781040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>What does Apple gain by removing these things?</p></div><p>A reliable operating system.   Although I'm betting this came to be due to someone using those "private APIs" poorly. Sloppy coding and an API that connects to a radio spell huge battery draw. I'm certain power use and abuse started this whole thing. Several of the apps were all using the same third party framework that did location tracing using wi-fi. Apple has made it clear it doesn't want apps using location without the users consent or for frivolous uses. Once again I will bet this is related to battery draw.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>What does Apple gain by removing these things ? A reliable operating system .
Although I 'm betting this came to be due to someone using those " private APIs " poorly .
Sloppy coding and an API that connects to a radio spell huge battery draw .
I 'm certain power use and abuse started this whole thing .
Several of the apps were all using the same third party framework that did location tracing using wi-fi .
Apple has made it clear it does n't want apps using location without the users consent or for frivolous uses .
Once again I will bet this is related to battery draw .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What does Apple gain by removing these things?A reliable operating system.
Although I'm betting this came to be due to someone using those "private APIs" poorly.
Sloppy coding and an API that connects to a radio spell huge battery draw.
I'm certain power use and abuse started this whole thing.
Several of the apps were all using the same third party framework that did location tracing using wi-fi.
Apple has made it clear it doesn't want apps using location without the users consent or for frivolous uses.
Once again I will bet this is related to battery draw.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365848</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365808</id>
	<title>walled garden</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267713060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>for the win.</p><p>if you wanted options, you would have gone android... fucksticks.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>for the win.if you wanted options , you would have gone android... fucksticks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>for the win.if you wanted options, you would have gone android... fucksticks.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366024</id>
	<title>Re:Thank you Apple!</title>
	<author>Cosgrach</author>
	<datestamp>1267714740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Beware those who would deny you Information. For in their heart they dream themselves your master.</p></div><p>Amen to that brother.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Beware those who would deny you Information .
For in their heart they dream themselves your master.Amen to that brother .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Beware those who would deny you Information.
For in their heart they dream themselves your master.Amen to that brother.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365884</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365948</id>
	<title>As a life long Apple user</title>
	<author>AHuxley</author>
	<datestamp>1267714200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>All I can say is get a real phone with options you like eg android, nokia 9x ect.<br>
Apple makes a great OS, some great hardware.<br>
Just stay away from the DRM junk and itoys.<br>
Or help port a real OS to it.<br>
As amazon showed with 1984, MS with win 7 mobile and now Apple shows, your just a consumer renting space on their their vision of the world.<br>
Time to disconnect Apple and buy or use/write a real mobile OS.</htmltext>
<tokenext>All I can say is get a real phone with options you like eg android , nokia 9x ect .
Apple makes a great OS , some great hardware .
Just stay away from the DRM junk and itoys .
Or help port a real OS to it .
As amazon showed with 1984 , MS with win 7 mobile and now Apple shows , your just a consumer renting space on their their vision of the world .
Time to disconnect Apple and buy or use/write a real mobile OS .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All I can say is get a real phone with options you like eg android, nokia 9x ect.
Apple makes a great OS, some great hardware.
Just stay away from the DRM junk and itoys.
Or help port a real OS to it.
As amazon showed with 1984, MS with win 7 mobile and now Apple shows, your just a consumer renting space on their their vision of the world.
Time to disconnect Apple and buy or use/write a real mobile OS.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366092</id>
	<title>Re:What's next?</title>
	<author>Tobenisstinky</author>
	<datestamp>1267715220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Oh, about 134,997 apps...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh , about 134,997 apps.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh, about 134,997 apps...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365828</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366000</id>
	<title>Re:I wonder</title>
	<author>amicusNYCL</author>
	<datestamp>1267714560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Is Apple actively trying to destroy any developer relationship that they had, and are they trying to show the community that they are not up to the challenge of hosting an app store?</p></div><p>No, they're just trying to show their users that they have total control.  Just to remind you.  In case you forgot.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is Apple actively trying to destroy any developer relationship that they had , and are they trying to show the community that they are not up to the challenge of hosting an app store ? No , they 're just trying to show their users that they have total control .
Just to remind you .
In case you forgot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is Apple actively trying to destroy any developer relationship that they had, and are they trying to show the community that they are not up to the challenge of hosting an app store?No, they're just trying to show their users that they have total control.
Just to remind you.
In case you forgot.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365836</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365884</id>
	<title>Thank you Apple!</title>
	<author>headkase</author>
	<datestamp>1267713600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm <i>so</i> glad you make all the hard decisions for me!  Would you like to cast my next vote for me??  Oh yeah, when I actually succumb to mobile devices they <i>will</i> be open.  This is like Microsoft telling you what software you can install on Windows!  Is this the future?  Twenty years from now Mac's will only be able to get applications from Apple's approved store?  Yeah, I'm not gonna help with that.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm so glad you make all the hard decisions for me !
Would you like to cast my next vote for me ? ?
Oh yeah , when I actually succumb to mobile devices they will be open .
This is like Microsoft telling you what software you can install on Windows !
Is this the future ?
Twenty years from now Mac 's will only be able to get applications from Apple 's approved store ?
Yeah , I 'm not gon na help with that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm so glad you make all the hard decisions for me!
Would you like to cast my next vote for me??
Oh yeah, when I actually succumb to mobile devices they will be open.
This is like Microsoft telling you what software you can install on Windows!
Is this the future?
Twenty years from now Mac's will only be able to get applications from Apple's approved store?
Yeah, I'm not gonna help with that.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366312</id>
	<title>Re:I wonder</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267716840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>And why I won't drop a couple grand to get xcode in order to write one for mine.</htmltext>
<tokenext>And why I wo n't drop a couple grand to get xcode in order to write one for mine .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And why I won't drop a couple grand to get xcode in order to write one for mine.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365836</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365836</id>
	<title>I wonder</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267713360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Is Apple actively trying to destroy any developer relationship that they had, and are they trying to show the community that they are not up to the challenge of hosting an app store?</p><p>As a software developer that owns an iPhone 3GS owner, and a first generation iPod touch, I feel like I am reminded every day as to why I do not drop $100 and write an application for my own phone.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is Apple actively trying to destroy any developer relationship that they had , and are they trying to show the community that they are not up to the challenge of hosting an app store ? As a software developer that owns an iPhone 3GS owner , and a first generation iPod touch , I feel like I am reminded every day as to why I do not drop $ 100 and write an application for my own phone .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is Apple actively trying to destroy any developer relationship that they had, and are they trying to show the community that they are not up to the challenge of hosting an app store?As a software developer that owns an iPhone 3GS owner, and a first generation iPod touch, I feel like I am reminded every day as to why I do not drop $100 and write an application for my own phone.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366036</id>
	<title>Can Apples Wifi chipset work in adhoc mode?</title>
	<author>sonamchauhan</author>
	<datestamp>1267714800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just somewhat related: Can Apple's Wifi chipset be somehow set to work in adhoc mode?</p><p>i.e. Can an IPhone/ITouch app (even a Jailbroken one?) let you communicate with the other 50 IPhone<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/ITouch users in the train you're on, without paying the cell companies?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just somewhat related : Can Apple 's Wifi chipset be somehow set to work in adhoc mode ? i.e .
Can an IPhone/ITouch app ( even a Jailbroken one ?
) let you communicate with the other 50 IPhone /ITouch users in the train you 're on , without paying the cell companies ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just somewhat related: Can Apple's Wifi chipset be somehow set to work in adhoc mode?i.e.
Can an IPhone/ITouch app (even a Jailbroken one?
) let you communicate with the other 50 IPhone /ITouch users in the train you're on, without paying the cell companies?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31368420</id>
	<title>Re:Really?</title>
	<author>Guy Harris</author>
	<datestamp>1267779780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>So it looks like this may be about the PlaceEngine framework, not wifi per se.</p></div><p>The OS X version of <a href="http://www.placeengine.com/en" title="placeengine.com">PlaceEngine</a> [placeengine.com] is an app, not a framework - and it, err, umm, uses a private framework:</p><blockquote><div><p> <tt>$ otool -L PlaceEngine<br>PlaceEngine:<br><nobr> <wbr></nobr>/usr/lib/libxml2.2.dylib (compatibility version 9.0.0, current version 9.16.0)<br><nobr> <wbr></nobr>/usr/lib/libcrypto.0.9.7.dylib (compatibility version 0.9.7, current version 0.9.7)<br><nobr> <wbr></nobr>/System/Library/Frameworks/Cocoa.framework/Versions/A/Cocoa (compatibility version 1.0.0, current version 11.0.0)<br><nobr> <wbr></nobr>/System/Library/PrivateFrameworks/Apple80211.framework/Versions/A/Apple80211 (compatibility version 1.0.0, current version 2.0.0)<br> <br><nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</tt></p></div> </blockquote><p>The iPhone OS version might do the same.  Yes, it's unfortunate that there's no public API in OS X - and, I suspect, iPhone OS - to get information about nearby access points, but I wouldn't assume that the private interfaces are, in their current state, something that Apple would like to be forced to preserve in a compatible fashion so as not to break third-party apps.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>So it looks like this may be about the PlaceEngine framework , not wifi per se.The OS X version of PlaceEngine [ placeengine.com ] is an app , not a framework - and it , err , umm , uses a private framework : $ otool -L PlaceEnginePlaceEngine : /usr/lib/libxml2.2.dylib ( compatibility version 9.0.0 , current version 9.16.0 ) /usr/lib/libcrypto.0.9.7.dylib ( compatibility version 0.9.7 , current version 0.9.7 ) /System/Library/Frameworks/Cocoa.framework/Versions/A/Cocoa ( compatibility version 1.0.0 , current version 11.0.0 ) /System/Library/PrivateFrameworks/Apple80211.framework/Versions/A/Apple80211 ( compatibility version 1.0.0 , current version 2.0.0 ) ... The iPhone OS version might do the same .
Yes , it 's unfortunate that there 's no public API in OS X - and , I suspect , iPhone OS - to get information about nearby access points , but I would n't assume that the private interfaces are , in their current state , something that Apple would like to be forced to preserve in a compatible fashion so as not to break third-party apps .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So it looks like this may be about the PlaceEngine framework, not wifi per se.The OS X version of PlaceEngine [placeengine.com] is an app, not a framework - and it, err, umm, uses a private framework: $ otool -L PlaceEnginePlaceEngine: /usr/lib/libxml2.2.dylib (compatibility version 9.0.0, current version 9.16.0) /usr/lib/libcrypto.0.9.7.dylib (compatibility version 0.9.7, current version 0.9.7) /System/Library/Frameworks/Cocoa.framework/Versions/A/Cocoa (compatibility version 1.0.0, current version 11.0.0) /System/Library/PrivateFrameworks/Apple80211.framework/Versions/A/Apple80211 (compatibility version 1.0.0, current version 2.0.0)  ... The iPhone OS version might do the same.
Yes, it's unfortunate that there's no public API in OS X - and, I suspect, iPhone OS - to get information about nearby access points, but I wouldn't assume that the private interfaces are, in their current state, something that Apple would like to be forced to preserve in a compatible fashion so as not to break third-party apps.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365900</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366522</id>
	<title>Re:I wonder</title>
	<author>vijayiyer</author>
	<datestamp>1267718820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No, it's simple. If you have an idea, and it fits the terms of service, you're fine. OTOH, if your idea \_requires\_ the use of private APIs, then maybe you should buy some beer instead.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No , it 's simple .
If you have an idea , and it fits the terms of service , you 're fine .
OTOH , if your idea \ _requires \ _ the use of private APIs , then maybe you should buy some beer instead .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, it's simple.
If you have an idea, and it fits the terms of service, you're fine.
OTOH, if your idea \_requires\_ the use of private APIs, then maybe you should buy some beer instead.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365836</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31368864</id>
	<title>Am I missing something?</title>
	<author>ewrong</author>
	<datestamp>1267785660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't understand why you would need a wi-fi "finder" app on an iPhone, the thing does a pretty good job of finding them by itself.</p><p>I was in Paris a while back and needed to send a quick email, just flicked to the wireless settings page walked fifty yards down the road watching all the networks scrolling by until one popped up without a lock symbol next to it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't understand why you would need a wi-fi " finder " app on an iPhone , the thing does a pretty good job of finding them by itself.I was in Paris a while back and needed to send a quick email , just flicked to the wireless settings page walked fifty yards down the road watching all the networks scrolling by until one popped up without a lock symbol next to it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't understand why you would need a wi-fi "finder" app on an iPhone, the thing does a pretty good job of finding them by itself.I was in Paris a while back and needed to send a quick email, just flicked to the wireless settings page walked fifty yards down the road watching all the networks scrolling by until one popped up without a lock symbol next to it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31368378</id>
	<title>More predictable "nyah-nyah" and defensiveness.</title>
	<author>erroneus</author>
	<datestamp>1267822380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Happens every time and even though the intelligent users of slashdot are more than aware of this, they can't seem to fight the compulsion to re-re-re-re-state their position/perception/opinion on the matter.</p><p>Apple strong on consistent user experience.  (by this I mean consistent with apple's ever-changing idea of what the user experience should be.)</p><p>Android strong on openness and flexibility.  (except for where the carriers object and attempt to control it... but even then, not so much.)</p><p>When the iPhone came out with a battery that couldn't be replaced by the user, I wrote it off.  To me, that was the primary show-stopper.  It's a privacy and security concern.  It's a battery life/conservation concern.  It's even a safety concern.</p><p>Android, on the other hand is interesting in that it is yet another high profile Linux based product that has elements of traditional Linux failure all over it.  I don't mean this to sound as bad as it sounds, but I can think of no better way to put it.  The game isn't over yet and perhaps the people steering Android will see the failures and find some solutions, but what traditional failures am I talking about?  Simple: "Being strong on consistent user experience" among other things.</p><p>Previous articles on slashdot came close to describing problems by talking about the wide variety of android phones and how software for one does not work for all.  (it's not a problem for normal Linux hackers... we know all about tarballs, DEBs and RPMS, i386/i586/i686/x86\_64/PPC and other divisions based on which version of glibc it was compiled for.)  But there is more.  The apps themselves are "more free" and therefore have less consistent delivery of look and feel.  When this happens, a solid device starts to feel like a handful of marbles.  At some level of consciousness, we all perceive problems when we are presented with things that don't match up well.  Whether or not it's an actual problem is irrelevant to the feelings of the user (which, by the way is foremost on the minds at Apple) which is where the real success or failure of a project lies.  "Better things" fail all the time at the hands of better marketing of lesser things.  If people feel one thing is better than another or more reliable or will last longer or be supported longer or will have better backing, the truth doesn't matter so much as their feelings.</p><p>As a Linux optimist, I see this as an opportunity for Linux to gain recognition and public favor.  We all know that Linux is a kernel and that it's in a LOT of stuff everywhere that most people never see or think about.  We also know that because it's just a kernel, the REAL problems are in how it's packaged with other things... with or without a GUI, which GUI, what package management, etc.  But there's more.  Look and feel has never really been stressed.  KDE users will probably disagree with me on this because KDE does, in fact, push more in favor of a consistent look and feel.  But they are an exception.</p><p>But even if the Android project pulls itself together and actually does build a very successful consumer implementation of a Linux based OS, it can't quite be said "It's good because it's Linux."  It would still be more accurate to say "It's good in spite of being Linux" because at the moment, a successful consumer Linux OS doesn't fix all the others that we know and love.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Happens every time and even though the intelligent users of slashdot are more than aware of this , they ca n't seem to fight the compulsion to re-re-re-re-state their position/perception/opinion on the matter.Apple strong on consistent user experience .
( by this I mean consistent with apple 's ever-changing idea of what the user experience should be .
) Android strong on openness and flexibility .
( except for where the carriers object and attempt to control it... but even then , not so much .
) When the iPhone came out with a battery that could n't be replaced by the user , I wrote it off .
To me , that was the primary show-stopper .
It 's a privacy and security concern .
It 's a battery life/conservation concern .
It 's even a safety concern.Android , on the other hand is interesting in that it is yet another high profile Linux based product that has elements of traditional Linux failure all over it .
I do n't mean this to sound as bad as it sounds , but I can think of no better way to put it .
The game is n't over yet and perhaps the people steering Android will see the failures and find some solutions , but what traditional failures am I talking about ?
Simple : " Being strong on consistent user experience " among other things.Previous articles on slashdot came close to describing problems by talking about the wide variety of android phones and how software for one does not work for all .
( it 's not a problem for normal Linux hackers... we know all about tarballs , DEBs and RPMS , i386/i586/i686/x86 \ _64/PPC and other divisions based on which version of glibc it was compiled for .
) But there is more .
The apps themselves are " more free " and therefore have less consistent delivery of look and feel .
When this happens , a solid device starts to feel like a handful of marbles .
At some level of consciousness , we all perceive problems when we are presented with things that do n't match up well .
Whether or not it 's an actual problem is irrelevant to the feelings of the user ( which , by the way is foremost on the minds at Apple ) which is where the real success or failure of a project lies .
" Better things " fail all the time at the hands of better marketing of lesser things .
If people feel one thing is better than another or more reliable or will last longer or be supported longer or will have better backing , the truth does n't matter so much as their feelings.As a Linux optimist , I see this as an opportunity for Linux to gain recognition and public favor .
We all know that Linux is a kernel and that it 's in a LOT of stuff everywhere that most people never see or think about .
We also know that because it 's just a kernel , the REAL problems are in how it 's packaged with other things... with or without a GUI , which GUI , what package management , etc .
But there 's more .
Look and feel has never really been stressed .
KDE users will probably disagree with me on this because KDE does , in fact , push more in favor of a consistent look and feel .
But they are an exception.But even if the Android project pulls itself together and actually does build a very successful consumer implementation of a Linux based OS , it ca n't quite be said " It 's good because it 's Linux .
" It would still be more accurate to say " It 's good in spite of being Linux " because at the moment , a successful consumer Linux OS does n't fix all the others that we know and love .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Happens every time and even though the intelligent users of slashdot are more than aware of this, they can't seem to fight the compulsion to re-re-re-re-state their position/perception/opinion on the matter.Apple strong on consistent user experience.
(by this I mean consistent with apple's ever-changing idea of what the user experience should be.
)Android strong on openness and flexibility.
(except for where the carriers object and attempt to control it... but even then, not so much.
)When the iPhone came out with a battery that couldn't be replaced by the user, I wrote it off.
To me, that was the primary show-stopper.
It's a privacy and security concern.
It's a battery life/conservation concern.
It's even a safety concern.Android, on the other hand is interesting in that it is yet another high profile Linux based product that has elements of traditional Linux failure all over it.
I don't mean this to sound as bad as it sounds, but I can think of no better way to put it.
The game isn't over yet and perhaps the people steering Android will see the failures and find some solutions, but what traditional failures am I talking about?
Simple: "Being strong on consistent user experience" among other things.Previous articles on slashdot came close to describing problems by talking about the wide variety of android phones and how software for one does not work for all.
(it's not a problem for normal Linux hackers... we know all about tarballs, DEBs and RPMS, i386/i586/i686/x86\_64/PPC and other divisions based on which version of glibc it was compiled for.
)  But there is more.
The apps themselves are "more free" and therefore have less consistent delivery of look and feel.
When this happens, a solid device starts to feel like a handful of marbles.
At some level of consciousness, we all perceive problems when we are presented with things that don't match up well.
Whether or not it's an actual problem is irrelevant to the feelings of the user (which, by the way is foremost on the minds at Apple) which is where the real success or failure of a project lies.
"Better things" fail all the time at the hands of better marketing of lesser things.
If people feel one thing is better than another or more reliable or will last longer or be supported longer or will have better backing, the truth doesn't matter so much as their feelings.As a Linux optimist, I see this as an opportunity for Linux to gain recognition and public favor.
We all know that Linux is a kernel and that it's in a LOT of stuff everywhere that most people never see or think about.
We also know that because it's just a kernel, the REAL problems are in how it's packaged with other things... with or without a GUI, which GUI, what package management, etc.
But there's more.
Look and feel has never really been stressed.
KDE users will probably disagree with me on this because KDE does, in fact, push more in favor of a consistent look and feel.
But they are an exception.But even if the Android project pulls itself together and actually does build a very successful consumer implementation of a Linux based OS, it can't quite be said "It's good because it's Linux.
"  It would still be more accurate to say "It's good in spite of being Linux" because at the moment, a successful consumer Linux OS doesn't fix all the others that we know and love.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31368082</id>
	<title>Just wait....</title>
	<author>louiech21</author>
	<datestamp>1267732320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Apple has made the decision yet again to limit the functionality of their own devices and control their consumers choices.  You would think instead of removing apps from their store that they would add more to make their own product more marketable and versitile.  Maybe instead of worrying limiting functionality, Apple should think about adding functionality and consider why people want other products instead of theirs.  The ability to browse flash sites would be a good start, who cares if there are apps to watch porn on the app store.  All people really want is the ability to do what they need, browse the web with no limitations, and use the device with no limitations.  If I want to tinker with the hardware who cares, the idea is that you are selling phones, ipods and computers.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Apple has made the decision yet again to limit the functionality of their own devices and control their consumers choices .
You would think instead of removing apps from their store that they would add more to make their own product more marketable and versitile .
Maybe instead of worrying limiting functionality , Apple should think about adding functionality and consider why people want other products instead of theirs .
The ability to browse flash sites would be a good start , who cares if there are apps to watch porn on the app store .
All people really want is the ability to do what they need , browse the web with no limitations , and use the device with no limitations .
If I want to tinker with the hardware who cares , the idea is that you are selling phones , ipods and computers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Apple has made the decision yet again to limit the functionality of their own devices and control their consumers choices.
You would think instead of removing apps from their store that they would add more to make their own product more marketable and versitile.
Maybe instead of worrying limiting functionality, Apple should think about adding functionality and consider why people want other products instead of theirs.
The ability to browse flash sites would be a good start, who cares if there are apps to watch porn on the app store.
All people really want is the ability to do what they need, browse the web with no limitations, and use the device with no limitations.
If I want to tinker with the hardware who cares, the idea is that you are selling phones, ipods and computers.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366266</id>
	<title>Re:Why?</title>
	<author>OverlordQ</author>
	<datestamp>1267716420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>What does Apple gain by removing these things?</i></p><p>More carrier lock-in?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What does Apple gain by removing these things ? More carrier lock-in ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What does Apple gain by removing these things?More carrier lock-in?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365848</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366302</id>
	<title>Re:Doesn't appear to be a moral judgement</title>
	<author>EastCoastSurfer</author>
	<datestamp>1267716780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>IMHO, any framework that is accessible is by default public.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>IMHO , any framework that is accessible is by default public .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>IMHO, any framework that is accessible is by default public.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365830</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31370254</id>
	<title>Sex apps not removed</title>
	<author>Brian Kendig</author>
	<datestamp>1267800780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Meanwhile, among the Top Free Apps in the iTunes App Store right now are "Sex Positions Game - 18+ Free" (#5), "69 Positions Lite - Sex Positions" (#8), and "Adult Sex Trick" (#25). What was this about Apple removing all sexual content from the App Store?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Meanwhile , among the Top Free Apps in the iTunes App Store right now are " Sex Positions Game - 18 + Free " ( # 5 ) , " 69 Positions Lite - Sex Positions " ( # 8 ) , and " Adult Sex Trick " ( # 25 ) .
What was this about Apple removing all sexual content from the App Store ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Meanwhile, among the Top Free Apps in the iTunes App Store right now are "Sex Positions Game - 18+ Free" (#5), "69 Positions Lite - Sex Positions" (#8), and "Adult Sex Trick" (#25).
What was this about Apple removing all sexual content from the App Store?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31370286</id>
	<title>Re:What's next?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267800960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Apple does not have any use for them after they are bought.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Apple does not have any use for them after they are bought .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Apple does not have any use for them after they are bought.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365828</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366508</id>
	<title>Re:What's next?</title>
	<author>icannotthinkofaname</author>
	<datestamp>1267718760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>What use do these "iPhone" devices have anymore, anyway?</p></div><p>Well...I'm pretty sure they're still phones....  I bet they can still make phone calls.  Maybe even send text messages, too!</p><p>I hope, anyway....</p><p>I do not own an iPhone, nor do I ever plan to own one, but...yeah...I'd hope anything with "phone" in the name would be able to contact other phones.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>What use do these " iPhone " devices have anymore , anyway ? Well...I 'm pretty sure they 're still phones.... I bet they can still make phone calls .
Maybe even send text messages , too ! I hope , anyway....I do not own an iPhone , nor do I ever plan to own one , but...yeah...I 'd hope anything with " phone " in the name would be able to contact other phones .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What use do these "iPhone" devices have anymore, anyway?Well...I'm pretty sure they're still phones....  I bet they can still make phone calls.
Maybe even send text messages, too!I hope, anyway....I do not own an iPhone, nor do I ever plan to own one, but...yeah...I'd hope anything with "phone" in the name would be able to contact other phones.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365828</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366466</id>
	<title>useless junk</title>
	<author>luther349</author>
	<datestamp>1267718460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>the iphone can see any wifi networks it can connect to. so why would you need another app to connect for you. apps with a db are all you need so you knoe where to go.</htmltext>
<tokenext>the iphone can see any wifi networks it can connect to .
so why would you need another app to connect for you .
apps with a db are all you need so you knoe where to go .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the iphone can see any wifi networks it can connect to.
so why would you need another app to connect for you.
apps with a db are all you need so you knoe where to go.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31367028</id>
	<title>Re:I wonder</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267722300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>As a software developer that owns an iPhone 3GS owner, and a first generation iPod touch, I feel like I am reminded every day as to why I do not drop $100 and write an application for my own phone.</p></div></blockquote><p>
We'll just have to suffer the loss of your brilliant contribution with as much courage as we can muster.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>As a software developer that owns an iPhone 3GS owner , and a first generation iPod touch , I feel like I am reminded every day as to why I do not drop $ 100 and write an application for my own phone .
We 'll just have to suffer the loss of your brilliant contribution with as much courage as we can muster .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As a software developer that owns an iPhone 3GS owner, and a first generation iPod touch, I feel like I am reminded every day as to why I do not drop $100 and write an application for my own phone.
We'll just have to suffer the loss of your brilliant contribution with as much courage as we can muster.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365836</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366040</id>
	<title>Re:Why?</title>
	<author>amicusNYCL</author>
	<datestamp>1267714800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>What does Apple gain by removing these things?</p></div><p>The kind of total control over their platform which they expect to have.  I'm reminded of the quote on Twitter the other day from the story about the top developers fired by Activision: "Getting mad at [Apple] for this is like getting mad at an ape for throwing feces.  It's just how the beast communicates."</p><p>This kind of control is Apple's MO, and anyone buying their products should either know that, or wouldn't be affected by it (some people do want their choices made for them).</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>What does Apple gain by removing these things ? The kind of total control over their platform which they expect to have .
I 'm reminded of the quote on Twitter the other day from the story about the top developers fired by Activision : " Getting mad at [ Apple ] for this is like getting mad at an ape for throwing feces .
It 's just how the beast communicates .
" This kind of control is Apple 's MO , and anyone buying their products should either know that , or would n't be affected by it ( some people do want their choices made for them ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What does Apple gain by removing these things?The kind of total control over their platform which they expect to have.
I'm reminded of the quote on Twitter the other day from the story about the top developers fired by Activision: "Getting mad at [Apple] for this is like getting mad at an ape for throwing feces.
It's just how the beast communicates.
"This kind of control is Apple's MO, and anyone buying their products should either know that, or wouldn't be affected by it (some people do want their choices made for them).
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365848</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366456</id>
	<title>It's great!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267718340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Best idea ever Apple.</p><p>It makes me even more proud to be a PC.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Best idea ever Apple.It makes me even more proud to be a PC .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Best idea ever Apple.It makes me even more proud to be a PC.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31369912</id>
	<title>Re:Great News !!</title>
	<author>tepples</author>
	<datestamp>1267798020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>As a developer, I like the enforcement of the "no private frameworks" rule.</p></div><p>So what do you do when your customers demand a feature, but the only framework that would support that feature is private?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>As a developer , I like the enforcement of the " no private frameworks " rule.So what do you do when your customers demand a feature , but the only framework that would support that feature is private ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As a developer, I like the enforcement of the "no private frameworks" rule.So what do you do when your customers demand a feature, but the only framework that would support that feature is private?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366358</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365832</id>
	<title>filter</title>
	<author>Jeek Elemental</author>
	<datestamp>1267713300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I kinda remember being able to filter stories away based on the section, did I dream this?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I kinda remember being able to filter stories away based on the section , did I dream this ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I kinda remember being able to filter stories away based on the section, did I dream this?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366054</id>
	<title>Re:Why?</title>
	<author>bertoelcon</author>
	<datestamp>1267714980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Slightly more size on their e-peen (or iPeen since it is Apple).</htmltext>
<tokenext>Slightly more size on their e-peen ( or iPeen since it is Apple ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Slightly more size on their e-peen (or iPeen since it is Apple).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365848</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366354</id>
	<title>They'd also be the only store in town...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267717320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; Just so we're clear here, it'd be like if Microsoft could decide what software it wanted to host on it's servers, and provide a shop framework for. Which, last time I checked, they have every right to do.</p><p>Yeah, but they'd also be the ONLY store you can buy from (unless you hacked your computer).  I know it's within their legal right.  I don't believe that they should HAVE that legal right, however.</p><p>Oh, and believe me, I DO complain about those other closed systems.  They're just a big and visible target.  Thus, they get all the public hate.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; Just so we 're clear here , it 'd be like if Microsoft could decide what software it wanted to host on it 's servers , and provide a shop framework for .
Which , last time I checked , they have every right to do.Yeah , but they 'd also be the ONLY store you can buy from ( unless you hacked your computer ) .
I know it 's within their legal right .
I do n't believe that they should HAVE that legal right , however.Oh , and believe me , I DO complain about those other closed systems .
They 're just a big and visible target .
Thus , they get all the public hate .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; Just so we're clear here, it'd be like if Microsoft could decide what software it wanted to host on it's servers, and provide a shop framework for.
Which, last time I checked, they have every right to do.Yeah, but they'd also be the ONLY store you can buy from (unless you hacked your computer).
I know it's within their legal right.
I don't believe that they should HAVE that legal right, however.Oh, and believe me, I DO complain about those other closed systems.
They're just a big and visible target.
Thus, they get all the public hate.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366110</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31368616</id>
	<title>Re:Great News !!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267782240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As a user, I dislike the enforcement of this, because I do wireless security audits for a living and WiFiFoFum has been my favorite app and has saved me hundreds of hours over the last few years.  I will be ditching my iPhone in order to keep using this application, unfortunately.</p><p>Perhaps publicising the framework and simply reminding people that certain updates may break functionality would be the best approach, eh?</p><p>I dunno...  Killed the only app that gets used more than mail and phone on my iPhone.  That's pretty weak as far as I'm concerned.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As a user , I dislike the enforcement of this , because I do wireless security audits for a living and WiFiFoFum has been my favorite app and has saved me hundreds of hours over the last few years .
I will be ditching my iPhone in order to keep using this application , unfortunately.Perhaps publicising the framework and simply reminding people that certain updates may break functionality would be the best approach , eh ? I dunno... Killed the only app that gets used more than mail and phone on my iPhone .
That 's pretty weak as far as I 'm concerned .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As a user, I dislike the enforcement of this, because I do wireless security audits for a living and WiFiFoFum has been my favorite app and has saved me hundreds of hours over the last few years.
I will be ditching my iPhone in order to keep using this application, unfortunately.Perhaps publicising the framework and simply reminding people that certain updates may break functionality would be the best approach, eh?I dunno...  Killed the only app that gets used more than mail and phone on my iPhone.
That's pretty weak as far as I'm concerned.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366358</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365882</id>
	<title>Re:Really?</title>
	<author>anagama</author>
	<datestamp>1267713600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>I read this morning that the ones removed were the ones using private frameworks.  Indeed, a quick google: <a href="http://nexus404.com/Blog/2010/03/05/apple-bans-wifi-hotspot-detecting-apps-from-itunes-iphone-ipod-touch-apps-using-\%E2\%80\%98private-frameworks\%E2\%80\%99-pulled/" title="nexus404.com">http://nexus404.com/Blog/2010/03/05/apple-bans-wifi-hotspot-detecting-apps-from-itunes-iphone-ipod-touch-apps-using-\%E2\%80\%98private-frameworks\%E2\%80\%99-pulled/</a> [nexus404.com]<blockquote><div><p>It should be said that so far the only Apps to be pulled are those that actively scan for WiFi hotspots and not those that employ a database paired with the iPhone's GPS capabilities</p></div></blockquote><p>So the ones left are totally lame.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I read this morning that the ones removed were the ones using private frameworks .
Indeed , a quick google : http : //nexus404.com/Blog/2010/03/05/apple-bans-wifi-hotspot-detecting-apps-from-itunes-iphone-ipod-touch-apps-using- \ % E2 \ % 80 \ % 98private-frameworks \ % E2 \ % 80 \ % 99-pulled/ [ nexus404.com ] It should be said that so far the only Apps to be pulled are those that actively scan for WiFi hotspots and not those that employ a database paired with the iPhone 's GPS capabilitiesSo the ones left are totally lame .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I read this morning that the ones removed were the ones using private frameworks.
Indeed, a quick google: http://nexus404.com/Blog/2010/03/05/apple-bans-wifi-hotspot-detecting-apps-from-itunes-iphone-ipod-touch-apps-using-\%E2\%80\%98private-frameworks\%E2\%80\%99-pulled/ [nexus404.com]It should be said that so far the only Apps to be pulled are those that actively scan for WiFi hotspots and not those that employ a database paired with the iPhone's GPS capabilitiesSo the ones left are totally lame.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365822</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366568</id>
	<title>Re:Great News !!</title>
	<author>ThePengwin</author>
	<datestamp>1267719180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> I don't want to have to compete against other developers who can implement things I can't implement, because they are willing to stay up for three weeks reverse-engineering some undocumented interface.</p></div><p>You don't want to compete with people who put in more effort into coding their apps than you?</p><p>.....what?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't want to have to compete against other developers who can implement things I ca n't implement , because they are willing to stay up for three weeks reverse-engineering some undocumented interface.You do n't want to compete with people who put in more effort into coding their apps than you ? .....what ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext> I don't want to have to compete against other developers who can implement things I can't implement, because they are willing to stay up for three weeks reverse-engineering some undocumented interface.You don't want to compete with people who put in more effort into coding their apps than you?.....what?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366358</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365944</id>
	<title>Re:Why?</title>
	<author>maxume</author>
	<datestamp>1267714200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They don't have to choose between user complaints and making changes to the private apis (used by the apps).</p><p>(Which perhaps isn't the most convincing reason, but it isn't all that crazy)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They do n't have to choose between user complaints and making changes to the private apis ( used by the apps ) .
( Which perhaps is n't the most convincing reason , but it is n't all that crazy )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They don't have to choose between user complaints and making changes to the private apis (used by the apps).
(Which perhaps isn't the most convincing reason, but it isn't all that crazy)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365848</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31368698</id>
	<title>Re:Great News !!</title>
	<author>TRRosen</author>
	<datestamp>1267783320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>its not closed its moderated. In if you think thats still evil go to any unmoderated newsgroup and count the number of spam postings.</p><p>Is Linux open? NO! They don'y just let anybody add code to the kernel project do they! There are people who look at submitted code and CONTROL what gets in and what doesn't. They must be evil too huh.</p><p>And what about those control freaks that keep telling how fast to drive in a school zone or how much I can drink before I drive. Screw them If I want to operated an open air unregulated nuclear reaction in my backyard thats my decision damit.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>its not closed its moderated .
In if you think thats still evil go to any unmoderated newsgroup and count the number of spam postings.Is Linux open ?
NO ! They don'y just let anybody add code to the kernel project do they !
There are people who look at submitted code and CONTROL what gets in and what does n't .
They must be evil too huh.And what about those control freaks that keep telling how fast to drive in a school zone or how much I can drink before I drive .
Screw them If I want to operated an open air unregulated nuclear reaction in my backyard thats my decision damit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>its not closed its moderated.
In if you think thats still evil go to any unmoderated newsgroup and count the number of spam postings.Is Linux open?
NO! They don'y just let anybody add code to the kernel project do they!
There are people who look at submitted code and CONTROL what gets in and what doesn't.
They must be evil too huh.And what about those control freaks that keep telling how fast to drive in a school zone or how much I can drink before I drive.
Screw them If I want to operated an open air unregulated nuclear reaction in my backyard thats my decision damit.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366026</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365822</id>
	<title>Really?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267713300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I just ran a search for WiFi in the app store, and plenty of free finders appeared.</p><p>Was there something about these specific apps, or is this just about those apps using reserved (ie subject to change) frameworks?</p><p>In short - let's not panic just yet, hm?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I just ran a search for WiFi in the app store , and plenty of free finders appeared.Was there something about these specific apps , or is this just about those apps using reserved ( ie subject to change ) frameworks ? In short - let 's not panic just yet , hm ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I just ran a search for WiFi in the app store, and plenty of free finders appeared.Was there something about these specific apps, or is this just about those apps using reserved (ie subject to change) frameworks?In short - let's not panic just yet, hm?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31371566</id>
	<title>Re:Really?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267807380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>And this is why we need to RTFA, there are just too many false and/or misleading summaries.</p></div><p>What, on Slashdot? Surely you jest!!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>And this is why we need to RTFA , there are just too many false and/or misleading summaries.What , on Slashdot ?
Surely you jest !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And this is why we need to RTFA, there are just too many false and/or misleading summaries.What, on Slashdot?
Surely you jest!
!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365900</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366110</id>
	<title>Re:Thank you Apple!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267715340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>This is like Microsoft telling you what software you can install on Windows!</p></div><p>Just so we're clear here, it'd be like if Microsoft could decide what software it wanted to host on it's servers, and provide a shop framework for. Which, last time I checked, they have every right to do.</p><p>There <em>is</em> a difference here, obviously. For most people (those who haven't jailbroken), Apple's store is the only place to get software. Apple has to approve this software. But since when is this any different than the software released for the xbox 360 or any other game console? At least Apple has a reasonable excuse: their phone has to work on a cell network, and it needs to have restrictions placed on software. Game consoles have <em>no</em> such excuse.</p><p>I'm not saying it's not stupid, I'm just saying that it's <em>their right</em> to do this. I don't see why people can be so uppity about the iPhone when there are plenty of other closed systems to complain about that have been around for much longer.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is like Microsoft telling you what software you can install on Windows ! Just so we 're clear here , it 'd be like if Microsoft could decide what software it wanted to host on it 's servers , and provide a shop framework for .
Which , last time I checked , they have every right to do.There is a difference here , obviously .
For most people ( those who have n't jailbroken ) , Apple 's store is the only place to get software .
Apple has to approve this software .
But since when is this any different than the software released for the xbox 360 or any other game console ?
At least Apple has a reasonable excuse : their phone has to work on a cell network , and it needs to have restrictions placed on software .
Game consoles have no such excuse.I 'm not saying it 's not stupid , I 'm just saying that it 's their right to do this .
I do n't see why people can be so uppity about the iPhone when there are plenty of other closed systems to complain about that have been around for much longer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is like Microsoft telling you what software you can install on Windows!Just so we're clear here, it'd be like if Microsoft could decide what software it wanted to host on it's servers, and provide a shop framework for.
Which, last time I checked, they have every right to do.There is a difference here, obviously.
For most people (those who haven't jailbroken), Apple's store is the only place to get software.
Apple has to approve this software.
But since when is this any different than the software released for the xbox 360 or any other game console?
At least Apple has a reasonable excuse: their phone has to work on a cell network, and it needs to have restrictions placed on software.
Game consoles have no such excuse.I'm not saying it's not stupid, I'm just saying that it's their right to do this.
I don't see why people can be so uppity about the iPhone when there are plenty of other closed systems to complain about that have been around for much longer.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365884</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366260</id>
	<title>Why Fry WiFiFoFum?</title>
	<author>Katyrnyn</author>
	<datestamp>1267716360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'll admit that even it has been a little rough,<br>with quirks and blips and little ticks since OS 3.1.<br>But even now I just say wow at the news that its been snuffed,<br>'cause as of late it's been so great to Find Wi while on the run.</p><p>It was lean and pretty clean as apps are want to be,<br>and so of use and not obtuse so now I'm slightly mad.<br>For no bugs I've seen have been so mean to give clear reason to me,<br>to kick it out and without a doubt this makes my phone so very very sad.</p><p>Uneven rules and duplicate tools have no doubt likely doomed,<br>our favorite apps we bought for laughs with money oh so small.<br>So let none be shocked and none be fooled to find out that we've zoomed,<br>on to other phones with other tones and no more garden wall.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'll admit that even it has been a little rough,with quirks and blips and little ticks since OS 3.1.But even now I just say wow at the news that its been snuffed,'cause as of late it 's been so great to Find Wi while on the run.It was lean and pretty clean as apps are want to be,and so of use and not obtuse so now I 'm slightly mad.For no bugs I 've seen have been so mean to give clear reason to me,to kick it out and without a doubt this makes my phone so very very sad.Uneven rules and duplicate tools have no doubt likely doomed,our favorite apps we bought for laughs with money oh so small.So let none be shocked and none be fooled to find out that we 've zoomed,on to other phones with other tones and no more garden wall .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'll admit that even it has been a little rough,with quirks and blips and little ticks since OS 3.1.But even now I just say wow at the news that its been snuffed,'cause as of late it's been so great to Find Wi while on the run.It was lean and pretty clean as apps are want to be,and so of use and not obtuse so now I'm slightly mad.For no bugs I've seen have been so mean to give clear reason to me,to kick it out and without a doubt this makes my phone so very very sad.Uneven rules and duplicate tools have no doubt likely doomed,our favorite apps we bought for laughs with money oh so small.So let none be shocked and none be fooled to find out that we've zoomed,on to other phones with other tones and no more garden wall.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365848</id>
	<title>Why?</title>
	<author>Darkness404</author>
	<datestamp>1267713360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>What does Apple gain by removing these things?</htmltext>
<tokenext>What does Apple gain by removing these things ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What does Apple gain by removing these things?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31376014</id>
	<title>Re:Thank you Apple!</title>
	<author>MistrBlank</author>
	<datestamp>1267785960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah, but the iPad and iPhone have no such restrictions, yet they are crippled by the same policy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , but the iPad and iPhone have no such restrictions , yet they are crippled by the same policy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, but the iPad and iPhone have no such restrictions, yet they are crippled by the same policy.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366110</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31368680</id>
	<title>Re:Thank you Apple!</title>
	<author>Serious Callers Only</author>
	<datestamp>1267783140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Twenty years from now Mac's will only be able to get applications from Apple's approved store?</p> </div><p>This may be closer than you think:</p><p><a href="http://www.macrumors.com/2010/03/05/apple-seeking-to-stimulate-mac-development-with-99-mac-dev-program/" title="macrumors.com">http://www.macrumors.com/2010/03/05/apple-seeking-to-stimulate-mac-development-with-99-mac-dev-program/</a> [macrumors.com]</p><p>Though this is just a first step toward an iPhone-like developer model, and I suspect they'll just introduce a mac store as an add-on first of all, and allow apps to be released in other ways, at least at first.</p><p>What scares me about this though is that Apple are gradually being sucked into their own hype; that only end-to-end control of the experience by Apple is the way to ensure quality. This in spite of the obvious failure in quality control in their store and the many inconsistencies in applying their policy. If there were some other option for getting apps onto the platform it wouldn't matter as much, but of course there isn't on iPhone.</p><p>This particular example probably isn't a good one, as the apps in question did use private APIs knowingly, which frankly they should not have done and is explicitly disallowed in the developer agreement. However it does bring into focus Apple's lacklustre quality control, ad-hoc and arbitrary approval process, and abuse of their powerful position as platform makers.</p><p>With the banning of some porn apps but not others, abuse of their power as arbiters on the app store to force out competitors (Google Voice), their casual indifference to the plight of pulled third party app developers, while leaving all sorts of crap on the app store, and their lawsuit against HTC for bullshit software patents (which makes them look like a fearful monopolist), Apple is in danger of becoming the next evil empire.</p><p>The hypocrisy is astounding, and is starting to make long-term Mac users rethink their commitment to both platforms, which are headed in a direction which is anti ethical to user and developer interests. A certain amount of control-freakery is good for the platform in that it keeps the hardware supported tight and the software selection high quality, but Apple have consistently overstepped the mark on iPhone OS and are now starting to abuse their power over the platform to their own ends. Jobs seems to be genuinely affronted that other platforms have 'stolen' their ideas, though of course he lives by the credo of 'great artists steal' himself and is not afraid to lift ideas from other sources.</p><p>As an iPhone/Mac user and developer, Android is looking a lot more interesting by the day, in spite of all its warts.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Twenty years from now Mac 's will only be able to get applications from Apple 's approved store ?
This may be closer than you think : http : //www.macrumors.com/2010/03/05/apple-seeking-to-stimulate-mac-development-with-99-mac-dev-program/ [ macrumors.com ] Though this is just a first step toward an iPhone-like developer model , and I suspect they 'll just introduce a mac store as an add-on first of all , and allow apps to be released in other ways , at least at first.What scares me about this though is that Apple are gradually being sucked into their own hype ; that only end-to-end control of the experience by Apple is the way to ensure quality .
This in spite of the obvious failure in quality control in their store and the many inconsistencies in applying their policy .
If there were some other option for getting apps onto the platform it would n't matter as much , but of course there is n't on iPhone.This particular example probably is n't a good one , as the apps in question did use private APIs knowingly , which frankly they should not have done and is explicitly disallowed in the developer agreement .
However it does bring into focus Apple 's lacklustre quality control , ad-hoc and arbitrary approval process , and abuse of their powerful position as platform makers.With the banning of some porn apps but not others , abuse of their power as arbiters on the app store to force out competitors ( Google Voice ) , their casual indifference to the plight of pulled third party app developers , while leaving all sorts of crap on the app store , and their lawsuit against HTC for bullshit software patents ( which makes them look like a fearful monopolist ) , Apple is in danger of becoming the next evil empire.The hypocrisy is astounding , and is starting to make long-term Mac users rethink their commitment to both platforms , which are headed in a direction which is anti ethical to user and developer interests .
A certain amount of control-freakery is good for the platform in that it keeps the hardware supported tight and the software selection high quality , but Apple have consistently overstepped the mark on iPhone OS and are now starting to abuse their power over the platform to their own ends .
Jobs seems to be genuinely affronted that other platforms have 'stolen ' their ideas , though of course he lives by the credo of 'great artists steal ' himself and is not afraid to lift ideas from other sources.As an iPhone/Mac user and developer , Android is looking a lot more interesting by the day , in spite of all its warts .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Twenty years from now Mac's will only be able to get applications from Apple's approved store?
This may be closer than you think:http://www.macrumors.com/2010/03/05/apple-seeking-to-stimulate-mac-development-with-99-mac-dev-program/ [macrumors.com]Though this is just a first step toward an iPhone-like developer model, and I suspect they'll just introduce a mac store as an add-on first of all, and allow apps to be released in other ways, at least at first.What scares me about this though is that Apple are gradually being sucked into their own hype; that only end-to-end control of the experience by Apple is the way to ensure quality.
This in spite of the obvious failure in quality control in their store and the many inconsistencies in applying their policy.
If there were some other option for getting apps onto the platform it wouldn't matter as much, but of course there isn't on iPhone.This particular example probably isn't a good one, as the apps in question did use private APIs knowingly, which frankly they should not have done and is explicitly disallowed in the developer agreement.
However it does bring into focus Apple's lacklustre quality control, ad-hoc and arbitrary approval process, and abuse of their powerful position as platform makers.With the banning of some porn apps but not others, abuse of their power as arbiters on the app store to force out competitors (Google Voice), their casual indifference to the plight of pulled third party app developers, while leaving all sorts of crap on the app store, and their lawsuit against HTC for bullshit software patents (which makes them look like a fearful monopolist), Apple is in danger of becoming the next evil empire.The hypocrisy is astounding, and is starting to make long-term Mac users rethink their commitment to both platforms, which are headed in a direction which is anti ethical to user and developer interests.
A certain amount of control-freakery is good for the platform in that it keeps the hardware supported tight and the software selection high quality, but Apple have consistently overstepped the mark on iPhone OS and are now starting to abuse their power over the platform to their own ends.
Jobs seems to be genuinely affronted that other platforms have 'stolen' their ideas, though of course he lives by the credo of 'great artists steal' himself and is not afraid to lift ideas from other sources.As an iPhone/Mac user and developer, Android is looking a lot more interesting by the day, in spite of all its warts.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365884</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31368544</id>
	<title>Re:Can Apples Wifi chipset work in adhoc mode?</title>
	<author>GordonBX</author>
	<datestamp>1267781460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yes. It's called Bluetooth.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes .
It 's called Bluetooth .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes.
It's called Bluetooth.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366036</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366254</id>
	<title>Re:Thank you Apple!</title>
	<author>mjwx</author>
	<datestamp>1267716240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Twenty years from now Mac's will only be able to get applications from Apple's approved store? Yeah, I'm not gonna help with that.</p></div></blockquote><p>

Twenty, try two. Apple is going to move its laptops and desktops away from X86 and into ARM and have them use the iphone OS. Why? control, apple hates the hackintoshes and even jailbroken iphones, with every update there is something that stops hackintoshes or jailbroken devices from working correctly. Yes there are developers who specialise in getting around this but it's pretty clear the vendor is fighting you tooth and nail for control of your devices.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Twenty years from now Mac 's will only be able to get applications from Apple 's approved store ?
Yeah , I 'm not gon na help with that .
Twenty , try two .
Apple is going to move its laptops and desktops away from X86 and into ARM and have them use the iphone OS .
Why ? control , apple hates the hackintoshes and even jailbroken iphones , with every update there is something that stops hackintoshes or jailbroken devices from working correctly .
Yes there are developers who specialise in getting around this but it 's pretty clear the vendor is fighting you tooth and nail for control of your devices .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Twenty years from now Mac's will only be able to get applications from Apple's approved store?
Yeah, I'm not gonna help with that.
Twenty, try two.
Apple is going to move its laptops and desktops away from X86 and into ARM and have them use the iphone OS.
Why? control, apple hates the hackintoshes and even jailbroken iphones, with every update there is something that stops hackintoshes or jailbroken devices from working correctly.
Yes there are developers who specialise in getting around this but it's pretty clear the vendor is fighting you tooth and nail for control of your devices.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365884</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365828</id>
	<title>What's next?</title>
	<author>ryantmer</author>
	<datestamp>1267713300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>First they remove the pron apps, then the wifi steal- er, "borrowing" apps... What use do these "iPhone" devices have anymore, anyway?</htmltext>
<tokenext>First they remove the pron apps , then the wifi steal- er , " borrowing " apps... What use do these " iPhone " devices have anymore , anyway ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>First they remove the pron apps, then the wifi steal- er, "borrowing" apps... What use do these "iPhone" devices have anymore, anyway?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31375014</id>
	<title>Re:Private Frameworks, people.</title>
	<author>lwsimon</author>
	<datestamp>1267780620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's great, but the correct way to handle apps that slipped through the cracks would seem to be:</p><p>1) Contact that developers<br>2) Give them X weeks to rewrite the app to fit the standard<br>3) Expedite the approval process for effected apps<br>4) Update the API specification, removing any apps which have not yet been updated.</p><p>Instead, it appears that Apple immediately removed the apps from the AppStore.  As an iPhone owner, this kind of..  abusive treatment of application developers and app owners is unacceptable.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's great , but the correct way to handle apps that slipped through the cracks would seem to be : 1 ) Contact that developers2 ) Give them X weeks to rewrite the app to fit the standard3 ) Expedite the approval process for effected apps4 ) Update the API specification , removing any apps which have not yet been updated.Instead , it appears that Apple immediately removed the apps from the AppStore .
As an iPhone owner , this kind of.. abusive treatment of application developers and app owners is unacceptable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's great, but the correct way to handle apps that slipped through the cracks would seem to be:1) Contact that developers2) Give them X weeks to rewrite the app to fit the standard3) Expedite the approval process for effected apps4) Update the API specification, removing any apps which have not yet been updated.Instead, it appears that Apple immediately removed the apps from the AppStore.
As an iPhone owner, this kind of..  abusive treatment of application developers and app owners is unacceptable.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365990</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365830</id>
	<title>Doesn't appear to be a moral judgement</title>
	<author>russotto</author>
	<datestamp>1267713300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It appears Apple's problem with the apps isn't with what they do but with how they do it; namely, using non-public frameworks.  There probably isn't a way to do it using public frameworks, though (on Mac OS X, you need to use the private Apple80211.framework, not sure about iPhone OS X).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It appears Apple 's problem with the apps is n't with what they do but with how they do it ; namely , using non-public frameworks .
There probably is n't a way to do it using public frameworks , though ( on Mac OS X , you need to use the private Apple80211.framework , not sure about iPhone OS X ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It appears Apple's problem with the apps isn't with what they do but with how they do it; namely, using non-public frameworks.
There probably isn't a way to do it using public frameworks, though (on Mac OS X, you need to use the private Apple80211.framework, not sure about iPhone OS X).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31370236</id>
	<title>Apple's submission tools aren't static</title>
	<author>NameIsDavid</author>
	<datestamp>1267800660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Everyone who's had an app pulled from the store has known beforehand that they were doing something risky and were counting on using public opinion as their insurance policy.

The prohibition against using private APIs is right in the developer agreement and Apple's submission tools have become increasingly sophisticated so that some apps that made it through at one point are now being flagged. There's no risk of doing this by mistake as Apple's API docs are extensive. If you don't see the desired class documented there, it's not intended for your use and you probably reverse-engineered the OS to find it in the first place.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Everyone who 's had an app pulled from the store has known beforehand that they were doing something risky and were counting on using public opinion as their insurance policy .
The prohibition against using private APIs is right in the developer agreement and Apple 's submission tools have become increasingly sophisticated so that some apps that made it through at one point are now being flagged .
There 's no risk of doing this by mistake as Apple 's API docs are extensive .
If you do n't see the desired class documented there , it 's not intended for your use and you probably reverse-engineered the OS to find it in the first place .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Everyone who's had an app pulled from the store has known beforehand that they were doing something risky and were counting on using public opinion as their insurance policy.
The prohibition against using private APIs is right in the developer agreement and Apple's submission tools have become increasingly sophisticated so that some apps that made it through at one point are now being flagged.
There's no risk of doing this by mistake as Apple's API docs are extensive.
If you don't see the desired class documented there, it's not intended for your use and you probably reverse-engineered the OS to find it in the first place.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366392</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31368496</id>
	<title>Re:Thank you Apple!</title>
	<author>Draek</author>
	<datestamp>1267780740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Because its been the standard in consoles for far too long. Back in the days of the original NES, older C64 and Atari players *did* deride it for the same reasons, but eventually the fact that Nintendo marketed almost exclusively to children made it easier to dismiss it as a mere 'toy' instead of a real, useful machine, and their success drowned what little criticism remained. In contrast, WinMo and JavaME developers haven't even been pushed out of the market yet let alone been gone long enough to be forgotten, so obviously the criticism will be much louder.</p><p>Furthermore, I don't give a shit about whether it's their right or not to do so. I only care that *I* don't like it and it is my right to voice my displeasure with it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Because its been the standard in consoles for far too long .
Back in the days of the original NES , older C64 and Atari players * did * deride it for the same reasons , but eventually the fact that Nintendo marketed almost exclusively to children made it easier to dismiss it as a mere 'toy ' instead of a real , useful machine , and their success drowned what little criticism remained .
In contrast , WinMo and JavaME developers have n't even been pushed out of the market yet let alone been gone long enough to be forgotten , so obviously the criticism will be much louder.Furthermore , I do n't give a shit about whether it 's their right or not to do so .
I only care that * I * do n't like it and it is my right to voice my displeasure with it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because its been the standard in consoles for far too long.
Back in the days of the original NES, older C64 and Atari players *did* deride it for the same reasons, but eventually the fact that Nintendo marketed almost exclusively to children made it easier to dismiss it as a mere 'toy' instead of a real, useful machine, and their success drowned what little criticism remained.
In contrast, WinMo and JavaME developers haven't even been pushed out of the market yet let alone been gone long enough to be forgotten, so obviously the criticism will be much louder.Furthermore, I don't give a shit about whether it's their right or not to do so.
I only care that *I* don't like it and it is my right to voice my displeasure with it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366110</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366566</id>
	<title>Re:Great News !!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267719180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They're well on their way to keeping me from buying an iPad.  I was all set to buy it when it became available but they're determined to discourage me.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They 're well on their way to keeping me from buying an iPad .
I was all set to buy it when it became available but they 're determined to discourage me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They're well on their way to keeping me from buying an iPad.
I was all set to buy it when it became available but they're determined to discourage me.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366026</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366178</id>
	<title>Re:Why?</title>
	<author>mysidia</author>
	<datestamp>1267715760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
That would be all well and good if they were providing complete public frameworks, so that private ones would not be needed for any valid use case.
</p><p>
But it's not...  these apps can't possibly be implemented using the public frameworks
</p><p>
So, Apple is essentially stifling their platform.
</p><p>
Better  to have some apps broken by an update of the OS later, than to have those apps never written at all, probably.
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That would be all well and good if they were providing complete public frameworks , so that private ones would not be needed for any valid use case .
But it 's not... these apps ca n't possibly be implemented using the public frameworks So , Apple is essentially stifling their platform .
Better to have some apps broken by an update of the OS later , than to have those apps never written at all , probably .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
That would be all well and good if they were providing complete public frameworks, so that private ones would not be needed for any valid use case.
But it's not...  these apps can't possibly be implemented using the public frameworks

So, Apple is essentially stifling their platform.
Better  to have some apps broken by an update of the OS later, than to have those apps never written at all, probably.
</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365940</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31474728</id>
	<title>Re:Really?</title>
	<author>ActiveMan</author>
	<datestamp>1268562240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>They have removed just WiFi signal scanners such as WiTrak</htmltext>
<tokenext>They have removed just WiFi signal scanners such as WiTrak</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They have removed just WiFi signal scanners such as WiTrak</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365822</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366366</id>
	<title>The mystery of advertising</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267717380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>"The Apple Appstore reaches 100K apps and 2 Billion downloads!!!!" Buy Buy Buy!
<br>
<br>
(1 week later)
<br>
"Apple removes 33\% or apps (porn/racy, wifi helpers, productivity tools, map tool, skype tools, <b>e-book readers</b>(?), etc..."
(Appstore now has 75K apps, and we find out 1 billion downloads were from porn/racy apps)
<br>
<br>
For some reason I think iTunes Connect will run faster and the appstore search will be more meaningful...</htmltext>
<tokenext>" The Apple Appstore reaches 100K apps and 2 Billion downloads ! ! ! !
" Buy Buy Buy !
( 1 week later ) " Apple removes 33 \ % or apps ( porn/racy , wifi helpers , productivity tools , map tool , skype tools , e-book readers ( ?
) , etc... " ( Appstore now has 75K apps , and we find out 1 billion downloads were from porn/racy apps ) For some reason I think iTunes Connect will run faster and the appstore search will be more meaningful.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"The Apple Appstore reaches 100K apps and 2 Billion downloads!!!!
" Buy Buy Buy!
(1 week later)

"Apple removes 33\% or apps (porn/racy, wifi helpers, productivity tools, map tool, skype tools, e-book readers(?
), etc..."
(Appstore now has 75K apps, and we find out 1 billion downloads were from porn/racy apps)


For some reason I think iTunes Connect will run faster and the appstore search will be more meaningful...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31368604</id>
	<title>Re:Thank you Apple!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267782060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>yeah I remember buying winMo apps from there store before Apple<nobr> <wbr></nobr>....er wait they didn't have one..But I could buy Apps for my phone for only $5 a month and they stopped working as soon as my phone contract did.</p><p>Remember this the only reason there are usable apps on any phone is because Apple made the iPhone. Before that no android. WM and palm Sucked ass.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>yeah I remember buying winMo apps from there store before Apple ....er wait they did n't have one..But I could buy Apps for my phone for only $ 5 a month and they stopped working as soon as my phone contract did.Remember this the only reason there are usable apps on any phone is because Apple made the iPhone .
Before that no android .
WM and palm Sucked ass .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>yeah I remember buying winMo apps from there store before Apple ....er wait they didn't have one..But I could buy Apps for my phone for only $5 a month and they stopped working as soon as my phone contract did.Remember this the only reason there are usable apps on any phone is because Apple made the iPhone.
Before that no android.
WM and palm Sucked ass.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366422</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366982</id>
	<title>In Apple America</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267722060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Steve Jobs' WIFI spots find YOU.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Steve Jobs ' WIFI spots find YOU .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Steve Jobs' WIFI spots find YOU.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31371856</id>
	<title>Re:Great News !!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267808700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Waaaah, I don't like that people can do better than me by doing more work and having more skills than I do, waaaah"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Waaaah , I do n't like that people can do better than me by doing more work and having more skills than I do , waaaah "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Waaaah, I don't like that people can do better than me by doing more work and having more skills than I do, waaaah"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366358</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365992</id>
	<title>Re:What's next?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267714500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So... all the people who were moaning that Apple couldn't survive without Steve Jobs: Are you glad he's back to micromanaging the company again?</p><p>I don't wish the man ill, by any means.  But as an Apple customer I'm beginning to wish he'd take more extended vacations.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So... all the people who were moaning that Apple could n't survive without Steve Jobs : Are you glad he 's back to micromanaging the company again ? I do n't wish the man ill , by any means .
But as an Apple customer I 'm beginning to wish he 'd take more extended vacations .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So... all the people who were moaning that Apple couldn't survive without Steve Jobs: Are you glad he's back to micromanaging the company again?I don't wish the man ill, by any means.
But as an Apple customer I'm beginning to wish he'd take more extended vacations.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365828</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365900</id>
	<title>Re:Really?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267713840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Looks like you're right. FTFA:<blockquote><div><p>"We received a very unfortunate e-mail today from Apple stating that WiFi-Where has been removed from sale on the App Store for using private frameworks to access wireless information," WiFi Where-maker Three Jacks Software, wrote on its Web site. <br>

There was no explanation as to what Apple meant by "private frameworks." Apple representatives were not immediately available for comment when contacted by CNET.
<br>
TechCrunch says Tonchidot, a Tokyo-based developer, had its app Sekai Camera removed because of its use of Wi-Fi, too. Sekai Camera uses PlaceEngine as a way to determine a user's location over Wi-Fi. <br>

PlaceEngine developer Koozyt says other apps that use its technology have also been removed, including Yahoo! Maps for the iPhone.</p></div></blockquote><p>So it looks like this may be about the PlaceEngine framework, not wifi per se. And this is why we need to RTFA, there are just too many false and/or misleading summaries.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Looks like you 're right .
FTFA : " We received a very unfortunate e-mail today from Apple stating that WiFi-Where has been removed from sale on the App Store for using private frameworks to access wireless information , " WiFi Where-maker Three Jacks Software , wrote on its Web site .
There was no explanation as to what Apple meant by " private frameworks .
" Apple representatives were not immediately available for comment when contacted by CNET .
TechCrunch says Tonchidot , a Tokyo-based developer , had its app Sekai Camera removed because of its use of Wi-Fi , too .
Sekai Camera uses PlaceEngine as a way to determine a user 's location over Wi-Fi .
PlaceEngine developer Koozyt says other apps that use its technology have also been removed , including Yahoo !
Maps for the iPhone.So it looks like this may be about the PlaceEngine framework , not wifi per se .
And this is why we need to RTFA , there are just too many false and/or misleading summaries .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Looks like you're right.
FTFA:"We received a very unfortunate e-mail today from Apple stating that WiFi-Where has been removed from sale on the App Store for using private frameworks to access wireless information," WiFi Where-maker Three Jacks Software, wrote on its Web site.
There was no explanation as to what Apple meant by "private frameworks.
" Apple representatives were not immediately available for comment when contacted by CNET.
TechCrunch says Tonchidot, a Tokyo-based developer, had its app Sekai Camera removed because of its use of Wi-Fi, too.
Sekai Camera uses PlaceEngine as a way to determine a user's location over Wi-Fi.
PlaceEngine developer Koozyt says other apps that use its technology have also been removed, including Yahoo!
Maps for the iPhone.So it looks like this may be about the PlaceEngine framework, not wifi per se.
And this is why we need to RTFA, there are just too many false and/or misleading summaries.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365822</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31369976</id>
	<title>Re:Can Apples Wifi chipset work in adhoc mode?</title>
	<author>de\_smudger</author>
	<datestamp>1267798680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>they sure can - for example, I connect my laptop and iPhone together in an ad-hoc network in order to use VNC and have whatever I'm doing on the phone show up in a constantly updating window on my desktop* (note the jailbreak to enable VNC isn't needed for the ad-hoc part to work - that's just done from the built-in settings app - so the capability is definitley there, and presumably you should be able to initiate wifi connections from within an app, but I don't know if the API calls for controlling the settings this specifically are public and/or if such an app would require jailbreak)<p>

(*web app QA by profession, so hitting Alt+PrintScreen on the VNC window is just a lot more efficient/much faster turnaround for getting a rendering issue into the bug tracker than the other way, which means taking screenshots on the iPhone by holding down the two buttons, quitting the browser, going into the photos app and emailing them to yourself from there, which launches the email app taking yet more time, then you have to re-launch the browser to get back to what you were doing.. and I use ad-hoc as I don't have to share the available bandwidth so it's much faster/screen updates are much more frequent than when going through the wifi router..)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>they sure can - for example , I connect my laptop and iPhone together in an ad-hoc network in order to use VNC and have whatever I 'm doing on the phone show up in a constantly updating window on my desktop * ( note the jailbreak to enable VNC is n't needed for the ad-hoc part to work - that 's just done from the built-in settings app - so the capability is definitley there , and presumably you should be able to initiate wifi connections from within an app , but I do n't know if the API calls for controlling the settings this specifically are public and/or if such an app would require jailbreak ) ( * web app QA by profession , so hitting Alt + PrintScreen on the VNC window is just a lot more efficient/much faster turnaround for getting a rendering issue into the bug tracker than the other way , which means taking screenshots on the iPhone by holding down the two buttons , quitting the browser , going into the photos app and emailing them to yourself from there , which launches the email app taking yet more time , then you have to re-launch the browser to get back to what you were doing.. and I use ad-hoc as I do n't have to share the available bandwidth so it 's much faster/screen updates are much more frequent than when going through the wifi router.. )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>they sure can - for example, I connect my laptop and iPhone together in an ad-hoc network in order to use VNC and have whatever I'm doing on the phone show up in a constantly updating window on my desktop* (note the jailbreak to enable VNC isn't needed for the ad-hoc part to work - that's just done from the built-in settings app - so the capability is definitley there, and presumably you should be able to initiate wifi connections from within an app, but I don't know if the API calls for controlling the settings this specifically are public and/or if such an app would require jailbreak)

(*web app QA by profession, so hitting Alt+PrintScreen on the VNC window is just a lot more efficient/much faster turnaround for getting a rendering issue into the bug tracker than the other way, which means taking screenshots on the iPhone by holding down the two buttons, quitting the browser, going into the photos app and emailing them to yourself from there, which launches the email app taking yet more time, then you have to re-launch the browser to get back to what you were doing.. and I use ad-hoc as I don't have to share the available bandwidth so it's much faster/screen updates are much more frequent than when going through the wifi router..)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366036</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366772</id>
	<title>Re:I wonder</title>
	<author>shutdown -p now</author>
	<datestamp>1267720680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I live in Mauritania, you insensitive clod.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I live in Mauritania , you insensitive clod .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I live in Mauritania, you insensitive clod.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365910</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31377068</id>
	<title>Re:Great News !!</title>
	<author>Hazelfield</author>
	<datestamp>1267793100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If you don't like the restrictions, fine. Jailbreak your phone. Or choose a different platform.</p></div><p>Thanks, I think I'll do just that.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you do n't like the restrictions , fine .
Jailbreak your phone .
Or choose a different platform.Thanks , I think I 'll do just that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you don't like the restrictions, fine.
Jailbreak your phone.
Or choose a different platform.Thanks, I think I'll do just that.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366358</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31369540</id>
	<title>Re:Great News !!</title>
	<author>lewko</author>
	<datestamp>1267794240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah!</p><p>Why should someone else's expertise, hard work or effort be allowed to give them an advantage over you? It's not fair!</p><p>I really wish there was a way to mod your comment +1 Socialist.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah ! Why should someone else 's expertise , hard work or effort be allowed to give them an advantage over you ?
It 's not fair ! I really wish there was a way to mod your comment + 1 Socialist .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah!Why should someone else's expertise, hard work or effort be allowed to give them an advantage over you?
It's not fair!I really wish there was a way to mod your comment +1 Socialist.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366358</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31368972</id>
	<title>Re:Can Apples Wifi chipset work in adhoc mode?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267787040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>i.e. Can an IPhone/ITouch app (even a Jailbroken one?) let you communicate with the other 50 IPhone<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/ITouch users in the train you're on, without paying the cell companies?</p></div><p>Enter Bluetooth PAN.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>i.e .
Can an IPhone/ITouch app ( even a Jailbroken one ?
) let you communicate with the other 50 IPhone /ITouch users in the train you 're on , without paying the cell companies ? Enter Bluetooth PAN .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>i.e.
Can an IPhone/ITouch app (even a Jailbroken one?
) let you communicate with the other 50 IPhone /ITouch users in the train you're on, without paying the cell companies?Enter Bluetooth PAN.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366036</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31375308</id>
	<title>Re:Great News !!</title>
	<author>JAlexoi</author>
	<datestamp>1267782060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>because they are willing to stay up for three weeks reverse-engineering some undocumented interface. It's kind of like doping in the Olympics</p></div></blockquote><p>
No, it's very like you staying on your couch and your competition training for the Olympics day and night. And you wonder why they win!?!?!?!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>because they are willing to stay up for three weeks reverse-engineering some undocumented interface .
It 's kind of like doping in the Olympics No , it 's very like you staying on your couch and your competition training for the Olympics day and night .
And you wonder why they win ! ? ! ? ! ?
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>because they are willing to stay up for three weeks reverse-engineering some undocumented interface.
It's kind of like doping in the Olympics
No, it's very like you staying on your couch and your competition training for the Olympics day and night.
And you wonder why they win!?!?!?
!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366358</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31367618</id>
	<title>Re:Private Frameworks, people.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267727040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If people use undocumented APIs it just means that Apple is also failing on the API front. Private API bad! Private API bad!! Well sure, but let's look at why people need to use it - it's because we aren't offering a published API that does what they want to do.</p><p>Not providing rich enough APIs, not deciding upfront what applications are allowed to do and what they are not, then not catching apps that use private API and approving those apps and finally abruptly removing the apps from the store - to me that's atrocious. Sane people will stay away from making any "bets" on the Apple store.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If people use undocumented APIs it just means that Apple is also failing on the API front .
Private API bad !
Private API bad ! !
Well sure , but let 's look at why people need to use it - it 's because we are n't offering a published API that does what they want to do.Not providing rich enough APIs , not deciding upfront what applications are allowed to do and what they are not , then not catching apps that use private API and approving those apps and finally abruptly removing the apps from the store - to me that 's atrocious .
Sane people will stay away from making any " bets " on the Apple store .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If people use undocumented APIs it just means that Apple is also failing on the API front.
Private API bad!
Private API bad!!
Well sure, but let's look at why people need to use it - it's because we aren't offering a published API that does what they want to do.Not providing rich enough APIs, not deciding upfront what applications are allowed to do and what they are not, then not catching apps that use private API and approving those apps and finally abruptly removing the apps from the store - to me that's atrocious.
Sane people will stay away from making any "bets" on the Apple store.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365990</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366196</id>
	<title>Re:I wonder</title>
	<author>mjwx</author>
	<datestamp>1267715940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Is Apple actively trying to destroy any developer relationship that they had</p></div></blockquote><p>

Awaken from your dreamy state, Apple has never cared about community development. Once more big boys sign on community (individual) developers will disappear from the app store as advertising precedence is given to those who are paying Apple the most money.</p><blockquote><div><p>and are they trying to show the community that they are not up to the challenge of hosting an app store?</p></div></blockquote><p>

No they are trying to show large publishers that they are up to the challenge of delivering their software to users without regardless of type or quality (pushing shovelware for a profit basically).<br> <br>

This is why every Ibikini app got kicked off but Playboy and Sports Illustrated didn't. I predicted this two years ago when the Iphone was released in Australia, you've got to be pretty naive not to believe it not.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is Apple actively trying to destroy any developer relationship that they had Awaken from your dreamy state , Apple has never cared about community development .
Once more big boys sign on community ( individual ) developers will disappear from the app store as advertising precedence is given to those who are paying Apple the most money.and are they trying to show the community that they are not up to the challenge of hosting an app store ?
No they are trying to show large publishers that they are up to the challenge of delivering their software to users without regardless of type or quality ( pushing shovelware for a profit basically ) .
This is why every Ibikini app got kicked off but Playboy and Sports Illustrated did n't .
I predicted this two years ago when the Iphone was released in Australia , you 've got to be pretty naive not to believe it not .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is Apple actively trying to destroy any developer relationship that they had

Awaken from your dreamy state, Apple has never cared about community development.
Once more big boys sign on community (individual) developers will disappear from the app store as advertising precedence is given to those who are paying Apple the most money.and are they trying to show the community that they are not up to the challenge of hosting an app store?
No they are trying to show large publishers that they are up to the challenge of delivering their software to users without regardless of type or quality (pushing shovelware for a profit basically).
This is why every Ibikini app got kicked off but Playboy and Sports Illustrated didn't.
I predicted this two years ago when the Iphone was released in Australia, you've got to be pretty naive not to believe it not.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365836</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366206</id>
	<title>Re:Thank you Apple!</title>
	<author>exomondo</author>
	<datestamp>1267716060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> Twenty years from now Mac's will only be able to get applications from Apple's approved store?.</p></div><p>And don't forget they can be removed without notice or reason.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Twenty years from now Mac 's will only be able to get applications from Apple 's approved store ? .And do n't forget they can be removed without notice or reason .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Twenty years from now Mac's will only be able to get applications from Apple's approved store?.And don't forget they can be removed without notice or reason.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365884</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366402</id>
	<title>Reason #1352...</title>
	<author>Itninja</author>
	<datestamp>1267717800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>...not to buy an iPhone.</htmltext>
<tokenext>...not to buy an iPhone .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...not to buy an iPhone.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31368318</id>
	<title>Re:Thank you Apple!</title>
	<author>cbhacking</author>
	<datestamp>1267821480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>FYI, you can write and run your own software on an Xbox 360 (or a Zune, if you're so inclined) using XNA (C# framework for games, although usable for non-games too). It's a high-level language and you only have access to those parts of the system that the framework exposes, but if you can compile it, you're allowed to run it. Microsoft even hosts homebrew Xbox 360 games in an online catalog/store, if their developers choose to pay the $100 fee (much like Apple's dev kit, except the actual SDK is free).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>FYI , you can write and run your own software on an Xbox 360 ( or a Zune , if you 're so inclined ) using XNA ( C # framework for games , although usable for non-games too ) .
It 's a high-level language and you only have access to those parts of the system that the framework exposes , but if you can compile it , you 're allowed to run it .
Microsoft even hosts homebrew Xbox 360 games in an online catalog/store , if their developers choose to pay the $ 100 fee ( much like Apple 's dev kit , except the actual SDK is free ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>FYI, you can write and run your own software on an Xbox 360 (or a Zune, if you're so inclined) using XNA (C# framework for games, although usable for non-games too).
It's a high-level language and you only have access to those parts of the system that the framework exposes, but if you can compile it, you're allowed to run it.
Microsoft even hosts homebrew Xbox 360 games in an online catalog/store, if their developers choose to pay the $100 fee (much like Apple's dev kit, except the actual SDK is free).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366110</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31371234</id>
	<title>Was a matter of time</title>
	<author>Flowstone</author>
	<datestamp>1267805820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The main bread and butter made on smartphones by the cursed cellular providers was the whole dataplan bit.
<p>
When you didn't opt for a dataplan, your iphone would still attempt to reach out through 3g for data. This would eventually add up on your bill and they'd make their crooked money by having the iphone ping the datanetwork everytime you brought it out of sleep mode. regardless of whether you were on a wifi, it continuously attempts this every chance it gets.
</p><p>
For those users who didn't want to give the providers money for nothing useful at all, they wanted to use the wifi as the primary means of data transmission. and after changing the api of the datanetwork defaults on the phone to a "fake" one, they were completely free of the bullshit that is normally involved with not signing up for a contract and being alienated by their provider.
</p><p>
these wifi apps empowered the user to make the most out of their wifi on their phone, which made it "easier" to opt out of the seemingly obligated contracts and dataplans. resulting ultimately in less money for the greedy bastards.
</p><p>
So im sure that they all bitched and moaned incessantly to apple crying about how those wifi apps are the devil and the user shouldn't have things so easy. now apple, naturally wanting to "improve" their relations with the companies; fucked the customer's choices because they see very little to no consequence over removing that group of apps.
</p><p>
I actually haven't jailbroken my iphone, because i believe in choice and paying for apps that deserve my money. I have however disabled my 3g data, and don't ever plan on caving in to getting a "convenient" dataplan.
</p><p>
Now that those apps have been taken from me as a choice, i am more prone to consider jailbreaking my phone so that i don't have to bend to whatever whim apple decides to take.
</p><p>
in the end, every move they make to control our choices; will push us to take our freedoms back. and if any developers' wallets get harmed in the process, it's apple's fault.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The main bread and butter made on smartphones by the cursed cellular providers was the whole dataplan bit .
When you did n't opt for a dataplan , your iphone would still attempt to reach out through 3g for data .
This would eventually add up on your bill and they 'd make their crooked money by having the iphone ping the datanetwork everytime you brought it out of sleep mode .
regardless of whether you were on a wifi , it continuously attempts this every chance it gets .
For those users who did n't want to give the providers money for nothing useful at all , they wanted to use the wifi as the primary means of data transmission .
and after changing the api of the datanetwork defaults on the phone to a " fake " one , they were completely free of the bullshit that is normally involved with not signing up for a contract and being alienated by their provider .
these wifi apps empowered the user to make the most out of their wifi on their phone , which made it " easier " to opt out of the seemingly obligated contracts and dataplans .
resulting ultimately in less money for the greedy bastards .
So im sure that they all bitched and moaned incessantly to apple crying about how those wifi apps are the devil and the user should n't have things so easy .
now apple , naturally wanting to " improve " their relations with the companies ; fucked the customer 's choices because they see very little to no consequence over removing that group of apps .
I actually have n't jailbroken my iphone , because i believe in choice and paying for apps that deserve my money .
I have however disabled my 3g data , and do n't ever plan on caving in to getting a " convenient " dataplan .
Now that those apps have been taken from me as a choice , i am more prone to consider jailbreaking my phone so that i do n't have to bend to whatever whim apple decides to take .
in the end , every move they make to control our choices ; will push us to take our freedoms back .
and if any developers ' wallets get harmed in the process , it 's apple 's fault .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The main bread and butter made on smartphones by the cursed cellular providers was the whole dataplan bit.
When you didn't opt for a dataplan, your iphone would still attempt to reach out through 3g for data.
This would eventually add up on your bill and they'd make their crooked money by having the iphone ping the datanetwork everytime you brought it out of sleep mode.
regardless of whether you were on a wifi, it continuously attempts this every chance it gets.
For those users who didn't want to give the providers money for nothing useful at all, they wanted to use the wifi as the primary means of data transmission.
and after changing the api of the datanetwork defaults on the phone to a "fake" one, they were completely free of the bullshit that is normally involved with not signing up for a contract and being alienated by their provider.
these wifi apps empowered the user to make the most out of their wifi on their phone, which made it "easier" to opt out of the seemingly obligated contracts and dataplans.
resulting ultimately in less money for the greedy bastards.
So im sure that they all bitched and moaned incessantly to apple crying about how those wifi apps are the devil and the user shouldn't have things so easy.
now apple, naturally wanting to "improve" their relations with the companies; fucked the customer's choices because they see very little to no consequence over removing that group of apps.
I actually haven't jailbroken my iphone, because i believe in choice and paying for apps that deserve my money.
I have however disabled my 3g data, and don't ever plan on caving in to getting a "convenient" dataplan.
Now that those apps have been taken from me as a choice, i am more prone to consider jailbreaking my phone so that i don't have to bend to whatever whim apple decides to take.
in the end, every move they make to control our choices; will push us to take our freedoms back.
and if any developers' wallets get harmed in the process, it's apple's fault.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366784</id>
	<title>Get real</title>
	<author>hiscross</author>
	<datestamp>1267720800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You liberals need to take a look at what you did in 2008 that resulted in 1-20-2009. Nice piece of work. "Who is John Galt?"</htmltext>
<tokenext>You liberals need to take a look at what you did in 2008 that resulted in 1-20-2009 .
Nice piece of work .
" Who is John Galt ?
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You liberals need to take a look at what you did in 2008 that resulted in 1-20-2009.
Nice piece of work.
"Who is John Galt?
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31408158</id>
	<title>Re:Great News !!</title>
	<author>jaysones</author>
	<datestamp>1268054880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Very well put.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Very well put .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Very well put.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366358</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31368926</id>
	<title>Re:Can Apples Wifi chipset work in adhoc mode?</title>
	<author>NoNickNameForMe</author>
	<datestamp>1267786440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yes and no.

You can't create an ad hoc network on your iPhone, but you can join one. So if someone has a notebook and creates (seeds) and ad hoc wifi network, then you can connect to that ad hoc network

(This issue has been raised in the iPhone Dev forum, and Apple is aware of it....for what it's worth).</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes and no .
You ca n't create an ad hoc network on your iPhone , but you can join one .
So if someone has a notebook and creates ( seeds ) and ad hoc wifi network , then you can connect to that ad hoc network ( This issue has been raised in the iPhone Dev forum , and Apple is aware of it....for what it 's worth ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes and no.
You can't create an ad hoc network on your iPhone, but you can join one.
So if someone has a notebook and creates (seeds) and ad hoc wifi network, then you can connect to that ad hoc network

(This issue has been raised in the iPhone Dev forum, and Apple is aware of it....for what it's worth).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366036</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31368480</id>
	<title>Re:I wonder</title>
	<author>TRRosen</author>
	<datestamp>1267780560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> I feel like I am reminded every day as to why I do not drop $100 and write an application for my own phone.</p></div><p> Umm because everything you think of is already $.99 in the app store already. (thats why I don't)</p><p><div class="quote"><p>As a software developer that owns an iPhone 3GS owner,</p></div><p> Letting your slaves have iPhones will not end well.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I feel like I am reminded every day as to why I do not drop $ 100 and write an application for my own phone .
Umm because everything you think of is already $ .99 in the app store already .
( thats why I do n't ) As a software developer that owns an iPhone 3GS owner , Letting your slaves have iPhones will not end well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> I feel like I am reminded every day as to why I do not drop $100 and write an application for my own phone.
Umm because everything you think of is already $.99 in the app store already.
(thats why I don't)As a software developer that owns an iPhone 3GS owner, Letting your slaves have iPhones will not end well.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365836</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366050</id>
	<title>What does Apple gain by removing these things?</title>
	<author>falconwolf</author>
	<datestamp>1267714920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have the same question.</p><p>While I like some Apple products, I love my MacBook Pro I'm typing this on, I question some of Apple's and Steve Jobs' actions.</p><p>

Falcon</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have the same question.While I like some Apple products , I love my MacBook Pro I 'm typing this on , I question some of Apple 's and Steve Jobs ' actions .
Falcon</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have the same question.While I like some Apple products, I love my MacBook Pro I'm typing this on, I question some of Apple's and Steve Jobs' actions.
Falcon</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365848</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366388</id>
	<title>Re:Private Frameworks, people.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267717680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>*Apple has NEVER permitted the use of private frameworks in iPhone apps. *

They allow such things in their own apps but if Microsoft did such a thing<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. would be melting down from the nerd rage</htmltext>
<tokenext>* Apple has NEVER permitted the use of private frameworks in iPhone apps .
* They allow such things in their own apps but if Microsoft did such a thing / .
would be melting down from the nerd rage</tokentext>
<sentencetext>*Apple has NEVER permitted the use of private frameworks in iPhone apps.
*

They allow such things in their own apps but if Microsoft did such a thing /.
would be melting down from the nerd rage</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365990</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31368066</id>
	<title>Re:I wonder</title>
	<author>mikestew</author>
	<datestamp>1267732200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It could be argued that Apple is trying to <b>maintain</b> their developer relationship. I have an app idea, and I know I can't write it without using a private framework or API. So I stick my idea back on the shelf and go work on something else. But then I see other apps with similar functionality, and I know they didn't do it while playing by the rules. At that point I'm a little irked at Apple when the rules apparently don't apply evenly.</p><p>That's not hypothetical, it's happened to me. The Red Laser app used the exact API I needed to use. They get to submit something that becomes best-selling, I didn't bother even creating a new project file. Later, instead of yanking Red Laser, Apple changes their mind and says, "umm, okay, go ahead and use the API". In the end, it's the better thing for Apple to do. Doesn't make me feel better about losing lead time.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It could be argued that Apple is trying to maintain their developer relationship .
I have an app idea , and I know I ca n't write it without using a private framework or API .
So I stick my idea back on the shelf and go work on something else .
But then I see other apps with similar functionality , and I know they did n't do it while playing by the rules .
At that point I 'm a little irked at Apple when the rules apparently do n't apply evenly.That 's not hypothetical , it 's happened to me .
The Red Laser app used the exact API I needed to use .
They get to submit something that becomes best-selling , I did n't bother even creating a new project file .
Later , instead of yanking Red Laser , Apple changes their mind and says , " umm , okay , go ahead and use the API " .
In the end , it 's the better thing for Apple to do .
Does n't make me feel better about losing lead time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It could be argued that Apple is trying to maintain their developer relationship.
I have an app idea, and I know I can't write it without using a private framework or API.
So I stick my idea back on the shelf and go work on something else.
But then I see other apps with similar functionality, and I know they didn't do it while playing by the rules.
At that point I'm a little irked at Apple when the rules apparently don't apply evenly.That's not hypothetical, it's happened to me.
The Red Laser app used the exact API I needed to use.
They get to submit something that becomes best-selling, I didn't bother even creating a new project file.
Later, instead of yanking Red Laser, Apple changes their mind and says, "umm, okay, go ahead and use the API".
In the end, it's the better thing for Apple to do.
Doesn't make me feel better about losing lead time.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365836</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31374700</id>
	<title>Re:I wonder</title>
	<author>slycrel</author>
	<datestamp>1267822260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually, this is close to 2 years overdue.</p><p>I have developed a few apps and one that I wanted to develop since launch is a WiFi finder.  There is no API for wifi hardware access unless you use apple's non-published APIs.  APIs which are strictly forbidden by their SDK license and crap.</p><p>I've been bugged for some time that apps like these, blatantly disregarding the rules, were able to make a bunch of money while the developers who played by the rules were not able to accomplish the same thing.  I'm surprised that it took them this long to do so.</p><p>That said, I think it's annoying and stupid to somewhat arbitrarily enforce these rules (or have them in the first place!). The rules are there, it would be very doable to add a technological piece to the app review process to stop this from happening entirely.  For some unknown reason they are not, saying one thing and doing another.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , this is close to 2 years overdue.I have developed a few apps and one that I wanted to develop since launch is a WiFi finder .
There is no API for wifi hardware access unless you use apple 's non-published APIs .
APIs which are strictly forbidden by their SDK license and crap.I 've been bugged for some time that apps like these , blatantly disregarding the rules , were able to make a bunch of money while the developers who played by the rules were not able to accomplish the same thing .
I 'm surprised that it took them this long to do so.That said , I think it 's annoying and stupid to somewhat arbitrarily enforce these rules ( or have them in the first place ! ) .
The rules are there , it would be very doable to add a technological piece to the app review process to stop this from happening entirely .
For some unknown reason they are not , saying one thing and doing another .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, this is close to 2 years overdue.I have developed a few apps and one that I wanted to develop since launch is a WiFi finder.
There is no API for wifi hardware access unless you use apple's non-published APIs.
APIs which are strictly forbidden by their SDK license and crap.I've been bugged for some time that apps like these, blatantly disregarding the rules, were able to make a bunch of money while the developers who played by the rules were not able to accomplish the same thing.
I'm surprised that it took them this long to do so.That said, I think it's annoying and stupid to somewhat arbitrarily enforce these rules (or have them in the first place!).
The rules are there, it would be very doable to add a technological piece to the app review process to stop this from happening entirely.
For some unknown reason they are not, saying one thing and doing another.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365836</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365932</id>
	<title>Re:Why?</title>
	<author>recoiledsnake</author>
	<datestamp>1267714080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The feeling of Control. ala 1984.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The feeling of Control .
ala 1984 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The feeling of Control.
ala 1984.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365848</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31379094</id>
	<title>Re:More predictable "nyah-nyah" and defensiveness.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267815600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes but, the Iphone is still the best easiest to use "phone" around.<br>As a workstation it is severely limited but as phone that is able access MS Exchange and Google maps  map and a reasonable camera and haps of other tricks it is brilliant.</p><p>I support about a dozen of these things at works and they are less effort to support than any other phone.</p><p>Also the battery life is great, there were a few early issues but they are long gone.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes but , the Iphone is still the best easiest to use " phone " around.As a workstation it is severely limited but as phone that is able access MS Exchange and Google maps map and a reasonable camera and haps of other tricks it is brilliant.I support about a dozen of these things at works and they are less effort to support than any other phone.Also the battery life is great , there were a few early issues but they are long gone .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes but, the Iphone is still the best easiest to use "phone" around.As a workstation it is severely limited but as phone that is able access MS Exchange and Google maps  map and a reasonable camera and haps of other tricks it is brilliant.I support about a dozen of these things at works and they are less effort to support than any other phone.Also the battery life is great, there were a few early issues but they are long gone.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31368378</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365940</id>
	<title>Re:Why?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267714140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>if it's for using private API's, avoiding the MS bad publicity. everyone worked around MS bugs and Microsoft couldn't make needed changes in their OS's due to developers complaining it was going to cause them to write code. in Vista they had to pull a new anti-virus API because of this.</p><p>Apple is just forcing everyone to follow the rules in the developer agreement. last thing Apple wants is to release an iPhone OS update and to have thousands of apps fail due to private API use and then all the devs will complain how it's Apple's fault</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>if it 's for using private API 's , avoiding the MS bad publicity .
everyone worked around MS bugs and Microsoft could n't make needed changes in their OS 's due to developers complaining it was going to cause them to write code .
in Vista they had to pull a new anti-virus API because of this.Apple is just forcing everyone to follow the rules in the developer agreement .
last thing Apple wants is to release an iPhone OS update and to have thousands of apps fail due to private API use and then all the devs will complain how it 's Apple 's fault</tokentext>
<sentencetext>if it's for using private API's, avoiding the MS bad publicity.
everyone worked around MS bugs and Microsoft couldn't make needed changes in their OS's due to developers complaining it was going to cause them to write code.
in Vista they had to pull a new anti-virus API because of this.Apple is just forcing everyone to follow the rules in the developer agreement.
last thing Apple wants is to release an iPhone OS update and to have thousands of apps fail due to private API use and then all the devs will complain how it's Apple's fault</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365848</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365922</id>
	<title>Even Yahoo Maps is gone</title>
	<author>recoiledsnake</author>
	<datestamp>1267714020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>PlaceEngine developer Koozyt says other apps that use its technology have also been removed, including Yahoo! Maps for the iPhone.</p></div><p>If big companies are not spared what about the individual developers?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>PlaceEngine developer Koozyt says other apps that use its technology have also been removed , including Yahoo !
Maps for the iPhone.If big companies are not spared what about the individual developers ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>PlaceEngine developer Koozyt says other apps that use its technology have also been removed, including Yahoo!
Maps for the iPhone.If big companies are not spared what about the individual developers?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365822</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31369062</id>
	<title>Removal</title>
	<author>igor123</author>
	<datestamp>1267788300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I for one have to agree with apple's removal of those apps.
I dont know how those apps slipped trough review process , but it created uneven plain-field among developers. I dont mind hard work but i mind when i dont have same treatment as some other developer , i suspect decision to pull those apps was made because complaints from other developers or bug reports, even change in that api might be a reason for application being pulled!

Company or developer made calculated risk when they used private api in their application, and suspect their risk was wary well payed off.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I for one have to agree with apple 's removal of those apps .
I dont know how those apps slipped trough review process , but it created uneven plain-field among developers .
I dont mind hard work but i mind when i dont have same treatment as some other developer , i suspect decision to pull those apps was made because complaints from other developers or bug reports , even change in that api might be a reason for application being pulled !
Company or developer made calculated risk when they used private api in their application , and suspect their risk was wary well payed off .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I for one have to agree with apple's removal of those apps.
I dont know how those apps slipped trough review process , but it created uneven plain-field among developers.
I dont mind hard work but i mind when i dont have same treatment as some other developer , i suspect decision to pull those apps was made because complaints from other developers or bug reports, even change in that api might be a reason for application being pulled!
Company or developer made calculated risk when they used private api in their application, and suspect their risk was wary well payed off.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31368320</id>
	<title>Complain Much?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267821540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Do people forget that when the iPhone was released it had no App Store?  For a year Apple told people "just make web apps".  In 2.0 they introduced the app store, and then when the apps came out, they had extremely limited functionality until 3.0.  Apple has opened a ton of new APIs up for public use.  I don't think it's so much that Apple is trying to block developers from doing things that they want as it is that Apple just isn't ready to support it.  I only see them opening things up more in the future as Apple progresses.  If they don't..  too bad. But's it's their platform and their decision.  If it draws more people to Android then Jobs will need to explain the shift in sales to the shareholders.  But you can't blame Apple for rejecting apps that aren't following the rules laid out before app was ever coded (though these apps should have been shot down in the approval process).  If Apple changed their policy and cut off developers that were doing things by the rules before, that's a valid complaint.
<br> <br>
So far though, I am very pleased with the iPhone.  It could use a LOT of improvement for sure.  They could make a more rugged model that isn't so focused on being thin and sexy, but more battery and a far less fragile case.  Rated to be "resistant" to falls from 5-6 feet onto an unforgiving surface would be great.  A little thicker so it's easier to hold onto without feeling like you're smashing a pancake into your ear would be great too.  It's cool that these phones can be made so thin, but that's just not always the best thing for usability.
<br> <br>
At the end of the day, though, you have to tell yourself "this is still a phone".  If you have software on there that causes it to act funky and not work as expected, there's going to be hell to pay when I miss important business calls.  Everything else comes second to it getting calls and keeping me connected to the people that fund my paycheck.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Do people forget that when the iPhone was released it had no App Store ?
For a year Apple told people " just make web apps " .
In 2.0 they introduced the app store , and then when the apps came out , they had extremely limited functionality until 3.0 .
Apple has opened a ton of new APIs up for public use .
I do n't think it 's so much that Apple is trying to block developers from doing things that they want as it is that Apple just is n't ready to support it .
I only see them opening things up more in the future as Apple progresses .
If they do n't.. too bad .
But 's it 's their platform and their decision .
If it draws more people to Android then Jobs will need to explain the shift in sales to the shareholders .
But you ca n't blame Apple for rejecting apps that are n't following the rules laid out before app was ever coded ( though these apps should have been shot down in the approval process ) .
If Apple changed their policy and cut off developers that were doing things by the rules before , that 's a valid complaint .
So far though , I am very pleased with the iPhone .
It could use a LOT of improvement for sure .
They could make a more rugged model that is n't so focused on being thin and sexy , but more battery and a far less fragile case .
Rated to be " resistant " to falls from 5-6 feet onto an unforgiving surface would be great .
A little thicker so it 's easier to hold onto without feeling like you 're smashing a pancake into your ear would be great too .
It 's cool that these phones can be made so thin , but that 's just not always the best thing for usability .
At the end of the day , though , you have to tell yourself " this is still a phone " .
If you have software on there that causes it to act funky and not work as expected , there 's going to be hell to pay when I miss important business calls .
Everything else comes second to it getting calls and keeping me connected to the people that fund my paycheck .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do people forget that when the iPhone was released it had no App Store?
For a year Apple told people "just make web apps".
In 2.0 they introduced the app store, and then when the apps came out, they had extremely limited functionality until 3.0.
Apple has opened a ton of new APIs up for public use.
I don't think it's so much that Apple is trying to block developers from doing things that they want as it is that Apple just isn't ready to support it.
I only see them opening things up more in the future as Apple progresses.
If they don't..  too bad.
But's it's their platform and their decision.
If it draws more people to Android then Jobs will need to explain the shift in sales to the shareholders.
But you can't blame Apple for rejecting apps that aren't following the rules laid out before app was ever coded (though these apps should have been shot down in the approval process).
If Apple changed their policy and cut off developers that were doing things by the rules before, that's a valid complaint.
So far though, I am very pleased with the iPhone.
It could use a LOT of improvement for sure.
They could make a more rugged model that isn't so focused on being thin and sexy, but more battery and a far less fragile case.
Rated to be "resistant" to falls from 5-6 feet onto an unforgiving surface would be great.
A little thicker so it's easier to hold onto without feeling like you're smashing a pancake into your ear would be great too.
It's cool that these phones can be made so thin, but that's just not always the best thing for usability.
At the end of the day, though, you have to tell yourself "this is still a phone".
If you have software on there that causes it to act funky and not work as expected, there's going to be hell to pay when I miss important business calls.
Everything else comes second to it getting calls and keeping me connected to the people that fund my paycheck.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365990</id>
	<title>Private Frameworks, people.</title>
	<author>pclminion</author>
	<datestamp>1267714500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Apple has NEVER permitted the use of private frameworks in iPhone apps. My company had to rewrite an app we were trying to deploy because we were using some undocumented features for still frame capture from the camera device. We almost made it through the authorization process, then Apple shot us down at the last second because of it. We had to wait a few more minor releases before the functionality we needed was exposed through an approved interface. It had nothing to do with our application, but rather, the way it was implemented.</p><p>In general, the use of undocumented APIs is frowned upon throughout the industry, as it makes for flaky application and reverse-vendor-lockin, when an extremely popular application relies on undocumented APIs, the APIs change, then people come bitching to the platform manufacturer for "breaking" their applications. There's nothing weird about this, whatsoever. Chill out, folks.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Apple has NEVER permitted the use of private frameworks in iPhone apps .
My company had to rewrite an app we were trying to deploy because we were using some undocumented features for still frame capture from the camera device .
We almost made it through the authorization process , then Apple shot us down at the last second because of it .
We had to wait a few more minor releases before the functionality we needed was exposed through an approved interface .
It had nothing to do with our application , but rather , the way it was implemented.In general , the use of undocumented APIs is frowned upon throughout the industry , as it makes for flaky application and reverse-vendor-lockin , when an extremely popular application relies on undocumented APIs , the APIs change , then people come bitching to the platform manufacturer for " breaking " their applications .
There 's nothing weird about this , whatsoever .
Chill out , folks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Apple has NEVER permitted the use of private frameworks in iPhone apps.
My company had to rewrite an app we were trying to deploy because we were using some undocumented features for still frame capture from the camera device.
We almost made it through the authorization process, then Apple shot us down at the last second because of it.
We had to wait a few more minor releases before the functionality we needed was exposed through an approved interface.
It had nothing to do with our application, but rather, the way it was implemented.In general, the use of undocumented APIs is frowned upon throughout the industry, as it makes for flaky application and reverse-vendor-lockin, when an extremely popular application relies on undocumented APIs, the APIs change, then people come bitching to the platform manufacturer for "breaking" their applications.
There's nothing weird about this, whatsoever.
Chill out, folks.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31368822</id>
	<title>Re:We Don't Know a Thing</title>
	<author>knappe duivel</author>
	<datestamp>1267785060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>sorry, I modded parent redundant by mistake. this comment is to undo the mod &amp; apologize</htmltext>
<tokenext>sorry , I modded parent redundant by mistake .
this comment is to undo the mod &amp; apologize</tokentext>
<sentencetext>sorry, I modded parent redundant by mistake.
this comment is to undo the mod &amp; apologize</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366106</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31367900</id>
	<title>Alternative iPhone app stores</title>
	<author>flyingfsck</author>
	<datestamp>1267730100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Well, it is not like there is a shortage of alternative iPhone application stores:
<a href="http://www.google.ae/search?hl=ar&amp;client=firefox-a&amp;hs=yJR&amp;rls=com.mandriva\%3Aen-US\%3Aunofficial&amp;q=alternative+iphone+application+stores&amp;btnG=\%D8\%A8\%D8\%AD\%D8\%AB!&amp;meta=&amp;aq=f&amp;oq=/" title="google.ae">http://www.google.ae/search?hl=ar&amp;client=firefox-a&amp;hs=yJR&amp;rls=com.mandriva\%3Aen-US\%3Aunofficial&amp;q=alternative+iphone+application+stores&amp;btnG=\%D8\%A8\%D8\%AD\%D8\%AB!&amp;meta=&amp;aq=f&amp;oq=/</a> [google.ae]</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , it is not like there is a shortage of alternative iPhone application stores : http : //www.google.ae/search ? hl = ar&amp;client = firefox-a&amp;hs = yJR&amp;rls = com.mandriva \ % 3Aen-US \ % 3Aunofficial&amp;q = alternative + iphone + application + stores&amp;btnG = \ % D8 \ % A8 \ % D8 \ % AD \ % D8 \ % AB ! &amp;meta = &amp;aq = f&amp;oq = / [ google.ae ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, it is not like there is a shortage of alternative iPhone application stores:
http://www.google.ae/search?hl=ar&amp;client=firefox-a&amp;hs=yJR&amp;rls=com.mandriva\%3Aen-US\%3Aunofficial&amp;q=alternative+iphone+application+stores&amp;btnG=\%D8\%A8\%D8\%AD\%D8\%AB!&amp;meta=&amp;aq=f&amp;oq=/ [google.ae]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366224</id>
	<title>Re:Fouling the well</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267716120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Because they aren't. In this case it's shitty developers pissing in Apple's well. There are reserved/private APIs that as an iPhone developer, you aren't supposed to fuck with. Partially because they let Apple (and only Apple) do cool things (and that reason sucks), and partially because those APIs are subject to change.</p><p>There are plenty of other WiFi finders in the Apple Store that haven't been removed. It looks like the only ones that were removed were screwing with those APIs.</p><p>No big surprise.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Because they are n't .
In this case it 's shitty developers pissing in Apple 's well .
There are reserved/private APIs that as an iPhone developer , you are n't supposed to fuck with .
Partially because they let Apple ( and only Apple ) do cool things ( and that reason sucks ) , and partially because those APIs are subject to change.There are plenty of other WiFi finders in the Apple Store that have n't been removed .
It looks like the only ones that were removed were screwing with those APIs.No big surprise .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because they aren't.
In this case it's shitty developers pissing in Apple's well.
There are reserved/private APIs that as an iPhone developer, you aren't supposed to fuck with.
Partially because they let Apple (and only Apple) do cool things (and that reason sucks), and partially because those APIs are subject to change.There are plenty of other WiFi finders in the Apple Store that haven't been removed.
It looks like the only ones that were removed were screwing with those APIs.No big surprise.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365862</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366748</id>
	<title>Why pick on Apple?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267720560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>MS is a virus-laden hotbed of instability. I want things that work. Apple stuff works.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>MS is a virus-laden hotbed of instability .
I want things that work .
Apple stuff works .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>MS is a virus-laden hotbed of instability.
I want things that work.
Apple stuff works.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31367982</id>
	<title>Because Apple tightens QA over time</title>
	<author>SuperKendall</author>
	<datestamp>1267731120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>If the issue is that the Apps used a private API, how did they get approved in the first place?</i></p><p>Because over time Apple gets better about figuring out who is using private API's.</p><p>In the early days it was the most egregious violations that visually screamed out "hey look, I am using a private API" - like Coverflow.</p><p>So then that died down, and for a while people got away with undocumented framework and system calls.</p><p>But recently Apple has started basically using a symbol analyses tool looking for calls to specific system stuff.  I can imagine it was only recently they thought to look at super low level network stuff.</p><p>Apple even has been pretty nice about it generally, most developers just get a warning saying "you are using a private API, fix that before your next update please".  I guess whatever this framework was using was a little more undesirable than most calls.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If the issue is that the Apps used a private API , how did they get approved in the first place ? Because over time Apple gets better about figuring out who is using private API 's.In the early days it was the most egregious violations that visually screamed out " hey look , I am using a private API " - like Coverflow.So then that died down , and for a while people got away with undocumented framework and system calls.But recently Apple has started basically using a symbol analyses tool looking for calls to specific system stuff .
I can imagine it was only recently they thought to look at super low level network stuff.Apple even has been pretty nice about it generally , most developers just get a warning saying " you are using a private API , fix that before your next update please " .
I guess whatever this framework was using was a little more undesirable than most calls .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If the issue is that the Apps used a private API, how did they get approved in the first place?Because over time Apple gets better about figuring out who is using private API's.In the early days it was the most egregious violations that visually screamed out "hey look, I am using a private API" - like Coverflow.So then that died down, and for a while people got away with undocumented framework and system calls.But recently Apple has started basically using a symbol analyses tool looking for calls to specific system stuff.
I can imagine it was only recently they thought to look at super low level network stuff.Apple even has been pretty nice about it generally, most developers just get a warning saying "you are using a private API, fix that before your next update please".
I guess whatever this framework was using was a little more undesirable than most calls.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366392</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366238</id>
	<title>Re:Why?</title>
	<author>nutznboltz</author>
	<datestamp>1267716180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So instead of devs will complaining how it's Apple's fault that an update broke their apps they have users complaining that it's Apple's fault they pulled the apps.  What an improvement!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So instead of devs will complaining how it 's Apple 's fault that an update broke their apps they have users complaining that it 's Apple 's fault they pulled the apps .
What an improvement !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So instead of devs will complaining how it's Apple's fault that an update broke their apps they have users complaining that it's Apple's fault they pulled the apps.
What an improvement!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365940</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366392</id>
	<title>doesn't add up</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267717680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If the issue is that the Apps used a private API, how did they get approved in the first place?</p><p>I'm not sure why anyone would develop for the iPhone, apparently you not only face a capricious approval process, but they may revoke that approval on a whim.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If the issue is that the Apps used a private API , how did they get approved in the first place ? I 'm not sure why anyone would develop for the iPhone , apparently you not only face a capricious approval process , but they may revoke that approval on a whim .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If the issue is that the Apps used a private API, how did they get approved in the first place?I'm not sure why anyone would develop for the iPhone, apparently you not only face a capricious approval process, but they may revoke that approval on a whim.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31371528</id>
	<title>Re:Great News !!</title>
	<author>celtic\_hackr</author>
	<datestamp>1267807260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Or, alternatively, Apple could document these APIs which give Apple the upper hand and third party developers at Apple's mercy for creating their own app to replace them. It seems to me, and I'm surprised none of the paranoid<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/.ers have mentioned this, that Apple is doing this so they can see what apps are really popular so they can create their own apps using the private frameworks which give them superior performance. Has Apple recently hired MS defectees? Or maybe I'm the only paranoid one.
</p><p>
The reason people are using these private frameworks is they're BETTER than the ones Apple deems developers are allowed to use. No matter how you break it down it's all about power and control. I certainly agree that Apple allowing the use of undocumented APIs and private frameworks is bad for Apple, and they should prevent it. Hoewever, Apple should open these one up that are turning out to be useful. Rather than kill the messenger, they should listen and respond appropriately.</p><p>
 Oh wait, this is Apple. Nevermind.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Or , alternatively , Apple could document these APIs which give Apple the upper hand and third party developers at Apple 's mercy for creating their own app to replace them .
It seems to me , and I 'm surprised none of the paranoid /.ers have mentioned this , that Apple is doing this so they can see what apps are really popular so they can create their own apps using the private frameworks which give them superior performance .
Has Apple recently hired MS defectees ?
Or maybe I 'm the only paranoid one .
The reason people are using these private frameworks is they 're BETTER than the ones Apple deems developers are allowed to use .
No matter how you break it down it 's all about power and control .
I certainly agree that Apple allowing the use of undocumented APIs and private frameworks is bad for Apple , and they should prevent it .
Hoewever , Apple should open these one up that are turning out to be useful .
Rather than kill the messenger , they should listen and respond appropriately .
Oh wait , this is Apple .
Nevermind .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or, alternatively, Apple could document these APIs which give Apple the upper hand and third party developers at Apple's mercy for creating their own app to replace them.
It seems to me, and I'm surprised none of the paranoid /.ers have mentioned this, that Apple is doing this so they can see what apps are really popular so they can create their own apps using the private frameworks which give them superior performance.
Has Apple recently hired MS defectees?
Or maybe I'm the only paranoid one.
The reason people are using these private frameworks is they're BETTER than the ones Apple deems developers are allowed to use.
No matter how you break it down it's all about power and control.
I certainly agree that Apple allowing the use of undocumented APIs and private frameworks is bad for Apple, and they should prevent it.
Hoewever, Apple should open these one up that are turning out to be useful.
Rather than kill the messenger, they should listen and respond appropriately.
Oh wait, this is Apple.
Nevermind.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366358</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31367140</id>
	<title>Re:doesn't add up</title>
	<author>bill\_mcgonigle</author>
	<datestamp>1267723200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>I'm not sure why anyone would develop for the iPhone, apparently you not only face a capricious approval process, but they may revoke that approval on a whim.</i></p><p>Just make sure your app complies with all current and future rules and does not compete against any apps Apple plans to introduce down the line, and you'll be fine.</p><p>Want to invest in my iPhone dev business?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not sure why anyone would develop for the iPhone , apparently you not only face a capricious approval process , but they may revoke that approval on a whim.Just make sure your app complies with all current and future rules and does not compete against any apps Apple plans to introduce down the line , and you 'll be fine.Want to invest in my iPhone dev business ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not sure why anyone would develop for the iPhone, apparently you not only face a capricious approval process, but they may revoke that approval on a whim.Just make sure your app complies with all current and future rules and does not compete against any apps Apple plans to introduce down the line, and you'll be fine.Want to invest in my iPhone dev business?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366392</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31374942</id>
	<title>Re:Really?</title>
	<author>lwsimon</author>
	<datestamp>1267780200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Interesting.  I have WifiFoFum, and use it for network troubleshooting and such - along with seeing if there is a decent hotspot before digging out my laptop in an unfamiliar place.</p><p>I'm curious to see how they treat users who have purchased rejected apps.  What happens if I remove it, and want to re-download it?  Do I get my money back?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Interesting .
I have WifiFoFum , and use it for network troubleshooting and such - along with seeing if there is a decent hotspot before digging out my laptop in an unfamiliar place.I 'm curious to see how they treat users who have purchased rejected apps .
What happens if I remove it , and want to re-download it ?
Do I get my money back ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Interesting.
I have WifiFoFum, and use it for network troubleshooting and such - along with seeing if there is a decent hotspot before digging out my laptop in an unfamiliar place.I'm curious to see how they treat users who have purchased rejected apps.
What happens if I remove it, and want to re-download it?
Do I get my money back?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365900</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31369552</id>
	<title>But there are legit uses for some of that software</title>
	<author>Phoenix</author>
	<datestamp>1267794420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I use WiFiFoFum at my hospital to check the strength of the Wireless AP's scattered through the floors. At the moment I'm using it on a Intermec CN3 handheld scanner that we're using for Medicine scanning and verification. I wanted to get an iTouch or an iPhone so I could use it on that device since I may or may not be able to keep the CN3 that I'm currently using as my dedicated Test Platform.</p><p>By denying us access to such tools, Apple is alienating the IT Professional community and may drive us to find other applications or even (in their eyes) worse, jail-breaking the damn things so we CAN run whatever the hell we want and not what THEY want us to run.</p><p>Remember the days when we used to mock Microsoft and their advertisements by saying "Microsoft: You WILL go here today!"?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I use WiFiFoFum at my hospital to check the strength of the Wireless AP 's scattered through the floors .
At the moment I 'm using it on a Intermec CN3 handheld scanner that we 're using for Medicine scanning and verification .
I wanted to get an iTouch or an iPhone so I could use it on that device since I may or may not be able to keep the CN3 that I 'm currently using as my dedicated Test Platform.By denying us access to such tools , Apple is alienating the IT Professional community and may drive us to find other applications or even ( in their eyes ) worse , jail-breaking the damn things so we CAN run whatever the hell we want and not what THEY want us to run.Remember the days when we used to mock Microsoft and their advertisements by saying " Microsoft : You WILL go here today !
" ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I use WiFiFoFum at my hospital to check the strength of the Wireless AP's scattered through the floors.
At the moment I'm using it on a Intermec CN3 handheld scanner that we're using for Medicine scanning and verification.
I wanted to get an iTouch or an iPhone so I could use it on that device since I may or may not be able to keep the CN3 that I'm currently using as my dedicated Test Platform.By denying us access to such tools, Apple is alienating the IT Professional community and may drive us to find other applications or even (in their eyes) worse, jail-breaking the damn things so we CAN run whatever the hell we want and not what THEY want us to run.Remember the days when we used to mock Microsoft and their advertisements by saying "Microsoft: You WILL go here today!
"?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31367108</id>
	<title>War-iphoning?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267722900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>WarIPhoning is not a crime.</htmltext>
<tokenext>WarIPhoning is not a crime .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>WarIPhoning is not a crime.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31370060</id>
	<title>Try Settings</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267799340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Please correct my ignorance...</p><p>Wi-Fi sniffers alert you when you are in range of a wifi signal.</p><p>I do this all the time with an app from Apple.  Go to Settings &gt; WiFi .  It will tell you all the Wifi networks around you.  If you cant see or dont know the ssid then you probably arent supposed to be on the network.  Please explain the other benefits of a third party wifi sniffer....</p><p>Also I noted some people chatting about how the iphone is better because of all the apps.  I'm a mac guy, and we need to look at this.  Remember the mac/pc argument...</p><p>"X86 computers have all the software!  There aren't any games for the mac, no way i'm using one!"</p><p>a plethora of software does not make a good product...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Please correct my ignorance...Wi-Fi sniffers alert you when you are in range of a wifi signal.I do this all the time with an app from Apple .
Go to Settings &gt; WiFi .
It will tell you all the Wifi networks around you .
If you cant see or dont know the ssid then you probably arent supposed to be on the network .
Please explain the other benefits of a third party wifi sniffer....Also I noted some people chatting about how the iphone is better because of all the apps .
I 'm a mac guy , and we need to look at this .
Remember the mac/pc argument... " X86 computers have all the software !
There are n't any games for the mac , no way i 'm using one !
" a plethora of software does not make a good product.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Please correct my ignorance...Wi-Fi sniffers alert you when you are in range of a wifi signal.I do this all the time with an app from Apple.
Go to Settings &gt; WiFi .
It will tell you all the Wifi networks around you.
If you cant see or dont know the ssid then you probably arent supposed to be on the network.
Please explain the other benefits of a third party wifi sniffer....Also I noted some people chatting about how the iphone is better because of all the apps.
I'm a mac guy, and we need to look at this.
Remember the mac/pc argument..."X86 computers have all the software!
There aren't any games for the mac, no way i'm using one!
"a plethora of software does not make a good product...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31373924</id>
	<title>Vetting for security only?</title>
	<author>jmcvetta</author>
	<datestamp>1267818660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Am I the only one who would like to see an app store where the applications are vetted for security -- i.e. will this app install backdoors in my phone, steal my identity, etc -- but otherwise allowed totally open access?  I personally don't care if there are dumb, broken, offensive, duplicate, etc apps; because they might be of service to someone, even if not to me.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Am I the only one who would like to see an app store where the applications are vetted for security -- i.e .
will this app install backdoors in my phone , steal my identity , etc -- but otherwise allowed totally open access ?
I personally do n't care if there are dumb , broken , offensive , duplicate , etc apps ; because they might be of service to someone , even if not to me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Am I the only one who would like to see an app store where the applications are vetted for security -- i.e.
will this app install backdoors in my phone, steal my identity, etc -- but otherwise allowed totally open access?
I personally don't care if there are dumb, broken, offensive, duplicate, etc apps; because they might be of service to someone, even if not to me.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31368306</id>
	<title>WiFiFoFum</title>
	<author>davvr6</author>
	<datestamp>1267821420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I bought the app and it has been great.
It helped me check to see if I was sharing a common wifi channel with my nearest neighbours. It also tells me the -db signal strength around the house. and it lets me log on to a range of foreign hotspots that apples settings just won't let you see. I used it today.
I somehow think that this has something to do with the heralding of wireless N on the iphone. Just my hunch. But I agree it is both strange and Kafkaesque.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I bought the app and it has been great .
It helped me check to see if I was sharing a common wifi channel with my nearest neighbours .
It also tells me the -db signal strength around the house .
and it lets me log on to a range of foreign hotspots that apples settings just wo n't let you see .
I used it today .
I somehow think that this has something to do with the heralding of wireless N on the iphone .
Just my hunch .
But I agree it is both strange and Kafkaesque .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I bought the app and it has been great.
It helped me check to see if I was sharing a common wifi channel with my nearest neighbours.
It also tells me the -db signal strength around the house.
and it lets me log on to a range of foreign hotspots that apples settings just won't let you see.
I used it today.
I somehow think that this has something to do with the heralding of wireless N on the iphone.
Just my hunch.
But I agree it is both strange and Kafkaesque.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366106</id>
	<title>We Don't Know a Thing</title>
	<author>repetty</author>
	<datestamp>1267715340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hey, I know!</p><p>Since nobody on Slashdot knows a single thing about this action by Apple  -- at this moment -- why don't we just post a bunch of shit that has absolutely no merit?! Hey, we can even call ourselves "journalists"!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hey , I know ! Since nobody on Slashdot knows a single thing about this action by Apple -- at this moment -- why do n't we just post a bunch of shit that has absolutely no merit ? !
Hey , we can even call ourselves " journalists " !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hey, I know!Since nobody on Slashdot knows a single thing about this action by Apple  -- at this moment -- why don't we just post a bunch of shit that has absolutely no merit?!
Hey, we can even call ourselves "journalists"!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366656</id>
	<title>Re:Doesn't appear to be a moral judgement</title>
	<author>yodleboy</author>
	<datestamp>1267719900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>"No, other apps that do the same thing are still allowed and available in the app store."  <br> <br> NO! they do not "do the same thing". I just tried two of the remaining apps. when you launch it, it asks for your location or permission to use location services. THEN it searches a database of "free" wifi hotspots near you. near meaning 5 miles away at the nearest starbucks, not the 5 networks my neighbors have listed in my laptop's wifi app.  what it does not do, then, is sniff the air for random wifi signals and let you know there's one available. seems like only apps that direct you to retail locations are gonna be approved.<br> <br> the deal is, i don't see the usefulness of this kind of app in either implementation.  if you open the wifi section in the iphone settings screen, you get a list of all networks within range of your phone and whether they are secured. in my experience, MOST pay networks seem to be secured in some way, so that's a fairly accurate indicator of whether you can get free wifi.</htmltext>
<tokenext>" No , other apps that do the same thing are still allowed and available in the app store .
" NO !
they do not " do the same thing " .
I just tried two of the remaining apps .
when you launch it , it asks for your location or permission to use location services .
THEN it searches a database of " free " wifi hotspots near you .
near meaning 5 miles away at the nearest starbucks , not the 5 networks my neighbors have listed in my laptop 's wifi app .
what it does not do , then , is sniff the air for random wifi signals and let you know there 's one available .
seems like only apps that direct you to retail locations are gon na be approved .
the deal is , i do n't see the usefulness of this kind of app in either implementation .
if you open the wifi section in the iphone settings screen , you get a list of all networks within range of your phone and whether they are secured .
in my experience , MOST pay networks seem to be secured in some way , so that 's a fairly accurate indicator of whether you can get free wifi .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"No, other apps that do the same thing are still allowed and available in the app store.
"    NO!
they do not "do the same thing".
I just tried two of the remaining apps.
when you launch it, it asks for your location or permission to use location services.
THEN it searches a database of "free" wifi hotspots near you.
near meaning 5 miles away at the nearest starbucks, not the 5 networks my neighbors have listed in my laptop's wifi app.
what it does not do, then, is sniff the air for random wifi signals and let you know there's one available.
seems like only apps that direct you to retail locations are gonna be approved.
the deal is, i don't see the usefulness of this kind of app in either implementation.
if you open the wifi section in the iphone settings screen, you get a list of all networks within range of your phone and whether they are secured.
in my experience, MOST pay networks seem to be secured in some way, so that's a fairly accurate indicator of whether you can get free wifi.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366390</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31372094</id>
	<title>Re:I wonder</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267809840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A real software developer would drop $100 in a heart beat. Because a real software developer enjoys writing software. Even if its just for fun, its just $100...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A real software developer would drop $ 100 in a heart beat .
Because a real software developer enjoys writing software .
Even if its just for fun , its just $ 100.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A real software developer would drop $100 in a heart beat.
Because a real software developer enjoys writing software.
Even if its just for fun, its just $100...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365836</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366610</id>
	<title>Ob Godwin</title>
	<author>Bryan\_W</author>
	<datestamp>1267719540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>First they came for the porn apps and I did not speak out -- because I did not like porn<br>Then they came for the wi-fi apps, and I did not speak out -- because I did not use wi-fi<br>Then they came for my apps -- and there was no one left to speak out for me.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>First they came for the porn apps and I did not speak out -- because I did not like pornThen they came for the wi-fi apps , and I did not speak out -- because I did not use wi-fiThen they came for my apps -- and there was no one left to speak out for me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>First they came for the porn apps and I did not speak out -- because I did not like pornThen they came for the wi-fi apps, and I did not speak out -- because I did not use wi-fiThen they came for my apps -- and there was no one left to speak out for me.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31369416</id>
	<title>Re:Great News !!</title>
	<author>Burz</author>
	<datestamp>1267792800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But a closed platform creates the whole reverse eng. issue in the first place.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But a closed platform creates the whole reverse eng .
issue in the first place .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But a closed platform creates the whole reverse eng.
issue in the first place.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366358</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366222</id>
	<title>Why 2014 will be like 1984</title>
	<author>ADRA</author>
	<datestamp>1267716120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Oh what a difference a few decades make.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh what a difference a few decades make .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh what a difference a few decades make.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365910</id>
	<title>Re:I wonder</title>
	<author>anagama</author>
	<datestamp>1267713900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Didn't you get the memo?  Even though I'm sure Iphone 3GS owners are not a protected class, slavery is definitely NOT legal anymore.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Did n't you get the memo ?
Even though I 'm sure Iphone 3GS owners are not a protected class , slavery is definitely NOT legal anymore .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Didn't you get the memo?
Even though I'm sure Iphone 3GS owners are not a protected class, slavery is definitely NOT legal anymore.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365836</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31386666</id>
	<title>Oh no!</title>
	<author>Sunnz</author>
	<datestamp>1267898700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Oh no! Can they actually hack into my phone and remove that app since they have removed it from the app store?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh no !
Can they actually hack into my phone and remove that app since they have removed it from the app store ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh no!
Can they actually hack into my phone and remove that app since they have removed it from the app store?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366446</id>
	<title>Getting tired...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267718280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Getting tired of these "apple removes..." blabla.</p><p>It's almost as if it's a marketing trick... get free news.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Getting tired of these " apple removes... " blabla.It 's almost as if it 's a marketing trick... get free news .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Getting tired of these "apple removes..." blabla.It's almost as if it's a marketing trick... get free news.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366390</id>
	<title>Re:Doesn't appear to be a moral judgement</title>
	<author>falconwolf</author>
	<datestamp>1267717680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>It appears Apple's problem with the apps isn't with what they do but with how they do it; namely, using non-public frameworks. There probably isn't a way to do it using public frameworks, though</i> </p><p>No, other apps that do the same thing are still allowed and available in the app store.</p><p><i>(on Mac OS X, you need to use the private Apple80211.framework, not sure about iPhone OS X).</i></p><p>No you don't.  Unlike with iPhones and iPads, with their crippled phoneOS, I can use any framework I want that I can install on my MacBook Pro.  Developers can even develop for <a href="http://developer.apple.com/opensource/tools/X11.html" title="apple.com">X11</a> [apple.com].  I have X11 installed on my Mac, it comes on OS X DVDs and can be downloaded as well.</p><p>

Falcon</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It appears Apple 's problem with the apps is n't with what they do but with how they do it ; namely , using non-public frameworks .
There probably is n't a way to do it using public frameworks , though No , other apps that do the same thing are still allowed and available in the app store .
( on Mac OS X , you need to use the private Apple80211.framework , not sure about iPhone OS X ) .No you do n't .
Unlike with iPhones and iPads , with their crippled phoneOS , I can use any framework I want that I can install on my MacBook Pro .
Developers can even develop for X11 [ apple.com ] .
I have X11 installed on my Mac , it comes on OS X DVDs and can be downloaded as well .
Falcon</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It appears Apple's problem with the apps isn't with what they do but with how they do it; namely, using non-public frameworks.
There probably isn't a way to do it using public frameworks, though No, other apps that do the same thing are still allowed and available in the app store.
(on Mac OS X, you need to use the private Apple80211.framework, not sure about iPhone OS X).No you don't.
Unlike with iPhones and iPads, with their crippled phoneOS, I can use any framework I want that I can install on my MacBook Pro.
Developers can even develop for X11 [apple.com].
I have X11 installed on my Mac, it comes on OS X DVDs and can be downloaded as well.
Falcon</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365830</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366236</id>
	<title>Re:filter</title>
	<author>SCPRedMage</author>
	<datestamp>1267716180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>For the dynamic front page, on the top of the left column, there's a list of sections.  Mouse-over the one you want to hide, and click the icon that shows up.  Then you can click "hide" to do the obvious.
<br> <br>
For the classic front page, you'll need to go <a href="http://slashdot.org/help" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">here</a> [slashdot.org], then click "Sections" under Classic Index.</htmltext>
<tokenext>For the dynamic front page , on the top of the left column , there 's a list of sections .
Mouse-over the one you want to hide , and click the icon that shows up .
Then you can click " hide " to do the obvious .
For the classic front page , you 'll need to go here [ slashdot.org ] , then click " Sections " under Classic Index .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For the dynamic front page, on the top of the left column, there's a list of sections.
Mouse-over the one you want to hide, and click the icon that shows up.
Then you can click "hide" to do the obvious.
For the classic front page, you'll need to go here [slashdot.org], then click "Sections" under Classic Index.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365832</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31376338</id>
	<title>Re:I wonder</title>
	<author>Jesus\_666</author>
	<datestamp>1267788000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Actually, no. As TFA (but not TFS) points out, only apps that use a certain private API were pulled. Apple didn't change anything, they just chose this particular point to enforce the already-established rule of developers not using private APIs. Why now? Maybe they only noticed it now. I don't know. But <em>they were entirely within their rights</em> to pull those apps.<br>
<br>
One could ask why the API isn't public. It also isn't on desktop OS X. Perhaps it works in a way that allows the user to have the radio violate the 802.11 spec, which is a very good reason not to let users mess with it. Perhaps it's not frozen and can change at any moment. Perhaps it's simply not very good.<br>
<br>
<br>
It's not a case of "Apple is being evil" but rather "Apple has noticed that people were using APIs not deemed fit for public use". The appropriate course of action is not to vow never to buy an Apple product again but to contact Apple and ask for the Apple80211 framework to be made public (or a suitable public wrapper framework to be provided).</htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , no .
As TFA ( but not TFS ) points out , only apps that use a certain private API were pulled .
Apple did n't change anything , they just chose this particular point to enforce the already-established rule of developers not using private APIs .
Why now ?
Maybe they only noticed it now .
I do n't know .
But they were entirely within their rights to pull those apps .
One could ask why the API is n't public .
It also is n't on desktop OS X. Perhaps it works in a way that allows the user to have the radio violate the 802.11 spec , which is a very good reason not to let users mess with it .
Perhaps it 's not frozen and can change at any moment .
Perhaps it 's simply not very good .
It 's not a case of " Apple is being evil " but rather " Apple has noticed that people were using APIs not deemed fit for public use " .
The appropriate course of action is not to vow never to buy an Apple product again but to contact Apple and ask for the Apple80211 framework to be made public ( or a suitable public wrapper framework to be provided ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, no.
As TFA (but not TFS) points out, only apps that use a certain private API were pulled.
Apple didn't change anything, they just chose this particular point to enforce the already-established rule of developers not using private APIs.
Why now?
Maybe they only noticed it now.
I don't know.
But they were entirely within their rights to pull those apps.
One could ask why the API isn't public.
It also isn't on desktop OS X. Perhaps it works in a way that allows the user to have the radio violate the 802.11 spec, which is a very good reason not to let users mess with it.
Perhaps it's not frozen and can change at any moment.
Perhaps it's simply not very good.
It's not a case of "Apple is being evil" but rather "Apple has noticed that people were using APIs not deemed fit for public use".
The appropriate course of action is not to vow never to buy an Apple product again but to contact Apple and ask for the Apple80211 framework to be made public (or a suitable public wrapper framework to be provided).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365836</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366026</id>
	<title>Great News !!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267714800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is great news !! This is the only way developers and users will learn never to trust a closed platform. Hopefully this starts pissing people off enough to go towards Android, or preferably the only truly open smartphone OS : Maemo / Meego. So I say, please Apple, remove more useful apps !!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is great news ! !
This is the only way developers and users will learn never to trust a closed platform .
Hopefully this starts pissing people off enough to go towards Android , or preferably the only truly open smartphone OS : Maemo / Meego .
So I say , please Apple , remove more useful apps !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is great news !!
This is the only way developers and users will learn never to trust a closed platform.
Hopefully this starts pissing people off enough to go towards Android, or preferably the only truly open smartphone OS : Maemo / Meego.
So I say, please Apple, remove more useful apps !
!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366422</id>
	<title>Re:Thank you Apple!</title>
	<author>recoiledsnake</author>
	<datestamp>1267718040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>WTF is this nonsense, there's so many phones out there that run on a cell network without taking 30\% cut of all software sold, just see all WinMO and Android phones.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>WTF is this nonsense , there 's so many phones out there that run on a cell network without taking 30 \ % cut of all software sold , just see all WinMO and Android phones .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>WTF is this nonsense, there's so many phones out there that run on a cell network without taking 30\% cut of all software sold, just see all WinMO and Android phones.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366110</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365904</id>
	<title>Time to go Android!</title>
	<author>thescooterman</author>
	<datestamp>1267713840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I've been using Android for a while now, and except for the whole ' evil android overlords ' thing... I love it! The apps rock, and you can have what you want, not what someone else does[n't] want you to have.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've been using Android for a while now , and except for the whole ' evil android overlords ' thing... I love it !
The apps rock , and you can have what you want , not what someone else does [ n't ] want you to have .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've been using Android for a while now, and except for the whole ' evil android overlords ' thing... I love it!
The apps rock, and you can have what you want, not what someone else does[n't] want you to have.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366358</id>
	<title>Re:Great News !!</title>
	<author>pclminion</author>
	<datestamp>1267717320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> <em>This is the only way developers and users will learn never to trust a closed platform.</em> </p><p>As a developer, I like the enforcement of the "no private frameworks" rule. I don't want to have to compete against other developers who can implement things I can't implement, because they are willing to stay up for three weeks reverse-engineering some undocumented interface. It's kind of like doping in the Olympics. If everybody was allowed to do it, soon it would be impossible to be competitive UNLESS you were doing it, and the result would be an incredible mess where every application was doing things using undocumented interfaces. And on top of that, Apple would have to be extremely careful whenever they want to alter their "private" APIs because it would risk breaking a huge number of applications -- and guess who the end user is going to complain to? (Hint -- not the application developer.)</p><p>If you don't like the restrictions, fine. Jailbreak your phone. Or choose a different platform. I'd rather work with something stable where the playing field is somewhat level.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is the only way developers and users will learn never to trust a closed platform .
As a developer , I like the enforcement of the " no private frameworks " rule .
I do n't want to have to compete against other developers who can implement things I ca n't implement , because they are willing to stay up for three weeks reverse-engineering some undocumented interface .
It 's kind of like doping in the Olympics .
If everybody was allowed to do it , soon it would be impossible to be competitive UNLESS you were doing it , and the result would be an incredible mess where every application was doing things using undocumented interfaces .
And on top of that , Apple would have to be extremely careful whenever they want to alter their " private " APIs because it would risk breaking a huge number of applications -- and guess who the end user is going to complain to ?
( Hint -- not the application developer .
) If you do n't like the restrictions , fine .
Jailbreak your phone .
Or choose a different platform .
I 'd rather work with something stable where the playing field is somewhat level .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> This is the only way developers and users will learn never to trust a closed platform.
As a developer, I like the enforcement of the "no private frameworks" rule.
I don't want to have to compete against other developers who can implement things I can't implement, because they are willing to stay up for three weeks reverse-engineering some undocumented interface.
It's kind of like doping in the Olympics.
If everybody was allowed to do it, soon it would be impossible to be competitive UNLESS you were doing it, and the result would be an incredible mess where every application was doing things using undocumented interfaces.
And on top of that, Apple would have to be extremely careful whenever they want to alter their "private" APIs because it would risk breaking a huge number of applications -- and guess who the end user is going to complain to?
(Hint -- not the application developer.
)If you don't like the restrictions, fine.
Jailbreak your phone.
Or choose a different platform.
I'd rather work with something stable where the playing field is somewhat level.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366026</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31368642</id>
	<title>Re:As a life long Apple user</title>
	<author>TRRosen</author>
	<datestamp>1267782600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Nobody wants a "real mobile OS" 99.9\% of people don't want to ever know there phone or computer has an OS. They just want to get their email, view a few web pages and waste some time playing a game every once in a while. Guess what else 99\% of people never replace there phone or laptops battery.</p><p>Don't expect Apple to design for geeks. Grandma doesn't give a frack about private frameworks and little billy has no ideal what an API is.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Nobody wants a " real mobile OS " 99.9 \ % of people do n't want to ever know there phone or computer has an OS .
They just want to get their email , view a few web pages and waste some time playing a game every once in a while .
Guess what else 99 \ % of people never replace there phone or laptops battery.Do n't expect Apple to design for geeks .
Grandma does n't give a frack about private frameworks and little billy has no ideal what an API is .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nobody wants a "real mobile OS" 99.9\% of people don't want to ever know there phone or computer has an OS.
They just want to get their email, view a few web pages and waste some time playing a game every once in a while.
Guess what else 99\% of people never replace there phone or laptops battery.Don't expect Apple to design for geeks.
Grandma doesn't give a frack about private frameworks and little billy has no ideal what an API is.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365948</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366048</id>
	<title>Welcome, Comrades!</title>
	<author>Un pobre guey</author>
	<datestamp>1267714920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Welcome, Comrades!<br>
Welcome to the Glorious Union of Soviet Corporatist Republics!<br> <br>
No more evils of individualism! No longer shall we be left victims of our base instincts! Now our heroic Comrades at The People's Ministry of Apple shall shine their brilliant light of Freedom and Collective Thought so that we never again go astray!<br> <br>
Captive audiences are Freedom!<br>
Exploitation is Liberty!<br>
Corporate control is Independence!<br> <br>
Long live The Great Leader Comrade Jobs!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Welcome , Comrades !
Welcome to the Glorious Union of Soviet Corporatist Republics !
No more evils of individualism !
No longer shall we be left victims of our base instincts !
Now our heroic Comrades at The People 's Ministry of Apple shall shine their brilliant light of Freedom and Collective Thought so that we never again go astray !
Captive audiences are Freedom !
Exploitation is Liberty !
Corporate control is Independence !
Long live The Great Leader Comrade Jobs !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Welcome, Comrades!
Welcome to the Glorious Union of Soviet Corporatist Republics!
No more evils of individualism!
No longer shall we be left victims of our base instincts!
Now our heroic Comrades at The People's Ministry of Apple shall shine their brilliant light of Freedom and Collective Thought so that we never again go astray!
Captive audiences are Freedom!
Exploitation is Liberty!
Corporate control is Independence!
Long live The Great Leader Comrade Jobs!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366380</id>
	<title>The Next Big iThing!</title>
	<author>interval1066</author>
	<datestamp>1267717560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Jobs: "I've got it! We'll make the iPhone... LESS USEFUL!"</htmltext>
<tokenext>Jobs : " I 've got it !
We 'll make the iPhone... LESS USEFUL !
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Jobs: "I've got it!
We'll make the iPhone... LESS USEFUL!
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365918</id>
	<title>Timothy is at it again</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1267713960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Three apps get removed and suddenly it becomes "Apple removes Wi-Fi finders from app store".</p><p>Like the adult apps topic of a few days ago, let's not panic.</p><p>* in case you still don't know, Apple has added a new category for those apps.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Three apps get removed and suddenly it becomes " Apple removes Wi-Fi finders from app store " .Like the adult apps topic of a few days ago , let 's not panic .
* in case you still do n't know , Apple has added a new category for those apps .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Three apps get removed and suddenly it becomes "Apple removes Wi-Fi finders from app store".Like the adult apps topic of a few days ago, let's not panic.
* in case you still don't know, Apple has added a new category for those apps.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31369774</id>
	<title>North American video game recession of 1983</title>
	<author>tepples</author>
	<datestamp>1267796760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>At least Apple has a reasonable excuse: their phone has to work on a cell network, and it needs to have restrictions placed on software. Game consoles have no such excuse.</p></div><p>Video game console makers' excuse is that they don't want their consoles to fall victim to an event like the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North\_American\_video\_game\_crash\_of\_1983" title="wikipedia.org">North American video game recession of 1983</a> [wikipedia.org].</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>At least Apple has a reasonable excuse : their phone has to work on a cell network , and it needs to have restrictions placed on software .
Game consoles have no such excuse.Video game console makers ' excuse is that they do n't want their consoles to fall victim to an event like the North American video game recession of 1983 [ wikipedia.org ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At least Apple has a reasonable excuse: their phone has to work on a cell network, and it needs to have restrictions placed on software.
Game consoles have no such excuse.Video game console makers' excuse is that they don't want their consoles to fall victim to an event like the North American video game recession of 1983 [wikipedia.org].
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366110</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31369146</id>
	<title>Re:Doesn't appear to be a moral judgement</title>
	<author>Dhalka226</author>
	<datestamp>1267789200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Unless there is a public framework somewhere to do the same thing--and you admit this is unlikely--you're doing nothing but regurgitating Apple's corporate PR speak justifying why they were completely right to do exactly what they would have done either way.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Unless there is a public framework somewhere to do the same thing--and you admit this is unlikely--you 're doing nothing but regurgitating Apple 's corporate PR speak justifying why they were completely right to do exactly what they would have done either way .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unless there is a public framework somewhere to do the same thing--and you admit this is unlikely--you're doing nothing but regurgitating Apple's corporate PR speak justifying why they were completely right to do exactly what they would have done either way.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365830</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0124215_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366026
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366358
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31377068
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0124215_64</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365884
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366110
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31369774
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0124215_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366392
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31367982
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0124215_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365990
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31367618
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0124215_63</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366026
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366358
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31371856
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0124215_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366106
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31384614
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0124215_65</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365848
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366266
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0124215_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366026
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366358
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366568
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0124215_70</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365884
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31368680
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0124215_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365822
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365900
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31368420
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0124215_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365990
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31375014
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0124215_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365848
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365940
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366178
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0124215_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365828
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365992
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0124215_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366392
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31367140
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0124215_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365884
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366110
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366354
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0124215_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365830
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366390
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366656
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0124215_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365836
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31374700
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0124215_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365836
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31367028
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0124215_62</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365848
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365932
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0124215_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365884
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366024
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0124215_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366392
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31370236
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0124215_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365822
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365882
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0124215_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365836
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365910
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366772
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0124215_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365836
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366196
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0124215_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366026
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366358
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31369540
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0124215_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365948
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31368642
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0124215_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365884
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366206
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0124215_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365848
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31368510
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0124215_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366026
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366358
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31368616
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0124215_69</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365836
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31376338
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0124215_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365836
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366522
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0124215_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365848
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365940
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366238
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0124215_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366026
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366566
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0124215_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365884
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366110
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31368318
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0124215_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365836
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366312
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0124215_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365836
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31368480
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0124215_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366036
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31368926
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0124215_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366026
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366358
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31369416
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0124215_68</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365832
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366236
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0124215_71</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366036
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31369554
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0124215_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365830
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31369146
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0124215_67</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365822
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365900
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31371566
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0124215_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366026
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366358
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31408158
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0124215_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365884
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366110
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31376014
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0124215_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366026
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366358
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31371528
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0124215_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365884
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366254
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0124215_61</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365822
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31474728
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0124215_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366106
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31368822
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0124215_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365830
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366302
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0124215_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366026
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31368698
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0124215_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365828
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366092
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0124215_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365822
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365900
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31374942
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0124215_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365848
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366050
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0124215_66</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366036
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31368972
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0124215_59</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365828
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31370286
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0124215_60</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365836
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366000
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0124215_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365990
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366388
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0124215_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366036
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31369976
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0124215_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365836
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31372094
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0124215_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366036
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31368544
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0124215_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365836
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31368066
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0124215_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365822
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365922
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0124215_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365848
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366054
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0124215_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365828
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366508
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0124215_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365884
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366110
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31368496
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0124215_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365848
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365944
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0124215_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366026
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366358
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31369912
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0124215_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365862
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366224
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0124215_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365884
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366110
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366422
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31368604
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0124215_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365848
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366040
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0124215_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31368378
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31379094
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_05_0124215_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366026
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366358
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31375308
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_0124215.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365848
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366054
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366050
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365940
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366238
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366178
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365944
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366040
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366266
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31368510
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365932
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_0124215.21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365836
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31367028
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366312
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366522
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31374700
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366000
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31376338
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31368480
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31372094
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366196
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31368066
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365910
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366772
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_0124215.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31368864
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_0124215.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31368306
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_0124215.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365830
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31369146
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366302
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366390
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366656
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_0124215.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365862
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366224
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_0124215.23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366392
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31370236
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31367140
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31367982
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_0124215.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365822
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365900
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31368420
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31371566
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31374942
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365922
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365882
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31474728
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_0124215.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365808
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_0124215.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31370466
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_0124215.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365884
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31368680
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366206
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366024
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366110
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31368496
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31369774
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366422
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31368604
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31368318
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31376014
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366354
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366254
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_0124215.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366610
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_0124215.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365828
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31370286
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365992
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366092
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366508
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_0124215.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31368082
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_0124215.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365990
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366388
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31367618
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31375014
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_0124215.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366106
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31368822
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31384614
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_0124215.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365832
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366236
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_0124215.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31369062
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_0124215.22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366026
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366358
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31369912
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31408158
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31377068
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31371856
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31369416
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31369540
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366568
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31368616
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31371528
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31375308
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31368698
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366566
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_0124215.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366456
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_0124215.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31365948
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31368642
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_0124215.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366036
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31368544
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31368926
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31368972
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31369554
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31369976
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_0124215.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31368378
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31379094
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_0124215.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31369552
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_05_0124215.24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_05_0124215.31366048
</commentlist>
</conversation>
