<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_03_10_2239224</id>
	<title>OnLive Remote Gaming Service Launches In June</title>
	<author>Soulskill</author>
	<datestamp>1268219280000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>adeelarshad82 writes <i>"After eight years of development, remote gaming service <a href="http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2361194,00.asp">OnLive is scheduled to roll out on June 17</a> for Windows and Mac. The company also announced its service pricing: <a href="http://venturebeat.com/2010/03/10/onlive-sets-launch-date-for-june-names-subscription-price-and-supporting-game-publishers/">users will need to pay $14.95 per month</a>, which will allow them access to the service. However, the company did not disclose the price to rent or purchase games. 'It is partnering in this launch with publishers including Electronic Arts, Ubisoft, 2K Games, THQ and Warner Bros. Interactive Entertainment. The games will also include new releases like <em>Mass Effect 2</em>, <em>Borderlands</em>, <em>Assassin&rsquo;s Creed II</em>, as well as a bunch of other titles. Perlman anticipates anywhere from a dozen to 25 titles to be available at launch time, and more after that, depending on how negotiations with other publishers proceed.'"</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>adeelarshad82 writes " After eight years of development , remote gaming service OnLive is scheduled to roll out on June 17 for Windows and Mac .
The company also announced its service pricing : users will need to pay $ 14.95 per month , which will allow them access to the service .
However , the company did not disclose the price to rent or purchase games .
'It is partnering in this launch with publishers including Electronic Arts , Ubisoft , 2K Games , THQ and Warner Bros. Interactive Entertainment .
The games will also include new releases like Mass Effect 2 , Borderlands , Assassin    s Creed II , as well as a bunch of other titles .
Perlman anticipates anywhere from a dozen to 25 titles to be available at launch time , and more after that , depending on how negotiations with other publishers proceed .
' "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>adeelarshad82 writes "After eight years of development, remote gaming service OnLive is scheduled to roll out on June 17 for Windows and Mac.
The company also announced its service pricing: users will need to pay $14.95 per month, which will allow them access to the service.
However, the company did not disclose the price to rent or purchase games.
'It is partnering in this launch with publishers including Electronic Arts, Ubisoft, 2K Games, THQ and Warner Bros. Interactive Entertainment.
The games will also include new releases like Mass Effect 2, Borderlands, Assassin’s Creed II, as well as a bunch of other titles.
Perlman anticipates anywhere from a dozen to 25 titles to be available at launch time, and more after that, depending on how negotiations with other publishers proceed.
'"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432448</id>
	<title>Wrong business model</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268223300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Games should be distributed for free, and gamers should pay a monthly fee for each game to access the servers. Dedicated servers for each game are probably a good idea too. This "all you can eat" price for using the shared server only encourages people to pirate games.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Games should be distributed for free , and gamers should pay a monthly fee for each game to access the servers .
Dedicated servers for each game are probably a good idea too .
This " all you can eat " price for using the shared server only encourages people to pirate games .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Games should be distributed for free, and gamers should pay a monthly fee for each game to access the servers.
Dedicated servers for each game are probably a good idea too.
This "all you can eat" price for using the shared server only encourages people to pirate games.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432456</id>
	<title>What is this?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268223360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Steam is Free?</p><p>But not for Mac users (yet).</p><p>AFAIK</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Electronic Arts, Ubisoft, 2K Games, THQ and Warner Bros. Interactive Entertainment. The games will also include new releases like Mass Effect 2, Borderlands, Assassin&rsquo;s Creed II</p></div><p>These companies are also working with Valve/Steam team and those games are available as well?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Steam is Free ? But not for Mac users ( yet ) .AFAIKElectronic Arts , Ubisoft , 2K Games , THQ and Warner Bros. Interactive Entertainment .
The games will also include new releases like Mass Effect 2 , Borderlands , Assassin    s Creed IIThese companies are also working with Valve/Steam team and those games are available as well ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Steam is Free?But not for Mac users (yet).AFAIKElectronic Arts, Ubisoft, 2K Games, THQ and Warner Bros. Interactive Entertainment.
The games will also include new releases like Mass Effect 2, Borderlands, Assassin’s Creed IIThese companies are also working with Valve/Steam team and those games are available as well?
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31434526</id>
	<title>Re:Wrong business model</title>
	<author>The End Of Days</author>
	<datestamp>1268242260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>This "all you can eat" price for using the shared server only encourages people to pirate games.</p></div><p>Oh, bullshit.  People pirate games for one reason only: they are amoral entitled assholes who want free entertainment.</p><p>This just encourages people to come up with more bullshit justifications for pirating games, which is not the same thing at all.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This " all you can eat " price for using the shared server only encourages people to pirate games.Oh , bullshit .
People pirate games for one reason only : they are amoral entitled assholes who want free entertainment.This just encourages people to come up with more bullshit justifications for pirating games , which is not the same thing at all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This "all you can eat" price for using the shared server only encourages people to pirate games.Oh, bullshit.
People pirate games for one reason only: they are amoral entitled assholes who want free entertainment.This just encourages people to come up with more bullshit justifications for pirating games, which is not the same thing at all.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432448</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432424</id>
	<title>Hmmm ...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268223120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>The reviews on performance were mediocre to bad<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... and some of those 'partners' don't exactly have the best customer service <i>track record</i><nobr> <wbr></nobr>... and only $14.95 a month you say? <br> <br>I wonder how long before one of those partners throws a tantrum and pulls the plug in one (or all) of its servers when it doesn't get what it wants?</htmltext>
<tokenext>The reviews on performance were mediocre to bad ... and some of those 'partners ' do n't exactly have the best customer service track record ... and only $ 14.95 a month you say ?
I wonder how long before one of those partners throws a tantrum and pulls the plug in one ( or all ) of its servers when it does n't get what it wants ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The reviews on performance were mediocre to bad ... and some of those 'partners' don't exactly have the best customer service track record ... and only $14.95 a month you say?
I wonder how long before one of those partners throws a tantrum and pulls the plug in one (or all) of its servers when it doesn't get what it wants?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432522</id>
	<title>Well good luck to them</title>
	<author>Sycraft-fu</author>
	<datestamp>1268223660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I just don't see this succeeding, especially after seeing the leaked preview article. The problem is that on top of the cost of the service, you have to have a good net connection. While it uses like 1mbps for the stream, you need more like a 10mbps connection to keep the latency low. Remember that you don't just have to take ping time in to account with data transfer, but the time it takes to transfer all the data. Ok well good connections cost more money and thus aren't so much the domain of the budget user which is their target user. I mean I've got a connection with low ping times and plenty of bandwidth, however I won't be buying since I also have a video card.</p><p>Another problem is that because of the compression on the video stream, you are not going to get the highest quality video, no matter what the settings on the host computer are. Part of their selling point is that you get the max quality of new video cards on your current system. No, not really. Looking at the gameplay vids you get more like mid to lowish quality video. Fine, but that isn't nearly so expensive. $100 will get you a video card that will look as good or better than what was shown, and that is not nearly such a barrier for entry.</p><p>Yet another problem is that their service requires you to be near one of their data centers, so that pings are low. Fair enough, latency can kill this, but that means their potential user base is less than it would be otherwise. There will be users who want the service and can't have it because their ping is too high. Some may even be near a data center physically, but too far Internet wise.</p><p>Finally there's the ever present lag issue. While the test showed some kinds of games to be playable, the lag is there and was noticeable in relation to a native system.</p><p>I just don't see this as having a big enough market. If they truly could deliver a gaming experience the same as owning a $1500-2000 system over low bandwidth net connections, sure. However they can't. They can (almost) deliver the experience of owning a $500 system with a $100 graphics card added on over a moderate bandwidth net connection to some areas.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I just do n't see this succeeding , especially after seeing the leaked preview article .
The problem is that on top of the cost of the service , you have to have a good net connection .
While it uses like 1mbps for the stream , you need more like a 10mbps connection to keep the latency low .
Remember that you do n't just have to take ping time in to account with data transfer , but the time it takes to transfer all the data .
Ok well good connections cost more money and thus are n't so much the domain of the budget user which is their target user .
I mean I 've got a connection with low ping times and plenty of bandwidth , however I wo n't be buying since I also have a video card.Another problem is that because of the compression on the video stream , you are not going to get the highest quality video , no matter what the settings on the host computer are .
Part of their selling point is that you get the max quality of new video cards on your current system .
No , not really .
Looking at the gameplay vids you get more like mid to lowish quality video .
Fine , but that is n't nearly so expensive .
$ 100 will get you a video card that will look as good or better than what was shown , and that is not nearly such a barrier for entry.Yet another problem is that their service requires you to be near one of their data centers , so that pings are low .
Fair enough , latency can kill this , but that means their potential user base is less than it would be otherwise .
There will be users who want the service and ca n't have it because their ping is too high .
Some may even be near a data center physically , but too far Internet wise.Finally there 's the ever present lag issue .
While the test showed some kinds of games to be playable , the lag is there and was noticeable in relation to a native system.I just do n't see this as having a big enough market .
If they truly could deliver a gaming experience the same as owning a $ 1500-2000 system over low bandwidth net connections , sure .
However they ca n't .
They can ( almost ) deliver the experience of owning a $ 500 system with a $ 100 graphics card added on over a moderate bandwidth net connection to some areas .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I just don't see this succeeding, especially after seeing the leaked preview article.
The problem is that on top of the cost of the service, you have to have a good net connection.
While it uses like 1mbps for the stream, you need more like a 10mbps connection to keep the latency low.
Remember that you don't just have to take ping time in to account with data transfer, but the time it takes to transfer all the data.
Ok well good connections cost more money and thus aren't so much the domain of the budget user which is their target user.
I mean I've got a connection with low ping times and plenty of bandwidth, however I won't be buying since I also have a video card.Another problem is that because of the compression on the video stream, you are not going to get the highest quality video, no matter what the settings on the host computer are.
Part of their selling point is that you get the max quality of new video cards on your current system.
No, not really.
Looking at the gameplay vids you get more like mid to lowish quality video.
Fine, but that isn't nearly so expensive.
$100 will get you a video card that will look as good or better than what was shown, and that is not nearly such a barrier for entry.Yet another problem is that their service requires you to be near one of their data centers, so that pings are low.
Fair enough, latency can kill this, but that means their potential user base is less than it would be otherwise.
There will be users who want the service and can't have it because their ping is too high.
Some may even be near a data center physically, but too far Internet wise.Finally there's the ever present lag issue.
While the test showed some kinds of games to be playable, the lag is there and was noticeable in relation to a native system.I just don't see this as having a big enough market.
If they truly could deliver a gaming experience the same as owning a $1500-2000 system over low bandwidth net connections, sure.
However they can't.
They can (almost) deliver the experience of owning a $500 system with a $100 graphics card added on over a moderate bandwidth net connection to some areas.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432682</id>
	<title>Re:Monthly charges AND per game</title>
	<author>Mandelbrot-5</author>
	<datestamp>1268224920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Four years out of a 1k gaming rig?  I'm a cheap bastard, and I still spend $400 a year to keep just above minimum specs for the new engines.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Four years out of a 1k gaming rig ?
I 'm a cheap bastard , and I still spend $ 400 a year to keep just above minimum specs for the new engines .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Four years out of a 1k gaming rig?
I'm a cheap bastard, and I still spend $400 a year to keep just above minimum specs for the new engines.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432488</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432876</id>
	<title>Re:Monthly charges AND per game</title>
	<author>Haeleth</author>
	<datestamp>1268226420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you're paying $400/yr, you're not a cheap bastard.  Sorry to shatter your world-view, but you really aren't.</p><p>I haven't spent a penny on my computer since 2007, when I upgraded it to what was mid-range <i>then</i> -- and it still runs new games just fine.</p><p>The simple fact of the matter is that most games have to run well on current-gen consoles, and current-gen consoles are stuck with 2005-vintage technology.  So there's no reason to upgrade beyond a certain point, unless you absolutely have to play with every single setting maxed out.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you 're paying $ 400/yr , you 're not a cheap bastard .
Sorry to shatter your world-view , but you really are n't.I have n't spent a penny on my computer since 2007 , when I upgraded it to what was mid-range then -- and it still runs new games just fine.The simple fact of the matter is that most games have to run well on current-gen consoles , and current-gen consoles are stuck with 2005-vintage technology .
So there 's no reason to upgrade beyond a certain point , unless you absolutely have to play with every single setting maxed out .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you're paying $400/yr, you're not a cheap bastard.
Sorry to shatter your world-view, but you really aren't.I haven't spent a penny on my computer since 2007, when I upgraded it to what was mid-range then -- and it still runs new games just fine.The simple fact of the matter is that most games have to run well on current-gen consoles, and current-gen consoles are stuck with 2005-vintage technology.
So there's no reason to upgrade beyond a certain point, unless you absolutely have to play with every single setting maxed out.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432682</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31438490</id>
	<title>Re:Not the point of onlive</title>
	<author>KDR\_11k</author>
	<datestamp>1268326200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Instead of you having to upgrade your computer every few years, and having to live with a sub-par gaming machine towards the end of its effective life cycle, onlive's servers will be continually upgraded to keep up with the games.</i></p><p>We'll see about that, they might end up with some beancounter figuring out that the cost-benefit ratio of continuous upgrading is too high so you might see upgrades too infrequently. They'll need some serious hardware to run high end games for thousands of users and upgrades will be costly.</p><p><i>But one of the biggest things is that since all the gaming code runs at the server end, this will almost eliminate cheating.</i></p><p>Only among terminal gamers, I don't expect many terminal-only games so any regular computer gamers can still cheat.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Instead of you having to upgrade your computer every few years , and having to live with a sub-par gaming machine towards the end of its effective life cycle , onlive 's servers will be continually upgraded to keep up with the games.We 'll see about that , they might end up with some beancounter figuring out that the cost-benefit ratio of continuous upgrading is too high so you might see upgrades too infrequently .
They 'll need some serious hardware to run high end games for thousands of users and upgrades will be costly.But one of the biggest things is that since all the gaming code runs at the server end , this will almost eliminate cheating.Only among terminal gamers , I do n't expect many terminal-only games so any regular computer gamers can still cheat .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Instead of you having to upgrade your computer every few years, and having to live with a sub-par gaming machine towards the end of its effective life cycle, onlive's servers will be continually upgraded to keep up with the games.We'll see about that, they might end up with some beancounter figuring out that the cost-benefit ratio of continuous upgrading is too high so you might see upgrades too infrequently.
They'll need some serious hardware to run high end games for thousands of users and upgrades will be costly.But one of the biggest things is that since all the gaming code runs at the server end, this will almost eliminate cheating.Only among terminal gamers, I don't expect many terminal-only games so any regular computer gamers can still cheat.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433928</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432852</id>
	<title>Re:Well good luck to them</title>
	<author>Guysmiley777</author>
	<datestamp>1268226180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>One review site that got sued for posting thoughts about the beta of OnLive basically said that the latency from the time you input a command to the time it shows up on the screen made 1st/3rd person shooter type games entirely unplayable. You would "overshoot" your target when trying to aim at something, and that problem is not solvable, end of story. REAL gaming systems render the client side with virtually zero latency from the controller, so when you let go of the thumbstick your cursor stops NOW. The OnLive setup can't see into the future to know when you're going to press a button or move a controller stick.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>One review site that got sued for posting thoughts about the beta of OnLive basically said that the latency from the time you input a command to the time it shows up on the screen made 1st/3rd person shooter type games entirely unplayable .
You would " overshoot " your target when trying to aim at something , and that problem is not solvable , end of story .
REAL gaming systems render the client side with virtually zero latency from the controller , so when you let go of the thumbstick your cursor stops NOW .
The OnLive setup ca n't see into the future to know when you 're going to press a button or move a controller stick .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One review site that got sued for posting thoughts about the beta of OnLive basically said that the latency from the time you input a command to the time it shows up on the screen made 1st/3rd person shooter type games entirely unplayable.
You would "overshoot" your target when trying to aim at something, and that problem is not solvable, end of story.
REAL gaming systems render the client side with virtually zero latency from the controller, so when you let go of the thumbstick your cursor stops NOW.
The OnLive setup can't see into the future to know when you're going to press a button or move a controller stick.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432522</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433152</id>
	<title>Re:What a steal!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268228520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't think you understand that publishers have a much greater incentive to discount their titles just like they do on Valve's steam.  You don't seem to realize that in retail the tail end of a game title's sales curve is completely leeched by used game companies like gamestop, who undercut retail prices by 50\% and reap all the profits for essentially doing nothing.

</p><p>As people have seen with Steam, when the companies don't have to contend with Gamestop they can lower their prices to very low levels to stimulate sales, knowing that they won't simply be undercut by used game stores.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't think you understand that publishers have a much greater incentive to discount their titles just like they do on Valve 's steam .
You do n't seem to realize that in retail the tail end of a game title 's sales curve is completely leeched by used game companies like gamestop , who undercut retail prices by 50 \ % and reap all the profits for essentially doing nothing .
As people have seen with Steam , when the companies do n't have to contend with Gamestop they can lower their prices to very low levels to stimulate sales , knowing that they wo n't simply be undercut by used game stores .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't think you understand that publishers have a much greater incentive to discount their titles just like they do on Valve's steam.
You don't seem to realize that in retail the tail end of a game title's sales curve is completely leeched by used game companies like gamestop, who undercut retail prices by 50\% and reap all the profits for essentially doing nothing.
As people have seen with Steam, when the companies don't have to contend with Gamestop they can lower their prices to very low levels to stimulate sales, knowing that they won't simply be undercut by used game stores.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432436</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31436650</id>
	<title>Re:Can I HomeBrew this?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268317320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://www.streammygame.com/" title="streammygame.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.streammygame.com/</a> [streammygame.com] claims to allow you to do this.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.streammygame.com/ [ streammygame.com ] claims to allow you to do this .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.streammygame.com/ [streammygame.com] claims to allow you to do this.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433774</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31434722</id>
	<title>Re:guaranteed failure</title>
	<author>Stuntmonkey</author>
	<datestamp>1268245200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>People that are inclined to play PC games already have hardware that can handle it.</p></div></blockquote><p>I think you suffer from observer bias.  There is a huge market out there for fun games that are quick and easy to play, where performance is secondary.  Look at pretty much any Wii game, or a game like Farmville, or anything on the iPhone.  The revenue from these games is enormous.  The people who play them won't go out of their way to buy a gaming PC.  They have never heard of NewEgg, or Frys.  Many have no idea what a video card is.  They probably have a $400 underpowered laptop with integrated graphics.  They definitely aren't willing to shell out $65 for the latest game, sight unseen.  State of the art games make no revenue from this casual gaming crowd today, and services like this potentially give them a way to do so.  Don't view this as the same product delivered in a different way (like Steam); this is a fundamentally different product, with a different target market.</p><p>I think a big factor in their potential success is how cheap and easy is it to try out.  If they can keep the up-front costs low (or zero) so the casual gamers can get a taste, they may be able to convince a good number of them to spend $30+ a month for the service.  But the key is it's got to be cheap and easy to try, to get people hooked (a formula that's worked for Farmville, and many iPhone/XBox Arcade games with free trials).  To me the $15 up-front commitment is a problem.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>People that are inclined to play PC games already have hardware that can handle it.I think you suffer from observer bias .
There is a huge market out there for fun games that are quick and easy to play , where performance is secondary .
Look at pretty much any Wii game , or a game like Farmville , or anything on the iPhone .
The revenue from these games is enormous .
The people who play them wo n't go out of their way to buy a gaming PC .
They have never heard of NewEgg , or Frys .
Many have no idea what a video card is .
They probably have a $ 400 underpowered laptop with integrated graphics .
They definitely are n't willing to shell out $ 65 for the latest game , sight unseen .
State of the art games make no revenue from this casual gaming crowd today , and services like this potentially give them a way to do so .
Do n't view this as the same product delivered in a different way ( like Steam ) ; this is a fundamentally different product , with a different target market.I think a big factor in their potential success is how cheap and easy is it to try out .
If they can keep the up-front costs low ( or zero ) so the casual gamers can get a taste , they may be able to convince a good number of them to spend $ 30 + a month for the service .
But the key is it 's got to be cheap and easy to try , to get people hooked ( a formula that 's worked for Farmville , and many iPhone/XBox Arcade games with free trials ) .
To me the $ 15 up-front commitment is a problem .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>People that are inclined to play PC games already have hardware that can handle it.I think you suffer from observer bias.
There is a huge market out there for fun games that are quick and easy to play, where performance is secondary.
Look at pretty much any Wii game, or a game like Farmville, or anything on the iPhone.
The revenue from these games is enormous.
The people who play them won't go out of their way to buy a gaming PC.
They have never heard of NewEgg, or Frys.
Many have no idea what a video card is.
They probably have a $400 underpowered laptop with integrated graphics.
They definitely aren't willing to shell out $65 for the latest game, sight unseen.
State of the art games make no revenue from this casual gaming crowd today, and services like this potentially give them a way to do so.
Don't view this as the same product delivered in a different way (like Steam); this is a fundamentally different product, with a different target market.I think a big factor in their potential success is how cheap and easy is it to try out.
If they can keep the up-front costs low (or zero) so the casual gamers can get a taste, they may be able to convince a good number of them to spend $30+ a month for the service.
But the key is it's got to be cheap and easy to try, to get people hooked (a formula that's worked for Farmville, and many iPhone/XBox Arcade games with free trials).
To me the $15 up-front commitment is a problem.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432540</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31435586</id>
	<title>Re:Cloud Computing</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268300880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's balk.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's balk .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's balk.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432552</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432666</id>
	<title>Mayday! Mayday!</title>
	<author>PapagenoX</author>
	<datestamp>1268224740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>This is so going to go down in flames. I give it 6 months.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is so going to go down in flames .
I give it 6 months .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is so going to go down in flames.
I give it 6 months.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31434852</id>
	<title>Re:Can I HomeBrew this?</title>
	<author>GenP</author>
	<datestamp>1268247000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Special low-latency compression hardware.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Special low-latency compression hardware .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Special low-latency compression hardware.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433774</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31437034</id>
	<title>Ubisoft DRM is better as does not need super high</title>
	<author>Joe The Dragon</author>
	<datestamp>1268320560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ubisoft DRM is better as does not need super high speed internet to work.</p><p>ON live needs 24/7 Internet with good speed trying doing that on cable when a lot people on the same node try to use this at the same time it will fail just like cablevisons network DVR systems will fail.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ubisoft DRM is better as does not need super high speed internet to work.ON live needs 24/7 Internet with good speed trying doing that on cable when a lot people on the same node try to use this at the same time it will fail just like cablevisons network DVR systems will fail .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ubisoft DRM is better as does not need super high speed internet to work.ON live needs 24/7 Internet with good speed trying doing that on cable when a lot people on the same node try to use this at the same time it will fail just like cablevisons network DVR systems will fail.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433424</id>
	<title>Doesn't seem to be much demand</title>
	<author>Sycraft-fu</author>
	<datestamp>1268230740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Remember that at a business, this kind of thing has long been possible and without many of the drawbacks. I can set up a Windows Terminal Server and more or less any Windows software can be run off that on to anything that can do RDP, be it a low power Windows box, a Linux box, or a thin client. All processing is done on the server and on a LAN, interface speed feels extremely near native.</p><p>However, it is extremely unpopular. You just don't see it used hardly at all. Instead businesses buy people their own computers and software. They could be doing this central model if they wanted, and companies would support it if they did, but very few seem interested.</p><p>The whole thin client/big server thing just isn't popular and doesn't seem to be getting there. It died off when the microcomputer became cheap and despite number predictions of it coming back and technologies oriented that way (like the Sun Ray) it hasn't gained anything other than a token market.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Remember that at a business , this kind of thing has long been possible and without many of the drawbacks .
I can set up a Windows Terminal Server and more or less any Windows software can be run off that on to anything that can do RDP , be it a low power Windows box , a Linux box , or a thin client .
All processing is done on the server and on a LAN , interface speed feels extremely near native.However , it is extremely unpopular .
You just do n't see it used hardly at all .
Instead businesses buy people their own computers and software .
They could be doing this central model if they wanted , and companies would support it if they did , but very few seem interested.The whole thin client/big server thing just is n't popular and does n't seem to be getting there .
It died off when the microcomputer became cheap and despite number predictions of it coming back and technologies oriented that way ( like the Sun Ray ) it has n't gained anything other than a token market .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Remember that at a business, this kind of thing has long been possible and without many of the drawbacks.
I can set up a Windows Terminal Server and more or less any Windows software can be run off that on to anything that can do RDP, be it a low power Windows box, a Linux box, or a thin client.
All processing is done on the server and on a LAN, interface speed feels extremely near native.However, it is extremely unpopular.
You just don't see it used hardly at all.
Instead businesses buy people their own computers and software.
They could be doing this central model if they wanted, and companies would support it if they did, but very few seem interested.The whole thin client/big server thing just isn't popular and doesn't seem to be getting there.
It died off when the microcomputer became cheap and despite number predictions of it coming back and technologies oriented that way (like the Sun Ray) it hasn't gained anything other than a token market.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433046</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433438</id>
	<title>It took me awhile...</title>
	<author>Anachragnome</author>
	<datestamp>1268230800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It took me awhile to figure out what the point in all this was. Well, besides someone making themselves a middleman for profit.</p><p>What it boils down to is this. Piracy, as far as computer games are concerned, is essentially the use of an executable(and it's associated files) without permission.</p><p>This whole scheme is simply testing the viability of never letting that executable out in the wild in the first place. No executable to crack, no piracy. Obviously, this will not work unless they also stop selling boxed games or downloads. Don't like paying for something and not have something to show for it? Don't buy the service. Buy the boxed version. Otherwise, if this service is successful, the next step IS the discontinuation of boxed game sales.</p><p>From my perspective, no executable, no money.</p><p>Don't let them get this one out of the barn...Put your money where it does what YOU want.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It took me awhile to figure out what the point in all this was .
Well , besides someone making themselves a middleman for profit.What it boils down to is this .
Piracy , as far as computer games are concerned , is essentially the use of an executable ( and it 's associated files ) without permission.This whole scheme is simply testing the viability of never letting that executable out in the wild in the first place .
No executable to crack , no piracy .
Obviously , this will not work unless they also stop selling boxed games or downloads .
Do n't like paying for something and not have something to show for it ?
Do n't buy the service .
Buy the boxed version .
Otherwise , if this service is successful , the next step IS the discontinuation of boxed game sales.From my perspective , no executable , no money.Do n't let them get this one out of the barn...Put your money where it does what YOU want .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It took me awhile to figure out what the point in all this was.
Well, besides someone making themselves a middleman for profit.What it boils down to is this.
Piracy, as far as computer games are concerned, is essentially the use of an executable(and it's associated files) without permission.This whole scheme is simply testing the viability of never letting that executable out in the wild in the first place.
No executable to crack, no piracy.
Obviously, this will not work unless they also stop selling boxed games or downloads.
Don't like paying for something and not have something to show for it?
Don't buy the service.
Buy the boxed version.
Otherwise, if this service is successful, the next step IS the discontinuation of boxed game sales.From my perspective, no executable, no money.Don't let them get this one out of the barn...Put your money where it does what YOU want.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433560</id>
	<title>Re:Monthly charges AND per game</title>
	<author>Wovel</author>
	<datestamp>1268232060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But do you know it will run midrange better than OnLive?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But do you know it will run midrange better than OnLive ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But do you know it will run midrange better than OnLive?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432876</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433342</id>
	<title>Re:Do not want</title>
	<author>sonicmerlin</author>
	<datestamp>1268229960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Hopefully they offer a discount to the games.  I feel like that's the best way to attract customers.  The real sweet spot would be a $10 discount, so anyone comparing the retail version and the OnLive version would constantly be confronted with the choice of paying more or less for a game.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hopefully they offer a discount to the games .
I feel like that 's the best way to attract customers .
The real sweet spot would be a $ 10 discount , so anyone comparing the retail version and the OnLive version would constantly be confronted with the choice of paying more or less for a game .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hopefully they offer a discount to the games.
I feel like that's the best way to attract customers.
The real sweet spot would be a $10 discount, so anyone comparing the retail version and the OnLive version would constantly be confronted with the choice of paying more or less for a game.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432694</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433354</id>
	<title>Re:What a steal!</title>
	<author>Hes Nikke</author>
	<datestamp>1268230080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>it would be the same as netflix if netflix charged you on a per-movie basis in addition to the monthly fee. this alone will make onlive fail. I have lost *ALL* interest in onlive do to the pricing model, especially now that steam is heading for the mac.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>it would be the same as netflix if netflix charged you on a per-movie basis in addition to the monthly fee .
this alone will make onlive fail .
I have lost * ALL * interest in onlive do to the pricing model , especially now that steam is heading for the mac .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>it would be the same as netflix if netflix charged you on a per-movie basis in addition to the monthly fee.
this alone will make onlive fail.
I have lost *ALL* interest in onlive do to the pricing model, especially now that steam is heading for the mac.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432802</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31438014</id>
	<title>Re:What a steal!</title>
	<author>KDR\_11k</author>
	<datestamp>1268325060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>companies like gamestop, who undercut retail prices by 50\%</i></p><p>Really? I usually see them undercutting the MSRP by 5-10\% (shopping around can give you bigger discounts than that). It's the reason I don't buy used (unless the game is so old that new copies don't exist anymore), a new copy is only marginally more expensive.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>companies like gamestop , who undercut retail prices by 50 \ % Really ?
I usually see them undercutting the MSRP by 5-10 \ % ( shopping around can give you bigger discounts than that ) .
It 's the reason I do n't buy used ( unless the game is so old that new copies do n't exist anymore ) , a new copy is only marginally more expensive .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>companies like gamestop, who undercut retail prices by 50\%Really?
I usually see them undercutting the MSRP by 5-10\% (shopping around can give you bigger discounts than that).
It's the reason I don't buy used (unless the game is so old that new copies don't exist anymore), a new copy is only marginally more expensive.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433152</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432888</id>
	<title>Re:What a steal!</title>
	<author>Ben4jammin</author>
	<datestamp>1268226540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Right, you can buy OR rent...so if you are renting you don't have to worry as much.  If you buy, you take the same risk as any other provider like this that could shut down.  I can see using this to rent games to see if you want to buy them.  Nothing pisses me off more than buying a $60 game just to find out the reviews I read hyped me into a bad purchase.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Right , you can buy OR rent...so if you are renting you do n't have to worry as much .
If you buy , you take the same risk as any other provider like this that could shut down .
I can see using this to rent games to see if you want to buy them .
Nothing pisses me off more than buying a $ 60 game just to find out the reviews I read hyped me into a bad purchase .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Right, you can buy OR rent...so if you are renting you don't have to worry as much.
If you buy, you take the same risk as any other provider like this that could shut down.
I can see using this to rent games to see if you want to buy them.
Nothing pisses me off more than buying a $60 game just to find out the reviews I read hyped me into a bad purchase.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432802</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31434712</id>
	<title>Re:Wow</title>
	<author>sonicmerlin</author>
	<datestamp>1268244900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yeah... I feel like a religious wing-nut preaching the benefits of the OnLive deity here, but I'm just reacting to the insanely negative attitudes on this forum.  It's amazing how conservative Slashdotters are.  They're just afraid of change and it colors all their thoughts and arguments.  Oh well.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah... I feel like a religious wing-nut preaching the benefits of the OnLive deity here , but I 'm just reacting to the insanely negative attitudes on this forum .
It 's amazing how conservative Slashdotters are .
They 're just afraid of change and it colors all their thoughts and arguments .
Oh well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah... I feel like a religious wing-nut preaching the benefits of the OnLive deity here, but I'm just reacting to the insanely negative attitudes on this forum.
It's amazing how conservative Slashdotters are.
They're just afraid of change and it colors all their thoughts and arguments.
Oh well.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31434148</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433644</id>
	<title>The ultimate in DRM and anti-piracy</title>
	<author>drfreak</author>
	<datestamp>1268232900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>People have been upset lately at publishers like Ubisoft requiring an internet connection to play a game. This totally trumps even that model, as you need an internet connection to stream the game content. Not only that, but how can you make a pirated copy of a game you aren't even running the code to?</p><p>1. Profit!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>People have been upset lately at publishers like Ubisoft requiring an internet connection to play a game .
This totally trumps even that model , as you need an internet connection to stream the game content .
Not only that , but how can you make a pirated copy of a game you are n't even running the code to ? 1 .
Profit !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>People have been upset lately at publishers like Ubisoft requiring an internet connection to play a game.
This totally trumps even that model, as you need an internet connection to stream the game content.
Not only that, but how can you make a pirated copy of a game you aren't even running the code to?1.
Profit!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31434494</id>
	<title>Extreme Brite White</title>
	<author>eduglous</author>
	<datestamp>1268241960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>The amazing system removes several layers of blots that gather on your enamel due to continuous intake of colored and intoxicated beverages gently and safely.
<a href="http://www.articlesbase.com/health-articles/extreme-brite-white-review-does-extreme-brite-white-work-1963653.html" title="articlesbase.com" rel="nofollow">Extreme Brite White</a> [articlesbase.com]</htmltext>
<tokenext>The amazing system removes several layers of blots that gather on your enamel due to continuous intake of colored and intoxicated beverages gently and safely .
Extreme Brite White [ articlesbase.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The amazing system removes several layers of blots that gather on your enamel due to continuous intake of colored and intoxicated beverages gently and safely.
Extreme Brite White [articlesbase.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31437094</id>
	<title>Re:What a steal!</title>
	<author>Jer</author>
	<datestamp>1268320980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>It amazes me that people even bother reselling games.  It's called disposable income for a reason.  If you can't afford to dispose of it then don't spend it.</p></div><p>And then throw the game away when you're done with it!  No one else could ever possibly have a use for it!  Also burn all of your books when you're done reading them, shred your DVDs when you're done watching them, and drive your car off a cliff when you're ready to get a new one.</p><p>Meanwhile, in the real world, some of us would like our disposable income to stretch farther and are willing to wait a few months for new releases.  If you don't want a game anymore and there's someone else who does what's wrong with selling it to them?  You get a bit more money to buy your next new game and they get a perfectly usable game rather than seeing it hit a landfill.  I'm not seeing the down side.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It amazes me that people even bother reselling games .
It 's called disposable income for a reason .
If you ca n't afford to dispose of it then do n't spend it.And then throw the game away when you 're done with it !
No one else could ever possibly have a use for it !
Also burn all of your books when you 're done reading them , shred your DVDs when you 're done watching them , and drive your car off a cliff when you 're ready to get a new one.Meanwhile , in the real world , some of us would like our disposable income to stretch farther and are willing to wait a few months for new releases .
If you do n't want a game anymore and there 's someone else who does what 's wrong with selling it to them ?
You get a bit more money to buy your next new game and they get a perfectly usable game rather than seeing it hit a landfill .
I 'm not seeing the down side .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It amazes me that people even bother reselling games.
It's called disposable income for a reason.
If you can't afford to dispose of it then don't spend it.And then throw the game away when you're done with it!
No one else could ever possibly have a use for it!
Also burn all of your books when you're done reading them, shred your DVDs when you're done watching them, and drive your car off a cliff when you're ready to get a new one.Meanwhile, in the real world, some of us would like our disposable income to stretch farther and are willing to wait a few months for new releases.
If you don't want a game anymore and there's someone else who does what's wrong with selling it to them?
You get a bit more money to buy your next new game and they get a perfectly usable game rather than seeing it hit a landfill.
I'm not seeing the down side.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432984</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432688</id>
	<title>Re:Monthly charges AND per game</title>
	<author>Microlith</author>
	<datestamp>1268224980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>are they Ubisoft in disguise</p></div></blockquote><p>They are what Ubisoft, EA, Activision, et. al. want the gaming world to become. No hard distribution channels, no consoles, no PCs, no DRM to fight with.</p><p>You go, buy a box, pay a monthly fee for the service and for the games. They retain 100\% control and can fuck with you at will, since you have no recourse. Now you can hack the game. Now you can get a killer deal on the predecessor to the latest HOT SEQUEL and find out it probably sucks (or is awesome, but who cares about -good games-). And best of all, your copy of $GAME can go inactive (like we all expect Assassins Creed II to) right before its sequel hits! They hate having informed consumers who can control how and when they play.</p><p>I suspect that rentals will be allowed on the publisher's schedule, preceded by many months of full retail (or maybe slightly discounted, to lure you in) prices on the games. No discounts, no control. So you might say my view on OnLive is that of complete and total pessimism, and I hope it goes down in flames.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>are they Ubisoft in disguiseThey are what Ubisoft , EA , Activision , et .
al. want the gaming world to become .
No hard distribution channels , no consoles , no PCs , no DRM to fight with.You go , buy a box , pay a monthly fee for the service and for the games .
They retain 100 \ % control and can fuck with you at will , since you have no recourse .
Now you can hack the game .
Now you can get a killer deal on the predecessor to the latest HOT SEQUEL and find out it probably sucks ( or is awesome , but who cares about -good games- ) .
And best of all , your copy of $ GAME can go inactive ( like we all expect Assassins Creed II to ) right before its sequel hits !
They hate having informed consumers who can control how and when they play.I suspect that rentals will be allowed on the publisher 's schedule , preceded by many months of full retail ( or maybe slightly discounted , to lure you in ) prices on the games .
No discounts , no control .
So you might say my view on OnLive is that of complete and total pessimism , and I hope it goes down in flames .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>are they Ubisoft in disguiseThey are what Ubisoft, EA, Activision, et.
al. want the gaming world to become.
No hard distribution channels, no consoles, no PCs, no DRM to fight with.You go, buy a box, pay a monthly fee for the service and for the games.
They retain 100\% control and can fuck with you at will, since you have no recourse.
Now you can hack the game.
Now you can get a killer deal on the predecessor to the latest HOT SEQUEL and find out it probably sucks (or is awesome, but who cares about -good games-).
And best of all, your copy of $GAME can go inactive (like we all expect Assassins Creed II to) right before its sequel hits!
They hate having informed consumers who can control how and when they play.I suspect that rentals will be allowed on the publisher's schedule, preceded by many months of full retail (or maybe slightly discounted, to lure you in) prices on the games.
No discounts, no control.
So you might say my view on OnLive is that of complete and total pessimism, and I hope it goes down in flames.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432488</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433620</id>
	<title>Re:What a steal!</title>
	<author>bnenning</author>
	<datestamp>1268232720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>At least the OnLive model is more honest than crap like UbiSoft's always-connected DRM. With OnLive it's clear that you own nothing and are just paying to rent games. With insane DRM you get to pay the higher cost of "buying" the game, and you still don't actually own anything.</p><p>That said, I won't believe their service is usable for midrange or higher games until I see it in person.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>At least the OnLive model is more honest than crap like UbiSoft 's always-connected DRM .
With OnLive it 's clear that you own nothing and are just paying to rent games .
With insane DRM you get to pay the higher cost of " buying " the game , and you still do n't actually own anything.That said , I wo n't believe their service is usable for midrange or higher games until I see it in person .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At least the OnLive model is more honest than crap like UbiSoft's always-connected DRM.
With OnLive it's clear that you own nothing and are just paying to rent games.
With insane DRM you get to pay the higher cost of "buying" the game, and you still don't actually own anything.That said, I won't believe their service is usable for midrange or higher games until I see it in person.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432436</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31434928</id>
	<title>Re:Can I HomeBrew this?</title>
	<author>slimjim8094</author>
	<datestamp>1268247900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A LAN is just about the only place an idea like this could work.</p><p>The key is to encode down to h.264 or some other *video* codec that can be smart about how it removes redundancy. VNC and other remote-desktop programs treat the screen as a series of still images, not moving pictures, so they couldn't ever work for something like this.</p><p>This OnLive thing is crazy, but I bet you could pull it off over the LAN. You'd need some video encoding hardware though.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A LAN is just about the only place an idea like this could work.The key is to encode down to h.264 or some other * video * codec that can be smart about how it removes redundancy .
VNC and other remote-desktop programs treat the screen as a series of still images , not moving pictures , so they could n't ever work for something like this.This OnLive thing is crazy , but I bet you could pull it off over the LAN .
You 'd need some video encoding hardware though .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A LAN is just about the only place an idea like this could work.The key is to encode down to h.264 or some other *video* codec that can be smart about how it removes redundancy.
VNC and other remote-desktop programs treat the screen as a series of still images, not moving pictures, so they couldn't ever work for something like this.This OnLive thing is crazy, but I bet you could pull it off over the LAN.
You'd need some video encoding hardware though.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433774</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31434874</id>
	<title>waste of the tech (if it works)</title>
	<author>sixsixtysix</author>
	<datestamp>1268247240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>all doubts aside(and i do have many, many doubts), i think, if this works, it would be one of the biggest tech breakthroughs in recent years. perhaps, the games are not simply 'run' in the cloud, but ported to work on a much lower level with the hardware, perhaps with a custom os, and rendered directly to compressed video stream? regardless of how, it seems that they are really squandering this tech, if they want to use it just for this. if it can do 1080p(that's what i am guessing their hd stream is) with a 5mb connection, what can it do on-site? why not interactive cgi movies? what about some sort of vr system (or is that still dead)? so much cool stuff could come out of this and i think using it for remote gaming as first step seems like a total waste.</htmltext>
<tokenext>all doubts aside ( and i do have many , many doubts ) , i think , if this works , it would be one of the biggest tech breakthroughs in recent years .
perhaps , the games are not simply 'run ' in the cloud , but ported to work on a much lower level with the hardware , perhaps with a custom os , and rendered directly to compressed video stream ?
regardless of how , it seems that they are really squandering this tech , if they want to use it just for this .
if it can do 1080p ( that 's what i am guessing their hd stream is ) with a 5mb connection , what can it do on-site ?
why not interactive cgi movies ?
what about some sort of vr system ( or is that still dead ) ?
so much cool stuff could come out of this and i think using it for remote gaming as first step seems like a total waste .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>all doubts aside(and i do have many, many doubts), i think, if this works, it would be one of the biggest tech breakthroughs in recent years.
perhaps, the games are not simply 'run' in the cloud, but ported to work on a much lower level with the hardware, perhaps with a custom os, and rendered directly to compressed video stream?
regardless of how, it seems that they are really squandering this tech, if they want to use it just for this.
if it can do 1080p(that's what i am guessing their hd stream is) with a 5mb connection, what can it do on-site?
why not interactive cgi movies?
what about some sort of vr system (or is that still dead)?
so much cool stuff could come out of this and i think using it for remote gaming as first step seems like a total waste.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31434842</id>
	<title>Demo of Input Latency</title>
	<author>sonicmerlin</author>
	<datestamp>1268246880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This is a great site with a demo of input latency to determine how you might feel about a possible service like OnLive:
<a href="http://galbraiths.org/feedback.html" title="galbraiths.org">http://galbraiths.org/feedback.html</a> [galbraiths.org]</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is a great site with a demo of input latency to determine how you might feel about a possible service like OnLive : http : //galbraiths.org/feedback.html [ galbraiths.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is a great site with a demo of input latency to determine how you might feel about a possible service like OnLive:
http://galbraiths.org/feedback.html [galbraiths.org]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31434014</id>
	<title>Re:Cloud Computing</title>
	<author>LordLimecat</author>
	<datestamp>1268236500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I can't wait for this newest bubble to burst</p></div><p>Has it occured to you how beneficial it would be for this to succeed within a casual gamer niche, in terms of what it would mean for bandwidth caps and internet speed?  More high-bandwidth apps pushing the envelope is a good thing.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I ca n't wait for this newest bubble to burstHas it occured to you how beneficial it would be for this to succeed within a casual gamer niche , in terms of what it would mean for bandwidth caps and internet speed ?
More high-bandwidth apps pushing the envelope is a good thing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can't wait for this newest bubble to burstHas it occured to you how beneficial it would be for this to succeed within a casual gamer niche, in terms of what it would mean for bandwidth caps and internet speed?
More high-bandwidth apps pushing the envelope is a good thing.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432552</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433306</id>
	<title>Re:guaranteed failure</title>
	<author>sonicmerlin</author>
	<datestamp>1268229660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>$15/month is steep, but it depends on the cost of games.  If people get a discount for buying them through OnLive, that right there is a huge incentive.</htmltext>
<tokenext>$ 15/month is steep , but it depends on the cost of games .
If people get a discount for buying them through OnLive , that right there is a huge incentive .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>$15/month is steep, but it depends on the cost of games.
If people get a discount for buying them through OnLive, that right there is a huge incentive.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432540</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31436242</id>
	<title>Re:What a steal!</title>
	<author>grumbel</author>
	<datestamp>1268311800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You are only looking on the dark side of it. The thing is the service has also a ton of positive stuff. Games get platform independent, can run on your PC, your Mac, your TV or even your iPhone. Savegames will always carry over. Even weak hardware can run the games. No more compatibility issues, driver updates, etc. You can watch, record and publish the recorded gameplay. Console hardware will be very cheap. Games will start instantly, without first downloading gigabytes of data. Multiplayer could be done server side, giving you a much higher upper limit on number of players in the same game. And lots more.</p><p>For the gaming companies there is also a ton of advantages, like they will get a bigger chunk of money and piracy is basically impossible.</p><p>The thing that scares me about this service most is that it actually could work. That might not be right away and it will certainly take time to get the server infrastructure everywhere to cover millions of gamers out there, but issues like bandwidth will simply disappear in the near future and not be a long term show stopper. And once the service becomes mainstream we might run into a dark age of video game history, as it will be completly in the publishers hands what games will be preserved and how.</p><p>All that said, when the thing becomes successful Linux gaming might end up being a solved problem, as porting a simple videogame player over to Linux is much easier then porting hundreds of games.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You are only looking on the dark side of it .
The thing is the service has also a ton of positive stuff .
Games get platform independent , can run on your PC , your Mac , your TV or even your iPhone .
Savegames will always carry over .
Even weak hardware can run the games .
No more compatibility issues , driver updates , etc .
You can watch , record and publish the recorded gameplay .
Console hardware will be very cheap .
Games will start instantly , without first downloading gigabytes of data .
Multiplayer could be done server side , giving you a much higher upper limit on number of players in the same game .
And lots more.For the gaming companies there is also a ton of advantages , like they will get a bigger chunk of money and piracy is basically impossible.The thing that scares me about this service most is that it actually could work .
That might not be right away and it will certainly take time to get the server infrastructure everywhere to cover millions of gamers out there , but issues like bandwidth will simply disappear in the near future and not be a long term show stopper .
And once the service becomes mainstream we might run into a dark age of video game history , as it will be completly in the publishers hands what games will be preserved and how.All that said , when the thing becomes successful Linux gaming might end up being a solved problem , as porting a simple videogame player over to Linux is much easier then porting hundreds of games .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You are only looking on the dark side of it.
The thing is the service has also a ton of positive stuff.
Games get platform independent, can run on your PC, your Mac, your TV or even your iPhone.
Savegames will always carry over.
Even weak hardware can run the games.
No more compatibility issues, driver updates, etc.
You can watch, record and publish the recorded gameplay.
Console hardware will be very cheap.
Games will start instantly, without first downloading gigabytes of data.
Multiplayer could be done server side, giving you a much higher upper limit on number of players in the same game.
And lots more.For the gaming companies there is also a ton of advantages, like they will get a bigger chunk of money and piracy is basically impossible.The thing that scares me about this service most is that it actually could work.
That might not be right away and it will certainly take time to get the server infrastructure everywhere to cover millions of gamers out there, but issues like bandwidth will simply disappear in the near future and not be a long term show stopper.
And once the service becomes mainstream we might run into a dark age of video game history, as it will be completly in the publishers hands what games will be preserved and how.All that said, when the thing becomes successful Linux gaming might end up being a solved problem, as porting a simple videogame player over to Linux is much easier then porting hundreds of games.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432436</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31437538</id>
	<title>Re:Broadband Cap?</title>
	<author>cbhacking</author>
	<datestamp>1268323620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Going by other comments in the thread, it sounds like the stream is bout 1 Mbps (for perspective, that's in the ballpark of a Skype video call on my system). To put it another way, it'll eat a megabyte of cap every 8 seconds, 2 hours and 15 minutes of OnLive gaming will use up just over 1 GB of your bandwidth.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Going by other comments in the thread , it sounds like the stream is bout 1 Mbps ( for perspective , that 's in the ballpark of a Skype video call on my system ) .
To put it another way , it 'll eat a megabyte of cap every 8 seconds , 2 hours and 15 minutes of OnLive gaming will use up just over 1 GB of your bandwidth .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Going by other comments in the thread, it sounds like the stream is bout 1 Mbps (for perspective, that's in the ballpark of a Skype video call on my system).
To put it another way, it'll eat a megabyte of cap every 8 seconds, 2 hours and 15 minutes of OnLive gaming will use up just over 1 GB of your bandwidth.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432626</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31435188</id>
	<title>Re:Wow</title>
	<author>bemymonkey</author>
	<datestamp>1268338560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Damn, I wish I had mod points. To be honest, I'd forgotten all about the little console replacement box.</p><p>And, with a console-type controller, the input lag might not even be that noticable... Do you have any comments about that, by any chance?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Damn , I wish I had mod points .
To be honest , I 'd forgotten all about the little console replacement box.And , with a console-type controller , the input lag might not even be that noticable... Do you have any comments about that , by any chance ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Damn, I wish I had mod points.
To be honest, I'd forgotten all about the little console replacement box.And, with a console-type controller, the input lag might not even be that noticable... Do you have any comments about that, by any chance?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31434148</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433690</id>
	<title>Re:Monthly charges AND per game</title>
	<author>Ruede</author>
	<datestamp>1268233320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>you dont need an internet connection when you like to play singleplayer games.<br>you need one though when you want to do the same for playing it on onlive. so cut out the isp costs....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>you dont need an internet connection when you like to play singleplayer games.you need one though when you want to do the same for playing it on onlive .
so cut out the isp costs... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>you dont need an internet connection when you like to play singleplayer games.you need one though when you want to do the same for playing it on onlive.
so cut out the isp costs....</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432654</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31435736</id>
	<title>Re:Monthly charges AND per game</title>
	<author>quadrox</author>
	<datestamp>1268303100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>furthermore, for that $280 extra you get to have a powerful computer which can also be used for video editing (think vacation video etc.), image editing, software development, rendering, you name it.</p><p>With on-live you likely have a crappy computer (and you still NEED a computer, so maybe you don't save $280 AT ALL) which can mostly only be used for gaming (only through onlive) and light office use.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>furthermore , for that $ 280 extra you get to have a powerful computer which can also be used for video editing ( think vacation video etc .
) , image editing , software development , rendering , you name it.With on-live you likely have a crappy computer ( and you still NEED a computer , so maybe you do n't save $ 280 AT ALL ) which can mostly only be used for gaming ( only through onlive ) and light office use .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>furthermore, for that $280 extra you get to have a powerful computer which can also be used for video editing (think vacation video etc.
), image editing, software development, rendering, you name it.With on-live you likely have a crappy computer (and you still NEED a computer, so maybe you don't save $280 AT ALL) which can mostly only be used for gaming (only through onlive) and light office use.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432488</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432588</id>
	<title>Ubisoft + DRM</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268224200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wow, only $15 to not be able to play a game offline, and not even play it at all*</p><p>*only when DRM authorization servers are offline.  Uptime not guaranteed.  Some restrictions apply.  See retailer for details.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wow , only $ 15 to not be able to play a game offline , and not even play it at all * * only when DRM authorization servers are offline .
Uptime not guaranteed .
Some restrictions apply .
See retailer for details .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wow, only $15 to not be able to play a game offline, and not even play it at all**only when DRM authorization servers are offline.
Uptime not guaranteed.
Some restrictions apply.
See retailer for details.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31434766</id>
	<title>Re:guaranteed failure</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268245740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You're not secretly afraid of not being able to bit torrent your games anymore, are you? $14.95 a month is not that steep. I'm thinking here from an Australia perspective so US$14.95 would equate to roughly AUS$17 which is $3 less than the cost of a World of Fail subscription for 1 month. They are clearly basing their business model on Blizzard's business model, but don't have any additional software development or maintenance costs outside of their SDK and compression technology.</p><p>If OnLive can offer games at cheap prices, pre-render all games at high specs 100\% of the time and do it all at decent speeds it's a win for them. Sign me up. I don't mind paying for games.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You 're not secretly afraid of not being able to bit torrent your games anymore , are you ?
$ 14.95 a month is not that steep .
I 'm thinking here from an Australia perspective so US $ 14.95 would equate to roughly AUS $ 17 which is $ 3 less than the cost of a World of Fail subscription for 1 month .
They are clearly basing their business model on Blizzard 's business model , but do n't have any additional software development or maintenance costs outside of their SDK and compression technology.If OnLive can offer games at cheap prices , pre-render all games at high specs 100 \ % of the time and do it all at decent speeds it 's a win for them .
Sign me up .
I do n't mind paying for games .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You're not secretly afraid of not being able to bit torrent your games anymore, are you?
$14.95 a month is not that steep.
I'm thinking here from an Australia perspective so US$14.95 would equate to roughly AUS$17 which is $3 less than the cost of a World of Fail subscription for 1 month.
They are clearly basing their business model on Blizzard's business model, but don't have any additional software development or maintenance costs outside of their SDK and compression technology.If OnLive can offer games at cheap prices, pre-render all games at high specs 100\% of the time and do it all at decent speeds it's a win for them.
Sign me up.
I don't mind paying for games.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432540</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31435140</id>
	<title>Re:Can I HomeBrew this?</title>
	<author>bemymonkey</author>
	<datestamp>1268338020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Dude, there was actually a buzz a few months back about a piece of hardware that does exactly that... think it was a set top box of some kind that takes direct video from a console or gaming PC and streams over LAN.</p><p>I'm pretty sure it was on Engadget...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Dude , there was actually a buzz a few months back about a piece of hardware that does exactly that... think it was a set top box of some kind that takes direct video from a console or gaming PC and streams over LAN.I 'm pretty sure it was on Engadget.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dude, there was actually a buzz a few months back about a piece of hardware that does exactly that... think it was a set top box of some kind that takes direct video from a console or gaming PC and streams over LAN.I'm pretty sure it was on Engadget...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433774</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433090</id>
	<title>After looking at Steve Perlman's track record...</title>
	<author>cunina</author>
	<datestamp>1268228160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm sure OnLive will be every bit as successful as WebTV was.  And for the same reasons, too.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm sure OnLive will be every bit as successful as WebTV was .
And for the same reasons , too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm sure OnLive will be every bit as successful as WebTV was.
And for the same reasons, too.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432636</id>
	<title>Re:Well good luck to them</title>
	<author>DominicFalcon</author>
	<datestamp>1268224560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The cost isn't exactly ideal either. For their cost plus an estimated $6 per title for 2 weeks (competitive with brick and mortar game rentals) over two years, you could buy a console and a GameFly account for many of the same benefits. You wouldn't have the same game selection as with the PC, but you would avoid all the latency and a large number of the connection issues.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The cost is n't exactly ideal either .
For their cost plus an estimated $ 6 per title for 2 weeks ( competitive with brick and mortar game rentals ) over two years , you could buy a console and a GameFly account for many of the same benefits .
You would n't have the same game selection as with the PC , but you would avoid all the latency and a large number of the connection issues .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The cost isn't exactly ideal either.
For their cost plus an estimated $6 per title for 2 weeks (competitive with brick and mortar game rentals) over two years, you could buy a console and a GameFly account for many of the same benefits.
You wouldn't have the same game selection as with the PC, but you would avoid all the latency and a large number of the connection issues.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432522</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433002</id>
	<title>Seriously?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268227440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I want to meet people who think this OnLive Service has any chance of succeeding, so I can point and laugh at their faces.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I want to meet people who think this OnLive Service has any chance of succeeding , so I can point and laugh at their faces .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I want to meet people who think this OnLive Service has any chance of succeeding, so I can point and laugh at their faces.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432984</id>
	<title>Re:What a steal!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268227260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Then cough up the $50 per and buy new releases.  This is an alternative; you can rent them.</p><p>It amazes me that people even bother reselling games.  It's called disposable income for a reason.  If you can't afford to dispose of it then don't spend it.</p><p>That all being said, I'll continue to buy my games.  I'm not interested in this service, but there is no need to bitch and whine and moan about it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Then cough up the $ 50 per and buy new releases .
This is an alternative ; you can rent them.It amazes me that people even bother reselling games .
It 's called disposable income for a reason .
If you ca n't afford to dispose of it then do n't spend it.That all being said , I 'll continue to buy my games .
I 'm not interested in this service , but there is no need to bitch and whine and moan about it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Then cough up the $50 per and buy new releases.
This is an alternative; you can rent them.It amazes me that people even bother reselling games.
It's called disposable income for a reason.
If you can't afford to dispose of it then don't spend it.That all being said, I'll continue to buy my games.
I'm not interested in this service, but there is no need to bitch and whine and moan about it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432436</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432798</id>
	<title>a option for the ipad perhaps</title>
	<author>radradrobotank</author>
	<datestamp>1268225820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not a WOW player, would WOW be playable on a ipad using this service? WOW players are used to subscription services, whats a extra $14.95 a month if you can play WOW in the bath.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not a WOW player , would WOW be playable on a ipad using this service ?
WOW players are used to subscription services , whats a extra $ 14.95 a month if you can play WOW in the bath .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not a WOW player, would WOW be playable on a ipad using this service?
WOW players are used to subscription services, whats a extra $14.95 a month if you can play WOW in the bath.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31434122</id>
	<title>Re:Monthly charges AND per game</title>
	<author>h4rr4r</author>
	<datestamp>1268238000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How the hell?<br>A Core 2 Quad machine from dell just needing a decent video card ~$500. The video card ~$150.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How the hell ? A Core 2 Quad machine from dell just needing a decent video card ~ $ 500 .
The video card ~ $ 150 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How the hell?A Core 2 Quad machine from dell just needing a decent video card ~$500.
The video card ~$150.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432682</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31434094</id>
	<title>Re:What a steal!</title>
	<author>h4rr4r</author>
	<datestamp>1268237460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Doing nothing? They provide a valuable service by creating a secondary market that provides income that is used in the primary market.</p><p>They reduce waste.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Doing nothing ?
They provide a valuable service by creating a secondary market that provides income that is used in the primary market.They reduce waste .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Doing nothing?
They provide a valuable service by creating a secondary market that provides income that is used in the primary market.They reduce waste.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433152</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31435832</id>
	<title>Re:Hmmm ...</title>
	<author>RocketRabbit</author>
	<datestamp>1268304600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sounds more like you're spreading FUD.</p><p>An NDA isn't some magic space-time net that prevents things from happening.  They are broken all the time.</p><p>And I'll go one better - you don't need to know much about this service to see that it will just die in horrible flames of fail.  Especially when computers and video cards are cheaper and more powerful than ever.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sounds more like you 're spreading FUD.An NDA is n't some magic space-time net that prevents things from happening .
They are broken all the time.And I 'll go one better - you do n't need to know much about this service to see that it will just die in horrible flames of fail .
Especially when computers and video cards are cheaper and more powerful than ever .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sounds more like you're spreading FUD.An NDA isn't some magic space-time net that prevents things from happening.
They are broken all the time.And I'll go one better - you don't need to know much about this service to see that it will just die in horrible flames of fail.
Especially when computers and video cards are cheaper and more powerful than ever.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433116</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31436286</id>
	<title>Re:Can I HomeBrew this?</title>
	<author>bjoeg</author>
	<datestamp>1268312520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.streammygame.com/" title="streammygame.com" rel="nofollow">StreamMyGame.com</a> [streammygame.com]
<br> <br>
Though this is more like VNC, where your powerhouse PC run the game and stream video to and controls from another PC.</htmltext>
<tokenext>StreamMyGame.com [ streammygame.com ] Though this is more like VNC , where your powerhouse PC run the game and stream video to and controls from another PC .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>StreamMyGame.com [streammygame.com]
 
Though this is more like VNC, where your powerhouse PC run the game and stream video to and controls from another PC.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433774</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31434148</id>
	<title>Wow</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268238240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Lots of comments, and not a single person that's tried it.</p><p>Guess what.  I've tried it for some time now.</p><p>Yes, I'm posting as Anon because of the NDA.  I've got to watch this carefully...but...here's my take...</p><p>What I can say is, every one of you that is saying "but I want a gaming rig" will continue to have a gaming rig.  What you're not seeing is the ultra-small, ultra-cheap box that you can buy to replace your overpriced Xbox360/PS3.  It's not about playing it on your computer.  That's secondary.  It's about playing it as a console.  A console that you will never upgrade, will never overheat and have a RRoD, never have the console vendor screw you every 18 months with a cheaper version of the same hardware that you paid a fortune for, and the hardware inside never goes obsolete.  And a console that is affordable.  Think $49 for a game console, which just barely gets you a 8-year-old design, a PS2.  Not $299.  Parents are willing to pay less to have happy kids, and that's the market.  Not college teens, or older people with incomes - kids.  Think this through.  The whole "play it as a streaming movie on your computer" thing is secondary.  That's just a bonus.  None of you are looking at the segment of Mac users that can't play PC games.  Now they can.</p><p>Upgrades?  Why upgrade at all?  That's their problem.  No more figuring out video cards.  No more e-peen waving about overpriced, overbuilt systems.  No more hassle.  All of those upgrade issues go away - it's up to them to upgrade their systems to make it work.  Nevermind that the video card is probably a rendering engine ASIC attached to another ASIC that spits out a stream of compressed video.  Get those made as a single custom ASIC for a few bucks a chip and suddenly, memory and CPU are all you have to worry about.  Intel is already doing "lookie-me" with their 40+ core CPU.  Guess who'll probably line up to be the first customer there, eh?  Looks like that hardware is getting *cheaper*, not more expensive; the primary cost of a new system is approaching the point where the video card is overtaking even the CPU in some cases.  If the video card is fixed, never-changing, then what does that mean?  And if you control the ability to make it do "new" things, then does it really matter?</p><p>The problem they face is not the hardware, it's the software.  I can't say any more than that, other than their license fees must be outrageous.  Yet if they can pull off subscriptions for just $15, that tells me that they've got an ace up their sleeve.  And every time I look at it, it comes back to speculating as to how they are approaching their hardware.</p><p>Yes, the model has flaws - they really should do $25/month pricing and all-you-can-eat gaming (where it's a universal rent service, you pay a flat rent and get any game, so long as you pay rent), instead of $15 basic service followed by rent/buy online.  I don't disagree.  But don't go saying that it's 100\% flawed.  Look at it in terms of hassle vs. money, and think like a value buyer, one that lacks your technical background.  And suddenly, it makes alot more sense.  There are lots of gamers that buy gaming rigs without knowning shinola about how to build a computer.  And there are those who know exactly what they are doing.  The former are their target market; the later are competition.</p><p>Let's not count the chickens until they hatch.  Maybe they will die.  Maybe they will overturn game consoles as we know them today.  Maybe it changes and mutates into something else.  In the meantime, wait and see.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Lots of comments , and not a single person that 's tried it.Guess what .
I 've tried it for some time now.Yes , I 'm posting as Anon because of the NDA .
I 've got to watch this carefully...but...here 's my take...What I can say is , every one of you that is saying " but I want a gaming rig " will continue to have a gaming rig .
What you 're not seeing is the ultra-small , ultra-cheap box that you can buy to replace your overpriced Xbox360/PS3 .
It 's not about playing it on your computer .
That 's secondary .
It 's about playing it as a console .
A console that you will never upgrade , will never overheat and have a RRoD , never have the console vendor screw you every 18 months with a cheaper version of the same hardware that you paid a fortune for , and the hardware inside never goes obsolete .
And a console that is affordable .
Think $ 49 for a game console , which just barely gets you a 8-year-old design , a PS2 .
Not $ 299 .
Parents are willing to pay less to have happy kids , and that 's the market .
Not college teens , or older people with incomes - kids .
Think this through .
The whole " play it as a streaming movie on your computer " thing is secondary .
That 's just a bonus .
None of you are looking at the segment of Mac users that ca n't play PC games .
Now they can.Upgrades ?
Why upgrade at all ?
That 's their problem .
No more figuring out video cards .
No more e-peen waving about overpriced , overbuilt systems .
No more hassle .
All of those upgrade issues go away - it 's up to them to upgrade their systems to make it work .
Nevermind that the video card is probably a rendering engine ASIC attached to another ASIC that spits out a stream of compressed video .
Get those made as a single custom ASIC for a few bucks a chip and suddenly , memory and CPU are all you have to worry about .
Intel is already doing " lookie-me " with their 40 + core CPU .
Guess who 'll probably line up to be the first customer there , eh ?
Looks like that hardware is getting * cheaper * , not more expensive ; the primary cost of a new system is approaching the point where the video card is overtaking even the CPU in some cases .
If the video card is fixed , never-changing , then what does that mean ?
And if you control the ability to make it do " new " things , then does it really matter ? The problem they face is not the hardware , it 's the software .
I ca n't say any more than that , other than their license fees must be outrageous .
Yet if they can pull off subscriptions for just $ 15 , that tells me that they 've got an ace up their sleeve .
And every time I look at it , it comes back to speculating as to how they are approaching their hardware.Yes , the model has flaws - they really should do $ 25/month pricing and all-you-can-eat gaming ( where it 's a universal rent service , you pay a flat rent and get any game , so long as you pay rent ) , instead of $ 15 basic service followed by rent/buy online .
I do n't disagree .
But do n't go saying that it 's 100 \ % flawed .
Look at it in terms of hassle vs. money , and think like a value buyer , one that lacks your technical background .
And suddenly , it makes alot more sense .
There are lots of gamers that buy gaming rigs without knowning shinola about how to build a computer .
And there are those who know exactly what they are doing .
The former are their target market ; the later are competition.Let 's not count the chickens until they hatch .
Maybe they will die .
Maybe they will overturn game consoles as we know them today .
Maybe it changes and mutates into something else .
In the meantime , wait and see .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Lots of comments, and not a single person that's tried it.Guess what.
I've tried it for some time now.Yes, I'm posting as Anon because of the NDA.
I've got to watch this carefully...but...here's my take...What I can say is, every one of you that is saying "but I want a gaming rig" will continue to have a gaming rig.
What you're not seeing is the ultra-small, ultra-cheap box that you can buy to replace your overpriced Xbox360/PS3.
It's not about playing it on your computer.
That's secondary.
It's about playing it as a console.
A console that you will never upgrade, will never overheat and have a RRoD, never have the console vendor screw you every 18 months with a cheaper version of the same hardware that you paid a fortune for, and the hardware inside never goes obsolete.
And a console that is affordable.
Think $49 for a game console, which just barely gets you a 8-year-old design, a PS2.
Not $299.
Parents are willing to pay less to have happy kids, and that's the market.
Not college teens, or older people with incomes - kids.
Think this through.
The whole "play it as a streaming movie on your computer" thing is secondary.
That's just a bonus.
None of you are looking at the segment of Mac users that can't play PC games.
Now they can.Upgrades?
Why upgrade at all?
That's their problem.
No more figuring out video cards.
No more e-peen waving about overpriced, overbuilt systems.
No more hassle.
All of those upgrade issues go away - it's up to them to upgrade their systems to make it work.
Nevermind that the video card is probably a rendering engine ASIC attached to another ASIC that spits out a stream of compressed video.
Get those made as a single custom ASIC for a few bucks a chip and suddenly, memory and CPU are all you have to worry about.
Intel is already doing "lookie-me" with their 40+ core CPU.
Guess who'll probably line up to be the first customer there, eh?
Looks like that hardware is getting *cheaper*, not more expensive; the primary cost of a new system is approaching the point where the video card is overtaking even the CPU in some cases.
If the video card is fixed, never-changing, then what does that mean?
And if you control the ability to make it do "new" things, then does it really matter?The problem they face is not the hardware, it's the software.
I can't say any more than that, other than their license fees must be outrageous.
Yet if they can pull off subscriptions for just $15, that tells me that they've got an ace up their sleeve.
And every time I look at it, it comes back to speculating as to how they are approaching their hardware.Yes, the model has flaws - they really should do $25/month pricing and all-you-can-eat gaming (where it's a universal rent service, you pay a flat rent and get any game, so long as you pay rent), instead of $15 basic service followed by rent/buy online.
I don't disagree.
But don't go saying that it's 100\% flawed.
Look at it in terms of hassle vs. money, and think like a value buyer, one that lacks your technical background.
And suddenly, it makes alot more sense.
There are lots of gamers that buy gaming rigs without knowning shinola about how to build a computer.
And there are those who know exactly what they are doing.
The former are their target market; the later are competition.Let's not count the chickens until they hatch.
Maybe they will die.
Maybe they will overturn game consoles as we know them today.
Maybe it changes and mutates into something else.
In the meantime, wait and see.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31435930</id>
	<title>Re:What a steal!</title>
	<author>GigaplexNZ</author>
	<datestamp>1268306400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I bought Mount &amp; Blade, Psychonauts, Beyond Good &amp; Evil, and Torchlight all for $5 each on Steam. $20 for several hundred hours of gameplay. Best $20 I've ever spent.</p></div><p>I got about 10-15 hours tops out of Torchlight before it got boring grinding on the pointless random quests that spawn after defeating the main boss. There's only so much grinding one can do on a single player RPG.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I bought Mount &amp; Blade , Psychonauts , Beyond Good &amp; Evil , and Torchlight all for $ 5 each on Steam .
$ 20 for several hundred hours of gameplay .
Best $ 20 I 've ever spent.I got about 10-15 hours tops out of Torchlight before it got boring grinding on the pointless random quests that spawn after defeating the main boss .
There 's only so much grinding one can do on a single player RPG .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I bought Mount &amp; Blade, Psychonauts, Beyond Good &amp; Evil, and Torchlight all for $5 each on Steam.
$20 for several hundred hours of gameplay.
Best $20 I've ever spent.I got about 10-15 hours tops out of Torchlight before it got boring grinding on the pointless random quests that spawn after defeating the main boss.
There's only so much grinding one can do on a single player RPG.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31434290</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31434124</id>
	<title>Re:Monthly charges AND per game</title>
	<author>sanosuke001</author>
	<datestamp>1268238000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>How do you justify taking into account internet connectivity costs? If someone has a computer, there is a reasonable assumption (99.99\% of people with a computer) that they will require an internet connection regardless of whether they use this service or not. <br> <br>

Second, if you use this service, as long as you play one game every four months, you break even.<br> <br>

I still wouldn't use the system; I don't trust digital retailers. I like having control over the software I buy.</htmltext>
<tokenext>How do you justify taking into account internet connectivity costs ?
If someone has a computer , there is a reasonable assumption ( 99.99 \ % of people with a computer ) that they will require an internet connection regardless of whether they use this service or not .
Second , if you use this service , as long as you play one game every four months , you break even .
I still would n't use the system ; I do n't trust digital retailers .
I like having control over the software I buy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How do you justify taking into account internet connectivity costs?
If someone has a computer, there is a reasonable assumption (99.99\% of people with a computer) that they will require an internet connection regardless of whether they use this service or not.
Second, if you use this service, as long as you play one game every four months, you break even.
I still wouldn't use the system; I don't trust digital retailers.
I like having control over the software I buy.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432654</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31436124</id>
	<title>Rest of the world</title>
	<author>bjoeg</author>
	<datestamp>1268309940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Any ideas when the european launch will take off? Guess Australia and Asia has the same question.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Any ideas when the european launch will take off ?
Guess Australia and Asia has the same question .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Any ideas when the european launch will take off?
Guess Australia and Asia has the same question.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432488</id>
	<title>Monthly charges AND per game</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268223480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So I'm paying $15 a month so that I don't need to have a fancy computer to play all the latest games. Except I'm still paying for the games.</p><p>So, say a $1000 computer will last me about four years. I'd save about $280 using this service, but I'd have to get all my games through them, I'd only be able to play when my Internet works (wait, are they Ubisoft in disguise?), and the quality of my experience isn't guaranteed to be as good as playing on a copy running off my own machine.</p><p>You know what? I'll *pay* that $280, and gladly.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So I 'm paying $ 15 a month so that I do n't need to have a fancy computer to play all the latest games .
Except I 'm still paying for the games.So , say a $ 1000 computer will last me about four years .
I 'd save about $ 280 using this service , but I 'd have to get all my games through them , I 'd only be able to play when my Internet works ( wait , are they Ubisoft in disguise ?
) , and the quality of my experience is n't guaranteed to be as good as playing on a copy running off my own machine.You know what ?
I 'll * pay * that $ 280 , and gladly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So I'm paying $15 a month so that I don't need to have a fancy computer to play all the latest games.
Except I'm still paying for the games.So, say a $1000 computer will last me about four years.
I'd save about $280 using this service, but I'd have to get all my games through them, I'd only be able to play when my Internet works (wait, are they Ubisoft in disguise?
), and the quality of my experience isn't guaranteed to be as good as playing on a copy running off my own machine.You know what?
I'll *pay* that $280, and gladly.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432704</id>
	<title>OnFail Remote Gaming Service</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268225100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>These scam artists and clowns need to hurry up and fail and go away. Everyone is tired of hearing about this turd of a gaming service.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>These scam artists and clowns need to hurry up and fail and go away .
Everyone is tired of hearing about this turd of a gaming service .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>These scam artists and clowns need to hurry up and fail and go away.
Everyone is tired of hearing about this turd of a gaming service.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432522</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432540</id>
	<title>guaranteed failure</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268223840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>The business model is flawed from square-one. This is going to sink into bankruptcy very, very quickly. The overhead is pretty significant and profit is required rapidly to keep it afloat. The problem is that there is very little incentive for anyone to sign up. They are competing with consoles AND pc games, yet they only offer pc games. <strong>People that are inclined to play PC games already have hardware that can handle it.</strong> Those who are not inclined, are on consoles. If their hardware isn't state-of-the-art, they play older games and save for newer hardware. $14.95 a month is so steep, it is only really the type of subscription fee that could be paid by someone who has enough money to buy a computer serious enough to play contemporary games.<br> <br>This will join cue-cat, divx, and broadcast.com in the tomb of ideas that suckered investors yet were non-movers in the marketplace.<br> <br>Seth</htmltext>
<tokenext>The business model is flawed from square-one .
This is going to sink into bankruptcy very , very quickly .
The overhead is pretty significant and profit is required rapidly to keep it afloat .
The problem is that there is very little incentive for anyone to sign up .
They are competing with consoles AND pc games , yet they only offer pc games .
People that are inclined to play PC games already have hardware that can handle it .
Those who are not inclined , are on consoles .
If their hardware is n't state-of-the-art , they play older games and save for newer hardware .
$ 14.95 a month is so steep , it is only really the type of subscription fee that could be paid by someone who has enough money to buy a computer serious enough to play contemporary games .
This will join cue-cat , divx , and broadcast.com in the tomb of ideas that suckered investors yet were non-movers in the marketplace .
Seth</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The business model is flawed from square-one.
This is going to sink into bankruptcy very, very quickly.
The overhead is pretty significant and profit is required rapidly to keep it afloat.
The problem is that there is very little incentive for anyone to sign up.
They are competing with consoles AND pc games, yet they only offer pc games.
People that are inclined to play PC games already have hardware that can handle it.
Those who are not inclined, are on consoles.
If their hardware isn't state-of-the-art, they play older games and save for newer hardware.
$14.95 a month is so steep, it is only really the type of subscription fee that could be paid by someone who has enough money to buy a computer serious enough to play contemporary games.
This will join cue-cat, divx, and broadcast.com in the tomb of ideas that suckered investors yet were non-movers in the marketplace.
Seth</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433108</id>
	<title>They need to start cutting deals with ISPs</title>
	<author>Flipao</author>
	<datestamp>1268228280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>And get a cut off the broadband line rental, the monthly fee is far too high. I see far more future on Dave Perry's Gaikai service, it uses far less bandwidth, runs on Flash and is aimed at casual gamers. Onlive look far too greedy and are setting people's expectations far too high.</htmltext>
<tokenext>And get a cut off the broadband line rental , the monthly fee is far too high .
I see far more future on Dave Perry 's Gaikai service , it uses far less bandwidth , runs on Flash and is aimed at casual gamers .
Onlive look far too greedy and are setting people 's expectations far too high .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And get a cut off the broadband line rental, the monthly fee is far too high.
I see far more future on Dave Perry's Gaikai service, it uses far less bandwidth, runs on Flash and is aimed at casual gamers.
Onlive look far too greedy and are setting people's expectations far too high.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31435506</id>
	<title>Dear Marketing Drone</title>
	<author>mjwx</author>
	<datestamp>1268299200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Nice speach, but having spent the last week inducting a new "Business Development" (read: marketing and sales) person into our organisation my BS filter is set to extreme and not much of that got through.<br> <br>

You have re-iterated the marketing spiel without touching on the issues that are really worrying people (I.E. you deliberately avoided them). No mention on how you will deal with lag, slower network connections, Competition with RAM and CPU, different resolutions and bandwidth requirements.<br> <br>

Instead you waffle on about tired points (upgrading, oh the horror), attempting to degrade the entire community by using the lowest members as the standard.<br> <br>

Next we have obvious sales pitches that hide the real cost,<blockquote><div><p>subscriptions for just $15</p></div></blockquote><p>

Just $15, per month, plus a fee per game. Oh sorry ignore most of that, it's Just $15.</p><blockquote><div><p>that tells me that they've got an ace up their sleeve.</p></div></blockquote><p>

Or someone is telling porkies about the true capabilities of their system (the marketing guy said you flat out lie to win a tender, worry about fulfilling the actual work order after you've won it).<br> <br>

This is really just a poorly disguised piece of marketing fluff with no actual information so please troll elsewhere, whilst not all<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/.ers have such a highly tuned BS filter this week, most are in good working order.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Nice speach , but having spent the last week inducting a new " Business Development " ( read : marketing and sales ) person into our organisation my BS filter is set to extreme and not much of that got through .
You have re-iterated the marketing spiel without touching on the issues that are really worrying people ( I.E .
you deliberately avoided them ) .
No mention on how you will deal with lag , slower network connections , Competition with RAM and CPU , different resolutions and bandwidth requirements .
Instead you waffle on about tired points ( upgrading , oh the horror ) , attempting to degrade the entire community by using the lowest members as the standard .
Next we have obvious sales pitches that hide the real cost,subscriptions for just $ 15 Just $ 15 , per month , plus a fee per game .
Oh sorry ignore most of that , it 's Just $ 15.that tells me that they 've got an ace up their sleeve .
Or someone is telling porkies about the true capabilities of their system ( the marketing guy said you flat out lie to win a tender , worry about fulfilling the actual work order after you 've won it ) .
This is really just a poorly disguised piece of marketing fluff with no actual information so please troll elsewhere , whilst not all /.ers have such a highly tuned BS filter this week , most are in good working order .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nice speach, but having spent the last week inducting a new "Business Development" (read: marketing and sales) person into our organisation my BS filter is set to extreme and not much of that got through.
You have re-iterated the marketing spiel without touching on the issues that are really worrying people (I.E.
you deliberately avoided them).
No mention on how you will deal with lag, slower network connections, Competition with RAM and CPU, different resolutions and bandwidth requirements.
Instead you waffle on about tired points (upgrading, oh the horror), attempting to degrade the entire community by using the lowest members as the standard.
Next we have obvious sales pitches that hide the real cost,subscriptions for just $15

Just $15, per month, plus a fee per game.
Oh sorry ignore most of that, it's Just $15.that tells me that they've got an ace up their sleeve.
Or someone is telling porkies about the true capabilities of their system (the marketing guy said you flat out lie to win a tender, worry about fulfilling the actual work order after you've won it).
This is really just a poorly disguised piece of marketing fluff with no actual information so please troll elsewhere, whilst not all /.ers have such a highly tuned BS filter this week, most are in good working order.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31434148</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432730</id>
	<title>Re:Monthly charges AND per game</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268225220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You're doing it wrong.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You 're doing it wrong .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You're doing it wrong.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432682</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433474</id>
	<title>Re:guaranteed failure</title>
	<author>AmberBlackCat</author>
	<datestamp>1268230980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I have a $400 laptop with integrated graphics. So no Duke Nukem Forever for me. But I have an internet connection and can possibly pay $15 a month. If the service actually worked as its advertisements claim, it would be something to think about. So the point of all that is, while the people who play PC games tend to already have the hardware for it, this could appeal to people who would play such games but don't have the hardware for it. But I think they should ask Vonage what happens to companies whose service depends on your internet connection. And I personally like to buy things, not rent them.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have a $ 400 laptop with integrated graphics .
So no Duke Nukem Forever for me .
But I have an internet connection and can possibly pay $ 15 a month .
If the service actually worked as its advertisements claim , it would be something to think about .
So the point of all that is , while the people who play PC games tend to already have the hardware for it , this could appeal to people who would play such games but do n't have the hardware for it .
But I think they should ask Vonage what happens to companies whose service depends on your internet connection .
And I personally like to buy things , not rent them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have a $400 laptop with integrated graphics.
So no Duke Nukem Forever for me.
But I have an internet connection and can possibly pay $15 a month.
If the service actually worked as its advertisements claim, it would be something to think about.
So the point of all that is, while the people who play PC games tend to already have the hardware for it, this could appeal to people who would play such games but don't have the hardware for it.
But I think they should ask Vonage what happens to companies whose service depends on your internet connection.
And I personally like to buy things, not rent them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432540</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432870</id>
	<title>What am I missing</title>
	<author>GKevlin</author>
	<datestamp>1268226360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>On newer HTPC's (which if they are using 720p seem to be the target for a service like this) Adobe flash and other applications can run into CPU bottlenecks rather easily.  Even if there are a whole lot of people out there that want this service, it seems entirely dependent on OnLives ability to squeeze blood from the stones that are super-efficient processors like Intel ATOMs.  Though, Adobe has shown cleverness in shifting some of the load onto GPUs in Flash 10.1 beta, will Onlive be able to deal with that stacked with network latency as huge bottlenecks.</htmltext>
<tokenext>On newer HTPC 's ( which if they are using 720p seem to be the target for a service like this ) Adobe flash and other applications can run into CPU bottlenecks rather easily .
Even if there are a whole lot of people out there that want this service , it seems entirely dependent on OnLives ability to squeeze blood from the stones that are super-efficient processors like Intel ATOMs .
Though , Adobe has shown cleverness in shifting some of the load onto GPUs in Flash 10.1 beta , will Onlive be able to deal with that stacked with network latency as huge bottlenecks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>On newer HTPC's (which if they are using 720p seem to be the target for a service like this) Adobe flash and other applications can run into CPU bottlenecks rather easily.
Even if there are a whole lot of people out there that want this service, it seems entirely dependent on OnLives ability to squeeze blood from the stones that are super-efficient processors like Intel ATOMs.
Though, Adobe has shown cleverness in shifting some of the load onto GPUs in Flash 10.1 beta, will Onlive be able to deal with that stacked with network latency as huge bottlenecks.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31434778</id>
	<title>Re:What a steal!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268245860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Better yet, there will be no bad mods for onlive games.</p><p>Like slashdot, where no mods can go wrong.</p><p>+1 kissing up</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Better yet , there will be no bad mods for onlive games.Like slashdot , where no mods can go wrong. + 1 kissing up</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Better yet, there will be no bad mods for onlive games.Like slashdot, where no mods can go wrong.+1 kissing up</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432436</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432802</id>
	<title>Re:What a steal!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268225820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Zero control over my purchases? Zero re-sale value when I'm tired of a game? Zero incentive for publishers to discount their titles? Zero bandwidth &amp; gaming ability remaining once I hit my cap? Zero ability to take my games with me once the company goes belly-up (and boy, will it ever...)? All for the low, low price of $15/mo? Sign me up!"</p><p>It's the same with Netflix. Unless you are illegally ripping the DVDs.  You aren't buying games, you are renting them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Zero control over my purchases ?
Zero re-sale value when I 'm tired of a game ?
Zero incentive for publishers to discount their titles ?
Zero bandwidth &amp; gaming ability remaining once I hit my cap ?
Zero ability to take my games with me once the company goes belly-up ( and boy , will it ever... ) ?
All for the low , low price of $ 15/mo ?
Sign me up !
" It 's the same with Netflix .
Unless you are illegally ripping the DVDs .
You are n't buying games , you are renting them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Zero control over my purchases?
Zero re-sale value when I'm tired of a game?
Zero incentive for publishers to discount their titles?
Zero bandwidth &amp; gaming ability remaining once I hit my cap?
Zero ability to take my games with me once the company goes belly-up (and boy, will it ever...)?
All for the low, low price of $15/mo?
Sign me up!
"It's the same with Netflix.
Unless you are illegally ripping the DVDs.
You aren't buying games, you are renting them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432436</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432694</id>
	<title>Do not want</title>
	<author>dave562</author>
	<datestamp>1268224980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm probably missing something here, but why would I want to pay $15 for the privledge of buying software from OnLive?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm probably missing something here , but why would I want to pay $ 15 for the privledge of buying software from OnLive ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm probably missing something here, but why would I want to pay $15 for the privledge of buying software from OnLive?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432770</id>
	<title>Re:Do not want</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268225580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Because they REALLY like your money.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Because they REALLY like your money .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because they REALLY like your money.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432694</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433282</id>
	<title>Re:Monthly charges AND per game</title>
	<author>shutdown -p now</author>
	<datestamp>1268229480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I'd have to get all my games through them, I'd only be able to play when my Internet works</p> </div><p>Not just any kind of Internet, either. At the moment, they're a requiring 5Mbps connection (they say they will also support a reduced-quality mode that runs on 1.5Mbps).</p><p>Which also leads me to ask: how much traffic will this thing actually eat? And how likely would be a person who games reasonably often to run into their ISP's cap (where such are common)?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd have to get all my games through them , I 'd only be able to play when my Internet works Not just any kind of Internet , either .
At the moment , they 're a requiring 5Mbps connection ( they say they will also support a reduced-quality mode that runs on 1.5Mbps ) .Which also leads me to ask : how much traffic will this thing actually eat ?
And how likely would be a person who games reasonably often to run into their ISP 's cap ( where such are common ) ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd have to get all my games through them, I'd only be able to play when my Internet works Not just any kind of Internet, either.
At the moment, they're a requiring 5Mbps connection (they say they will also support a reduced-quality mode that runs on 1.5Mbps).Which also leads me to ask: how much traffic will this thing actually eat?
And how likely would be a person who games reasonably often to run into their ISP's cap (where such are common)?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432488</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433046</id>
	<title>I've seen a demo recently -- it was pretty cool!</title>
	<author>Thagg</author>
	<datestamp>1268227860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't know if I'd use this for games, but I saw a demo of this running some very expensive software recently, and it was pretty amazing.  If you could rent time on the software at a reasonable price, and get good performance over OnLive, it might be worthwhile.</p><p>Say you are a CAD designer.  It turns out that there are six or seven high-end CAD packages, that each have their strengths and weaknesses.  If you could rent the one you need for a particular job, it might be a good deal, rather than fork out $5000 per package.</p><p>It does require that the software vendors allow this kind of thing -- after all, they win when somebody buys there software, whether the person uses it every day or just a few times a year.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't know if I 'd use this for games , but I saw a demo of this running some very expensive software recently , and it was pretty amazing .
If you could rent time on the software at a reasonable price , and get good performance over OnLive , it might be worthwhile.Say you are a CAD designer .
It turns out that there are six or seven high-end CAD packages , that each have their strengths and weaknesses .
If you could rent the one you need for a particular job , it might be a good deal , rather than fork out $ 5000 per package.It does require that the software vendors allow this kind of thing -- after all , they win when somebody buys there software , whether the person uses it every day or just a few times a year .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't know if I'd use this for games, but I saw a demo of this running some very expensive software recently, and it was pretty amazing.
If you could rent time on the software at a reasonable price, and get good performance over OnLive, it might be worthwhile.Say you are a CAD designer.
It turns out that there are six or seven high-end CAD packages, that each have their strengths and weaknesses.
If you could rent the one you need for a particular job, it might be a good deal, rather than fork out $5000 per package.It does require that the software vendors allow this kind of thing -- after all, they win when somebody buys there software, whether the person uses it every day or just a few times a year.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433390</id>
	<title>Re:Broadband Cap?</title>
	<author>Sycraft-fu</author>
	<datestamp>1268230380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It seems to use 1mbps for their "HD" stream, which is 720p (sorta, rather low quality 720p from the look of it). For that they currently say you need 5mbps, earlier it was seeming they were saying 10mbps. It's possible they refined things, but more likely that they've just decided that excluded too many potential customers and will screw people with worse service.</p><p>So the 1mbps thing seems to be pretty solid in terms of usage. That translates to about 440 megabytes per hour of gameplay.</p><p>As for speed you'll need I don't think there'll be a hard and fast answer. The faster your net, the lower the lag. Remember that with data transfer latency isn't ping time, it is ping time PLUS the time it takes to send all the data you need. So assume you are sending 100kbits of data. That'd take 100ms on a 1mbps line, but only 10ms on a 10mbps line.</p><p>Figure if they are saying 5mbps that's the minimum that'd work and figure 10mbps for a more realistic good experience (since we all know lines have hiccups and slowdowns).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It seems to use 1mbps for their " HD " stream , which is 720p ( sorta , rather low quality 720p from the look of it ) .
For that they currently say you need 5mbps , earlier it was seeming they were saying 10mbps .
It 's possible they refined things , but more likely that they 've just decided that excluded too many potential customers and will screw people with worse service.So the 1mbps thing seems to be pretty solid in terms of usage .
That translates to about 440 megabytes per hour of gameplay.As for speed you 'll need I do n't think there 'll be a hard and fast answer .
The faster your net , the lower the lag .
Remember that with data transfer latency is n't ping time , it is ping time PLUS the time it takes to send all the data you need .
So assume you are sending 100kbits of data .
That 'd take 100ms on a 1mbps line , but only 10ms on a 10mbps line.Figure if they are saying 5mbps that 's the minimum that 'd work and figure 10mbps for a more realistic good experience ( since we all know lines have hiccups and slowdowns ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It seems to use 1mbps for their "HD" stream, which is 720p (sorta, rather low quality 720p from the look of it).
For that they currently say you need 5mbps, earlier it was seeming they were saying 10mbps.
It's possible they refined things, but more likely that they've just decided that excluded too many potential customers and will screw people with worse service.So the 1mbps thing seems to be pretty solid in terms of usage.
That translates to about 440 megabytes per hour of gameplay.As for speed you'll need I don't think there'll be a hard and fast answer.
The faster your net, the lower the lag.
Remember that with data transfer latency isn't ping time, it is ping time PLUS the time it takes to send all the data you need.
So assume you are sending 100kbits of data.
That'd take 100ms on a 1mbps line, but only 10ms on a 10mbps line.Figure if they are saying 5mbps that's the minimum that'd work and figure 10mbps for a more realistic good experience (since we all know lines have hiccups and slowdowns).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432626</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31434180</id>
	<title>Re:Not the point of onlive</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268238540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Instead of you having to upgrade your computer every few years, and having to live with a sub-par gaming machine towards the end of its effective life cycle, onlive's servers will be continually upgraded to keep up with the games.</p></div><p>You are assuming that the onlive experience will be better than a sub-par gaming machine. It won't be.<br>A $600 desktop will easily be able to run crysis at a higher resolution and a higher frame rate, without the input lag.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Instead of you having to upgrade your computer every few years , and having to live with a sub-par gaming machine towards the end of its effective life cycle , onlive 's servers will be continually upgraded to keep up with the games.You are assuming that the onlive experience will be better than a sub-par gaming machine .
It wo n't be.A $ 600 desktop will easily be able to run crysis at a higher resolution and a higher frame rate , without the input lag .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Instead of you having to upgrade your computer every few years, and having to live with a sub-par gaming machine towards the end of its effective life cycle, onlive's servers will be continually upgraded to keep up with the games.You are assuming that the onlive experience will be better than a sub-par gaming machine.
It won't be.A $600 desktop will easily be able to run crysis at a higher resolution and a higher frame rate, without the input lag.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433928</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31435908</id>
	<title>I doubt it can be done</title>
	<author>SmallFurryCreature</author>
	<datestamp>1268305860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We are talking about hosting here, pure and simple. You rent a server, and that costs money. Oh you can get a 256mb VPS for next to nothing, but that is because that is cheap to setup. HD space, traffic, these are cheap to scale up. MEMORY is the killer for servers. If you want 4gb on a VPS, then that must be machine with X*4gb for every VPS that runs on it, and memory scales badly with price. 16gb is NOT 4x4gb price.
</p><p>So, how are they going to run what is effectively a PC for 14.95 a month? How are you going to fit a 1gb vid card and 2gb memory and a dualcore in a rack and not get killed by the location costs alone? Especially since they got to run windows for each server.
</p><p>Now, they can save some costs because not to many people will game 24/7, so they can share the same server across multiple accounts BUT because they themselves admit you MUST be within a certain distance from the server, they will also have a lot of low times, when people are not playing but their servers are taking up space and getting old.
</p><p>And the fee is X for the box, 14.95 for the subscription, 30 for the internet connection and then you still don't have any actual games...
</p><p>And lets see, 299 for a regular console. Substract the box price, leaves 250. That is just 16 months before you break even. You then own your regular console, and have absolutely NOTHING with this service.
</p><p>No, it is an interesting idea, but I doubt it is going to work. The hardcore gamers want the performance of the local hardware and for the casual gamers, paying a fixed fee every month, having to buy a piece of hardware, extra fees for the games... that is just to much hassle.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We are talking about hosting here , pure and simple .
You rent a server , and that costs money .
Oh you can get a 256mb VPS for next to nothing , but that is because that is cheap to setup .
HD space , traffic , these are cheap to scale up .
MEMORY is the killer for servers .
If you want 4gb on a VPS , then that must be machine with X * 4gb for every VPS that runs on it , and memory scales badly with price .
16gb is NOT 4x4gb price .
So , how are they going to run what is effectively a PC for 14.95 a month ?
How are you going to fit a 1gb vid card and 2gb memory and a dualcore in a rack and not get killed by the location costs alone ?
Especially since they got to run windows for each server .
Now , they can save some costs because not to many people will game 24/7 , so they can share the same server across multiple accounts BUT because they themselves admit you MUST be within a certain distance from the server , they will also have a lot of low times , when people are not playing but their servers are taking up space and getting old .
And the fee is X for the box , 14.95 for the subscription , 30 for the internet connection and then you still do n't have any actual games.. . And lets see , 299 for a regular console .
Substract the box price , leaves 250 .
That is just 16 months before you break even .
You then own your regular console , and have absolutely NOTHING with this service .
No , it is an interesting idea , but I doubt it is going to work .
The hardcore gamers want the performance of the local hardware and for the casual gamers , paying a fixed fee every month , having to buy a piece of hardware , extra fees for the games... that is just to much hassle .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We are talking about hosting here, pure and simple.
You rent a server, and that costs money.
Oh you can get a 256mb VPS for next to nothing, but that is because that is cheap to setup.
HD space, traffic, these are cheap to scale up.
MEMORY is the killer for servers.
If you want 4gb on a VPS, then that must be machine with X*4gb for every VPS that runs on it, and memory scales badly with price.
16gb is NOT 4x4gb price.
So, how are they going to run what is effectively a PC for 14.95 a month?
How are you going to fit a 1gb vid card and 2gb memory and a dualcore in a rack and not get killed by the location costs alone?
Especially since they got to run windows for each server.
Now, they can save some costs because not to many people will game 24/7, so they can share the same server across multiple accounts BUT because they themselves admit you MUST be within a certain distance from the server, they will also have a lot of low times, when people are not playing but their servers are taking up space and getting old.
And the fee is X for the box, 14.95 for the subscription, 30 for the internet connection and then you still don't have any actual games...
And lets see, 299 for a regular console.
Substract the box price, leaves 250.
That is just 16 months before you break even.
You then own your regular console, and have absolutely NOTHING with this service.
No, it is an interesting idea, but I doubt it is going to work.
The hardcore gamers want the performance of the local hardware and for the casual gamers, paying a fixed fee every month, having to buy a piece of hardware, extra fees for the games... that is just to much hassle.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31434148</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31437622</id>
	<title>Re:What a steal!</title>
	<author>rgviza</author>
	<datestamp>1268323860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Considering the average title has 8-12 hours of play time, you could easily play 4 games a month to completion. TBH I usually shelve a game and never play it again once I'm done. You pay $60 for a new game, and might get $10 back when you sell it, if you are lucky. If you don't sell it, within a couple of years, the OS will have moved on and it won't work any more.</p><p>The economics, at least for someone like me, are pretty compelling. $15 a mo is a bargain, \_if the service works\_ which it doesn't.</p><p>The idea is based on a flawed concept and I don't care how you slice it, it will never work. They should move to a model where you download the real game with a module added that calls home each time to make sure you are subscribed. Game client executables can't run remotely and give you anything resembling performance, I don't care if you have a 1Tbps connection. The latency will screw you if it's any more than 10ms. You get that from 3-4 hops.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Considering the average title has 8-12 hours of play time , you could easily play 4 games a month to completion .
TBH I usually shelve a game and never play it again once I 'm done .
You pay $ 60 for a new game , and might get $ 10 back when you sell it , if you are lucky .
If you do n't sell it , within a couple of years , the OS will have moved on and it wo n't work any more.The economics , at least for someone like me , are pretty compelling .
$ 15 a mo is a bargain , \ _if the service works \ _ which it does n't.The idea is based on a flawed concept and I do n't care how you slice it , it will never work .
They should move to a model where you download the real game with a module added that calls home each time to make sure you are subscribed .
Game client executables ca n't run remotely and give you anything resembling performance , I do n't care if you have a 1Tbps connection .
The latency will screw you if it 's any more than 10ms .
You get that from 3-4 hops .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Considering the average title has 8-12 hours of play time, you could easily play 4 games a month to completion.
TBH I usually shelve a game and never play it again once I'm done.
You pay $60 for a new game, and might get $10 back when you sell it, if you are lucky.
If you don't sell it, within a couple of years, the OS will have moved on and it won't work any more.The economics, at least for someone like me, are pretty compelling.
$15 a mo is a bargain, \_if the service works\_ which it doesn't.The idea is based on a flawed concept and I don't care how you slice it, it will never work.
They should move to a model where you download the real game with a module added that calls home each time to make sure you are subscribed.
Game client executables can't run remotely and give you anything resembling performance, I don't care if you have a 1Tbps connection.
The latency will screw you if it's any more than 10ms.
You get that from 3-4 hops.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432436</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432628</id>
	<title>partner up?</title>
	<author>akabigbro</author>
	<datestamp>1268224440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They should think about partnering up with the developers of Google Chrome OS. This seems like a match made in heaven.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They should think about partnering up with the developers of Google Chrome OS .
This seems like a match made in heaven .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They should think about partnering up with the developers of Google Chrome OS.
This seems like a match made in heaven.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31436342</id>
	<title>Re:Can I HomeBrew this?</title>
	<author>grumbel</author>
	<datestamp>1268313480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You can't homebrew this easily, at least not when you want quality gaming. One problem is that all normal video compression is mostly useless for this task, as the latency is to high, they have developed special algorithms for the task to keep the latency extremely low. The second problem is that they have their special compression stuff in hardware, not software, as normal general purpose hardware is just to slow for the tasks. So to replicate this you wouldn't just need a gaming box, but also a second powerful box just for the compression. So it would be easier to just buy a gaming laptop.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You ca n't homebrew this easily , at least not when you want quality gaming .
One problem is that all normal video compression is mostly useless for this task , as the latency is to high , they have developed special algorithms for the task to keep the latency extremely low .
The second problem is that they have their special compression stuff in hardware , not software , as normal general purpose hardware is just to slow for the tasks .
So to replicate this you would n't just need a gaming box , but also a second powerful box just for the compression .
So it would be easier to just buy a gaming laptop .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can't homebrew this easily, at least not when you want quality gaming.
One problem is that all normal video compression is mostly useless for this task, as the latency is to high, they have developed special algorithms for the task to keep the latency extremely low.
The second problem is that they have their special compression stuff in hardware, not software, as normal general purpose hardware is just to slow for the tasks.
So to replicate this you wouldn't just need a gaming box, but also a second powerful box just for the compression.
So it would be easier to just buy a gaming laptop.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433774</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31436284</id>
	<title>Re:What a steal!</title>
	<author>grumbel</author>
	<datestamp>1268312520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I don't think you understand that publishers have a much greater incentive to discount their titles just like they do on Valve's steam</p></div><p>Lets see, Dirt 2 from Steam costs 50EUR, from Amazon.de it costs 30EUR, Assassins Creed 2 is 50EUR vs 45EUR, Orange Box is 30EUR vs 20EUR and so on. Steam is almost always more expensive then ordering something boxed from Amazon.de and of course Amazon.de throws in free shipping for everything above 20EUR. As I understand it the situation is a little less worse in the USA then it is in Germany, but still, Steam isn't exactly cheap. And that was is saved on shipping goes straight to the developers, not to a price discount.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't think you understand that publishers have a much greater incentive to discount their titles just like they do on Valve 's steamLets see , Dirt 2 from Steam costs 50EUR , from Amazon.de it costs 30EUR , Assassins Creed 2 is 50EUR vs 45EUR , Orange Box is 30EUR vs 20EUR and so on .
Steam is almost always more expensive then ordering something boxed from Amazon.de and of course Amazon.de throws in free shipping for everything above 20EUR .
As I understand it the situation is a little less worse in the USA then it is in Germany , but still , Steam is n't exactly cheap .
And that was is saved on shipping goes straight to the developers , not to a price discount .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't think you understand that publishers have a much greater incentive to discount their titles just like they do on Valve's steamLets see, Dirt 2 from Steam costs 50EUR, from Amazon.de it costs 30EUR, Assassins Creed 2 is 50EUR vs 45EUR, Orange Box is 30EUR vs 20EUR and so on.
Steam is almost always more expensive then ordering something boxed from Amazon.de and of course Amazon.de throws in free shipping for everything above 20EUR.
As I understand it the situation is a little less worse in the USA then it is in Germany, but still, Steam isn't exactly cheap.
And that was is saved on shipping goes straight to the developers, not to a price discount.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433152</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31436746</id>
	<title>Re:Wow</title>
	<author>mister\_playboy</author>
	<datestamp>1268318220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>From reading your posts in this thread, it is very obvious you are either an employee of, paid shill for, or investor in OnLive.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>From reading your posts in this thread , it is very obvious you are either an employee of , paid shill for , or investor in OnLive .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From reading your posts in this thread, it is very obvious you are either an employee of, paid shill for, or investor in OnLive.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31434712</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433116</id>
	<title>Re:Hmmm ...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268228340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What reviews of service?  Stop spreading your garbage FUD.  There were no reviews allowed due to the NDA for beta users.

</p><p>The only review I ever read was done by a guy who wasn't authorized to use the service, using a friend's account, and played from twice the recommended distance to one of the game servers.

</p><p>Half the time the servers refused to let him on because his lag was too high.  And yet despite being 2000 miles away and being constantly warned of poor performance and lag by the servers, he *still* had a positive experience with several of the games.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What reviews of service ?
Stop spreading your garbage FUD .
There were no reviews allowed due to the NDA for beta users .
The only review I ever read was done by a guy who was n't authorized to use the service , using a friend 's account , and played from twice the recommended distance to one of the game servers .
Half the time the servers refused to let him on because his lag was too high .
And yet despite being 2000 miles away and being constantly warned of poor performance and lag by the servers , he * still * had a positive experience with several of the games .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What reviews of service?
Stop spreading your garbage FUD.
There were no reviews allowed due to the NDA for beta users.
The only review I ever read was done by a guy who wasn't authorized to use the service, using a friend's account, and played from twice the recommended distance to one of the game servers.
Half the time the servers refused to let him on because his lag was too high.
And yet despite being 2000 miles away and being constantly warned of poor performance and lag by the servers, he *still* had a positive experience with several of the games.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432424</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31434698</id>
	<title>Re:It took me awhile...</title>
	<author>sonicmerlin</author>
	<datestamp>1268244600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Actually I remember a video in which Perlman himself has said the lack of piracy is a questionable benefit because you don't really know if the pirates would have bought the game in the first place.  The guy's not an idiotic game company CEO.  His pitch to the publishers has mainly been about how they don't have to pay royalties to retailers and they won't lose money to game resell channels.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually I remember a video in which Perlman himself has said the lack of piracy is a questionable benefit because you do n't really know if the pirates would have bought the game in the first place .
The guy 's not an idiotic game company CEO .
His pitch to the publishers has mainly been about how they do n't have to pay royalties to retailers and they wo n't lose money to game resell channels .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually I remember a video in which Perlman himself has said the lack of piracy is a questionable benefit because you don't really know if the pirates would have bought the game in the first place.
The guy's not an idiotic game company CEO.
His pitch to the publishers has mainly been about how they don't have to pay royalties to retailers and they won't lose money to game resell channels.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433438</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433798</id>
	<title>Re:Monthly charges AND per game</title>
	<author>Suddenly\_Dead</author>
	<datestamp>1268234520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My last major upgrade was in 2007. It wasn't super high-end; it's a Core 2 Duo E6600 and a Geforce 8800 GTS with a cheap motherboard (P5B-E) and <em>okay</em> RAM. Everything still runs more than acceptably. I've also overclocked the CPU and GPU moderately, which brings most new games past "more than acceptably" and up to "runs on High at 1920x1080 at more than 50 FPS". This is probably the longest I've had a PC last at this level of performance.</p><p><em>What</em> are you buying every year?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My last major upgrade was in 2007 .
It was n't super high-end ; it 's a Core 2 Duo E6600 and a Geforce 8800 GTS with a cheap motherboard ( P5B-E ) and okay RAM .
Everything still runs more than acceptably .
I 've also overclocked the CPU and GPU moderately , which brings most new games past " more than acceptably " and up to " runs on High at 1920x1080 at more than 50 FPS " .
This is probably the longest I 've had a PC last at this level of performance.What are you buying every year ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My last major upgrade was in 2007.
It wasn't super high-end; it's a Core 2 Duo E6600 and a Geforce 8800 GTS with a cheap motherboard (P5B-E) and okay RAM.
Everything still runs more than acceptably.
I've also overclocked the CPU and GPU moderately, which brings most new games past "more than acceptably" and up to "runs on High at 1920x1080 at more than 50 FPS".
This is probably the longest I've had a PC last at this level of performance.What are you buying every year?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432682</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31434082</id>
	<title>Re:What a steal!</title>
	<author>h4rr4r</author>
	<datestamp>1268237340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Of course people resell games, it gets them more disposable income to spend on more games. What part of this confuses you?</p><p>This service charges 15/month then still wants you to buy the game.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Of course people resell games , it gets them more disposable income to spend on more games .
What part of this confuses you ? This service charges 15/month then still wants you to buy the game .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Of course people resell games, it gets them more disposable income to spend on more games.
What part of this confuses you?This service charges 15/month then still wants you to buy the game.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432984</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432856</id>
	<title>Re:What a steal!</title>
	<author>Killer Orca</author>
	<datestamp>1268226240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>It's the same with Netflix. Unless you are illegally ripping the DVDs.  You aren't buying games, you are renting them.</p></div><p>Yes but Netflix only charges a monthly fee, there is no additional fees based on the amount of movies you rent.  Except for BluRay, those are just $1 extra tacked onto the rental fee and it isn't per-movie.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's the same with Netflix .
Unless you are illegally ripping the DVDs .
You are n't buying games , you are renting them.Yes but Netflix only charges a monthly fee , there is no additional fees based on the amount of movies you rent .
Except for BluRay , those are just $ 1 extra tacked onto the rental fee and it is n't per-movie .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's the same with Netflix.
Unless you are illegally ripping the DVDs.
You aren't buying games, you are renting them.Yes but Netflix only charges a monthly fee, there is no additional fees based on the amount of movies you rent.
Except for BluRay, those are just $1 extra tacked onto the rental fee and it isn't per-movie.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432802</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432832</id>
	<title>Re:Well good luck to them</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268226060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No-one cares if it delivers the experience of a $2000 system or the experience of a $200 system. What they care about are games.</p><p>What OnLive really needs to do is to sign up with Nintendo, Sony and Microsoft to run games from Wii, PS3 and XBOX360. Good fucking luck.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No-one cares if it delivers the experience of a $ 2000 system or the experience of a $ 200 system .
What they care about are games.What OnLive really needs to do is to sign up with Nintendo , Sony and Microsoft to run games from Wii , PS3 and XBOX360 .
Good fucking luck .
: - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No-one cares if it delivers the experience of a $2000 system or the experience of a $200 system.
What they care about are games.What OnLive really needs to do is to sign up with Nintendo, Sony and Microsoft to run games from Wii, PS3 and XBOX360.
Good fucking luck.
:-)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432522</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433132</id>
	<title>Re:Wrong business model</title>
	<author>dangitman</author>
	<datestamp>1268228460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Games should be distributed for free, and gamers should pay a monthly fee for each game to access the servers.</p></div><p>Why, because you say so? I'd much rather buy games and not have to pay monthly fees. In fact, that's what I do. I don't go near any games that require monthly fees to play online.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Games should be distributed for free , and gamers should pay a monthly fee for each game to access the servers.Why , because you say so ?
I 'd much rather buy games and not have to pay monthly fees .
In fact , that 's what I do .
I do n't go near any games that require monthly fees to play online .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Games should be distributed for free, and gamers should pay a monthly fee for each game to access the servers.Why, because you say so?
I'd much rather buy games and not have to pay monthly fees.
In fact, that's what I do.
I don't go near any games that require monthly fees to play online.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432448</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432552</id>
	<title>Cloud Computing</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268223960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I can't wait for this newest bubble to burst.  Thin clients haven't really been embraced for office apps where 95\% of the functionality can run in the browser and it will work reasonably well.  How can you expect to compete with native apps on PCs where performance is cheaply had so long as you don't need to run at the highest settings...or on consoles which look almost as good?  The problem for game companies is that many folks have realized that they can play year old games on cheap new hardware to great effect...after the game is reduced to 50\%.</p><p>I don't see the market niche.  Hardcore gamers won't touch it.  Casual gamers will baulk at the $15/month by in BEFORE you get the privilege to buy/rent a game.  So, who will want this unless the games are steeply discounted?  $180/year could be well spent on local hardware upgrades.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I ca n't wait for this newest bubble to burst .
Thin clients have n't really been embraced for office apps where 95 \ % of the functionality can run in the browser and it will work reasonably well .
How can you expect to compete with native apps on PCs where performance is cheaply had so long as you do n't need to run at the highest settings...or on consoles which look almost as good ?
The problem for game companies is that many folks have realized that they can play year old games on cheap new hardware to great effect...after the game is reduced to 50 \ % .I do n't see the market niche .
Hardcore gamers wo n't touch it .
Casual gamers will baulk at the $ 15/month by in BEFORE you get the privilege to buy/rent a game .
So , who will want this unless the games are steeply discounted ?
$ 180/year could be well spent on local hardware upgrades .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can't wait for this newest bubble to burst.
Thin clients haven't really been embraced for office apps where 95\% of the functionality can run in the browser and it will work reasonably well.
How can you expect to compete with native apps on PCs where performance is cheaply had so long as you don't need to run at the highest settings...or on consoles which look almost as good?
The problem for game companies is that many folks have realized that they can play year old games on cheap new hardware to great effect...after the game is reduced to 50\%.I don't see the market niche.
Hardcore gamers won't touch it.
Casual gamers will baulk at the $15/month by in BEFORE you get the privilege to buy/rent a game.
So, who will want this unless the games are steeply discounted?
$180/year could be well spent on local hardware upgrades.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432598</id>
	<title>Re:guaranteed failure</title>
	<author>Xugumad</author>
	<datestamp>1268224260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah... they might be just about competitive against PCs, but on a 4-5 year console lifespan they're not even in the same ballpark...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah... they might be just about competitive against PCs , but on a 4-5 year console lifespan they 're not even in the same ballpark.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah... they might be just about competitive against PCs, but on a 4-5 year console lifespan they're not even in the same ballpark...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432540</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433882</id>
	<title>Lol</title>
	<author>nataflux</author>
	<datestamp>1268235300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's like playing a game at youtube quality, as well as having control delays.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's like playing a game at youtube quality , as well as having control delays .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's like playing a game at youtube quality, as well as having control delays.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433530</id>
	<title>Re:Cloud Computing</title>
	<author>mhajicek</author>
	<datestamp>1268231760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>We use thin clients and Citrix windows a lot at my company, and they <i>barely</i> function well enough to get the job done.  Good luck if you try running a video through one.</htmltext>
<tokenext>We use thin clients and Citrix windows a lot at my company , and they barely function well enough to get the job done .
Good luck if you try running a video through one .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We use thin clients and Citrix windows a lot at my company, and they barely function well enough to get the job done.
Good luck if you try running a video through one.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432552</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31437902</id>
	<title>Re:Can I HomeBrew this?</title>
	<author>cbhacking</author>
	<datestamp>1268324700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't know of anything that does what OnLinve does, although Remote Desktop (tsclient/rdesktop) or Live Mesh (now available for Mac, <a href="http://mesh.com/" title="mesh.com">http://mesh.com/</a> [mesh.com] might work well enough to try. RD can save bandwidth by just sending the draw commands (rather than the rendered frames) over the network, which is a big advantage when working remotely on a slow connection. You actually can use this technique for gaming, but it uses the client's video card, which negates the purpose. For gaming on a fast LAN, though, it might be able to push rendered frames rather than draw commands, using the server's GPU to do the work.</p><p>OnLive uses lossy compression to provide the video stream, which of course neither of the services I've mentioned above do (they're designed for working remotely, and having your documents blurred by compression artifacts wouldn't go over well). It would be an interesting project, though.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't know of anything that does what OnLinve does , although Remote Desktop ( tsclient/rdesktop ) or Live Mesh ( now available for Mac , http : //mesh.com/ [ mesh.com ] might work well enough to try .
RD can save bandwidth by just sending the draw commands ( rather than the rendered frames ) over the network , which is a big advantage when working remotely on a slow connection .
You actually can use this technique for gaming , but it uses the client 's video card , which negates the purpose .
For gaming on a fast LAN , though , it might be able to push rendered frames rather than draw commands , using the server 's GPU to do the work.OnLive uses lossy compression to provide the video stream , which of course neither of the services I 've mentioned above do ( they 're designed for working remotely , and having your documents blurred by compression artifacts would n't go over well ) .
It would be an interesting project , though .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't know of anything that does what OnLinve does, although Remote Desktop (tsclient/rdesktop) or Live Mesh (now available for Mac, http://mesh.com/ [mesh.com] might work well enough to try.
RD can save bandwidth by just sending the draw commands (rather than the rendered frames) over the network, which is a big advantage when working remotely on a slow connection.
You actually can use this technique for gaming, but it uses the client's video card, which negates the purpose.
For gaming on a fast LAN, though, it might be able to push rendered frames rather than draw commands, using the server's GPU to do the work.OnLive uses lossy compression to provide the video stream, which of course neither of the services I've mentioned above do (they're designed for working remotely, and having your documents blurred by compression artifacts wouldn't go over well).
It would be an interesting project, though.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433774</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432450</id>
	<title>DEAD ON ARRIVAL</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268223300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Plus you have to buy each game, its not like some sort of netflix for games, you have to rent or buy every game.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Plus you have to buy each game , its not like some sort of netflix for games , you have to rent or buy every game .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Plus you have to buy each game, its not like some sort of netflix for games, you have to rent or buy every game.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433190</id>
	<title>Re:What a steal!</title>
	<author>PopeRatzo</author>
	<datestamp>1268228760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Zero control over my purchases? Zero re-sale value when I'm tired of a game? Zero incentive for publishers to discount their titles? Zero bandwidth &amp; gaming ability remaining once I hit my cap? Zero ability to take my games with me once the company goes belly-up</p></div></blockquote><p>Welcome to the brave new future.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Zero control over my purchases ?
Zero re-sale value when I 'm tired of a game ?
Zero incentive for publishers to discount their titles ?
Zero bandwidth &amp; gaming ability remaining once I hit my cap ?
Zero ability to take my games with me once the company goes belly-upWelcome to the brave new future .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Zero control over my purchases?
Zero re-sale value when I'm tired of a game?
Zero incentive for publishers to discount their titles?
Zero bandwidth &amp; gaming ability remaining once I hit my cap?
Zero ability to take my games with me once the company goes belly-upWelcome to the brave new future.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432436</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433994</id>
	<title>Eve users dream</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268236320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This service is Awesome for people who run more then one account at the same time on any MMORPG, most "serious" losers have taken on this ugly habit. It will allow for someone to Play a game on their home computer at premium graphics levels while their alt farms on the remote computer, it will also open the door for developers to make games that could never come close to running on a home PC accessible.</p><p>they will make alot of money.</p><p>mark my words</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This service is Awesome for people who run more then one account at the same time on any MMORPG , most " serious " losers have taken on this ugly habit .
It will allow for someone to Play a game on their home computer at premium graphics levels while their alt farms on the remote computer , it will also open the door for developers to make games that could never come close to running on a home PC accessible.they will make alot of money.mark my words</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This service is Awesome for people who run more then one account at the same time on any MMORPG, most "serious" losers have taken on this ugly habit.
It will allow for someone to Play a game on their home computer at premium graphics levels while their alt farms on the remote computer, it will also open the door for developers to make games that could never come close to running on a home PC accessible.they will make alot of money.mark my words</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432552</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31436698</id>
	<title>Re:Wow</title>
	<author>grumbel</author>
	<datestamp>1268317800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>They're just afraid of change and it colors all their thoughts and arguments.</p></div><p>There are plenty of reasons why you should be afraid of this. This service basically means perfect DRM, the code never leaves the servers, so there is no way to make a backup. If the server goes down or they decide to remove a game, then its gone for good with no way to recover it for a user. This also means no more used sales or normal shop sales, so they have plenty of freedom to dictate the price that they want. One might also worry about privacy issues, as they will be able to tell exactly what you played and when you played it.</p><p>Now of course, technology behind this is brilliant, but it also means you give up almost all control to a third party.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>They 're just afraid of change and it colors all their thoughts and arguments.There are plenty of reasons why you should be afraid of this .
This service basically means perfect DRM , the code never leaves the servers , so there is no way to make a backup .
If the server goes down or they decide to remove a game , then its gone for good with no way to recover it for a user .
This also means no more used sales or normal shop sales , so they have plenty of freedom to dictate the price that they want .
One might also worry about privacy issues , as they will be able to tell exactly what you played and when you played it.Now of course , technology behind this is brilliant , but it also means you give up almost all control to a third party .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They're just afraid of change and it colors all their thoughts and arguments.There are plenty of reasons why you should be afraid of this.
This service basically means perfect DRM, the code never leaves the servers, so there is no way to make a backup.
If the server goes down or they decide to remove a game, then its gone for good with no way to recover it for a user.
This also means no more used sales or normal shop sales, so they have plenty of freedom to dictate the price that they want.
One might also worry about privacy issues, as they will be able to tell exactly what you played and when you played it.Now of course, technology behind this is brilliant, but it also means you give up almost all control to a third party.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31434712</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31436324</id>
	<title>Where is my</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268313060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>picture of my favourite Borg?<br>The article clearly states that his presence is required!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>picture of my favourite Borg ? The article clearly states that his presence is required !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>picture of my favourite Borg?The article clearly states that his presence is required!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31434444</id>
	<title>Re:Not the point of onlive</title>
	<author>LingNoi</author>
	<datestamp>1268241420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A typical high end machine will last you 4 years minimum. At $15 a month for 4 years that's $720. You'd be better off just spending the $720 up front on a high end machine or games console.</p><p>The end result of using this service for 4 years then cancelling is that you loose all your games and can not resell them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A typical high end machine will last you 4 years minimum .
At $ 15 a month for 4 years that 's $ 720 .
You 'd be better off just spending the $ 720 up front on a high end machine or games console.The end result of using this service for 4 years then cancelling is that you loose all your games and can not resell them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A typical high end machine will last you 4 years minimum.
At $15 a month for 4 years that's $720.
You'd be better off just spending the $720 up front on a high end machine or games console.The end result of using this service for 4 years then cancelling is that you loose all your games and can not resell them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433928</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432436</id>
	<title>What a steal!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268223240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Zero control over my purchases? Zero re-sale value when I'm tired of a game? Zero incentive for publishers to discount their titles? Zero bandwidth &amp; gaming ability remaining once I hit my cap? Zero ability to take my games with me once the company goes belly-up (and boy, will it ever...)? All for the low, low price of $15/mo? Sign me up!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Zero control over my purchases ?
Zero re-sale value when I 'm tired of a game ?
Zero incentive for publishers to discount their titles ?
Zero bandwidth &amp; gaming ability remaining once I hit my cap ?
Zero ability to take my games with me once the company goes belly-up ( and boy , will it ever... ) ?
All for the low , low price of $ 15/mo ?
Sign me up !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Zero control over my purchases?
Zero re-sale value when I'm tired of a game?
Zero incentive for publishers to discount their titles?
Zero bandwidth &amp; gaming ability remaining once I hit my cap?
Zero ability to take my games with me once the company goes belly-up (and boy, will it ever...)?
All for the low, low price of $15/mo?
Sign me up!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31435456</id>
	<title>Re:It took me awhile...</title>
	<author>mjwx</author>
	<datestamp>1268298540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Piracy</p></div></blockquote><p>

Ahh, the McCarthyism of our day.<br> <br>

You sir, are you or have you ever been a pirate. [audience gasps in horror]<br> <br>

Now the horror is subsiding the scaremongers of piracy are being revealed. I purchased Bad Company 2 (for the PC) because I read it was a good game but what clenched the deal was EA's stance on DRM (with Bad Company 2 and Mass Effect 2) that I should not have to activate my game (I do realise that a mostly multiplayer game has a limited life span, mostly, I still play BF1942 at LAN's). If Ubisoft and Take 2 continue with their anti-piracy crusade with more and more restrictive DRM schemes they will quickly find that their competitors have locked them out of the market (captured the point, one might say) and they have no real way back in. After all, amongst us gamers who would shell out good money for a lag plagued gaming experience on a shared server when you can get better graphics and response times on a mediocre gaming box at home.<br> <br>

Just like McCarthyism, one day average people will wake up and realise that the problem they describe does not exist.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Piracy Ahh , the McCarthyism of our day .
You sir , are you or have you ever been a pirate .
[ audience gasps in horror ] Now the horror is subsiding the scaremongers of piracy are being revealed .
I purchased Bad Company 2 ( for the PC ) because I read it was a good game but what clenched the deal was EA 's stance on DRM ( with Bad Company 2 and Mass Effect 2 ) that I should not have to activate my game ( I do realise that a mostly multiplayer game has a limited life span , mostly , I still play BF1942 at LAN 's ) .
If Ubisoft and Take 2 continue with their anti-piracy crusade with more and more restrictive DRM schemes they will quickly find that their competitors have locked them out of the market ( captured the point , one might say ) and they have no real way back in .
After all , amongst us gamers who would shell out good money for a lag plagued gaming experience on a shared server when you can get better graphics and response times on a mediocre gaming box at home .
Just like McCarthyism , one day average people will wake up and realise that the problem they describe does not exist .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Piracy

Ahh, the McCarthyism of our day.
You sir, are you or have you ever been a pirate.
[audience gasps in horror] 

Now the horror is subsiding the scaremongers of piracy are being revealed.
I purchased Bad Company 2 (for the PC) because I read it was a good game but what clenched the deal was EA's stance on DRM (with Bad Company 2 and Mass Effect 2) that I should not have to activate my game (I do realise that a mostly multiplayer game has a limited life span, mostly, I still play BF1942 at LAN's).
If Ubisoft and Take 2 continue with their anti-piracy crusade with more and more restrictive DRM schemes they will quickly find that their competitors have locked them out of the market (captured the point, one might say) and they have no real way back in.
After all, amongst us gamers who would shell out good money for a lag plagued gaming experience on a shared server when you can get better graphics and response times on a mediocre gaming box at home.
Just like McCarthyism, one day average people will wake up and realise that the problem they describe does not exist.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433438</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433212</id>
	<title>Re:Hmmm ...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268228880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>15$/month AND you HAVE TO BUY the game!!!! What kind of fucking bullshit is this for a sub-par gaming experience?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>15 $ /month AND you HAVE TO BUY the game ! ! ! !
What kind of fucking bullshit is this for a sub-par gaming experience ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>15$/month AND you HAVE TO BUY the game!!!!
What kind of fucking bullshit is this for a sub-par gaming experience?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432424</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433774</id>
	<title>Can I HomeBrew this?</title>
	<author>DeadboltX</author>
	<datestamp>1268234100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Any idea what kind of software they are using to relay the "real time" video from their servers to your computer? I'd love to be able to have my weak laptop connect up to my powerhouse gaming machine for same gaming on the couch, but programs like VNC are waaaay too slow to do this.
<br> <br>
If these companies are achieving moderate detail over the internet, how can I accomplish this on my LAN?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Any idea what kind of software they are using to relay the " real time " video from their servers to your computer ?
I 'd love to be able to have my weak laptop connect up to my powerhouse gaming machine for same gaming on the couch , but programs like VNC are waaaay too slow to do this .
If these companies are achieving moderate detail over the internet , how can I accomplish this on my LAN ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Any idea what kind of software they are using to relay the "real time" video from their servers to your computer?
I'd love to be able to have my weak laptop connect up to my powerhouse gaming machine for same gaming on the couch, but programs like VNC are waaaay too slow to do this.
If these companies are achieving moderate detail over the internet, how can I accomplish this on my LAN?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31434290</id>
	<title>Re:What a steal!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268239680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I bought Mount &amp; Blade, Psychonauts, Beyond Good &amp; Evil, and Torchlight all for $5 each on Steam. $20 for several hundred hours of gameplay. Best $20 I've ever spent.</p><p>The holidays are fun time. Steam always has a *massive* holiday sale where everything is 10\%-80\% off. Valve games are typically 50\% off. Last year I bought the iD pack and got every game iD ever made (except for Quake 4 and Enemy Territory Quake) for <em>$35</em>.</p><p>There is seriously no good reason not to like Steam.</p><p>Yeah, DRM. Yeah, you need to activate over the Internet. Yeah, you may one day "lose" your games. But if I had bought retail discs, I would have had maybe 10-15 games (unless I bought used, which are dubious at best considering issues like banned CD-keys because of cheating) instead of 100+.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I bought Mount &amp; Blade , Psychonauts , Beyond Good &amp; Evil , and Torchlight all for $ 5 each on Steam .
$ 20 for several hundred hours of gameplay .
Best $ 20 I 've ever spent.The holidays are fun time .
Steam always has a * massive * holiday sale where everything is 10 \ % -80 \ % off .
Valve games are typically 50 \ % off .
Last year I bought the iD pack and got every game iD ever made ( except for Quake 4 and Enemy Territory Quake ) for $ 35.There is seriously no good reason not to like Steam.Yeah , DRM .
Yeah , you need to activate over the Internet .
Yeah , you may one day " lose " your games .
But if I had bought retail discs , I would have had maybe 10-15 games ( unless I bought used , which are dubious at best considering issues like banned CD-keys because of cheating ) instead of 100 + .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I bought Mount &amp; Blade, Psychonauts, Beyond Good &amp; Evil, and Torchlight all for $5 each on Steam.
$20 for several hundred hours of gameplay.
Best $20 I've ever spent.The holidays are fun time.
Steam always has a *massive* holiday sale where everything is 10\%-80\% off.
Valve games are typically 50\% off.
Last year I bought the iD pack and got every game iD ever made (except for Quake 4 and Enemy Territory Quake) for $35.There is seriously no good reason not to like Steam.Yeah, DRM.
Yeah, you need to activate over the Internet.
Yeah, you may one day "lose" your games.
But if I had bought retail discs, I would have had maybe 10-15 games (unless I bought used, which are dubious at best considering issues like banned CD-keys because of cheating) instead of 100+.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433152</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432626</id>
	<title>Broadband Cap?</title>
	<author>wisnoskij</author>
	<datestamp>1268224440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Has anyone heard how much this will eat into broadband cap?<br>and what internet speed is needed to play?</p><p>Their is one thing I know, I would not want to be stuck with a game that I cannot play till the start of a new month because I decided to watch a few youtube videos.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Has anyone heard how much this will eat into broadband cap ? and what internet speed is needed to play ? Their is one thing I know , I would not want to be stuck with a game that I can not play till the start of a new month because I decided to watch a few youtube videos .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Has anyone heard how much this will eat into broadband cap?and what internet speed is needed to play?Their is one thing I know, I would not want to be stuck with a game that I cannot play till the start of a new month because I decided to watch a few youtube videos.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432426</id>
	<title>Monthly Charges?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268223120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wait you want me to pay a monthly charge in order to have the privledge of buying a game? This is apposed to just buying the game at a gamestop how?</p><p>Also I can imagine Lag being a bitch</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wait you want me to pay a monthly charge in order to have the privledge of buying a game ?
This is apposed to just buying the game at a gamestop how ? Also I can imagine Lag being a bitch</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wait you want me to pay a monthly charge in order to have the privledge of buying a game?
This is apposed to just buying the game at a gamestop how?Also I can imagine Lag being a bitch</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31434068</id>
	<title>Re:What a steal!</title>
	<author>h4rr4r</author>
	<datestamp>1268237280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Netflix charges a flat rate, this service requires you to still buy the games after the rate.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Netflix charges a flat rate , this service requires you to still buy the games after the rate .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Netflix charges a flat rate, this service requires you to still buy the games after the rate.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432802</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31442586</id>
	<title>Re:Hmmm ...</title>
	<author>thetoadwarrior</author>
	<datestamp>1268340420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Internet traffic is anything but consistent. This is destined to fail because we're just not at a point where you can reliably stream a whole game. Hell we still have issues with multi-player games that only need to send minimal data. Also from the sounds of it, $14.95 only gives you access to some games and you have to pay extra for premium games which no doubt means any new game worth playing.
<br> <br>
Fuck that, I'll still with physical consoles.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Internet traffic is anything but consistent .
This is destined to fail because we 're just not at a point where you can reliably stream a whole game .
Hell we still have issues with multi-player games that only need to send minimal data .
Also from the sounds of it , $ 14.95 only gives you access to some games and you have to pay extra for premium games which no doubt means any new game worth playing .
Fuck that , I 'll still with physical consoles .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Internet traffic is anything but consistent.
This is destined to fail because we're just not at a point where you can reliably stream a whole game.
Hell we still have issues with multi-player games that only need to send minimal data.
Also from the sounds of it, $14.95 only gives you access to some games and you have to pay extra for premium games which no doubt means any new game worth playing.
Fuck that, I'll still with physical consoles.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433116</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433750</id>
	<title>Re:guaranteed failure</title>
	<author>Wovel</author>
	<datestamp>1268233980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I am sure Mark Cuban is all torn up about the 6 Billion dollars (well I think after he sold it all of he actually walked away with about $4B) Yahoo paid for broadcast.com.  Since Yahoo merged it into all their other media services it is difficult to call it a "failure".   It is difficult to call it much of anything at all.  It was clearly not worth $6B or $4B (Cuban has alluded to his own disbelief several times in interviews). In another 24 months Google would have likely paid even more after streaming media over the Internet really took hold.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I am sure Mark Cuban is all torn up about the 6 Billion dollars ( well I think after he sold it all of he actually walked away with about $ 4B ) Yahoo paid for broadcast.com .
Since Yahoo merged it into all their other media services it is difficult to call it a " failure " .
It is difficult to call it much of anything at all .
It was clearly not worth $ 6B or $ 4B ( Cuban has alluded to his own disbelief several times in interviews ) .
In another 24 months Google would have likely paid even more after streaming media over the Internet really took hold .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am sure Mark Cuban is all torn up about the 6 Billion dollars (well I think after he sold it all of he actually walked away with about $4B) Yahoo paid for broadcast.com.
Since Yahoo merged it into all their other media services it is difficult to call it a "failure".
It is difficult to call it much of anything at all.
It was clearly not worth $6B or $4B (Cuban has alluded to his own disbelief several times in interviews).
In another 24 months Google would have likely paid even more after streaming media over the Internet really took hold.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432540</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31435964</id>
	<title>Re:What a steal!</title>
	<author>Nikker</author>
	<datestamp>1268306880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If someone makes a game and sells 10,000 copies then a while later 1,000 people decide they don't want the game at all any more and sell the game for a couple of bucks to someone else there are still only 10,000 copies.  Maybe if you made a better game you would have sold 20,000 copies or maybe those 1,000 people wouldn't have sold their copies for about 20\% of the original price.  Either way nothing is stolen and the fact remains their game was only good enough to sell 10,000 copies.  Complaining that someone 'deserves' to sell 11,000 copies is completely up to the person who made the purchase.  If that is what you believe then if you purchase a game and realize it sucks, your bored of it or otherwise that copy is yours and you can do with it as you wish.  That is called capitalism and market self regulation.  You have the power to do what you like but I also have the power to do what I like, if you have a problem with that well there is not much I want to do for you, but if you believe I should give up my power to the companies unconditionally you can go fuck yourself<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)<br> <br>
kthxbye</htmltext>
<tokenext>If someone makes a game and sells 10,000 copies then a while later 1,000 people decide they do n't want the game at all any more and sell the game for a couple of bucks to someone else there are still only 10,000 copies .
Maybe if you made a better game you would have sold 20,000 copies or maybe those 1,000 people would n't have sold their copies for about 20 \ % of the original price .
Either way nothing is stolen and the fact remains their game was only good enough to sell 10,000 copies .
Complaining that someone 'deserves ' to sell 11,000 copies is completely up to the person who made the purchase .
If that is what you believe then if you purchase a game and realize it sucks , your bored of it or otherwise that copy is yours and you can do with it as you wish .
That is called capitalism and market self regulation .
You have the power to do what you like but I also have the power to do what I like , if you have a problem with that well there is not much I want to do for you , but if you believe I should give up my power to the companies unconditionally you can go fuck yourself : ) kthxbye</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If someone makes a game and sells 10,000 copies then a while later 1,000 people decide they don't want the game at all any more and sell the game for a couple of bucks to someone else there are still only 10,000 copies.
Maybe if you made a better game you would have sold 20,000 copies or maybe those 1,000 people wouldn't have sold their copies for about 20\% of the original price.
Either way nothing is stolen and the fact remains their game was only good enough to sell 10,000 copies.
Complaining that someone 'deserves' to sell 11,000 copies is completely up to the person who made the purchase.
If that is what you believe then if you purchase a game and realize it sucks, your bored of it or otherwise that copy is yours and you can do with it as you wish.
That is called capitalism and market self regulation.
You have the power to do what you like but I also have the power to do what I like, if you have a problem with that well there is not much I want to do for you, but if you believe I should give up my power to the companies unconditionally you can go fuck yourself :) 
kthxbye</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433152</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433928</id>
	<title>Not the point of onlive</title>
	<author>Francis</author>
	<datestamp>1268235720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You're missing the biggest point of onlive - they maintain the gaming machines for you. Instead of you having to upgrade your computer every few years, and having to live with a sub-par gaming machine towards the end of its effective life cycle, onlive's servers will be continually upgraded to keep up with the games.</p><p>So now you can game on your netbook, your Mac, your TV or even your cellphone.</p><p>There's inherent advantages to this approach - you don't have to worry about downloading/installing games, hardware specs are always properly matched, you can play the same game, pause and restart from different terminals, you can share replays with your friends, etc.</p><p>But one of the biggest things is that since all the gaming code runs at the server end, this will almost eliminate cheating. No more aimbots, wallhacks, network hacks, etc. It's all just mouseclicks and video.</p><p>You'll have to decide if $15/mo is worth it for you, but I think the charge is reasonable given what they have to support. You definitely get more for your money than a subscription to XBox Live.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You 're missing the biggest point of onlive - they maintain the gaming machines for you .
Instead of you having to upgrade your computer every few years , and having to live with a sub-par gaming machine towards the end of its effective life cycle , onlive 's servers will be continually upgraded to keep up with the games.So now you can game on your netbook , your Mac , your TV or even your cellphone.There 's inherent advantages to this approach - you do n't have to worry about downloading/installing games , hardware specs are always properly matched , you can play the same game , pause and restart from different terminals , you can share replays with your friends , etc.But one of the biggest things is that since all the gaming code runs at the server end , this will almost eliminate cheating .
No more aimbots , wallhacks , network hacks , etc .
It 's all just mouseclicks and video.You 'll have to decide if $ 15/mo is worth it for you , but I think the charge is reasonable given what they have to support .
You definitely get more for your money than a subscription to XBox Live .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You're missing the biggest point of onlive - they maintain the gaming machines for you.
Instead of you having to upgrade your computer every few years, and having to live with a sub-par gaming machine towards the end of its effective life cycle, onlive's servers will be continually upgraded to keep up with the games.So now you can game on your netbook, your Mac, your TV or even your cellphone.There's inherent advantages to this approach - you don't have to worry about downloading/installing games, hardware specs are always properly matched, you can play the same game, pause and restart from different terminals, you can share replays with your friends, etc.But one of the biggest things is that since all the gaming code runs at the server end, this will almost eliminate cheating.
No more aimbots, wallhacks, network hacks, etc.
It's all just mouseclicks and video.You'll have to decide if $15/mo is worth it for you, but I think the charge is reasonable given what they have to support.
You definitely get more for your money than a subscription to XBox Live.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432436</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433340</id>
	<title>Re:Monthly charges AND per game</title>
	<author>Tromad</author>
	<datestamp>1268229900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I've spent $600 over the past 4 years and my computer can play anything I throw at it that I am interested in. The only game that caps my CPU is Empire total war and even then I'm getting 30fps with high detail. Core2duo, 4gb ram, radeon 4770, all dirt cheap now and able to handle 98\% of games out there.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've spent $ 600 over the past 4 years and my computer can play anything I throw at it that I am interested in .
The only game that caps my CPU is Empire total war and even then I 'm getting 30fps with high detail .
Core2duo , 4gb ram , radeon 4770 , all dirt cheap now and able to handle 98 \ % of games out there .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've spent $600 over the past 4 years and my computer can play anything I throw at it that I am interested in.
The only game that caps my CPU is Empire total war and even then I'm getting 30fps with high detail.
Core2duo, 4gb ram, radeon 4770, all dirt cheap now and able to handle 98\% of games out there.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432682</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31435526</id>
	<title>Re:Wow</title>
	<author>mjwx</author>
	<datestamp>1268299680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>I feel like a religious wing-nut preaching the benefits of the OnLive deity here,</p></div></blockquote><p>

Yes you do, attempting to introduce an irrational and unprovable system which by the application of reason seems certain to fail spectacularly. That analogy is remarkably apt.</p><blockquote><div><p>They're just afraid of change and it colours all their thoughts and arguments.</p></div></blockquote><p>

And this does not apply to you of course. Note I have corrected one of your misspelled words, it should give you an indication of where I am from (OK I added a U to colour, which means I'm not from the US) and I cant see this thing working in most nations dues to broadband speeds being so bad or unreliable.<br> <br>

Now lag is a serious issue, thus far I cant even get decent streaming SD TV, let alone HD TV. Now you are trying to convince me that I can get a box to replace my gaming rig (A$1500, not that expensive at all) and it will be able to take input and respond with video data whilst simultaneously taking more input data imperceptibility and without interfering with my game (read: slowing it down) when I cant even join a Team Fortress game on the other side of the country and maintain a low enough ping to make it playable.<br> <br>

Latency killed this idea in its inception, the only ones who haven't realised it yet are you and the people selling it.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I feel like a religious wing-nut preaching the benefits of the OnLive deity here , Yes you do , attempting to introduce an irrational and unprovable system which by the application of reason seems certain to fail spectacularly .
That analogy is remarkably apt.They 're just afraid of change and it colours all their thoughts and arguments .
And this does not apply to you of course .
Note I have corrected one of your misspelled words , it should give you an indication of where I am from ( OK I added a U to colour , which means I 'm not from the US ) and I cant see this thing working in most nations dues to broadband speeds being so bad or unreliable .
Now lag is a serious issue , thus far I cant even get decent streaming SD TV , let alone HD TV .
Now you are trying to convince me that I can get a box to replace my gaming rig ( A $ 1500 , not that expensive at all ) and it will be able to take input and respond with video data whilst simultaneously taking more input data imperceptibility and without interfering with my game ( read : slowing it down ) when I cant even join a Team Fortress game on the other side of the country and maintain a low enough ping to make it playable .
Latency killed this idea in its inception , the only ones who have n't realised it yet are you and the people selling it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I feel like a religious wing-nut preaching the benefits of the OnLive deity here,

Yes you do, attempting to introduce an irrational and unprovable system which by the application of reason seems certain to fail spectacularly.
That analogy is remarkably apt.They're just afraid of change and it colours all their thoughts and arguments.
And this does not apply to you of course.
Note I have corrected one of your misspelled words, it should give you an indication of where I am from (OK I added a U to colour, which means I'm not from the US) and I cant see this thing working in most nations dues to broadband speeds being so bad or unreliable.
Now lag is a serious issue, thus far I cant even get decent streaming SD TV, let alone HD TV.
Now you are trying to convince me that I can get a box to replace my gaming rig (A$1500, not that expensive at all) and it will be able to take input and respond with video data whilst simultaneously taking more input data imperceptibility and without interfering with my game (read: slowing it down) when I cant even join a Team Fortress game on the other side of the country and maintain a low enough ping to make it playable.
Latency killed this idea in its inception, the only ones who haven't realised it yet are you and the people selling it.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31434712</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31436166</id>
	<title>Re:Can I HomeBrew this?</title>
	<author>L4t3r4lu5</author>
	<datestamp>1268310480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If you have a gaming PC, you have gaming peripherals.<br> <br>Couch-gaming is great until you realise that you have a small keyboard, are hunched over a small screen, and have no mouse (touchpad / clitmouse doesn't count).</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you have a gaming PC , you have gaming peripherals .
Couch-gaming is great until you realise that you have a small keyboard , are hunched over a small screen , and have no mouse ( touchpad / clitmouse does n't count ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you have a gaming PC, you have gaming peripherals.
Couch-gaming is great until you realise that you have a small keyboard, are hunched over a small screen, and have no mouse (touchpad / clitmouse doesn't count).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433774</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433330</id>
	<title>Re:Cloud Computing</title>
	<author>sonicmerlin</author>
	<datestamp>1268229840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Right... and you think the majority of people in the US upgrade their computers every 2 or 3 years to play the latest games?  Do you understand the appeal of being able to play Crysis on a netbook, or even on your Wi-Fi enabled smartphone?  Or on... god forbid Linux?!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Right... and you think the majority of people in the US upgrade their computers every 2 or 3 years to play the latest games ?
Do you understand the appeal of being able to play Crysis on a netbook , or even on your Wi-Fi enabled smartphone ?
Or on... god forbid Linux ?
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Right... and you think the majority of people in the US upgrade their computers every 2 or 3 years to play the latest games?
Do you understand the appeal of being able to play Crysis on a netbook, or even on your Wi-Fi enabled smartphone?
Or on... god forbid Linux?
!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432552</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31435112</id>
	<title>Re:Wow</title>
	<author>h4rr4r</author>
	<datestamp>1268250960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No, we just have very sensitive bullshit detectors.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No , we just have very sensitive bullshit detectors .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, we just have very sensitive bullshit detectors.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31434712</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432714</id>
	<title>Re:Wrong business model</title>
	<author>EvanED</author>
	<datestamp>1268225100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Games should be distributed for free, and gamers should pay a monthly fee for each game to access the servers.</i></p><p>I'm sure that'd work really well for a game like Mass Effect 2.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Games should be distributed for free , and gamers should pay a monthly fee for each game to access the servers.I 'm sure that 'd work really well for a game like Mass Effect 2 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Games should be distributed for free, and gamers should pay a monthly fee for each game to access the servers.I'm sure that'd work really well for a game like Mass Effect 2.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432448</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432654</id>
	<title>Re:Monthly charges AND per game</title>
	<author>Monkeedude1212</author>
	<datestamp>1268224680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Lets say you've got $1000 bucks to spend. Internet connection we'll say is ~$30 a month. Thats for decent gaming speeds @ home. In scenario A, you grab a $200 computer and your total billing becomes $45 a month - so ~18 months of gaming.In the other scenario, 18 months of internet connectivity is $540. That leaves you $460 for a new Rig. Not a whole lot to deck out your machine.</p><p>Reversely, if you buy an 800$ machine, expecting it to last you 3 years, thats $800 + $540 so $1340 overall. If you buy a $200 machine, expecting to play for 3 years, thats $200 + 1620 so 1820 overall. Saving about 500 bucks. The only factors you as a user have to think about its how long you'll go between upgrades.</p><p>This OnLive System appears to work well for those who want to game during summer vacation but Buckle down during the school year - in other words: Short spurts of gaming.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Lets say you 've got $ 1000 bucks to spend .
Internet connection we 'll say is ~ $ 30 a month .
Thats for decent gaming speeds @ home .
In scenario A , you grab a $ 200 computer and your total billing becomes $ 45 a month - so ~ 18 months of gaming.In the other scenario , 18 months of internet connectivity is $ 540 .
That leaves you $ 460 for a new Rig .
Not a whole lot to deck out your machine.Reversely , if you buy an 800 $ machine , expecting it to last you 3 years , thats $ 800 + $ 540 so $ 1340 overall .
If you buy a $ 200 machine , expecting to play for 3 years , thats $ 200 + 1620 so 1820 overall .
Saving about 500 bucks .
The only factors you as a user have to think about its how long you 'll go between upgrades.This OnLive System appears to work well for those who want to game during summer vacation but Buckle down during the school year - in other words : Short spurts of gaming .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Lets say you've got $1000 bucks to spend.
Internet connection we'll say is ~$30 a month.
Thats for decent gaming speeds @ home.
In scenario A, you grab a $200 computer and your total billing becomes $45 a month - so ~18 months of gaming.In the other scenario, 18 months of internet connectivity is $540.
That leaves you $460 for a new Rig.
Not a whole lot to deck out your machine.Reversely, if you buy an 800$ machine, expecting it to last you 3 years, thats $800 + $540 so $1340 overall.
If you buy a $200 machine, expecting to play for 3 years, thats $200 + 1620 so 1820 overall.
Saving about 500 bucks.
The only factors you as a user have to think about its how long you'll go between upgrades.This OnLive System appears to work well for those who want to game during summer vacation but Buckle down during the school year - in other words: Short spurts of gaming.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432488</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433624</id>
	<title>Re:Well good luck to them</title>
	<author>illumnatLA</author>
	<datestamp>1268232780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Lag would be a big issue.  Games like World of Warcraft are built from the ground up with latency issues in mind.  It's part of the reason they have things like a 'Global Cooldown.'  Even then, especially in things like PVP, it's not exactly perfect.<br> <br>

I can't imagine that 'twitch' games like first person shooters could be anything but annoying given even minimal lag.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Lag would be a big issue .
Games like World of Warcraft are built from the ground up with latency issues in mind .
It 's part of the reason they have things like a 'Global Cooldown .
' Even then , especially in things like PVP , it 's not exactly perfect .
I ca n't imagine that 'twitch ' games like first person shooters could be anything but annoying given even minimal lag .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Lag would be a big issue.
Games like World of Warcraft are built from the ground up with latency issues in mind.
It's part of the reason they have things like a 'Global Cooldown.
'  Even then, especially in things like PVP, it's not exactly perfect.
I can't imagine that 'twitch' games like first person shooters could be anything but annoying given even minimal lag.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432522</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31434908</id>
	<title>Re:Cloud Computing</title>
	<author>slimjim8094</author>
	<datestamp>1268247600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is perfect for my NeoMagic MagicGraph256ZX, you insensitive clod!</p><p>Seriously... the only use I can see for this service is the ever-relevant "I don't have a 3d accelerator" group. Even a built-in Intel card is far more than sufficient to run most games pretty well. And "pretty well" is the absolute upper limit of how good this can be.</p><p>(sidenote: that's the 2d-only graphics card I had in a IBM thinkpad from like 1998. it even had a "NT4.0 or Win95" sticker on it)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is perfect for my NeoMagic MagicGraph256ZX , you insensitive clod ! Seriously... the only use I can see for this service is the ever-relevant " I do n't have a 3d accelerator " group .
Even a built-in Intel card is far more than sufficient to run most games pretty well .
And " pretty well " is the absolute upper limit of how good this can be .
( sidenote : that 's the 2d-only graphics card I had in a IBM thinkpad from like 1998. it even had a " NT4.0 or Win95 " sticker on it )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is perfect for my NeoMagic MagicGraph256ZX, you insensitive clod!Seriously... the only use I can see for this service is the ever-relevant "I don't have a 3d accelerator" group.
Even a built-in Intel card is far more than sufficient to run most games pretty well.
And "pretty well" is the absolute upper limit of how good this can be.
(sidenote: that's the 2d-only graphics card I had in a IBM thinkpad from like 1998. it even had a "NT4.0 or Win95" sticker on it)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432552</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31436094</id>
	<title>Re:guaranteed failure</title>
	<author>quadrox</author>
	<datestamp>1268309280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>While I agree with most of your post (i.e. that the entire concept is stupid), I believe there are enough stupid people who will get suckered into it - it's largely a question of marketing.</p><p>I don't think they will be a big success, but I predict the service will be tolerable enough to stay slightly profitable.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>While I agree with most of your post ( i.e .
that the entire concept is stupid ) , I believe there are enough stupid people who will get suckered into it - it 's largely a question of marketing.I do n't think they will be a big success , but I predict the service will be tolerable enough to stay slightly profitable .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While I agree with most of your post (i.e.
that the entire concept is stupid), I believe there are enough stupid people who will get suckered into it - it's largely a question of marketing.I don't think they will be a big success, but I predict the service will be tolerable enough to stay slightly profitable.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432540</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_10_2239224_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433774
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31434852
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_10_2239224_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432552
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433330
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_10_2239224_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432522
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433624
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_10_2239224_63</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432984
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31434082
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_10_2239224_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432802
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433354
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_10_2239224_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432488
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432688
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_10_2239224_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31434148
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31435188
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_10_2239224_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432448
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432714
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_10_2239224_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31434148
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31434712
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31435526
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_10_2239224_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433620
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_10_2239224_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433046
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433424
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_10_2239224_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31436242
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_10_2239224_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432488
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432682
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31434122
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_10_2239224_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432424
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433116
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31442586
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_10_2239224_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433774
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31435140
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_10_2239224_74</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433928
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31434444
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_10_2239224_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433190
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_10_2239224_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433774
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31437902
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_10_2239224_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432626
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433390
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_10_2239224_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432552
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31434908
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_10_2239224_66</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432522
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432852
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_10_2239224_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432694
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432770
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_10_2239224_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432694
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433342
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_10_2239224_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432552
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31435586
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_10_2239224_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433928
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31438490
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_10_2239224_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432488
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432654
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31434124
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_10_2239224_59</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432488
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432682
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433798
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_10_2239224_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432522
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432636
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_10_2239224_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432540
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433306
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_10_2239224_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432488
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31435736
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_10_2239224_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433774
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31436650
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_10_2239224_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432802
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432888
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_10_2239224_61</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433438
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31434698
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_10_2239224_64</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432540
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433750
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_10_2239224_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432540
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432598
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_10_2239224_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31434148
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31435908
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_10_2239224_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432488
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432682
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433340
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_10_2239224_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432424
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433116
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31435832
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_10_2239224_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432552
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31434014
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_10_2239224_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433152
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31435964
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_10_2239224_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432488
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432682
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432730
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_10_2239224_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31437622
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_10_2239224_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432984
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31437094
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_10_2239224_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432488
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433282
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_10_2239224_73</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433438
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31435456
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_10_2239224_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432488
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432682
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432876
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433560
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_10_2239224_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433152
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31434094
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_10_2239224_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433152
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31438014
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_10_2239224_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432802
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31434068
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_10_2239224_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432448
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433132
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_10_2239224_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433774
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31436286
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_10_2239224_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432522
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432832
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_10_2239224_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432540
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31434722
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_10_2239224_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432448
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31434526
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_10_2239224_69</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433152
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31436284
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_10_2239224_72</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31434148
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31434712
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31436698
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_10_2239224_68</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432540
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433474
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_10_2239224_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432488
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432654
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433690
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_10_2239224_71</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432540
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31436094
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_10_2239224_62</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432802
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432856
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_10_2239224_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31434148
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31434712
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31436746
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_10_2239224_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31434778
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_10_2239224_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31434148
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31435506
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_10_2239224_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432424
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433212
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_10_2239224_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432540
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31434766
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_10_2239224_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433774
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31436166
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_10_2239224_65</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432626
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31437538
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_10_2239224_67</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432552
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433530
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_10_2239224_70</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433928
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31434180
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_10_2239224_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433774
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31436342
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_10_2239224_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432552
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433994
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_10_2239224_60</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433774
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31434928
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_10_2239224_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433152
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31434290
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31435930
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_10_2239224_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31434148
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31434712
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31435112
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_10_2239224_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432522
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432704
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_10_2239224.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432436
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432984
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31437094
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31434082
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433190
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433928
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31434444
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31438490
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31434180
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433152
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31438014
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31434290
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31435930
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31435964
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31434094
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31436284
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433620
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31436242
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31437622
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432802
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432888
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432856
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433354
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31434068
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31434778
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_10_2239224.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432448
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31434526
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433132
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432714
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_10_2239224.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433090
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_10_2239224.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432522
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432704
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432636
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432832
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432852
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433624
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_10_2239224.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432798
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_10_2239224.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432626
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31437538
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433390
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_10_2239224.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433438
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31435456
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31434698
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_10_2239224.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432456
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_10_2239224.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432488
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433282
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432688
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31435736
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432682
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433340
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433798
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432730
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432876
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433560
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31434122
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432654
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433690
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31434124
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_10_2239224.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433002
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_10_2239224.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433774
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31436650
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31436286
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31436166
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31437902
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31434928
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31436342
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31434852
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31435140
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_10_2239224.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432540
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31436094
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433474
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433750
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31434766
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433306
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31434722
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432598
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_10_2239224.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433046
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433424
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_10_2239224.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432424
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433116
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31442586
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31435832
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433212
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_10_2239224.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31434148
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31435506
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31435188
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31434712
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31435526
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31436746
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31435112
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31436698
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31435908
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_10_2239224.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432552
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433330
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31434014
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433530
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31435586
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31434908
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433994
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_10_2239224.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432694
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31433342
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_10_2239224.31432770
</commentlist>
</conversation>
