<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_03_20_191237</id>
	<title>5 Reasons Tablets Suck, and You Won't Buy One</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1269075180000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>Crazzaper writes <i>"When the iPad was announced, a lot of people who didn't care about tablets came out to bash Apple's new device. These same people said 'I would have bought it if it had a full OS,' but in reality full OS tablets existed before the iPad rumors even started. This article gives an interesting perspective on why this happened, and argues that there's five big reasons why <a href="http://www.tomshardware.com/news/tablet-islate-ipad-netbook-notebook,9929.html">more powerful tablets exists but no one cares</a>."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>Crazzaper writes " When the iPad was announced , a lot of people who did n't care about tablets came out to bash Apple 's new device .
These same people said 'I would have bought it if it had a full OS, ' but in reality full OS tablets existed before the iPad rumors even started .
This article gives an interesting perspective on why this happened , and argues that there 's five big reasons why more powerful tablets exists but no one cares .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Crazzaper writes "When the iPad was announced, a lot of people who didn't care about tablets came out to bash Apple's new device.
These same people said 'I would have bought it if it had a full OS,' but in reality full OS tablets existed before the iPad rumors even started.
This article gives an interesting perspective on why this happened, and argues that there's five big reasons why more powerful tablets exists but no one cares.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553444</id>
	<title>Short-sighted, ignores history.</title>
	<author>SuperKendall</author>
	<datestamp>1269089220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I totally disagree tablets are in any way inherently mostly-output devices.  It's just we have not found optimal input methods for tablets yet - except for drawing.</p><p>A Pen &amp; Pencil excelled for generations for input so I don't see what makes a tablet have to suck for input having close to the same form factor.</p><p>Tablets have a ton of potential.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I totally disagree tablets are in any way inherently mostly-output devices .
It 's just we have not found optimal input methods for tablets yet - except for drawing.A Pen &amp; Pencil excelled for generations for input so I do n't see what makes a tablet have to suck for input having close to the same form factor.Tablets have a ton of potential .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I totally disagree tablets are in any way inherently mostly-output devices.
It's just we have not found optimal input methods for tablets yet - except for drawing.A Pen &amp; Pencil excelled for generations for input so I don't see what makes a tablet have to suck for input having close to the same form factor.Tablets have a ton of potential.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552146</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31555686</id>
	<title>Re:Battery life</title>
	<author>shutdown -p now</author>
	<datestamp>1269202560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Windows, Mac OS X and Linux. None of these are well suited for even stylus based interaction, let alone multitouch.</p></div><p>It should be noted that, while this is correct at the moment, there's nothing precluding those OSes from becoming more touch-friendly. Win7 at least shows clear signs of that, both on API side (multitouch) and UI side (new taskbar). I don't know about OS X, but I think it's actually more touch-friendly out of the box as it is, and I'd be surprised if it didn't get better, either. Linux? Someone, somewhere, is probably working on it...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Windows , Mac OS X and Linux .
None of these are well suited for even stylus based interaction , let alone multitouch.It should be noted that , while this is correct at the moment , there 's nothing precluding those OSes from becoming more touch-friendly .
Win7 at least shows clear signs of that , both on API side ( multitouch ) and UI side ( new taskbar ) .
I do n't know about OS X , but I think it 's actually more touch-friendly out of the box as it is , and I 'd be surprised if it did n't get better , either .
Linux ? Someone , somewhere , is probably working on it.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Windows, Mac OS X and Linux.
None of these are well suited for even stylus based interaction, let alone multitouch.It should be noted that, while this is correct at the moment, there's nothing precluding those OSes from becoming more touch-friendly.
Win7 at least shows clear signs of that, both on API side (multitouch) and UI side (new taskbar).
I don't know about OS X, but I think it's actually more touch-friendly out of the box as it is, and I'd be surprised if it didn't get better, either.
Linux? Someone, somewhere, is probably working on it...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553062</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31554912</id>
	<title>Re:Tablets are mostly-output devices</title>
	<author>weston</author>
	<datestamp>1269103500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Think of Apple's "iPad" as a big e-reader, with color and video, and it makes more sense.</i></p><p>And a touch screen. And an optional keyboard peripheral.</p><p>I see a lot of reductionist views of the iPad and my own take is that these miss the mark. Yeah, I do think it's designed to capture part of the eReader market (not all, since some people will insist on e-ink)... but I think it's also designed to capture part of the netbook market (though not all, because some people will insist on having another OS and more freedom), and part of the portable entertainment market (though not all, because some people don't care what size they're watching video at and/or prefer another gaming platform).</p><p>I see a bet by Apple that there's a spot for a convergence device between all these things. And a lot of commentators who assume they're wrong because it's not superior to each one of those devices in their niche. Particularly on slashdot. Not a surprise: geeks like the idea of clean transitivity. We'll see in a year or two who's right.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Think of Apple 's " iPad " as a big e-reader , with color and video , and it makes more sense.And a touch screen .
And an optional keyboard peripheral.I see a lot of reductionist views of the iPad and my own take is that these miss the mark .
Yeah , I do think it 's designed to capture part of the eReader market ( not all , since some people will insist on e-ink ) ... but I think it 's also designed to capture part of the netbook market ( though not all , because some people will insist on having another OS and more freedom ) , and part of the portable entertainment market ( though not all , because some people do n't care what size they 're watching video at and/or prefer another gaming platform ) .I see a bet by Apple that there 's a spot for a convergence device between all these things .
And a lot of commentators who assume they 're wrong because it 's not superior to each one of those devices in their niche .
Particularly on slashdot .
Not a surprise : geeks like the idea of clean transitivity .
We 'll see in a year or two who 's right .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Think of Apple's "iPad" as a big e-reader, with color and video, and it makes more sense.And a touch screen.
And an optional keyboard peripheral.I see a lot of reductionist views of the iPad and my own take is that these miss the mark.
Yeah, I do think it's designed to capture part of the eReader market (not all, since some people will insist on e-ink)... but I think it's also designed to capture part of the netbook market (though not all, because some people will insist on having another OS and more freedom), and part of the portable entertainment market (though not all, because some people don't care what size they're watching video at and/or prefer another gaming platform).I see a bet by Apple that there's a spot for a convergence device between all these things.
And a lot of commentators who assume they're wrong because it's not superior to each one of those devices in their niche.
Particularly on slashdot.
Not a surprise: geeks like the idea of clean transitivity.
We'll see in a year or two who's right.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552146</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552194</id>
	<title>Tablets suck and you won't buy one</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269080220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Telling me what do you, are you?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Telling me what do you , are you ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Telling me what do you, are you?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553946</id>
	<title>Re:Tablets are mostly-output devices</title>
	<author>King\_TJ</author>
	<datestamp>1269093420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yep....  except it appears Apple is also working hard to address alternate ways to handle some of the input-side with the "gestures" they're so interested in.</p><p>I think the gestures, a la Fingerworks that Apple bought out, have a lot of potential - but they require a lot of "thinking outside the box" on the part of the software developers too.  Gesture-based input starts to suck when the user starts feeling like he/she has to memorize a bunch of random ones to get anything accomplished.  The truly effective gestures, so far, seem to be the ones with parallels in the "real world".  Everyone immediately "gets" the idea that you'd pinch your fingers together or spread them apart to shrink or zoom an object on the screen.  They're also going to "get" concepts like making a twisting/turning motion with your fingers to spin a virtual dial around on the screen.  They're NOT really going to intuitively "get" something like drawing a "Z" with 3 fingers held on the pad though<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... so they've got to be really careful when they start trying to come up with more unique movements.</p><p>I'm also starting to see a user interface "issue" developing with the iPhone/iPad and other similar devices, where they want to give users a menu bar of some sort, but the screen real-estate just isn't there to leave it on-screen all the time.  So they do the "invisible" one that only pops up when you tap or double-tap the right place.  That's non-intuitive and leads to frustration when people accidentally make the thing appear, as well as when they have to accidentally discover that one is even being used in a certain place in a program.  I don't claim to have all the answers, but I think I like the idea of making apps feel like they have a front and a back side, and an appropriate gesture will "flip them over" like you'd flip a playing card, to see an options screen on the "back side".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yep.... except it appears Apple is also working hard to address alternate ways to handle some of the input-side with the " gestures " they 're so interested in.I think the gestures , a la Fingerworks that Apple bought out , have a lot of potential - but they require a lot of " thinking outside the box " on the part of the software developers too .
Gesture-based input starts to suck when the user starts feeling like he/she has to memorize a bunch of random ones to get anything accomplished .
The truly effective gestures , so far , seem to be the ones with parallels in the " real world " .
Everyone immediately " gets " the idea that you 'd pinch your fingers together or spread them apart to shrink or zoom an object on the screen .
They 're also going to " get " concepts like making a twisting/turning motion with your fingers to spin a virtual dial around on the screen .
They 're NOT really going to intuitively " get " something like drawing a " Z " with 3 fingers held on the pad though ... so they 've got to be really careful when they start trying to come up with more unique movements.I 'm also starting to see a user interface " issue " developing with the iPhone/iPad and other similar devices , where they want to give users a menu bar of some sort , but the screen real-estate just is n't there to leave it on-screen all the time .
So they do the " invisible " one that only pops up when you tap or double-tap the right place .
That 's non-intuitive and leads to frustration when people accidentally make the thing appear , as well as when they have to accidentally discover that one is even being used in a certain place in a program .
I do n't claim to have all the answers , but I think I like the idea of making apps feel like they have a front and a back side , and an appropriate gesture will " flip them over " like you 'd flip a playing card , to see an options screen on the " back side " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yep....  except it appears Apple is also working hard to address alternate ways to handle some of the input-side with the "gestures" they're so interested in.I think the gestures, a la Fingerworks that Apple bought out, have a lot of potential - but they require a lot of "thinking outside the box" on the part of the software developers too.
Gesture-based input starts to suck when the user starts feeling like he/she has to memorize a bunch of random ones to get anything accomplished.
The truly effective gestures, so far, seem to be the ones with parallels in the "real world".
Everyone immediately "gets" the idea that you'd pinch your fingers together or spread them apart to shrink or zoom an object on the screen.
They're also going to "get" concepts like making a twisting/turning motion with your fingers to spin a virtual dial around on the screen.
They're NOT really going to intuitively "get" something like drawing a "Z" with 3 fingers held on the pad though ... so they've got to be really careful when they start trying to come up with more unique movements.I'm also starting to see a user interface "issue" developing with the iPhone/iPad and other similar devices, where they want to give users a menu bar of some sort, but the screen real-estate just isn't there to leave it on-screen all the time.
So they do the "invisible" one that only pops up when you tap or double-tap the right place.
That's non-intuitive and leads to frustration when people accidentally make the thing appear, as well as when they have to accidentally discover that one is even being used in a certain place in a program.
I don't claim to have all the answers, but I think I like the idea of making apps feel like they have a front and a back side, and an appropriate gesture will "flip them over" like you'd flip a playing card, to see an options screen on the "back side".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552146</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31556778</id>
	<title>well</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269178140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm sorry, the Apple guys took the trouble of building those devices properly.</p><p>Everyone else built them either for:<br>1. fun, and evidently you cannot ask for quality on those products, but I do treat them in the spirit they have been built: I salute you, pioneers, you have my greatest admiration.<br>2. money, and they were so greedy or short sighted that they figured, hey, let's make it the cheapest piece of junk ever, we need moar ca$h! Wonder why no one looks at them?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm sorry , the Apple guys took the trouble of building those devices properly.Everyone else built them either for : 1. fun , and evidently you can not ask for quality on those products , but I do treat them in the spirit they have been built : I salute you , pioneers , you have my greatest admiration.2 .
money , and they were so greedy or short sighted that they figured , hey , let 's make it the cheapest piece of junk ever , we need moar ca $ h !
Wonder why no one looks at them ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm sorry, the Apple guys took the trouble of building those devices properly.Everyone else built them either for:1. fun, and evidently you cannot ask for quality on those products, but I do treat them in the spirit they have been built: I salute you, pioneers, you have my greatest admiration.2.
money, and they were so greedy or short sighted that they figured, hey, let's make it the cheapest piece of junk ever, we need moar ca$h!
Wonder why no one looks at them?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31554858</id>
	<title>Re:Corrections, repeated</title>
	<author>sl149q</author>
	<datestamp>1269102900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; Between CoreData, and Interface Builder</p><p>And under the hood it really is just Mac OS X (which is really just BSD)... and XCode is more than happy to do C development. Not difficult at all to port just about anything in. Lack of application level multi-tasking is slightly annoying, but you can multi-thread to your hearts content even to the extent of spawning threads to run what would otherwise be a separate program.</p><p>As a developer it is at times slightly challenging, but as a user it's great.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; Between CoreData , and Interface BuilderAnd under the hood it really is just Mac OS X ( which is really just BSD ) ... and XCode is more than happy to do C development .
Not difficult at all to port just about anything in .
Lack of application level multi-tasking is slightly annoying , but you can multi-thread to your hearts content even to the extent of spawning threads to run what would otherwise be a separate program.As a developer it is at times slightly challenging , but as a user it 's great .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; Between CoreData, and Interface BuilderAnd under the hood it really is just Mac OS X (which is really just BSD)... and XCode is more than happy to do C development.
Not difficult at all to port just about anything in.
Lack of application level multi-tasking is slightly annoying, but you can multi-thread to your hearts content even to the extent of spawning threads to run what would otherwise be a separate program.As a developer it is at times slightly challenging, but as a user it's great.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553002</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31558332</id>
	<title>Re:niches</title>
	<author>chill</author>
	<datestamp>1269194520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually, that is something a grandparent would say.</p><p>It has been a couple years since my kids watched TV.  They watch everything on their PC.  What little I watch I do on my phone or PC.  The only person who uses the TV in our house is my wife, and even she is migrating to the PC because Hulu has the last two weeks of episodes of the shows she watches.  You have to be REAL lazy (or have a real life) to miss an episode then!</p><p>My grandparents, however, are still all "well MASH comes on at 7 o'clock..." and "the news is on, don't you want to watch the 10 o'clock news?"  No grandma, I already saw it all on my PC.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , that is something a grandparent would say.It has been a couple years since my kids watched TV .
They watch everything on their PC .
What little I watch I do on my phone or PC .
The only person who uses the TV in our house is my wife , and even she is migrating to the PC because Hulu has the last two weeks of episodes of the shows she watches .
You have to be REAL lazy ( or have a real life ) to miss an episode then ! My grandparents , however , are still all " well MASH comes on at 7 o'clock... " and " the news is on , do n't you want to watch the 10 o'clock news ?
" No grandma , I already saw it all on my PC .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, that is something a grandparent would say.It has been a couple years since my kids watched TV.
They watch everything on their PC.
What little I watch I do on my phone or PC.
The only person who uses the TV in our house is my wife, and even she is migrating to the PC because Hulu has the last two weeks of episodes of the shows she watches.
You have to be REAL lazy (or have a real life) to miss an episode then!My grandparents, however, are still all "well MASH comes on at 7 o'clock..." and "the news is on, don't you want to watch the 10 o'clock news?
"  No grandma, I already saw it all on my PC.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552602</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553546</id>
	<title>The overwhelming reason is Windows</title>
	<author>Low Ranked Craig</author>
	<datestamp>1269090000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Windows tablet editions are simply windows.  You use your finger as a mouse, and you use an on screen keyboard in place of a real keyboard.  This is the root reason excepting expense.  Why is there not a lot of tablet software?  Because the tablet OS is just windows, so everything that runs on windows will run on a tablet, but the experience isn't that good.  The standard mouse / keyboard interactions don't translate well.  I had a Compaq tablet and it was a fun, novel experience, but after playing with it I chose a think pad t-series and gave the tablet back to IT because the track stick and the keyboard were much more conducive to a good Windows experience.</p><p>I think that people that are clamoring to have a full OS are completely missing the point; the iPad will be successful precisely because it isn't a full OS.  It will be successful because it will offer the user the ability do do all the things they'd want to do on a tablet: browse the web, read their email, read a book, watch a movie, maybe play a game.  Generally speaking, you're not going to write a paper, do your taxes, play Crysis, code, do serious graphic design, etc. on a tablet, unless that tablet has a full keyboard and a external or convertible monitor.</p><p>Personally speaking, based on everything I've read the iPad is almost exactly the secondary device I want.  e-Book reader (yes, not eInk, I don't care), browser, movies, music, some games, and that's it.  This is the device I'll take on day trips instead of my laptop, unless I need to write a document or do coding on the road.  This is the device I'll use sitting on the couch or the patio to browse the web.  This is the device I'll read a book on while on a plane or at a coffee shop waiting for a friend.   The three things that I don't like are lack of multi-tasking (I'd like to leave skype running in the background, for instance), a front facing camera (for skype) and the lack of a USB port.  By all accounts iPhone OS version 4 adds multi-tasking, and I can hook up my camera to review photos using an adapter (yuck), so essentially, no camera is my only real issue (and a small one at that) assuming the iPhone 4.0 OS info is true.</p><p>Really, I can see the iPad as the only computer needed for a large group of people.  My parents for example do little on the computer other than browse the internet and do e-mail. With the 3g account they could get rid of their monthly ISP bill, and with the keyboard dock they can answer lengthy e-mails.</p><p>I predict that even in this economy the iPad will be a success for Apple.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Windows tablet editions are simply windows .
You use your finger as a mouse , and you use an on screen keyboard in place of a real keyboard .
This is the root reason excepting expense .
Why is there not a lot of tablet software ?
Because the tablet OS is just windows , so everything that runs on windows will run on a tablet , but the experience is n't that good .
The standard mouse / keyboard interactions do n't translate well .
I had a Compaq tablet and it was a fun , novel experience , but after playing with it I chose a think pad t-series and gave the tablet back to IT because the track stick and the keyboard were much more conducive to a good Windows experience.I think that people that are clamoring to have a full OS are completely missing the point ; the iPad will be successful precisely because it is n't a full OS .
It will be successful because it will offer the user the ability do do all the things they 'd want to do on a tablet : browse the web , read their email , read a book , watch a movie , maybe play a game .
Generally speaking , you 're not going to write a paper , do your taxes , play Crysis , code , do serious graphic design , etc .
on a tablet , unless that tablet has a full keyboard and a external or convertible monitor.Personally speaking , based on everything I 've read the iPad is almost exactly the secondary device I want .
e-Book reader ( yes , not eInk , I do n't care ) , browser , movies , music , some games , and that 's it .
This is the device I 'll take on day trips instead of my laptop , unless I need to write a document or do coding on the road .
This is the device I 'll use sitting on the couch or the patio to browse the web .
This is the device I 'll read a book on while on a plane or at a coffee shop waiting for a friend .
The three things that I do n't like are lack of multi-tasking ( I 'd like to leave skype running in the background , for instance ) , a front facing camera ( for skype ) and the lack of a USB port .
By all accounts iPhone OS version 4 adds multi-tasking , and I can hook up my camera to review photos using an adapter ( yuck ) , so essentially , no camera is my only real issue ( and a small one at that ) assuming the iPhone 4.0 OS info is true.Really , I can see the iPad as the only computer needed for a large group of people .
My parents for example do little on the computer other than browse the internet and do e-mail .
With the 3g account they could get rid of their monthly ISP bill , and with the keyboard dock they can answer lengthy e-mails.I predict that even in this economy the iPad will be a success for Apple .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Windows tablet editions are simply windows.
You use your finger as a mouse, and you use an on screen keyboard in place of a real keyboard.
This is the root reason excepting expense.
Why is there not a lot of tablet software?
Because the tablet OS is just windows, so everything that runs on windows will run on a tablet, but the experience isn't that good.
The standard mouse / keyboard interactions don't translate well.
I had a Compaq tablet and it was a fun, novel experience, but after playing with it I chose a think pad t-series and gave the tablet back to IT because the track stick and the keyboard were much more conducive to a good Windows experience.I think that people that are clamoring to have a full OS are completely missing the point; the iPad will be successful precisely because it isn't a full OS.
It will be successful because it will offer the user the ability do do all the things they'd want to do on a tablet: browse the web, read their email, read a book, watch a movie, maybe play a game.
Generally speaking, you're not going to write a paper, do your taxes, play Crysis, code, do serious graphic design, etc.
on a tablet, unless that tablet has a full keyboard and a external or convertible monitor.Personally speaking, based on everything I've read the iPad is almost exactly the secondary device I want.
e-Book reader (yes, not eInk, I don't care), browser, movies, music, some games, and that's it.
This is the device I'll take on day trips instead of my laptop, unless I need to write a document or do coding on the road.
This is the device I'll use sitting on the couch or the patio to browse the web.
This is the device I'll read a book on while on a plane or at a coffee shop waiting for a friend.
The three things that I don't like are lack of multi-tasking (I'd like to leave skype running in the background, for instance), a front facing camera (for skype) and the lack of a USB port.
By all accounts iPhone OS version 4 adds multi-tasking, and I can hook up my camera to review photos using an adapter (yuck), so essentially, no camera is my only real issue (and a small one at that) assuming the iPhone 4.0 OS info is true.Really, I can see the iPad as the only computer needed for a large group of people.
My parents for example do little on the computer other than browse the internet and do e-mail.
With the 3g account they could get rid of their monthly ISP bill, and with the keyboard dock they can answer lengthy e-mails.I predict that even in this economy the iPad will be a success for Apple.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552568</id>
	<title>Re:well duh</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1269083100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What? Windows is THE tablet OS. Since its whole UI is designed to be used solely by the mouse. Hell even MS Word is mainly a button-pusher app, with a irrelevant text area.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p><p>Try to use Windows with a mouse only. And then with the keyboard only.<br>Some things will be impossible with the keyboard only. While you can do everything with the mouse.</p><p>I know because I was forced to try it out.</p><p>P.S.: Yes, I&rsquo;m exaggerating it a bit.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What ?
Windows is THE tablet OS .
Since its whole UI is designed to be used solely by the mouse .
Hell even MS Word is mainly a button-pusher app , with a irrelevant text area .
; ) Try to use Windows with a mouse only .
And then with the keyboard only.Some things will be impossible with the keyboard only .
While you can do everything with the mouse.I know because I was forced to try it out.P.S .
: Yes , I    m exaggerating it a bit .
; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What?
Windows is THE tablet OS.
Since its whole UI is designed to be used solely by the mouse.
Hell even MS Word is mainly a button-pusher app, with a irrelevant text area.
;)Try to use Windows with a mouse only.
And then with the keyboard only.Some things will be impossible with the keyboard only.
While you can do everything with the mouse.I know because I was forced to try it out.P.S.
: Yes, I’m exaggerating it a bit.
;)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552128</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31554224</id>
	<title>But but...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269095820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But... Wacoms are the awesomes! And you can draw! And then you don't really need to use a scanner!</p><p>*Awkward silence from slashdot*</p><p>Oh wait, you're not talking about those are ya?</p><p>*Reception of blank and/or annoyed stares from slashdot crowd*</p><p>Boy, do I feel dumb now. I guess I should have RTFA, huh? Nevermind!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But... Wacoms are the awesomes !
And you can draw !
And then you do n't really need to use a scanner !
* Awkward silence from slashdot * Oh wait , you 're not talking about those are ya ?
* Reception of blank and/or annoyed stares from slashdot crowd * Boy , do I feel dumb now .
I guess I should have RTFA , huh ?
Nevermind !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But... Wacoms are the awesomes!
And you can draw!
And then you don't really need to use a scanner!
*Awkward silence from slashdot*Oh wait, you're not talking about those are ya?
*Reception of blank and/or annoyed stares from slashdot crowd*Boy, do I feel dumb now.
I guess I should have RTFA, huh?
Nevermind!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553624</id>
	<title>Re:niches</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269090720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The iPad will succeed very well for <b>it's</b> targeted market. Here's a hint: it's not you.</p></div><p>Here's a hint: the possessive pronoun "its" doesn't have an apostrophe in it.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The iPad will succeed very well for it 's targeted market .
Here 's a hint : it 's not you.Here 's a hint : the possessive pronoun " its " does n't have an apostrophe in it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The iPad will succeed very well for it's targeted market.
Here's a hint: it's not you.Here's a hint: the possessive pronoun "its" doesn't have an apostrophe in it.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552942</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31555888</id>
	<title>Re:niches</title>
	<author>WaywardGeek</author>
	<datestamp>1269163680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Exactly.  I want a Kindle that also lets me browse the web.  That's why I was so disappointed with the iPad announcement.</p><p>Kindles and other e-ink based e-book readers make sense.  I bought two as presents for Xmas.  They need to be cheap and have multi-day battery life, and they need to be sunlight readable.  Now, let me browse the web, and make the screen larger and multi-touch, without increasing the price, and I'm sold!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Exactly .
I want a Kindle that also lets me browse the web .
That 's why I was so disappointed with the iPad announcement.Kindles and other e-ink based e-book readers make sense .
I bought two as presents for Xmas .
They need to be cheap and have multi-day battery life , and they need to be sunlight readable .
Now , let me browse the web , and make the screen larger and multi-touch , without increasing the price , and I 'm sold !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Exactly.
I want a Kindle that also lets me browse the web.
That's why I was so disappointed with the iPad announcement.Kindles and other e-ink based e-book readers make sense.
I bought two as presents for Xmas.
They need to be cheap and have multi-day battery life, and they need to be sunlight readable.
Now, let me browse the web, and make the screen larger and multi-touch, without increasing the price, and I'm sold!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552396</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31556850</id>
	<title>Re:My problem with iPad</title>
	<author>Own3d-You</author>
	<datestamp>1269178860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>1. Fair enough, hopefully this will be addressed with 4.0<br>
2. How so? Get the SDK and go for it...<br>
3. This is a good thing<br>
4. This is also a good thing<br>
5. It's a bit of an inconvenience sure, but there are plenty of valid reasons for it<br>
6. There have been some questionable ones, but for the most part they have been from developers who just needed to play by the rules. That hasn't been the case for all of them, and off the top of my head there have been a few that annoyed me, like google latitude, but the overwhelming majority have been from devs who didn't read the rules<br>
7. In the years the iPhone has been around now, that has not happened once. Also, I'm not sure what you mean by tampering with apps and settings. The only thing I am aware of is the app killswitch<br>
8. The emulator violated SDK policy and the devs should have seen that coming, Google Voice duplicates the phone app, which is also covered in the SDK. You can argue all you want that the rules are unfair, but there they are, the devs knew it, and released apps that violated them anyway, then complained when they got removed / rejected. Big surprise there<br>
9. Like what? I have heard of apps being knocked back with the Apple guys making a list of suggestions on how to make their UI better, or more consistent. This is a good thing</htmltext>
<tokenext>1 .
Fair enough , hopefully this will be addressed with 4.0 2 .
How so ?
Get the SDK and go for it.. . 3. This is a good thing 4 .
This is also a good thing 5 .
It 's a bit of an inconvenience sure , but there are plenty of valid reasons for it 6 .
There have been some questionable ones , but for the most part they have been from developers who just needed to play by the rules .
That has n't been the case for all of them , and off the top of my head there have been a few that annoyed me , like google latitude , but the overwhelming majority have been from devs who did n't read the rules 7 .
In the years the iPhone has been around now , that has not happened once .
Also , I 'm not sure what you mean by tampering with apps and settings .
The only thing I am aware of is the app killswitch 8 .
The emulator violated SDK policy and the devs should have seen that coming , Google Voice duplicates the phone app , which is also covered in the SDK .
You can argue all you want that the rules are unfair , but there they are , the devs knew it , and released apps that violated them anyway , then complained when they got removed / rejected .
Big surprise there 9 .
Like what ?
I have heard of apps being knocked back with the Apple guys making a list of suggestions on how to make their UI better , or more consistent .
This is a good thing</tokentext>
<sentencetext>1.
Fair enough, hopefully this will be addressed with 4.0
2.
How so?
Get the SDK and go for it...
3. This is a good thing
4.
This is also a good thing
5.
It's a bit of an inconvenience sure, but there are plenty of valid reasons for it
6.
There have been some questionable ones, but for the most part they have been from developers who just needed to play by the rules.
That hasn't been the case for all of them, and off the top of my head there have been a few that annoyed me, like google latitude, but the overwhelming majority have been from devs who didn't read the rules
7.
In the years the iPhone has been around now, that has not happened once.
Also, I'm not sure what you mean by tampering with apps and settings.
The only thing I am aware of is the app killswitch
8.
The emulator violated SDK policy and the devs should have seen that coming, Google Voice duplicates the phone app, which is also covered in the SDK.
You can argue all you want that the rules are unfair, but there they are, the devs knew it, and released apps that violated them anyway, then complained when they got removed / rejected.
Big surprise there
9.
Like what?
I have heard of apps being knocked back with the Apple guys making a list of suggestions on how to make their UI better, or more consistent.
This is a good thing</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552252</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31555398</id>
	<title>Either you have one, or wish you did</title>
	<author>cstec</author>
	<datestamp>1269110640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
This article has no business being covered by Slashdot.  There are two kinds of tablet owners - those that have one, or those that will.
</p><p>
People that don't have one frankly don't get it.  And none of the Mac users get it at all.  Microsoft has been making tablets happen for years.  They're slick and they work well  They're not oversized iPhones, they're full machines that can run a full Eclipse environment one minute and excel at Art Rage the next.  Once you get used to being able to swing that screen around anytime you need something more portable, say when pulling your engine codes while under someone's car dash, and then being able to swing it back to a full laptop to write up a report, you'll never look back.  Sometimes I type, sometimes I hand write.  I use mine with the mouse, the stylus, my finger - whatever I feel like, not what some pompous twit who thinks putting 'designer' on his business card means he gets to decide what I need.  Some days it's an e-reader, some days it compiles firmware, some days it plays movies.  It does it all, and it fits like a champ in an airplane seat!
</p><p>
Tablets came years ago, and stayed.   There is no one "ideal form factor", and they get packaged many ways.  But the convertible class is nothing but a superset of the laptop.  If the price is there, there's no reason not to get one and hasn't been for a long time.
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This article has no business being covered by Slashdot .
There are two kinds of tablet owners - those that have one , or those that will .
People that do n't have one frankly do n't get it .
And none of the Mac users get it at all .
Microsoft has been making tablets happen for years .
They 're slick and they work well They 're not oversized iPhones , they 're full machines that can run a full Eclipse environment one minute and excel at Art Rage the next .
Once you get used to being able to swing that screen around anytime you need something more portable , say when pulling your engine codes while under someone 's car dash , and then being able to swing it back to a full laptop to write up a report , you 'll never look back .
Sometimes I type , sometimes I hand write .
I use mine with the mouse , the stylus , my finger - whatever I feel like , not what some pompous twit who thinks putting 'designer ' on his business card means he gets to decide what I need .
Some days it 's an e-reader , some days it compiles firmware , some days it plays movies .
It does it all , and it fits like a champ in an airplane seat !
Tablets came years ago , and stayed .
There is no one " ideal form factor " , and they get packaged many ways .
But the convertible class is nothing but a superset of the laptop .
If the price is there , there 's no reason not to get one and has n't been for a long time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
This article has no business being covered by Slashdot.
There are two kinds of tablet owners - those that have one, or those that will.
People that don't have one frankly don't get it.
And none of the Mac users get it at all.
Microsoft has been making tablets happen for years.
They're slick and they work well  They're not oversized iPhones, they're full machines that can run a full Eclipse environment one minute and excel at Art Rage the next.
Once you get used to being able to swing that screen around anytime you need something more portable, say when pulling your engine codes while under someone's car dash, and then being able to swing it back to a full laptop to write up a report, you'll never look back.
Sometimes I type, sometimes I hand write.
I use mine with the mouse, the stylus, my finger - whatever I feel like, not what some pompous twit who thinks putting 'designer' on his business card means he gets to decide what I need.
Some days it's an e-reader, some days it compiles firmware, some days it plays movies.
It does it all, and it fits like a champ in an airplane seat!
Tablets came years ago, and stayed.
There is no one "ideal form factor", and they get packaged many ways.
But the convertible class is nothing but a superset of the laptop.
If the price is there, there's no reason not to get one and hasn't been for a long time.
</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552578</id>
	<title>Re:If Bill says it, it must be true</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269083160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>"Within five years, I predict it will be the most popular form of PC sold in America.  It will come with a full 640 KB of RAM which should be enough for anybody.  We will continue to out-innovate Apple.  Then we're going to fscking kill Google."</p></div><p>and, "OS/2 will be the platform for the 90's"</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Within five years , I predict it will be the most popular form of PC sold in America .
It will come with a full 640 KB of RAM which should be enough for anybody .
We will continue to out-innovate Apple .
Then we 're going to fscking kill Google .
" and , " OS/2 will be the platform for the 90 's "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Within five years, I predict it will be the most popular form of PC sold in America.
It will come with a full 640 KB of RAM which should be enough for anybody.
We will continue to out-innovate Apple.
Then we're going to fscking kill Google.
"and, "OS/2 will be the platform for the 90's"
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552204</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552834</id>
	<title>One reason I would buy an iPad</title>
	<author>OzPeter</author>
	<datestamp>1269085020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have a 10" Eee PC that I drag around the house for surfing websites when I don't want to be in front of a normal computer.  I love its size but the one thing about it that drives me nuts is the sound from the fan.  Its high pitched whine just grates on my ears. an iPad without a fan would litterally be music to my ears.</p><p>Of course I am interested in any suggestions for 10" screen sized netbooks that don't have fans.  Any one know of any?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have a 10 " Eee PC that I drag around the house for surfing websites when I do n't want to be in front of a normal computer .
I love its size but the one thing about it that drives me nuts is the sound from the fan .
Its high pitched whine just grates on my ears .
an iPad without a fan would litterally be music to my ears.Of course I am interested in any suggestions for 10 " screen sized netbooks that do n't have fans .
Any one know of any ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have a 10" Eee PC that I drag around the house for surfing websites when I don't want to be in front of a normal computer.
I love its size but the one thing about it that drives me nuts is the sound from the fan.
Its high pitched whine just grates on my ears.
an iPad without a fan would litterally be music to my ears.Of course I am interested in any suggestions for 10" screen sized netbooks that don't have fans.
Any one know of any?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552300</id>
	<title>what?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269081120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>tablet pc's already failed like 10 years ago... that's why they are trying to sell them as tables now...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>tablet pc 's already failed like 10 years ago... that 's why they are trying to sell them as tables now.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>tablet pc's already failed like 10 years ago... that's why they are trying to sell them as tables now...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553782</id>
	<title>The REAL reason, which he forgot</title>
	<author>brunes69</author>
	<datestamp>1269092220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The first time someone buys a brand new iPad (or any other tablet) and sits down in front of his TV with it, and surfs the web, he will be happy.</p><p>The first time he trys to reply to an email, reply to a MSN or iChat message, he will curse and swear at the thing, and will probably shelve it within a week.</p><p>See, people keep going on about how the tablet is ideal for the web. They conveniently forget that today, the web is *everything you do on the PC* - and the tablet is *not* ideal for everything, namely, it is very sub-par for anything that involves any amount of typing whatsoever.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The first time someone buys a brand new iPad ( or any other tablet ) and sits down in front of his TV with it , and surfs the web , he will be happy.The first time he trys to reply to an email , reply to a MSN or iChat message , he will curse and swear at the thing , and will probably shelve it within a week.See , people keep going on about how the tablet is ideal for the web .
They conveniently forget that today , the web is * everything you do on the PC * - and the tablet is * not * ideal for everything , namely , it is very sub-par for anything that involves any amount of typing whatsoever .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The first time someone buys a brand new iPad (or any other tablet) and sits down in front of his TV with it, and surfs the web, he will be happy.The first time he trys to reply to an email, reply to a MSN or iChat message, he will curse and swear at the thing, and will probably shelve it within a week.See, people keep going on about how the tablet is ideal for the web.
They conveniently forget that today, the web is *everything you do on the PC* - and the tablet is *not* ideal for everything, namely, it is very sub-par for anything that involves any amount of typing whatsoever.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31554084</id>
	<title>Re:Battery life</title>
	<author>dangitman</author>
	<datestamp>1269094800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>But really, when a company puts out a netbook in the form of a tablet, prices it like a netbook</p></div><p>But if it's in the form of a tablet, then how is it a netbook any longer? It seems to me that the *book designation (see: Powerbook, Notebook) derives from devices that have a folding screen/keyboard form factor. If it is a tablet that doesn't fold, then it's not a netbook anymore, is it?</p><p>Also, what does "pricing it like a netbook" mean? There are netbooks out there that cost more than tablets.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>But really , when a company puts out a netbook in the form of a tablet , prices it like a netbookBut if it 's in the form of a tablet , then how is it a netbook any longer ?
It seems to me that the * book designation ( see : Powerbook , Notebook ) derives from devices that have a folding screen/keyboard form factor .
If it is a tablet that does n't fold , then it 's not a netbook anymore , is it ? Also , what does " pricing it like a netbook " mean ?
There are netbooks out there that cost more than tablets .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But really, when a company puts out a netbook in the form of a tablet, prices it like a netbookBut if it's in the form of a tablet, then how is it a netbook any longer?
It seems to me that the *book designation (see: Powerbook, Notebook) derives from devices that have a folding screen/keyboard form factor.
If it is a tablet that doesn't fold, then it's not a netbook anymore, is it?Also, what does "pricing it like a netbook" mean?
There are netbooks out there that cost more than tablets.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552486</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31555544</id>
	<title>Different Strokes</title>
	<author>Tablizer</author>
	<datestamp>1269113280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>One thing I've learned in life is that different people like different things because their eyes, fingers, and brains take different approaches and skills to things. Some prefer smart phones, some laptops, some desktops, and so forth. If a sufficient support and product ecosystem exists for tablets and they reach a "usable" state, then a sufficient chunk of the population will dig them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>One thing I 've learned in life is that different people like different things because their eyes , fingers , and brains take different approaches and skills to things .
Some prefer smart phones , some laptops , some desktops , and so forth .
If a sufficient support and product ecosystem exists for tablets and they reach a " usable " state , then a sufficient chunk of the population will dig them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One thing I've learned in life is that different people like different things because their eyes, fingers, and brains take different approaches and skills to things.
Some prefer smart phones, some laptops, some desktops, and so forth.
If a sufficient support and product ecosystem exists for tablets and they reach a "usable" state, then a sufficient chunk of the population will dig them.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552394</id>
	<title>Wrong...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269081840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually, I will buy not one, not two, but probably three or maybe even more. The iPad is exactly what I've been needing for 20 years. Great device specs and I'm sure Apple will live up to the hype. I'm also sure that the OS issue will be resolved in time. MacOSX will be on the iPad and Apps will run on the MacOSX (e.g., my laptop). Life just gets better.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , I will buy not one , not two , but probably three or maybe even more .
The iPad is exactly what I 've been needing for 20 years .
Great device specs and I 'm sure Apple will live up to the hype .
I 'm also sure that the OS issue will be resolved in time .
MacOSX will be on the iPad and Apps will run on the MacOSX ( e.g. , my laptop ) .
Life just gets better .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, I will buy not one, not two, but probably three or maybe even more.
The iPad is exactly what I've been needing for 20 years.
Great device specs and I'm sure Apple will live up to the hype.
I'm also sure that the OS issue will be resolved in time.
MacOSX will be on the iPad and Apps will run on the MacOSX (e.g., my laptop).
Life just gets better.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31558576</id>
	<title>Re:niches - fixed that for ya</title>
	<author>ceoyoyo</author>
	<datestamp>1269196920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm curious.  Did this Schell person say this before, after or during the iPad release in the US where they took preorders for a couple hundred thousand of the things?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm curious .
Did this Schell person say this before , after or during the iPad release in the US where they took preorders for a couple hundred thousand of the things ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm curious.
Did this Schell person say this before, after or during the iPad release in the US where they took preorders for a couple hundred thousand of the things?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552656</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552310</id>
	<title>Re:If Bill says it, it must be true</title>
	<author>MrMista\_B</author>
	<datestamp>1269081180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>'Then we're going to fscking kill Google."'</p><p>'fsking'? Really? Are you a child, or speaking to children?</p><p>It's 'fucking'.</p><p>What you meant to say is, 'Then we're going to fucking kill Google."</p><p>Enough with the bullshit baby talk.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>'Then we 're going to fscking kill Google. " ''fsking ' ?
Really ? Are you a child , or speaking to children ? It 's 'fucking'.What you meant to say is , 'Then we 're going to fucking kill Google .
" Enough with the bullshit baby talk .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>'Then we're going to fscking kill Google."''fsking'?
Really? Are you a child, or speaking to children?It's 'fucking'.What you meant to say is, 'Then we're going to fucking kill Google.
"Enough with the bullshit baby talk.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552204</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31557092</id>
	<title>This is the wrong crowd for a tablet anyway</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269181800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, all the comments (I haven't read them all in this thread, but have read comments regarding tablets and iTablets - later iPads for several months now), are most likely skewed in a direction - mostly indicating that tablets won't succeed.  They won't succeed because they don't implement the OS of my choice on them (but even when they do have my OS of choice, I won't buy one because of ).</p><p>I believe the iPad will be successful - and with a crowd of people who don't read/care/post comments to<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/.  When the iPad was announced, I had many mixed reactions to it - mostly about the things it didn't have that all the pundits &amp; hopefuls said it should have to be "complete" or "successful".  Then an interesting thing started occurring - even here on<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/.  Several said they weren't going to buy an iPad - BUT they were going to get one for their parents or grandparents.  Those groups of people who sometimes have a computer, but we all wind up supporting them and eradicating the virii on their computers.  (My mother-in-law has one that I've been down to fix 3-4 times a year, and winds up getting sick again within 2 weeks after I leave).</p><p>This group of people who mostly want nothing more than to do some light web surfing, email, get pictures of the grandkids and family, maybe take a few notes down, etc - they are the ones who will make the iPad successful.  While everyone lambasts the iPad as being "too expensive", most of the others that have had price announcements and point to products that will actually last more than 6 months, are at least as expensive, if not more so.  (Get real - how long do you think that $99 tablet that some Chinese firm is making and will be available "real soon now" will actually last?  Or will actually be $99?  Or will actually be useable for that price point?  Maybe in 4-5 more years, but not this year).</p><p>So - my prediction - the iPad will sell well, and will sell mostly to a crowd that does not inhabit the tech forums and areas of the 'net that are now predicting the demise of the iPad.  It will sell to them because it does what they want.  I don't know what's occurred over the last many years, but at least when I started out programming, you first asked yourself what you really needed in software - you found that software, THEN you worried about what hardware it ran on - and you used the OS that came with that hardware (if you had a choice, great, but most often you didn't).  Somewhere along the line, a generation has come up worrying about what hardware or OS is first - then making their software selections later.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , all the comments ( I have n't read them all in this thread , but have read comments regarding tablets and iTablets - later iPads for several months now ) , are most likely skewed in a direction - mostly indicating that tablets wo n't succeed .
They wo n't succeed because they do n't implement the OS of my choice on them ( but even when they do have my OS of choice , I wo n't buy one because of ) .I believe the iPad will be successful - and with a crowd of people who do n't read/care/post comments to / .
When the iPad was announced , I had many mixed reactions to it - mostly about the things it did n't have that all the pundits &amp; hopefuls said it should have to be " complete " or " successful " .
Then an interesting thing started occurring - even here on / .
Several said they were n't going to buy an iPad - BUT they were going to get one for their parents or grandparents .
Those groups of people who sometimes have a computer , but we all wind up supporting them and eradicating the virii on their computers .
( My mother-in-law has one that I 've been down to fix 3-4 times a year , and winds up getting sick again within 2 weeks after I leave ) .This group of people who mostly want nothing more than to do some light web surfing , email , get pictures of the grandkids and family , maybe take a few notes down , etc - they are the ones who will make the iPad successful .
While everyone lambasts the iPad as being " too expensive " , most of the others that have had price announcements and point to products that will actually last more than 6 months , are at least as expensive , if not more so .
( Get real - how long do you think that $ 99 tablet that some Chinese firm is making and will be available " real soon now " will actually last ?
Or will actually be $ 99 ?
Or will actually be useable for that price point ?
Maybe in 4-5 more years , but not this year ) .So - my prediction - the iPad will sell well , and will sell mostly to a crowd that does not inhabit the tech forums and areas of the 'net that are now predicting the demise of the iPad .
It will sell to them because it does what they want .
I do n't know what 's occurred over the last many years , but at least when I started out programming , you first asked yourself what you really needed in software - you found that software , THEN you worried about what hardware it ran on - and you used the OS that came with that hardware ( if you had a choice , great , but most often you did n't ) .
Somewhere along the line , a generation has come up worrying about what hardware or OS is first - then making their software selections later .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, all the comments (I haven't read them all in this thread, but have read comments regarding tablets and iTablets - later iPads for several months now), are most likely skewed in a direction - mostly indicating that tablets won't succeed.
They won't succeed because they don't implement the OS of my choice on them (but even when they do have my OS of choice, I won't buy one because of ).I believe the iPad will be successful - and with a crowd of people who don't read/care/post comments to /.
When the iPad was announced, I had many mixed reactions to it - mostly about the things it didn't have that all the pundits &amp; hopefuls said it should have to be "complete" or "successful".
Then an interesting thing started occurring - even here on /.
Several said they weren't going to buy an iPad - BUT they were going to get one for their parents or grandparents.
Those groups of people who sometimes have a computer, but we all wind up supporting them and eradicating the virii on their computers.
(My mother-in-law has one that I've been down to fix 3-4 times a year, and winds up getting sick again within 2 weeks after I leave).This group of people who mostly want nothing more than to do some light web surfing, email, get pictures of the grandkids and family, maybe take a few notes down, etc - they are the ones who will make the iPad successful.
While everyone lambasts the iPad as being "too expensive", most of the others that have had price announcements and point to products that will actually last more than 6 months, are at least as expensive, if not more so.
(Get real - how long do you think that $99 tablet that some Chinese firm is making and will be available "real soon now" will actually last?
Or will actually be $99?
Or will actually be useable for that price point?
Maybe in 4-5 more years, but not this year).So - my prediction - the iPad will sell well, and will sell mostly to a crowd that does not inhabit the tech forums and areas of the 'net that are now predicting the demise of the iPad.
It will sell to them because it does what they want.
I don't know what's occurred over the last many years, but at least when I started out programming, you first asked yourself what you really needed in software - you found that software, THEN you worried about what hardware it ran on - and you used the OS that came with that hardware (if you had a choice, great, but most often you didn't).
Somewhere along the line, a generation has come up worrying about what hardware or OS is first - then making their software selections later.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31555312</id>
	<title>Re:well duh</title>
	<author>ClosedSource</author>
	<datestamp>1269109620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If the metaphor is a tablet you should be using your finger, not a stylus right? I mean when I use a real tablet I write with my finger not a pencil or pen, right?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If the metaphor is a tablet you should be using your finger , not a stylus right ?
I mean when I use a real tablet I write with my finger not a pencil or pen , right ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If the metaphor is a tablet you should be using your finger, not a stylus right?
I mean when I use a real tablet I write with my finger not a pencil or pen, right?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552128</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553412</id>
	<title>Re:niches</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269088980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> <i>At best, I see them dominating the eBook-reader and netbook markets</i>
</p><p>
There is a comment, just above, doubting iPad's impact in eBook market. I also see it this way, given that Kindle or Sony or B&amp;N readers cost half that much, and 3G is included for free. There is also that eternal debate about eInk vs. backlit screens... and certainly battery life of an eInk device is infinitely better than anything that iPad has to offer.
</p><p>
But netbook market, IMO, is not going to curl up and die either. A netbook is a fully functioning portable computer. You can consume information with it, and you can equally well create information with it. This is important for people with urge to post every 5 minutes what they are doing (mostly "updating my Facebook page", apparently<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-) iPad, on the other hand, is a consumption device - you can browse the Web, somewhat (without Flash) and you can watch movies, but you can't do much else. Posting a comment like this on<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. would be painful, and writing a larger text would be foolish. Netbooks, with their keyboards, however small, are still better suited to the bidirectional exchange of information, and all that comes in a single package - you open it and you are good to go. No need to carry separate adapters, separate dock, separate keyboard.
</p><p>
I personally see iPad productively used only as a supplementary, generic Web browser. It won't have any plugins (like MS Media Player) that many Web sites use to stream music. It won't have any of the software that you know how to operate. Everything will be new, and everything will have to be bought. This will result in few apps sold, certainly less than those for iPhone. Who, outside of a few fanbois, is going to "accessorize" a computer that you rarely use and hardly ever carry with you? Especially when you already have that functionality working just fine, usually for free, on your laptop - the device that is the real competitor of iPad.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>At best , I see them dominating the eBook-reader and netbook markets There is a comment , just above , doubting iPad 's impact in eBook market .
I also see it this way , given that Kindle or Sony or B&amp;N readers cost half that much , and 3G is included for free .
There is also that eternal debate about eInk vs. backlit screens... and certainly battery life of an eInk device is infinitely better than anything that iPad has to offer .
But netbook market , IMO , is not going to curl up and die either .
A netbook is a fully functioning portable computer .
You can consume information with it , and you can equally well create information with it .
This is important for people with urge to post every 5 minutes what they are doing ( mostly " updating my Facebook page " , apparently : - ) iPad , on the other hand , is a consumption device - you can browse the Web , somewhat ( without Flash ) and you can watch movies , but you ca n't do much else .
Posting a comment like this on / .
would be painful , and writing a larger text would be foolish .
Netbooks , with their keyboards , however small , are still better suited to the bidirectional exchange of information , and all that comes in a single package - you open it and you are good to go .
No need to carry separate adapters , separate dock , separate keyboard .
I personally see iPad productively used only as a supplementary , generic Web browser .
It wo n't have any plugins ( like MS Media Player ) that many Web sites use to stream music .
It wo n't have any of the software that you know how to operate .
Everything will be new , and everything will have to be bought .
This will result in few apps sold , certainly less than those for iPhone .
Who , outside of a few fanbois , is going to " accessorize " a computer that you rarely use and hardly ever carry with you ?
Especially when you already have that functionality working just fine , usually for free , on your laptop - the device that is the real competitor of iPad .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> At best, I see them dominating the eBook-reader and netbook markets

There is a comment, just above, doubting iPad's impact in eBook market.
I also see it this way, given that Kindle or Sony or B&amp;N readers cost half that much, and 3G is included for free.
There is also that eternal debate about eInk vs. backlit screens... and certainly battery life of an eInk device is infinitely better than anything that iPad has to offer.
But netbook market, IMO, is not going to curl up and die either.
A netbook is a fully functioning portable computer.
You can consume information with it, and you can equally well create information with it.
This is important for people with urge to post every 5 minutes what they are doing (mostly "updating my Facebook page", apparently :-) iPad, on the other hand, is a consumption device - you can browse the Web, somewhat (without Flash) and you can watch movies, but you can't do much else.
Posting a comment like this on /.
would be painful, and writing a larger text would be foolish.
Netbooks, with their keyboards, however small, are still better suited to the bidirectional exchange of information, and all that comes in a single package - you open it and you are good to go.
No need to carry separate adapters, separate dock, separate keyboard.
I personally see iPad productively used only as a supplementary, generic Web browser.
It won't have any plugins (like MS Media Player) that many Web sites use to stream music.
It won't have any of the software that you know how to operate.
Everything will be new, and everything will have to be bought.
This will result in few apps sold, certainly less than those for iPhone.
Who, outside of a few fanbois, is going to "accessorize" a computer that you rarely use and hardly ever carry with you?
Especially when you already have that functionality working just fine, usually for free, on your laptop - the device that is the real competitor of iPad.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552374</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31556630</id>
	<title>Re:Apple's tablet is different from other tablets.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269175860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>For me, the only reason not considering an iPad is lack of Flash support and lack of openness. I think it's on the right path, and if these two are solved, I'll consider buying one.</p></div><p>That and a lack of multi tasking, USB Host, Memory card etc etc etc</p><p>A toy with a pretty interface is still a toy</p><p>Hopefully someone will invent a decent interface for a real machine but until then....</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>For me , the only reason not considering an iPad is lack of Flash support and lack of openness .
I think it 's on the right path , and if these two are solved , I 'll consider buying one.That and a lack of multi tasking , USB Host , Memory card etc etc etcA toy with a pretty interface is still a toyHopefully someone will invent a decent interface for a real machine but until then... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For me, the only reason not considering an iPad is lack of Flash support and lack of openness.
I think it's on the right path, and if these two are solved, I'll consider buying one.That and a lack of multi tasking, USB Host, Memory card etc etc etcA toy with a pretty interface is still a toyHopefully someone will invent a decent interface for a real machine but until then....
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552532</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31555720</id>
	<title>Re:well duh</title>
	<author>MemoryDragon</author>
	<datestamp>1269203100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually for me there are three reasons not to buy an iPad, lack of SD port, the really lousy behavior apple puts on the day regarding battery switches (we replace the batteries themselves but only if the machine has no scratches) and the lack of flash.</p><p>The deal breaker was the battery exchange program for me, this is a portable device, it is nearly impossible not to have any scratches on it at the time the battery has to be replaced, if apple refuses to replace the battery because the device has a used look then they cannot sell it to me. I normally would have replaced the battery myself or have a service technician do it, but this is forbidden by apple also!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually for me there are three reasons not to buy an iPad , lack of SD port , the really lousy behavior apple puts on the day regarding battery switches ( we replace the batteries themselves but only if the machine has no scratches ) and the lack of flash.The deal breaker was the battery exchange program for me , this is a portable device , it is nearly impossible not to have any scratches on it at the time the battery has to be replaced , if apple refuses to replace the battery because the device has a used look then they can not sell it to me .
I normally would have replaced the battery myself or have a service technician do it , but this is forbidden by apple also !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually for me there are three reasons not to buy an iPad, lack of SD port, the really lousy behavior apple puts on the day regarding battery switches (we replace the batteries themselves but only if the machine has no scratches) and the lack of flash.The deal breaker was the battery exchange program for me, this is a portable device, it is nearly impossible not to have any scratches on it at the time the battery has to be replaced, if apple refuses to replace the battery because the device has a used look then they cannot sell it to me.
I normally would have replaced the battery myself or have a service technician do it, but this is forbidden by apple also!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552128</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31556134</id>
	<title>Re:Small differences add up</title>
	<author>EnglishTim</author>
	<datestamp>1269167760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think for a tablet to really make it big in an office environment, it needs to replace two things:</p><p>a) Printed out documents<br>b) Paper notepads</p><p>I can't see the iPad doing either of those things because it doesn't have a very accurate input system. Sure, you can read documents on it, but for it to replace paper versions I think you'll want a pen for annotations. Likewise I don't think the iPad's touchscreen would cut it for taking notes.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think for a tablet to really make it big in an office environment , it needs to replace two things : a ) Printed out documentsb ) Paper notepadsI ca n't see the iPad doing either of those things because it does n't have a very accurate input system .
Sure , you can read documents on it , but for it to replace paper versions I think you 'll want a pen for annotations .
Likewise I do n't think the iPad 's touchscreen would cut it for taking notes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think for a tablet to really make it big in an office environment, it needs to replace two things:a) Printed out documentsb) Paper notepadsI can't see the iPad doing either of those things because it doesn't have a very accurate input system.
Sure, you can read documents on it, but for it to replace paper versions I think you'll want a pen for annotations.
Likewise I don't think the iPad's touchscreen would cut it for taking notes.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552362</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31556200</id>
	<title>Re:Battery life</title>
	<author>rtb61</author>
	<datestamp>1269168840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> With the tablet it is actually product squeeze, simply smart phones on one side and ultra portable notebooks on the other side. It makes sense to have both, this of course means the tablet is in addition to those devices. Now for a highly connected person, that phone and netbook are already in addition to a desktop (large screen format) and a smart theatre (big screen TV hooked up to a media centre). </p><p> Popular now is the remote app for you media centre running on your smart phone, which is often a mini-tablet, chances are if you want to do more, than a full keyboard on a netbook is required to fill the next step, even if you are just remoting into your smart theatre. So a large form factor smart phone that no longer can fit in your pocket doesn't really fill a product need that is not already better filled by a netbook fitted with a flip and rotate screen.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>With the tablet it is actually product squeeze , simply smart phones on one side and ultra portable notebooks on the other side .
It makes sense to have both , this of course means the tablet is in addition to those devices .
Now for a highly connected person , that phone and netbook are already in addition to a desktop ( large screen format ) and a smart theatre ( big screen TV hooked up to a media centre ) .
Popular now is the remote app for you media centre running on your smart phone , which is often a mini-tablet , chances are if you want to do more , than a full keyboard on a netbook is required to fill the next step , even if you are just remoting into your smart theatre .
So a large form factor smart phone that no longer can fit in your pocket does n't really fill a product need that is not already better filled by a netbook fitted with a flip and rotate screen .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> With the tablet it is actually product squeeze, simply smart phones on one side and ultra portable notebooks on the other side.
It makes sense to have both, this of course means the tablet is in addition to those devices.
Now for a highly connected person, that phone and netbook are already in addition to a desktop (large screen format) and a smart theatre (big screen TV hooked up to a media centre).
Popular now is the remote app for you media centre running on your smart phone, which is often a mini-tablet, chances are if you want to do more, than a full keyboard on a netbook is required to fill the next step, even if you are just remoting into your smart theatre.
So a large form factor smart phone that no longer can fit in your pocket doesn't really fill a product need that is not already better filled by a netbook fitted with a flip and rotate screen.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552486</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552888</id>
	<title>Re:well duh</title>
	<author>Kenja</author>
	<datestamp>1269085440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The copy of Windows 3.1 For Pens I have sitting in the closet says otherwise. Was very useful back in the day on my little 486sx 25mhz tablet back in the day for running network diagnostics and such.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The copy of Windows 3.1 For Pens I have sitting in the closet says otherwise .
Was very useful back in the day on my little 486sx 25mhz tablet back in the day for running network diagnostics and such .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The copy of Windows 3.1 For Pens I have sitting in the closet says otherwise.
Was very useful back in the day on my little 486sx 25mhz tablet back in the day for running network diagnostics and such.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552128</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31554344</id>
	<title>Re:Battery life</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269097140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Here's why I never bought any of the previous tablets, or ebooks:<br>1. Slow (often intel GMA garbage)<br>2. Crap interface (article hits the "interface designed for mouse not going to fly on a tablet" spot on)<br>3. Missing features that would make it useful (SD/SDHC/SDXC slot! 3G SIM, 802.11n, GPS, and 5mpixel camera) and not have to tow around another device.</p><p>The iPad comes close (It should have the SD slot.) It's primarily failure point is lack of the SD card or ability to interface with a dedicated camera, so being able to blog or be a reporter with this device is a non-starter. So what else is it useful for?</p><p>It's not useful as a sketchpad, because it lacks a wacom pressure sensitive stylus, and previous generations of tablet PC's have had this.</p><p>It lacks a GPS, so it doesn't replace a map, given it CAN get away with Adaptive-GPS if it has 3G. No model of iPhone has GPS either.</p><p>My N95 is still more useful than an iPhone and the primary reason I never bought one (I also never bought any third party software for the N95 because... omg the device is not a good form factor for doing non-phone things on!) I can however do everything except crackberry messaging on it, because it lacks a keyboard.</p><p>Oh wait, can't do that with an iPad either.</p><p>Okay so just what is the iPad useful for?</p><p>- Can't type on it<br>- Can't take photos with it<br>- Can't use it as map<br>- Can read books with it<br>- Can use "the internet", but that suffers from user interface of a web designed for a mouse.<br>- Can't play games that haven't been designed for the iphone/ipad (hell I don't know of any games for the iphone that I'd want to play that have been ported from the pc/console, due to lack of buttons.) Again user interface.</p><p>It's a device looking for a market. Apple believes that if you build it, they will come. But all you have to do is look at previous generations of PalmPC devices that ran windows mobile:</p><p>First generation:<br>Different processor types - non starter<br>Grey scale screen low rez<br>RAM-only<br>Second generation:<br>Color screen, low color, low rezolution<br>RAM only<br>Third generation:<br>800x600 (same general size as iphone)<br>RAM only<br>Fouth generation:<br>Microsoft starts making more of a move to "mobile phone" OS, but still makes everything go through a start-menu like button hell<br>Finally static storage</p><p>But still, software never backwards compatible.</p><p>In fact I feel like I wasted money every time I bought a palm device because they would inevitably not run "newer" software, still couldn't be used as a sketchpad, still no gps, no camera, no 3g. It had bluetooth, and 802.11, at most it's only real utility was to pair it with a GPS (which is what I DID use it for before, before getting the N95 which was cheaper and did this without a separate GPS)</p><p>Hell. You know what.<br>Just give me the N95 with the iPad interface, OS and screen size, and we'd have almost the perfect device.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Here 's why I never bought any of the previous tablets , or ebooks : 1 .
Slow ( often intel GMA garbage ) 2 .
Crap interface ( article hits the " interface designed for mouse not going to fly on a tablet " spot on ) 3 .
Missing features that would make it useful ( SD/SDHC/SDXC slot !
3G SIM , 802.11n , GPS , and 5mpixel camera ) and not have to tow around another device.The iPad comes close ( It should have the SD slot .
) It 's primarily failure point is lack of the SD card or ability to interface with a dedicated camera , so being able to blog or be a reporter with this device is a non-starter .
So what else is it useful for ? It 's not useful as a sketchpad , because it lacks a wacom pressure sensitive stylus , and previous generations of tablet PC 's have had this.It lacks a GPS , so it does n't replace a map , given it CAN get away with Adaptive-GPS if it has 3G .
No model of iPhone has GPS either.My N95 is still more useful than an iPhone and the primary reason I never bought one ( I also never bought any third party software for the N95 because... omg the device is not a good form factor for doing non-phone things on !
) I can however do everything except crackberry messaging on it , because it lacks a keyboard.Oh wait , ca n't do that with an iPad either.Okay so just what is the iPad useful for ? - Ca n't type on it- Ca n't take photos with it- Ca n't use it as map- Can read books with it- Can use " the internet " , but that suffers from user interface of a web designed for a mouse.- Ca n't play games that have n't been designed for the iphone/ipad ( hell I do n't know of any games for the iphone that I 'd want to play that have been ported from the pc/console , due to lack of buttons .
) Again user interface.It 's a device looking for a market .
Apple believes that if you build it , they will come .
But all you have to do is look at previous generations of PalmPC devices that ran windows mobile : First generation : Different processor types - non starterGrey scale screen low rezRAM-onlySecond generation : Color screen , low color , low rezolutionRAM onlyThird generation : 800x600 ( same general size as iphone ) RAM onlyFouth generation : Microsoft starts making more of a move to " mobile phone " OS , but still makes everything go through a start-menu like button hellFinally static storageBut still , software never backwards compatible.In fact I feel like I wasted money every time I bought a palm device because they would inevitably not run " newer " software , still could n't be used as a sketchpad , still no gps , no camera , no 3g .
It had bluetooth , and 802.11 , at most it 's only real utility was to pair it with a GPS ( which is what I DID use it for before , before getting the N95 which was cheaper and did this without a separate GPS ) Hell .
You know what.Just give me the N95 with the iPad interface , OS and screen size , and we 'd have almost the perfect device .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Here's why I never bought any of the previous tablets, or ebooks:1.
Slow (often intel GMA garbage)2.
Crap interface (article hits the "interface designed for mouse not going to fly on a tablet" spot on)3.
Missing features that would make it useful (SD/SDHC/SDXC slot!
3G SIM, 802.11n, GPS, and 5mpixel camera) and not have to tow around another device.The iPad comes close (It should have the SD slot.
) It's primarily failure point is lack of the SD card or ability to interface with a dedicated camera, so being able to blog or be a reporter with this device is a non-starter.
So what else is it useful for?It's not useful as a sketchpad, because it lacks a wacom pressure sensitive stylus, and previous generations of tablet PC's have had this.It lacks a GPS, so it doesn't replace a map, given it CAN get away with Adaptive-GPS if it has 3G.
No model of iPhone has GPS either.My N95 is still more useful than an iPhone and the primary reason I never bought one (I also never bought any third party software for the N95 because... omg the device is not a good form factor for doing non-phone things on!
) I can however do everything except crackberry messaging on it, because it lacks a keyboard.Oh wait, can't do that with an iPad either.Okay so just what is the iPad useful for?- Can't type on it- Can't take photos with it- Can't use it as map- Can read books with it- Can use "the internet", but that suffers from user interface of a web designed for a mouse.- Can't play games that haven't been designed for the iphone/ipad (hell I don't know of any games for the iphone that I'd want to play that have been ported from the pc/console, due to lack of buttons.
) Again user interface.It's a device looking for a market.
Apple believes that if you build it, they will come.
But all you have to do is look at previous generations of PalmPC devices that ran windows mobile:First generation:Different processor types - non starterGrey scale screen low rezRAM-onlySecond generation:Color screen, low color, low rezolutionRAM onlyThird generation:800x600 (same general size as iphone)RAM onlyFouth generation:Microsoft starts making more of a move to "mobile phone" OS, but still makes everything go through a start-menu like button hellFinally static storageBut still, software never backwards compatible.In fact I feel like I wasted money every time I bought a palm device because they would inevitably not run "newer" software, still couldn't be used as a sketchpad, still no gps, no camera, no 3g.
It had bluetooth, and 802.11, at most it's only real utility was to pair it with a GPS (which is what I DID use it for before, before getting the N95 which was cheaper and did this without a separate GPS)Hell.
You know what.Just give me the N95 with the iPad interface, OS and screen size, and we'd have almost the perfect device.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553062</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553164</id>
	<title>ipad sucks just like the rest of them</title>
	<author>cenobyte40k</author>
	<datestamp>1269087060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>All of them are going to fail until you can put them in your pocket. Honestly if I have to have a bag to carry it around why would I want something that doesn't do everything a netbook/notebook would do?

Once they perfect fold out screens we will see more tablet like applications on phones, not on stand alone tablets at all. They are going to just make the screen bigger, the CPU more powerful, and add storage to your phone. Eventually that phone with it's fold out keyboard and fold out screen will eat the netbook/notebook market as well. I think the 'PC' will have better long legs after that, but eventually the PC market will be eaten up by phone as well.</htmltext>
<tokenext>All of them are going to fail until you can put them in your pocket .
Honestly if I have to have a bag to carry it around why would I want something that does n't do everything a netbook/notebook would do ?
Once they perfect fold out screens we will see more tablet like applications on phones , not on stand alone tablets at all .
They are going to just make the screen bigger , the CPU more powerful , and add storage to your phone .
Eventually that phone with it 's fold out keyboard and fold out screen will eat the netbook/notebook market as well .
I think the 'PC ' will have better long legs after that , but eventually the PC market will be eaten up by phone as well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All of them are going to fail until you can put them in your pocket.
Honestly if I have to have a bag to carry it around why would I want something that doesn't do everything a netbook/notebook would do?
Once they perfect fold out screens we will see more tablet like applications on phones, not on stand alone tablets at all.
They are going to just make the screen bigger, the CPU more powerful, and add storage to your phone.
Eventually that phone with it's fold out keyboard and fold out screen will eat the netbook/notebook market as well.
I think the 'PC' will have better long legs after that, but eventually the PC market will be eaten up by phone as well.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552444</id>
	<title>Why not a slide out keyboard?</title>
	<author>Posting=!Working</author>
	<datestamp>1269082200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why don't they follow the trend with phones and have a smaller slide out keyboard. It doesn't have to be a full one, just one like cell phones have, Qwerty only with an Alt key for numbers and special characters. If three rows of full size keys are too much, even a cell phone sized keyboard would help, I've kinda gotten used to typing with my thumbs now.  It beats a touch screen keyboard.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why do n't they follow the trend with phones and have a smaller slide out keyboard .
It does n't have to be a full one , just one like cell phones have , Qwerty only with an Alt key for numbers and special characters .
If three rows of full size keys are too much , even a cell phone sized keyboard would help , I 've kinda gotten used to typing with my thumbs now .
It beats a touch screen keyboard .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why don't they follow the trend with phones and have a smaller slide out keyboard.
It doesn't have to be a full one, just one like cell phones have, Qwerty only with an Alt key for numbers and special characters.
If three rows of full size keys are too much, even a cell phone sized keyboard would help, I've kinda gotten used to typing with my thumbs now.
It beats a touch screen keyboard.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552806</id>
	<title>Re:Author ignores the main reason tablets failed</title>
	<author>Aladrin</author>
	<datestamp>1269084840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You say 'always', but HP has produced $800 tablets for years now.  I upgraded one and spent $1200, but that's still half of your $2500.</p><p>So, why didn't they catch on?</p><p>The digitizer is just so-so<br>The processor is crap and can't really handle digitizer input at full speed, even if the digitizer wasn't so-so.<br>It's heavy.  You imagine holding it on one arm and drawing with the other, like you might a clipboard...  This will not happen for more than a couple minutes.<br>It's touch-screen as well as having a digitizer.  In theory, the touchscreen disables when the pen is near the screen, so your hand doesn't accidentally draw.  In reality, the distance has to be too close, and you end up messing things up constantly.<br>It's heavy.  You imagine reading books on it, but it's simply a pain to move around while you're reading.<br>It's hot.  That processor, as weak as it is, produces so much heat that you'll think twice about setting it on your lap.<br>Did I mention that it's heavy?  Seriously.  Everything you think you want to do with it will fail because it's just heavy.</p><p>So, why do I expect the iPad and its competitors to succeed?</p><p>They won't be heavy.  Just like an iPod Touch or iPhone, it'll be a nice light-weight device that only does what it needs to:  Display content!<br>Decent book-readers are already $200-300 anyhow.  (And they used to be $500.)  For the media capabilities in a better tablet, the extra price is justified.<br>You can run your already-existing mobile apps.  The iPad will use your iPhone apps, and the Android devices will supposedly use your Android apps you've already bought.  On all other computers, you're expected to repurchase your apps when you have multiple devices.  (I've always thought this was a stupid policy.  A person can only use 1 computer at a time anyhow, so just let them install it multiple times.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You say 'always ' , but HP has produced $ 800 tablets for years now .
I upgraded one and spent $ 1200 , but that 's still half of your $ 2500.So , why did n't they catch on ? The digitizer is just so-soThe processor is crap and ca n't really handle digitizer input at full speed , even if the digitizer was n't so-so.It 's heavy .
You imagine holding it on one arm and drawing with the other , like you might a clipboard... This will not happen for more than a couple minutes.It 's touch-screen as well as having a digitizer .
In theory , the touchscreen disables when the pen is near the screen , so your hand does n't accidentally draw .
In reality , the distance has to be too close , and you end up messing things up constantly.It 's heavy .
You imagine reading books on it , but it 's simply a pain to move around while you 're reading.It 's hot .
That processor , as weak as it is , produces so much heat that you 'll think twice about setting it on your lap.Did I mention that it 's heavy ?
Seriously. Everything you think you want to do with it will fail because it 's just heavy.So , why do I expect the iPad and its competitors to succeed ? They wo n't be heavy .
Just like an iPod Touch or iPhone , it 'll be a nice light-weight device that only does what it needs to : Display content ! Decent book-readers are already $ 200-300 anyhow .
( And they used to be $ 500 .
) For the media capabilities in a better tablet , the extra price is justified.You can run your already-existing mobile apps .
The iPad will use your iPhone apps , and the Android devices will supposedly use your Android apps you 've already bought .
On all other computers , you 're expected to repurchase your apps when you have multiple devices .
( I 've always thought this was a stupid policy .
A person can only use 1 computer at a time anyhow , so just let them install it multiple times .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You say 'always', but HP has produced $800 tablets for years now.
I upgraded one and spent $1200, but that's still half of your $2500.So, why didn't they catch on?The digitizer is just so-soThe processor is crap and can't really handle digitizer input at full speed, even if the digitizer wasn't so-so.It's heavy.
You imagine holding it on one arm and drawing with the other, like you might a clipboard...  This will not happen for more than a couple minutes.It's touch-screen as well as having a digitizer.
In theory, the touchscreen disables when the pen is near the screen, so your hand doesn't accidentally draw.
In reality, the distance has to be too close, and you end up messing things up constantly.It's heavy.
You imagine reading books on it, but it's simply a pain to move around while you're reading.It's hot.
That processor, as weak as it is, produces so much heat that you'll think twice about setting it on your lap.Did I mention that it's heavy?
Seriously.  Everything you think you want to do with it will fail because it's just heavy.So, why do I expect the iPad and its competitors to succeed?They won't be heavy.
Just like an iPod Touch or iPhone, it'll be a nice light-weight device that only does what it needs to:  Display content!Decent book-readers are already $200-300 anyhow.
(And they used to be $500.
)  For the media capabilities in a better tablet, the extra price is justified.You can run your already-existing mobile apps.
The iPad will use your iPhone apps, and the Android devices will supposedly use your Android apps you've already bought.
On all other computers, you're expected to repurchase your apps when you have multiple devices.
(I've always thought this was a stupid policy.
A person can only use 1 computer at a time anyhow, so just let them install it multiple times.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552224</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31554838</id>
	<title>Re:I Have a Tablet, and It's Brilliant!</title>
	<author>dangitman</author>
	<datestamp>1269102420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> The irony is that with some deep discounting and some coupons, my TabletPC cost less than the higher-end iPad will cost, *and* it can easily run 1080p from both MKV/AVC and Flash with ease.</p></div><p>It's not really ironic that with <strong>deep discounts</strong> in addition to <strong>coupons</strong> you can get this cheaply, but it's hardly relevant to the average customer, who gets neither.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The irony is that with some deep discounting and some coupons , my TabletPC cost less than the higher-end iPad will cost , * and * it can easily run 1080p from both MKV/AVC and Flash with ease.It 's not really ironic that with deep discounts in addition to coupons you can get this cheaply , but it 's hardly relevant to the average customer , who gets neither .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> The irony is that with some deep discounting and some coupons, my TabletPC cost less than the higher-end iPad will cost, *and* it can easily run 1080p from both MKV/AVC and Flash with ease.It's not really ironic that with deep discounts in addition to coupons you can get this cheaply, but it's hardly relevant to the average customer, who gets neither.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552260</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552204</id>
	<title>If Bill says it, it must be true</title>
	<author>whereiswaldo</author>
	<datestamp>1269080340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Within five years, I predict it will be the most popular form of PC sold in America.  It will come with a full 640 KB of RAM which should be enough for anybody.  We will continue to out-innovate Apple.  Then we're going to fscking kill Google."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Within five years , I predict it will be the most popular form of PC sold in America .
It will come with a full 640 KB of RAM which should be enough for anybody .
We will continue to out-innovate Apple .
Then we 're going to fscking kill Google .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Within five years, I predict it will be the most popular form of PC sold in America.
It will come with a full 640 KB of RAM which should be enough for anybody.
We will continue to out-innovate Apple.
Then we're going to fscking kill Google.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31561756</id>
	<title>tablets existed</title>
	<author>josepha48</author>
	<datestamp>1269177660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>but none run OS X the full OS.  What I was hoping for was basically apple taking their imac and making it 1/2 as thick and touch screen.  Also the cost price point in tablets have never been 'in range'
<br>PC around $500 (some less some more) affordable to all
<br>laptop $800 (some less some more) affordable to all, netbooks cheaper
<br>tablet $1500 (few less, most more)
<p>Ok if my number are slightly off, the point is that tablets that have full os would cost more than laptop and offer only a little in way of portability.  But this is changing now, so we will see if tablets take off and if the ipad ( I still think of mad tv skit) rules that world or not.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>but none run OS X the full OS .
What I was hoping for was basically apple taking their imac and making it 1/2 as thick and touch screen .
Also the cost price point in tablets have never been 'in range ' PC around $ 500 ( some less some more ) affordable to all laptop $ 800 ( some less some more ) affordable to all , netbooks cheaper tablet $ 1500 ( few less , most more ) Ok if my number are slightly off , the point is that tablets that have full os would cost more than laptop and offer only a little in way of portability .
But this is changing now , so we will see if tablets take off and if the ipad ( I still think of mad tv skit ) rules that world or not .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>but none run OS X the full OS.
What I was hoping for was basically apple taking their imac and making it 1/2 as thick and touch screen.
Also the cost price point in tablets have never been 'in range'
PC around $500 (some less some more) affordable to all
laptop $800 (some less some more) affordable to all, netbooks cheaper
tablet $1500 (few less, most more)
Ok if my number are slightly off, the point is that tablets that have full os would cost more than laptop and offer only a little in way of portability.
But this is changing now, so we will see if tablets take off and if the ipad ( I still think of mad tv skit) rules that world or not.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552352</id>
	<title>Long Tail...</title>
	<author>bennomatic</author>
	<datestamp>1269081540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>There's niches and there's niches.  It would be possible to create a device that's useful for only one task, and if only a few million people in the  world are interested in that task, then you've got a really limited market.
<br> <br>
Tablet devices have long been billed as fully functional computes with a new form-factor, but in some ways, they've been the worst of both worlds.  As others have pointed out, the form-factor is typically tacked onto the OS, rather than both being designed to work flawlessly together.  And they've historically been underpowered systems which would never replace a desktop.
<br> <br>
What's interesting about the iPad is that it answers a different question than other tablets have.  Rather than asking, "what sort of device would computer users want to buy?", it seems to me that Apple has asked, "What sort of device would appeal to people who hate computers?"
<br> <br>
That question leads to others, like, "What tasks do  people want to do without having to boot up a computer?"  Reading, watching movies, web browsing, playing games.  Sure, there are more things you can do with an iPad--they wouldn't have migrated iWork to the platform if they didn't think some people would want to use it for work--but I think the main thing they've done is build something that is indeed a computer, but that a lot of people who don't like computers don't have to see as one.
<br> <br>
Like Apple or not, they've done a great job with interface design on the iPhone, and the lessons learned there transfer well to the iPad.  Will it succeed or fail?  I don't know; it depends on your definition, I guess.  I doubt iPad sales will ever quite catch up with the iPhone's, but of course, that's a pretty high bar to shoot for.  They've set their target at 10 million this year.  Again, like Apple or not, it's been a while since they fell short of sales estimates, even on completely new products.
<br> <br>
In fact, they've made some big wins on products which everyone thought would fail.  The original iPod was going to be just another MP3 player.  They killed the iPod Mini, their most successful model, at its sales peak and replaced it with the Nano, a complete redesign, and got a huge sales bump.  They made the screen-less shuffle, providing fewer features than the competitors that Jobs referred to as crap, and outselling those competitors by a mile.  They released the iPhone for $599, no SDK, no MMS, no cut and paste, and all sorts of other things wrong with it according to the chatter on the Internet, and yet, here we are.
<br> <br>
I'm sure there are going to be a lot of new tablets released in short order, some of which might be even better than Apple's in some ways or others.  But I'm not sure it's time to bet against Apple in terms of long term success for the product.</htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's niches and there 's niches .
It would be possible to create a device that 's useful for only one task , and if only a few million people in the world are interested in that task , then you 've got a really limited market .
Tablet devices have long been billed as fully functional computes with a new form-factor , but in some ways , they 've been the worst of both worlds .
As others have pointed out , the form-factor is typically tacked onto the OS , rather than both being designed to work flawlessly together .
And they 've historically been underpowered systems which would never replace a desktop .
What 's interesting about the iPad is that it answers a different question than other tablets have .
Rather than asking , " what sort of device would computer users want to buy ?
" , it seems to me that Apple has asked , " What sort of device would appeal to people who hate computers ?
" That question leads to others , like , " What tasks do people want to do without having to boot up a computer ?
" Reading , watching movies , web browsing , playing games .
Sure , there are more things you can do with an iPad--they would n't have migrated iWork to the platform if they did n't think some people would want to use it for work--but I think the main thing they 've done is build something that is indeed a computer , but that a lot of people who do n't like computers do n't have to see as one .
Like Apple or not , they 've done a great job with interface design on the iPhone , and the lessons learned there transfer well to the iPad .
Will it succeed or fail ?
I do n't know ; it depends on your definition , I guess .
I doubt iPad sales will ever quite catch up with the iPhone 's , but of course , that 's a pretty high bar to shoot for .
They 've set their target at 10 million this year .
Again , like Apple or not , it 's been a while since they fell short of sales estimates , even on completely new products .
In fact , they 've made some big wins on products which everyone thought would fail .
The original iPod was going to be just another MP3 player .
They killed the iPod Mini , their most successful model , at its sales peak and replaced it with the Nano , a complete redesign , and got a huge sales bump .
They made the screen-less shuffle , providing fewer features than the competitors that Jobs referred to as crap , and outselling those competitors by a mile .
They released the iPhone for $ 599 , no SDK , no MMS , no cut and paste , and all sorts of other things wrong with it according to the chatter on the Internet , and yet , here we are .
I 'm sure there are going to be a lot of new tablets released in short order , some of which might be even better than Apple 's in some ways or others .
But I 'm not sure it 's time to bet against Apple in terms of long term success for the product .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's niches and there's niches.
It would be possible to create a device that's useful for only one task, and if only a few million people in the  world are interested in that task, then you've got a really limited market.
Tablet devices have long been billed as fully functional computes with a new form-factor, but in some ways, they've been the worst of both worlds.
As others have pointed out, the form-factor is typically tacked onto the OS, rather than both being designed to work flawlessly together.
And they've historically been underpowered systems which would never replace a desktop.
What's interesting about the iPad is that it answers a different question than other tablets have.
Rather than asking, "what sort of device would computer users want to buy?
", it seems to me that Apple has asked, "What sort of device would appeal to people who hate computers?
"
 
That question leads to others, like, "What tasks do  people want to do without having to boot up a computer?
"  Reading, watching movies, web browsing, playing games.
Sure, there are more things you can do with an iPad--they wouldn't have migrated iWork to the platform if they didn't think some people would want to use it for work--but I think the main thing they've done is build something that is indeed a computer, but that a lot of people who don't like computers don't have to see as one.
Like Apple or not, they've done a great job with interface design on the iPhone, and the lessons learned there transfer well to the iPad.
Will it succeed or fail?
I don't know; it depends on your definition, I guess.
I doubt iPad sales will ever quite catch up with the iPhone's, but of course, that's a pretty high bar to shoot for.
They've set their target at 10 million this year.
Again, like Apple or not, it's been a while since they fell short of sales estimates, even on completely new products.
In fact, they've made some big wins on products which everyone thought would fail.
The original iPod was going to be just another MP3 player.
They killed the iPod Mini, their most successful model, at its sales peak and replaced it with the Nano, a complete redesign, and got a huge sales bump.
They made the screen-less shuffle, providing fewer features than the competitors that Jobs referred to as crap, and outselling those competitors by a mile.
They released the iPhone for $599, no SDK, no MMS, no cut and paste, and all sorts of other things wrong with it according to the chatter on the Internet, and yet, here we are.
I'm sure there are going to be a lot of new tablets released in short order, some of which might be even better than Apple's in some ways or others.
But I'm not sure it's time to bet against Apple in terms of long term success for the product.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552260</id>
	<title>I Have a Tablet, and It's Brilliant!</title>
	<author>meehawl</author>
	<datestamp>1269080760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just got a <a href="http://www.google.com/webhp#hl=en&amp;source=hp&amp;q=hp+tm2&amp;aq=f&amp;aqi=g10&amp;aql=&amp;oq=&amp;gs\_rfai=&amp;fp=ae8f9588018abe0f" title="google.com">Hp Tm2</a> [google.com]. Capacitive multitouch screen + Wacom pressure-sensitive digitiser screen + huge multitouch trackpad. I added a 3-button scrolling trackball for my own UI preference. 10 watt CULV dual-core CPU. Dual boot Ubuntu and Win7, with each virtualising the physical partition of the other on-demand, and virtual XP and OSx86 just for kicks. Yes, the basic screen UIs such as Gnome and Win7 File Explorer are less than optimal for finger manipulation. But there are so many replacement apps and shells that this is not really an issue. And the ability to avoid the mouse/trackball unless absolutely necessary and directly interact with the objects on screen is both amazing and liberating. I suspect that many of the people who diss on TabletPCs simply haven't really used one, or have not yet found a compelling reason to use one or haven't really looked very much. Personally, I use wanted a tablet for the immediacy of interacting directly on the screen, and the amazingly convenient comic book/ebook/media viewer it enables. I'm no stranger to mechanically disintermediated UIs -- was using a light pen in the early 1980s and a mouse since the Mac came out in the mid-80s -- but after a few years of a touchscreen phone/PDA I simply knew my next PC had to have touch. The irony is that with some deep discounting and some coupons, my TabletPC cost less than the higher-end iPad will cost, *and* it can easily run 1080p from both MKV/AVC and Flash with ease.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just got a Hp Tm2 [ google.com ] .
Capacitive multitouch screen + Wacom pressure-sensitive digitiser screen + huge multitouch trackpad .
I added a 3-button scrolling trackball for my own UI preference .
10 watt CULV dual-core CPU .
Dual boot Ubuntu and Win7 , with each virtualising the physical partition of the other on-demand , and virtual XP and OSx86 just for kicks .
Yes , the basic screen UIs such as Gnome and Win7 File Explorer are less than optimal for finger manipulation .
But there are so many replacement apps and shells that this is not really an issue .
And the ability to avoid the mouse/trackball unless absolutely necessary and directly interact with the objects on screen is both amazing and liberating .
I suspect that many of the people who diss on TabletPCs simply have n't really used one , or have not yet found a compelling reason to use one or have n't really looked very much .
Personally , I use wanted a tablet for the immediacy of interacting directly on the screen , and the amazingly convenient comic book/ebook/media viewer it enables .
I 'm no stranger to mechanically disintermediated UIs -- was using a light pen in the early 1980s and a mouse since the Mac came out in the mid-80s -- but after a few years of a touchscreen phone/PDA I simply knew my next PC had to have touch .
The irony is that with some deep discounting and some coupons , my TabletPC cost less than the higher-end iPad will cost , * and * it can easily run 1080p from both MKV/AVC and Flash with ease .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just got a Hp Tm2 [google.com].
Capacitive multitouch screen + Wacom pressure-sensitive digitiser screen + huge multitouch trackpad.
I added a 3-button scrolling trackball for my own UI preference.
10 watt CULV dual-core CPU.
Dual boot Ubuntu and Win7, with each virtualising the physical partition of the other on-demand, and virtual XP and OSx86 just for kicks.
Yes, the basic screen UIs such as Gnome and Win7 File Explorer are less than optimal for finger manipulation.
But there are so many replacement apps and shells that this is not really an issue.
And the ability to avoid the mouse/trackball unless absolutely necessary and directly interact with the objects on screen is both amazing and liberating.
I suspect that many of the people who diss on TabletPCs simply haven't really used one, or have not yet found a compelling reason to use one or haven't really looked very much.
Personally, I use wanted a tablet for the immediacy of interacting directly on the screen, and the amazingly convenient comic book/ebook/media viewer it enables.
I'm no stranger to mechanically disintermediated UIs -- was using a light pen in the early 1980s and a mouse since the Mac came out in the mid-80s -- but after a few years of a touchscreen phone/PDA I simply knew my next PC had to have touch.
The irony is that with some deep discounting and some coupons, my TabletPC cost less than the higher-end iPad will cost, *and* it can easily run 1080p from both MKV/AVC and Flash with ease.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31557328</id>
	<title>5 reasons</title>
	<author>chord.wav</author>
	<datestamp>1269184320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>5 reasons not to click on a link to an enumerative article:</p><p>1 - Most of the time you get 1 of those items per page, exposing you to more banners and stuff.<br>2 - They tell you nothing new.<br>3 - Sometimes, reasons are invented just because they have to have 3, 5, or 10 reasons, never 6.<br>4 - They are poorly written. The "N reasons [to|not to]" are the best cost/benefit for the site owner, they get the article up in minutes and the title gets zillions of wondering surfers to their site. They don't want to inform you, they want you to see the banners or they want to promote their blog/site.<br>5 - Just because you probably have something better to do with your time, like reading this post.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>5 reasons not to click on a link to an enumerative article : 1 - Most of the time you get 1 of those items per page , exposing you to more banners and stuff.2 - They tell you nothing new.3 - Sometimes , reasons are invented just because they have to have 3 , 5 , or 10 reasons , never 6.4 - They are poorly written .
The " N reasons [ to | not to ] " are the best cost/benefit for the site owner , they get the article up in minutes and the title gets zillions of wondering surfers to their site .
They do n't want to inform you , they want you to see the banners or they want to promote their blog/site.5 - Just because you probably have something better to do with your time , like reading this post .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>5 reasons not to click on a link to an enumerative article:1 - Most of the time you get 1 of those items per page, exposing you to more banners and stuff.2 - They tell you nothing new.3 - Sometimes, reasons are invented just because they have to have 3, 5, or 10 reasons, never 6.4 - They are poorly written.
The "N reasons [to|not to]" are the best cost/benefit for the site owner, they get the article up in minutes and the title gets zillions of wondering surfers to their site.
They don't want to inform you, they want you to see the banners or they want to promote their blog/site.5 - Just because you probably have something better to do with your time, like reading this post.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553778</id>
	<title>Which is why it may be a successful appliance.</title>
	<author>guidryp</author>
	<datestamp>1269092160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> My problem with iPad. Is that it's not an open platform.</p> </div><p>Which is precisely why it might be a successful appliance.</p><p>I won't address your many incorrect bullet points, (mainly variations on Apple approves apps) as Kendall already did that well (someone mod him up), but I will point out that this isn't meant to replace your desktop environment.</p><p>Apples touch devices are more meant to be an Appliance platform. Each application can expect to take over the device and turn it into a new type of appliance. Maintaining a high level of quality control for applications instead of a free for all, improves the user experience by eliminating a large among of buggy junk they won't have to wade through. There is next to nothing useful actually missing, but it does give complainers something to complain about.</p><p>Likewise having controlled multi-tasking also allows much better use of resources. I suspect the will have new back-grounding API in 4.0 but only for applications that get approved for that usage, like Pandora (just about the only thing I ever see when people try to make the case that they need multi-tasking).</p><p>My only gripe with the iPad is I don't have a Mac and coding my own apps more or less require it (yeah, I know there are kludgy alternatives...).</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>My problem with iPad .
Is that it 's not an open platform .
Which is precisely why it might be a successful appliance.I wo n't address your many incorrect bullet points , ( mainly variations on Apple approves apps ) as Kendall already did that well ( someone mod him up ) , but I will point out that this is n't meant to replace your desktop environment.Apples touch devices are more meant to be an Appliance platform .
Each application can expect to take over the device and turn it into a new type of appliance .
Maintaining a high level of quality control for applications instead of a free for all , improves the user experience by eliminating a large among of buggy junk they wo n't have to wade through .
There is next to nothing useful actually missing , but it does give complainers something to complain about.Likewise having controlled multi-tasking also allows much better use of resources .
I suspect the will have new back-grounding API in 4.0 but only for applications that get approved for that usage , like Pandora ( just about the only thing I ever see when people try to make the case that they need multi-tasking ) .My only gripe with the iPad is I do n't have a Mac and coding my own apps more or less require it ( yeah , I know there are kludgy alternatives... ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> My problem with iPad.
Is that it's not an open platform.
Which is precisely why it might be a successful appliance.I won't address your many incorrect bullet points, (mainly variations on Apple approves apps) as Kendall already did that well (someone mod him up), but I will point out that this isn't meant to replace your desktop environment.Apples touch devices are more meant to be an Appliance platform.
Each application can expect to take over the device and turn it into a new type of appliance.
Maintaining a high level of quality control for applications instead of a free for all, improves the user experience by eliminating a large among of buggy junk they won't have to wade through.
There is next to nothing useful actually missing, but it does give complainers something to complain about.Likewise having controlled multi-tasking also allows much better use of resources.
I suspect the will have new back-grounding API in 4.0 but only for applications that get approved for that usage, like Pandora (just about the only thing I ever see when people try to make the case that they need multi-tasking).My only gripe with the iPad is I don't have a Mac and coding my own apps more or less require it (yeah, I know there are kludgy alternatives...).
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552252</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552318</id>
	<title>Netbooks or tablets</title>
	<author>Gruff1002</author>
	<datestamp>1269081180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Which form factor will it be?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Which form factor will it be ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Which form factor will it be?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553764</id>
	<title>Tablets dont suck</title>
	<author>Watertowers</author>
	<datestamp>1269091980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I disagree, tablets don't suck.  Tablets have had a problem of short battery life, screens are not good in sunlight and the interface is that of a laptop/desktop rather than tablet, where a user would have access to a keyboard and mouse.  I think since multi-touch has become available, this market has been changing for the better.  I also think that once the multi-touch colour e-ink type displays become more prevalent and battery life creeps over 12 hours (which is already starting to happen) these devices will become more popular.  The only problem left is to make it possible to view video on an e-ink type display, although the Pixel Qi display has provided a solution to this it would be better if you didn't have to swap between display types.

To me, a tablet is something I want to use for reading, browsing the internet and annotating documents.  So I am after a version that opens like a book and has 2 hi-res (min 1366 x 786) multi-touch screens and a battery life of over 12 hours and enough grunt to browse and watch video.  The device must be capable of running multiple apps simulatenously.  The screen should also be readable in sunlight.  With the Pixel Qi screen and other technologies currently available I think this is achievable.  So where is it?</htmltext>
<tokenext>I disagree , tablets do n't suck .
Tablets have had a problem of short battery life , screens are not good in sunlight and the interface is that of a laptop/desktop rather than tablet , where a user would have access to a keyboard and mouse .
I think since multi-touch has become available , this market has been changing for the better .
I also think that once the multi-touch colour e-ink type displays become more prevalent and battery life creeps over 12 hours ( which is already starting to happen ) these devices will become more popular .
The only problem left is to make it possible to view video on an e-ink type display , although the Pixel Qi display has provided a solution to this it would be better if you did n't have to swap between display types .
To me , a tablet is something I want to use for reading , browsing the internet and annotating documents .
So I am after a version that opens like a book and has 2 hi-res ( min 1366 x 786 ) multi-touch screens and a battery life of over 12 hours and enough grunt to browse and watch video .
The device must be capable of running multiple apps simulatenously .
The screen should also be readable in sunlight .
With the Pixel Qi screen and other technologies currently available I think this is achievable .
So where is it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I disagree, tablets don't suck.
Tablets have had a problem of short battery life, screens are not good in sunlight and the interface is that of a laptop/desktop rather than tablet, where a user would have access to a keyboard and mouse.
I think since multi-touch has become available, this market has been changing for the better.
I also think that once the multi-touch colour e-ink type displays become more prevalent and battery life creeps over 12 hours (which is already starting to happen) these devices will become more popular.
The only problem left is to make it possible to view video on an e-ink type display, although the Pixel Qi display has provided a solution to this it would be better if you didn't have to swap between display types.
To me, a tablet is something I want to use for reading, browsing the internet and annotating documents.
So I am after a version that opens like a book and has 2 hi-res (min 1366 x 786) multi-touch screens and a battery life of over 12 hours and enough grunt to browse and watch video.
The device must be capable of running multiple apps simulatenously.
The screen should also be readable in sunlight.
With the Pixel Qi screen and other technologies currently available I think this is achievable.
So where is it?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553060</id>
	<title>Re:niches</title>
	<author>Wovel</author>
	<datestamp>1269086520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Must have had something, the iPhone is the #1 selling smart phone in Japan atm... (Look it up on your own)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Must have had something , the iPhone is the # 1 selling smart phone in Japan atm... ( Look it up on your own )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Must have had something, the iPhone is the #1 selling smart phone in Japan atm... (Look it up on your own)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552520</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553216</id>
	<title>It's not for you</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269087300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Listen you bunch of tech zealots: the iPad is not for you. It's for the computer illiterate, and for people that hate computers. And there are a far lot more of them, then there are of you. It will be a big succes.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Listen you bunch of tech zealots : the iPad is not for you .
It 's for the computer illiterate , and for people that hate computers .
And there are a far lot more of them , then there are of you .
It will be a big succes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Listen you bunch of tech zealots: the iPad is not for you.
It's for the computer illiterate, and for people that hate computers.
And there are a far lot more of them, then there are of you.
It will be a big succes.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552916</id>
	<title>Re:Pfft</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269085620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Lemme see if I follow your argument:</p><blockquote><div><p>The reason people don't want a tablet, especially the iPad, is because it doesn't do anything special.</p></div></blockquote><p>Hm. Ok, I'll buy it. Tablets are usually more expensive laptops, that run full operating systems and are operated by a clumsy UI. You don't gain anything. Well, except the iPad. It's running a special tablet-oriented version of OS X. But you're right... you don't really get more functionality from the iPad than a laptop or even a netbook.</p><blockquote><div><p>It's pretty much the same "throw existing apps on something without a keyboard and call it a tablet" that everyone else has tried.</p></div></blockquote><p>Again, I agree... MS Office would be especially painful if all you could use with it is a stylus. But the iPad will specifically *not* be using existing apps. In fact, they made a completely new version of iWork to run on the iPad...</p><blockquote><div><p>That's not how the iPod and iPhone were successful. It's not how smartphones became successful in general, or even how netbooks became successful. If you want to make a real tablet, you've got to have a focused, tablet-oriented system, and a pervasive tablet UI.</p></div></blockquote><p>I'm sorry. Do you even know what an iPad is? It pretty much is a "real tablet" with a "focused, tablet-oriented system" and a "pervasive tablet UI". At least, it's the closest thing we've come to in the mainstream market.</p><p>You seem to be arguing that the people who don't want a tablet don't want it because it has clunky, non-tablet software. But even tablets that *do* have tablet-oriented software and a tablet-specific UI are doomed to failure because they don't have clunky, non-tablet software. Umm....</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Lem me see if I follow your argument : The reason people do n't want a tablet , especially the iPad , is because it does n't do anything special.Hm .
Ok , I 'll buy it .
Tablets are usually more expensive laptops , that run full operating systems and are operated by a clumsy UI .
You do n't gain anything .
Well , except the iPad .
It 's running a special tablet-oriented version of OS X. But you 're right... you do n't really get more functionality from the iPad than a laptop or even a netbook.It 's pretty much the same " throw existing apps on something without a keyboard and call it a tablet " that everyone else has tried.Again , I agree... MS Office would be especially painful if all you could use with it is a stylus .
But the iPad will specifically * not * be using existing apps .
In fact , they made a completely new version of iWork to run on the iPad...That 's not how the iPod and iPhone were successful .
It 's not how smartphones became successful in general , or even how netbooks became successful .
If you want to make a real tablet , you 've got to have a focused , tablet-oriented system , and a pervasive tablet UI.I 'm sorry .
Do you even know what an iPad is ?
It pretty much is a " real tablet " with a " focused , tablet-oriented system " and a " pervasive tablet UI " .
At least , it 's the closest thing we 've come to in the mainstream market.You seem to be arguing that the people who do n't want a tablet do n't want it because it has clunky , non-tablet software .
But even tablets that * do * have tablet-oriented software and a tablet-specific UI are doomed to failure because they do n't have clunky , non-tablet software .
Umm... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Lemme see if I follow your argument:The reason people don't want a tablet, especially the iPad, is because it doesn't do anything special.Hm.
Ok, I'll buy it.
Tablets are usually more expensive laptops, that run full operating systems and are operated by a clumsy UI.
You don't gain anything.
Well, except the iPad.
It's running a special tablet-oriented version of OS X. But you're right... you don't really get more functionality from the iPad than a laptop or even a netbook.It's pretty much the same "throw existing apps on something without a keyboard and call it a tablet" that everyone else has tried.Again, I agree... MS Office would be especially painful if all you could use with it is a stylus.
But the iPad will specifically *not* be using existing apps.
In fact, they made a completely new version of iWork to run on the iPad...That's not how the iPod and iPhone were successful.
It's not how smartphones became successful in general, or even how netbooks became successful.
If you want to make a real tablet, you've got to have a focused, tablet-oriented system, and a pervasive tablet UI.I'm sorry.
Do you even know what an iPad is?
It pretty much is a "real tablet" with a "focused, tablet-oriented system" and a "pervasive tablet UI".
At least, it's the closest thing we've come to in the mainstream market.You seem to be arguing that the people who don't want a tablet don't want it because it has clunky, non-tablet software.
But even tablets that *do* have tablet-oriented software and a tablet-specific UI are doomed to failure because they don't have clunky, non-tablet software.
Umm....
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552258</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31555718</id>
	<title>Re:If Bill says it, it must be true</title>
	<author>shutdown -p now</author>
	<datestamp>1269203040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The year 2010 is going to be the Year of Linux on the Tablet!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The year 2010 is going to be the Year of Linux on the Tablet !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The year 2010 is going to be the Year of Linux on the Tablet!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552204</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31556672</id>
	<title>I loved my ThinkPad tablet</title>
	<author>rcharbon</author>
	<datestamp>1269176460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I had a Lenovo ThinkPad tablet with Vista at my last job and I loved it.  The tablet interface was perfect for playing Microsoft's Sudoko app while I was waiting for them to dump me.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I had a Lenovo ThinkPad tablet with Vista at my last job and I loved it .
The tablet interface was perfect for playing Microsoft 's Sudoko app while I was waiting for them to dump me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I had a Lenovo ThinkPad tablet with Vista at my last job and I loved it.
The tablet interface was perfect for playing Microsoft's Sudoko app while I was waiting for them to dump me.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553440</id>
	<title>Re:I Have a Tablet, and It's Brilliant!</title>
	<author>Compuser</author>
	<datestamp>1269089220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>At half the price and half the weight this would be kick-ass. I get tired carrying anything above 2.5 lb with me all day. Anything above $500 is a serious investment.<br>Plus I do not see anything about Wacom active digitizer, without which this thing is useless for drawing or taking notes. The word stylus is not even on the linked<br>page.</p><p>I still give it another two-three years before the tablets become usable enough, cheap enough, and light enough. And Ipad is a joke for my uses but we'll se if it<br>has a niche in general.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>At half the price and half the weight this would be kick-ass .
I get tired carrying anything above 2.5 lb with me all day .
Anything above $ 500 is a serious investment.Plus I do not see anything about Wacom active digitizer , without which this thing is useless for drawing or taking notes .
The word stylus is not even on the linkedpage.I still give it another two-three years before the tablets become usable enough , cheap enough , and light enough .
And Ipad is a joke for my uses but we 'll se if ithas a niche in general .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At half the price and half the weight this would be kick-ass.
I get tired carrying anything above 2.5 lb with me all day.
Anything above $500 is a serious investment.Plus I do not see anything about Wacom active digitizer, without which this thing is useless for drawing or taking notes.
The word stylus is not even on the linkedpage.I still give it another two-three years before the tablets become usable enough, cheap enough, and light enough.
And Ipad is a joke for my uses but we'll se if ithas a niche in general.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552260</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552970</id>
	<title>Re:Author ignores the main reason tablets failed</title>
	<author>Rockoon</author>
	<datestamp>1269086040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This.<br>
<br>
Quick verification: go to NewEgg and bring up the Tablet PC's, sort by lowest price and see that its a whopping $1150 minimum.<br>
<br>
For $1150 I can easily build a desktop that is about 10 times faster than my current one, with enough money left over for a companion netbook.<br>
<br>
I don't care what form factor it comes in.. I'm simply not spending $1000 on a computer for myself. Period.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>..and there is no chance that apples toy will get the attention of my money, either.<br>
<br>
Might pick up a notebook for ~$550, or build a new desktop for ~$650, or even sink ~$300 into a fast SSD.. drop the tablet price to $400 and it might be an interesting alternative to a notebook</htmltext>
<tokenext>This .
Quick verification : go to NewEgg and bring up the Tablet PC 's , sort by lowest price and see that its a whopping $ 1150 minimum .
For $ 1150 I can easily build a desktop that is about 10 times faster than my current one , with enough money left over for a companion netbook .
I do n't care what form factor it comes in.. I 'm simply not spending $ 1000 on a computer for myself .
Period. ..and there is no chance that apples toy will get the attention of my money , either .
Might pick up a notebook for ~ $ 550 , or build a new desktop for ~ $ 650 , or even sink ~ $ 300 into a fast SSD.. drop the tablet price to $ 400 and it might be an interesting alternative to a notebook</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This.
Quick verification: go to NewEgg and bring up the Tablet PC's, sort by lowest price and see that its a whopping $1150 minimum.
For $1150 I can easily build a desktop that is about 10 times faster than my current one, with enough money left over for a companion netbook.
I don't care what form factor it comes in.. I'm simply not spending $1000 on a computer for myself.
Period. ..and there is no chance that apples toy will get the attention of my money, either.
Might pick up a notebook for ~$550, or build a new desktop for ~$650, or even sink ~$300 into a fast SSD.. drop the tablet price to $400 and it might be an interesting alternative to a notebook</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552224</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552824</id>
	<title>Re:niches</title>
	<author>Miseph</author>
	<datestamp>1269084960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So, your problem with his generalization is that he made it short, pithy and memorable, rather than long-winded and full of exceptions?</p><p>I'll bet you're the kind of person who gets upset when bumper stickers fail to adequately convey all the nuances of a person's opinion... "I'd rather be fishing" indeed.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So , your problem with his generalization is that he made it short , pithy and memorable , rather than long-winded and full of exceptions ? I 'll bet you 're the kind of person who gets upset when bumper stickers fail to adequately convey all the nuances of a person 's opinion... " I 'd rather be fishing " indeed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So, your problem with his generalization is that he made it short, pithy and memorable, rather than long-winded and full of exceptions?I'll bet you're the kind of person who gets upset when bumper stickers fail to adequately convey all the nuances of a person's opinion... "I'd rather be fishing" indeed.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552436</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31555036</id>
	<title>Imagine</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269105120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; Can you imagine pecking around with your finger on ultra-thin scroll bars and tiny buttons? ------ You mean like on my Windows Mobile Phone?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; Can you imagine pecking around with your finger on ultra-thin scroll bars and tiny buttons ?
------ You mean like on my Windows Mobile Phone ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; Can you imagine pecking around with your finger on ultra-thin scroll bars and tiny buttons?
------ You mean like on my Windows Mobile Phone?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552678</id>
	<title>Re:My problem with iPad</title>
	<author>PDG</author>
	<datestamp>1269084060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why does everyone believe they have the inherent right to install applications on electronics they buy?  Have you not noticed that Apple exited the computer business when they removed 'computer' from their corporate name?  They make consume electronics now.  Sure, some of those happen to be computers.  Others happen to be devices to which they generously opened some ability for others to extend onto their platform.</p><p>But honestly, when's the last time you installed an application on your toaster?  Or your alarm clock?  I don't hear anybody bitching about Sony keeping their flat screen television systems controlled.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why does everyone believe they have the inherent right to install applications on electronics they buy ?
Have you not noticed that Apple exited the computer business when they removed 'computer ' from their corporate name ?
They make consume electronics now .
Sure , some of those happen to be computers .
Others happen to be devices to which they generously opened some ability for others to extend onto their platform.But honestly , when 's the last time you installed an application on your toaster ?
Or your alarm clock ?
I do n't hear anybody bitching about Sony keeping their flat screen television systems controlled .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why does everyone believe they have the inherent right to install applications on electronics they buy?
Have you not noticed that Apple exited the computer business when they removed 'computer' from their corporate name?
They make consume electronics now.
Sure, some of those happen to be computers.
Others happen to be devices to which they generously opened some ability for others to extend onto their platform.But honestly, when's the last time you installed an application on your toaster?
Or your alarm clock?
I don't hear anybody bitching about Sony keeping their flat screen television systems controlled.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552252</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31557822</id>
	<title>Re:The article isn't talking about the iPad</title>
	<author>maxwell demon</author>
	<datestamp>1269189120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Unlike the other tablets, the iPad is designed with an interface done correctly for a tablet. It's not trying to be a full OS because the interface wouldn't work correctly.</p></div></blockquote><p>Why are people constantly confusing the OS with the UI? And what's wrong with a "full" OS? What's a "non-full" OS, after all?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Unlike the other tablets , the iPad is designed with an interface done correctly for a tablet .
It 's not trying to be a full OS because the interface would n't work correctly.Why are people constantly confusing the OS with the UI ?
And what 's wrong with a " full " OS ?
What 's a " non-full " OS , after all ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unlike the other tablets, the iPad is designed with an interface done correctly for a tablet.
It's not trying to be a full OS because the interface wouldn't work correctly.Why are people constantly confusing the OS with the UI?
And what's wrong with a "full" OS?
What's a "non-full" OS, after all?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552220</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552486</id>
	<title>Re:Battery life</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269082500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>It's about the opportunities it enables</p></div></blockquote><p>It's also about the price.</p><p>Apple has the right idea, having a tablet start at $500.   Other companies should be able to make something similar for $350.</p><p>But really, when a company puts out a netbook in the form of a tablet, prices it like a netbook, <i>then</i> you'll see a lot of us come off the sidelines and buy.  It's not that we have anything against tablets, it's just that it's not really worth an additional $500 for the privilege of not having a physical keyboard.  Few people would use a tablet as their main system.  But a lot of people would like to have one <i>in addition</i> to their main system.  For that, the price point needs to be  well under $500, and it needs to have a real OS, and no tie-ins to a single source for applications.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's about the opportunities it enablesIt 's also about the price.Apple has the right idea , having a tablet start at $ 500 .
Other companies should be able to make something similar for $ 350.But really , when a company puts out a netbook in the form of a tablet , prices it like a netbook , then you 'll see a lot of us come off the sidelines and buy .
It 's not that we have anything against tablets , it 's just that it 's not really worth an additional $ 500 for the privilege of not having a physical keyboard .
Few people would use a tablet as their main system .
But a lot of people would like to have one in addition to their main system .
For that , the price point needs to be well under $ 500 , and it needs to have a real OS , and no tie-ins to a single source for applications .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's about the opportunities it enablesIt's also about the price.Apple has the right idea, having a tablet start at $500.
Other companies should be able to make something similar for $350.But really, when a company puts out a netbook in the form of a tablet, prices it like a netbook, then you'll see a lot of us come off the sidelines and buy.
It's not that we have anything against tablets, it's just that it's not really worth an additional $500 for the privilege of not having a physical keyboard.
Few people would use a tablet as their main system.
But a lot of people would like to have one in addition to their main system.
For that, the price point needs to be  well under $500, and it needs to have a real OS, and no tie-ins to a single source for applications.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552020</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552848</id>
	<title>Re:Battery life</title>
	<author>thePowerOfGrayskull</author>
	<datestamp>1269085140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'd also add to that form factor.  When it's down to the size of a Steno notebook in dimensions and weight (and I think there's no doubt it will get there) -- or at most an A4 50-page tablet -- and meets the requirements above, at least I know of one customer then.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd also add to that form factor .
When it 's down to the size of a Steno notebook in dimensions and weight ( and I think there 's no doubt it will get there ) -- or at most an A4 50-page tablet -- and meets the requirements above , at least I know of one customer then .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd also add to that form factor.
When it's down to the size of a Steno notebook in dimensions and weight (and I think there's no doubt it will get there) -- or at most an A4 50-page tablet -- and meets the requirements above, at least I know of one customer then.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552020</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552402</id>
	<title>Re:niches</title>
	<author>tronbradia</author>
	<datestamp>1269081900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The only reason why the iPhone, a case of convergence, was so successful was what he called the "pocket exception" - things that go in your pocket converge with each other..."And that's why everyone hates the iPad."</p></div><p>Um, no.
<br> <br>
The personal computer is a stereo, a TV, a typewriter, a calculator, and serves infinite other random functions. But I mean, who would want one of those? Oh sorry I guess you keep yours in your pocket.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The only reason why the iPhone , a case of convergence , was so successful was what he called the " pocket exception " - things that go in your pocket converge with each other... " And that 's why everyone hates the iPad .
" Um , no .
The personal computer is a stereo , a TV , a typewriter , a calculator , and serves infinite other random functions .
But I mean , who would want one of those ?
Oh sorry I guess you keep yours in your pocket .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The only reason why the iPhone, a case of convergence, was so successful was what he called the "pocket exception" - things that go in your pocket converge with each other..."And that's why everyone hates the iPad.
"Um, no.
The personal computer is a stereo, a TV, a typewriter, a calculator, and serves infinite other random functions.
But I mean, who would want one of those?
Oh sorry I guess you keep yours in your pocket.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552180</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31555328</id>
	<title>false reasoning</title>
	<author>chilvence</author>
	<datestamp>1269109860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This entire subject is bollox... if tablets weren't twice the price as equivalently spec'd laptops, they would have taken over the market as expected.  It's got nothing to do with the os or any special software support or any of that shit. As it happens, no one is prepared to pay extortionate prices just to be rid of their meeces, which up until now have done perfectly well fulfilling the role of providing a tactile interface to the computer. What is so unbelievably ironic about this is that there isn''t any more sensible way to be able to manipulate a computer screen than to use your fingers or a stylus, and if there was any sense in the world, then there wouldn't be a computer WITHOUT touch screen support. After all, what is the mouse other than a poor placeholder for being able to directly manipulate the GUI? This article is just trying to dig for a reason why the mass market wont buy tablet pcs, when the obvious reason is they are still sold as if they are an exclusive, niche item only for people with money to throw away.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This entire subject is bollox... if tablets were n't twice the price as equivalently spec 'd laptops , they would have taken over the market as expected .
It 's got nothing to do with the os or any special software support or any of that shit .
As it happens , no one is prepared to pay extortionate prices just to be rid of their meeces , which up until now have done perfectly well fulfilling the role of providing a tactile interface to the computer .
What is so unbelievably ironic about this is that there isn''t any more sensible way to be able to manipulate a computer screen than to use your fingers or a stylus , and if there was any sense in the world , then there would n't be a computer WITHOUT touch screen support .
After all , what is the mouse other than a poor placeholder for being able to directly manipulate the GUI ?
This article is just trying to dig for a reason why the mass market wont buy tablet pcs , when the obvious reason is they are still sold as if they are an exclusive , niche item only for people with money to throw away .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This entire subject is bollox... if tablets weren't twice the price as equivalently spec'd laptops, they would have taken over the market as expected.
It's got nothing to do with the os or any special software support or any of that shit.
As it happens, no one is prepared to pay extortionate prices just to be rid of their meeces, which up until now have done perfectly well fulfilling the role of providing a tactile interface to the computer.
What is so unbelievably ironic about this is that there isn''t any more sensible way to be able to manipulate a computer screen than to use your fingers or a stylus, and if there was any sense in the world, then there wouldn't be a computer WITHOUT touch screen support.
After all, what is the mouse other than a poor placeholder for being able to directly manipulate the GUI?
This article is just trying to dig for a reason why the mass market wont buy tablet pcs, when the obvious reason is they are still sold as if they are an exclusive, niche item only for people with money to throw away.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552028</id>
	<title>niches</title>
	<author>TheSHAD0W</author>
	<datestamp>1269079080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>More powerful = lower battery life.  Yes, tablets are niche devices, but if you think about it there are a LOT of niches a tablet with some flexibility and a good amount of battery life can fill.  Book reader, obviously.  Notepad replacement, somewhat.  Inventory control, yup.  It's all been a matter of expense, durability, communications and operating life.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>More powerful = lower battery life .
Yes , tablets are niche devices , but if you think about it there are a LOT of niches a tablet with some flexibility and a good amount of battery life can fill .
Book reader , obviously .
Notepad replacement , somewhat .
Inventory control , yup .
It 's all been a matter of expense , durability , communications and operating life .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>More powerful = lower battery life.
Yes, tablets are niche devices, but if you think about it there are a LOT of niches a tablet with some flexibility and a good amount of battery life can fill.
Book reader, obviously.
Notepad replacement, somewhat.
Inventory control, yup.
It's all been a matter of expense, durability, communications and operating life.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31554786</id>
	<title>Tablets dont suck</title>
	<author>drolli</author>
	<datestamp>1269101760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>for about $400 you can get an used Thinkpad X41 tablet (which undoubtedly also has its bad sides) with the battery replaced. I installoed ubuntu 9.10 and am using xournal, cellwriter and inkscape to take notes and gesture recognition to start programs and thats enough to take notes during seminars in a flexible way without making keyboard noise.

Yes, its not enough for a 8 hours of note-taking, but for the typical situation that there is a 2h meeting and then you are back to you workplace its fine.

However, i will ask my employer to buy an modern tablet soon (no, not an ipad).</htmltext>
<tokenext>for about $ 400 you can get an used Thinkpad X41 tablet ( which undoubtedly also has its bad sides ) with the battery replaced .
I installoed ubuntu 9.10 and am using xournal , cellwriter and inkscape to take notes and gesture recognition to start programs and thats enough to take notes during seminars in a flexible way without making keyboard noise .
Yes , its not enough for a 8 hours of note-taking , but for the typical situation that there is a 2h meeting and then you are back to you workplace its fine .
However , i will ask my employer to buy an modern tablet soon ( no , not an ipad ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>for about $400 you can get an used Thinkpad X41 tablet (which undoubtedly also has its bad sides) with the battery replaced.
I installoed ubuntu 9.10 and am using xournal, cellwriter and inkscape to take notes and gesture recognition to start programs and thats enough to take notes during seminars in a flexible way without making keyboard noise.
Yes, its not enough for a 8 hours of note-taking, but for the typical situation that there is a 2h meeting and then you are back to you workplace its fine.
However, i will ask my employer to buy an modern tablet soon (no, not an ipad).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31555950</id>
	<title>Re:My problem with iPad</title>
	<author>vonFinkelstien</author>
	<datestamp>1269164520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Is that it's not an open platform.

That's an important point to many of us here.

That's true for a computer, not for a consumer device. How many people on Slashdot really care if their home theater systems is open? The same with an iPad/iPod Touch. It's a consumer device for consuming media of all types.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is that it 's not an open platform .
That 's an important point to many of us here .
That 's true for a computer , not for a consumer device .
How many people on Slashdot really care if their home theater systems is open ?
The same with an iPad/iPod Touch .
It 's a consumer device for consuming media of all types .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is that it's not an open platform.
That's an important point to many of us here.
That's true for a computer, not for a consumer device.
How many people on Slashdot really care if their home theater systems is open?
The same with an iPad/iPod Touch.
It's a consumer device for consuming media of all types.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552472</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553644</id>
	<title>Re:My problem with iPad</title>
	<author>Draek</author>
	<datestamp>1269090960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When was the last time you had the opportunity to add new features to your alarm clock by purchasing them from the manufacturer's special store? right.</p><p>Crippled as they may be, the iPad, iPod et al are computers, regardless of what the apologists may claim. They aren't marketed as appliances, they don't work as appliances, and they don't compete against appliances, therefore there are *no* reasons to consider them as such other than the fact that it makes Apple sound slightly less evil.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When was the last time you had the opportunity to add new features to your alarm clock by purchasing them from the manufacturer 's special store ?
right.Crippled as they may be , the iPad , iPod et al are computers , regardless of what the apologists may claim .
They are n't marketed as appliances , they do n't work as appliances , and they do n't compete against appliances , therefore there are * no * reasons to consider them as such other than the fact that it makes Apple sound slightly less evil .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When was the last time you had the opportunity to add new features to your alarm clock by purchasing them from the manufacturer's special store?
right.Crippled as they may be, the iPad, iPod et al are computers, regardless of what the apologists may claim.
They aren't marketed as appliances, they don't work as appliances, and they don't compete against appliances, therefore there are *no* reasons to consider them as such other than the fact that it makes Apple sound slightly less evil.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552678</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553312</id>
	<title>I shall look back and laugh</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269088260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I shall look back on this sometime in the future and laugh, the same as I'm doing now to those who said that the iPod and iPhone would fail.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I shall look back on this sometime in the future and laugh , the same as I 'm doing now to those who said that the iPod and iPhone would fail .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I shall look back on this sometime in the future and laugh, the same as I'm doing now to those who said that the iPod and iPhone would fail.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552618</id>
	<title>Re:niches</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269083460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The personal computer is a stereo, a TV, a typewriter, a calculator, and serves infinite other random functions. But I mean, who would want one of those? Oh sorry I guess you keep yours in your pocket.</p></div><p>The difference is that the PC does all that you stated more than adequately.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The personal computer is a stereo , a TV , a typewriter , a calculator , and serves infinite other random functions .
But I mean , who would want one of those ?
Oh sorry I guess you keep yours in your pocket.The difference is that the PC does all that you stated more than adequately .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The personal computer is a stereo, a TV, a typewriter, a calculator, and serves infinite other random functions.
But I mean, who would want one of those?
Oh sorry I guess you keep yours in your pocket.The difference is that the PC does all that you stated more than adequately.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552402</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31557008</id>
	<title>Re:Battery life</title>
	<author>PopeRatzo</author>
	<datestamp>1269180600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>But if it's in the form of a tablet, then how is it a netbook any longer?</p></div></blockquote><p>I apologize for not conforming to the conventions of marketing-speak.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>But if it 's in the form of a tablet , then how is it a netbook any longer ? I apologize for not conforming to the conventions of marketing-speak .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But if it's in the form of a tablet, then how is it a netbook any longer?I apologize for not conforming to the conventions of marketing-speak.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31554084</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31554726</id>
	<title>I need an excuse to buy a tablet</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269101100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If the iPad came with an HDMI port to use an extra monitor, then I'd get one...  Then I'd have another toy to play with, and if it sucked, at least it would add some screen space to my desktop.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If the iPad came with an HDMI port to use an extra monitor , then I 'd get one... Then I 'd have another toy to play with , and if it sucked , at least it would add some screen space to my desktop .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If the iPad came with an HDMI port to use an extra monitor, then I'd get one...  Then I'd have another toy to play with, and if it sucked, at least it would add some screen space to my desktop.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31565138</id>
	<title>Re:Battery life</title>
	<author>meringuoid</author>
	<datestamp>1269259620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>Just give me the N95 with the iPad interface, OS and screen size, and we'd have almost the perfect device.</i>

<p>Something the matter with the N900? Apart from the battery life, anyway<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-P</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just give me the N95 with the iPad interface , OS and screen size , and we 'd have almost the perfect device .
Something the matter with the N900 ?
Apart from the battery life , anyway : -P</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just give me the N95 with the iPad interface, OS and screen size, and we'd have almost the perfect device.
Something the matter with the N900?
Apart from the battery life, anyway :-P</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31554344</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31554106</id>
	<title>Re:Small differences add up</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269094860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt;iPhone changed the set of expectations for a touch UI. &gt;iPhone, Android, Windows Phone 7, and other new-generation &gt;touch UIs will leave the old tablet UIs behind. iPad will &gt;pioneer a new generation of office productivity software &gt;specifically designed for touch interaction...</p><p>And then Steve Jobs will descend from the Mountain with two iPads and take us all to the promised land...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; iPhone changed the set of expectations for a touch UI .
&gt; iPhone , Android , Windows Phone 7 , and other new-generation &gt; touch UIs will leave the old tablet UIs behind .
iPad will &gt; pioneer a new generation of office productivity software &gt; specifically designed for touch interaction...And then Steve Jobs will descend from the Mountain with two iPads and take us all to the promised land.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt;iPhone changed the set of expectations for a touch UI.
&gt;iPhone, Android, Windows Phone 7, and other new-generation &gt;touch UIs will leave the old tablet UIs behind.
iPad will &gt;pioneer a new generation of office productivity software &gt;specifically designed for touch interaction...And then Steve Jobs will descend from the Mountain with two iPads and take us all to the promised land...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552362</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552728</id>
	<title>Re:niches</title>
	<author>ooshna</author>
	<datestamp>1269084420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Ask college students if they want all their textbooks to converge into a single device, <b>if it can be done so without increasing cost or removing important features</b>. Items like backpacks, luggage, sunglasses, clothing, personal transport, etc. are instances where convergence is desired by the general public. When was the last time you saw a student carrying a laptop case and a separate bag for their books? Those have pretty much converged at this point... but contrary to Mr. Schell's assertion you can't fit either in your pocket.</p></div><p>The iPad doesn't do these things cheaper than others (and with the cost of ereaders right now forget cheaper with those) and they have it locked down so you can't use features like I don't know multi-tasking.  Whats that you want to take notes and looks at a picture about what your learning I hope you bought two iPads don't try to tether them together either thats a nono.  But that's ok right I mean I could always attach a cheap usb keyboard to help with productivity, shit no USB oh well  for $500 what can you expect.  Plus your analogy using bookbags is just retarded that's the same as saying whens the last time you had to walk through your yard to take a shit in the outhouse,  Some things are just practical to have together.  Houses with indoor plumbing ,  a container of some sort be it luggage or even your pocket on some pants plus whats in them.  Oh and the reason cars have radios is so our grandparents had something to listen to other than our parents constant BS.  Ok I made that last part up.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Ask college students if they want all their textbooks to converge into a single device , if it can be done so without increasing cost or removing important features .
Items like backpacks , luggage , sunglasses , clothing , personal transport , etc .
are instances where convergence is desired by the general public .
When was the last time you saw a student carrying a laptop case and a separate bag for their books ?
Those have pretty much converged at this point... but contrary to Mr. Schell 's assertion you ca n't fit either in your pocket.The iPad does n't do these things cheaper than others ( and with the cost of ereaders right now forget cheaper with those ) and they have it locked down so you ca n't use features like I do n't know multi-tasking .
Whats that you want to take notes and looks at a picture about what your learning I hope you bought two iPads do n't try to tether them together either thats a nono .
But that 's ok right I mean I could always attach a cheap usb keyboard to help with productivity , shit no USB oh well for $ 500 what can you expect .
Plus your analogy using bookbags is just retarded that 's the same as saying whens the last time you had to walk through your yard to take a shit in the outhouse , Some things are just practical to have together .
Houses with indoor plumbing , a container of some sort be it luggage or even your pocket on some pants plus whats in them .
Oh and the reason cars have radios is so our grandparents had something to listen to other than our parents constant BS .
Ok I made that last part up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ask college students if they want all their textbooks to converge into a single device, if it can be done so without increasing cost or removing important features.
Items like backpacks, luggage, sunglasses, clothing, personal transport, etc.
are instances where convergence is desired by the general public.
When was the last time you saw a student carrying a laptop case and a separate bag for their books?
Those have pretty much converged at this point... but contrary to Mr. Schell's assertion you can't fit either in your pocket.The iPad doesn't do these things cheaper than others (and with the cost of ereaders right now forget cheaper with those) and they have it locked down so you can't use features like I don't know multi-tasking.
Whats that you want to take notes and looks at a picture about what your learning I hope you bought two iPads don't try to tether them together either thats a nono.
But that's ok right I mean I could always attach a cheap usb keyboard to help with productivity, shit no USB oh well  for $500 what can you expect.
Plus your analogy using bookbags is just retarded that's the same as saying whens the last time you had to walk through your yard to take a shit in the outhouse,  Some things are just practical to have together.
Houses with indoor plumbing ,  a container of some sort be it luggage or even your pocket on some pants plus whats in them.
Oh and the reason cars have radios is so our grandparents had something to listen to other than our parents constant BS.
Ok I made that last part up.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552436</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31554276</id>
	<title>Re:Battery life</title>
	<author>daver00</author>
	<datestamp>1269096360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p> Windows, Mac OS X and Linux. None of these are well suited for even stylus based interaction, let alone multitouch.</p></div></blockquote><p>I disagree, strongly. Windows Vista has numerous enhancements for stylus input, 7 has even more and they both work well for certain tasks on a stylus machine. I have a convertible hp tablet pc, it has been my primary machine for university for two years now, and for mathematics/engineering, could not be better. The stylus is a marked improvement over the stupid trackpad, vastly more accurate and faster, I pull out the stylus frequently in favour of the trackpad. I could not however, imagine using full blown windows without the keyboard.</p><p>I agree that touch is another story, but the stylus on a small laptop screen is faster/more accurate than the trackpad, and even arguably better than a mouse. The only problem I have is that as a lefty, I can't change the whole OS to display scroll bars on the left hand side of the screen, but at least onenote can do this, and thats my primary pen app anyway.</p><p>IT guys tend not to 'get it' when it comes to tablets, you need to have a real need for handwriting before it makes sense. For me I have that need, and I carry around with me the equivalent of a whole bookcase worth of my notes which I can flick through at my leisure when they are needed. To me a tablet sans stylus makes absolutely no sense, and I'll take my eeepc (5 hrs battery life) over this kind of device anyday.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Windows , Mac OS X and Linux .
None of these are well suited for even stylus based interaction , let alone multitouch.I disagree , strongly .
Windows Vista has numerous enhancements for stylus input , 7 has even more and they both work well for certain tasks on a stylus machine .
I have a convertible hp tablet pc , it has been my primary machine for university for two years now , and for mathematics/engineering , could not be better .
The stylus is a marked improvement over the stupid trackpad , vastly more accurate and faster , I pull out the stylus frequently in favour of the trackpad .
I could not however , imagine using full blown windows without the keyboard.I agree that touch is another story , but the stylus on a small laptop screen is faster/more accurate than the trackpad , and even arguably better than a mouse .
The only problem I have is that as a lefty , I ca n't change the whole OS to display scroll bars on the left hand side of the screen , but at least onenote can do this , and thats my primary pen app anyway.IT guys tend not to 'get it ' when it comes to tablets , you need to have a real need for handwriting before it makes sense .
For me I have that need , and I carry around with me the equivalent of a whole bookcase worth of my notes which I can flick through at my leisure when they are needed .
To me a tablet sans stylus makes absolutely no sense , and I 'll take my eeepc ( 5 hrs battery life ) over this kind of device anyday .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> Windows, Mac OS X and Linux.
None of these are well suited for even stylus based interaction, let alone multitouch.I disagree, strongly.
Windows Vista has numerous enhancements for stylus input, 7 has even more and they both work well for certain tasks on a stylus machine.
I have a convertible hp tablet pc, it has been my primary machine for university for two years now, and for mathematics/engineering, could not be better.
The stylus is a marked improvement over the stupid trackpad, vastly more accurate and faster, I pull out the stylus frequently in favour of the trackpad.
I could not however, imagine using full blown windows without the keyboard.I agree that touch is another story, but the stylus on a small laptop screen is faster/more accurate than the trackpad, and even arguably better than a mouse.
The only problem I have is that as a lefty, I can't change the whole OS to display scroll bars on the left hand side of the screen, but at least onenote can do this, and thats my primary pen app anyway.IT guys tend not to 'get it' when it comes to tablets, you need to have a real need for handwriting before it makes sense.
For me I have that need, and I carry around with me the equivalent of a whole bookcase worth of my notes which I can flick through at my leisure when they are needed.
To me a tablet sans stylus makes absolutely no sense, and I'll take my eeepc (5 hrs battery life) over this kind of device anyday.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553062</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31554308</id>
	<title>E-Magazine Reader</title>
	<author>h4x354x0r</author>
	<datestamp>1269096840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The iPad is an e-magazine reader. Same size as a physical glossy magazine, nice screen. They will get tossed on the coffee table just like magazines, too. That's really all it's designed to be, but leaving iPod functionality in there doesn't hurt anything. Magazine publishers could give these things away with a 2-year subscription, and probably come out nearly even compared to print production and distribution.

I'm not saying the iPad will be a hit. I see shades of the Apple Cube here. But there is a business model behind it, and it's not the smartphone or the netbook business model.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The iPad is an e-magazine reader .
Same size as a physical glossy magazine , nice screen .
They will get tossed on the coffee table just like magazines , too .
That 's really all it 's designed to be , but leaving iPod functionality in there does n't hurt anything .
Magazine publishers could give these things away with a 2-year subscription , and probably come out nearly even compared to print production and distribution .
I 'm not saying the iPad will be a hit .
I see shades of the Apple Cube here .
But there is a business model behind it , and it 's not the smartphone or the netbook business model .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The iPad is an e-magazine reader.
Same size as a physical glossy magazine, nice screen.
They will get tossed on the coffee table just like magazines, too.
That's really all it's designed to be, but leaving iPod functionality in there doesn't hurt anything.
Magazine publishers could give these things away with a 2-year subscription, and probably come out nearly even compared to print production and distribution.
I'm not saying the iPad will be a hit.
I see shades of the Apple Cube here.
But there is a business model behind it, and it's not the smartphone or the netbook business model.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31554216</id>
	<title>spoken like a well washed brain</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269095760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt;though someone finally taking a stand against flash is refreshing.</p><p>Of course its refreshing for the fruit crowd, you would never see it as not giving the people access to the most popular sites but rather as a feature.<br>I wouldnt be surprised if some of you were convinced to pay extra to not have Flash.</p><p>Apple's stands have only to do with their pocketbook and the great part about it is they have millions of sheep willing to repeat the company mantra.<br>I remember during the horrible OS 8 and 9 all the fanbois were talking about how the PowerPC architecture was taken from the deity's testicles and had magical powera  and that Intel sucked. Same group did a full 180 a few years later.<br>Then while most of the planet was using USB, the sheeple bleated how Firewire was the bestest evers and that visual professionals (because everyone who has a mac is an artist. Or likes to see themselves as one) needed FW.<br>As soon as Firewire was on its way out, the tune changed.</p><p>I can guarantee that when Apple finally gets their way and add Flash, the same people will forget the refreshing stand and join the rest of the planet. Heck, you might even visit this site called Youtube.</p><p>But for now, you are proud of the refreshing stand and of having a diminished OS.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; though someone finally taking a stand against flash is refreshing.Of course its refreshing for the fruit crowd , you would never see it as not giving the people access to the most popular sites but rather as a feature.I wouldnt be surprised if some of you were convinced to pay extra to not have Flash.Apple 's stands have only to do with their pocketbook and the great part about it is they have millions of sheep willing to repeat the company mantra.I remember during the horrible OS 8 and 9 all the fanbois were talking about how the PowerPC architecture was taken from the deity 's testicles and had magical powera and that Intel sucked .
Same group did a full 180 a few years later.Then while most of the planet was using USB , the sheeple bleated how Firewire was the bestest evers and that visual professionals ( because everyone who has a mac is an artist .
Or likes to see themselves as one ) needed FW.As soon as Firewire was on its way out , the tune changed.I can guarantee that when Apple finally gets their way and add Flash , the same people will forget the refreshing stand and join the rest of the planet .
Heck , you might even visit this site called Youtube.But for now , you are proud of the refreshing stand and of having a diminished OS .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt;though someone finally taking a stand against flash is refreshing.Of course its refreshing for the fruit crowd, you would never see it as not giving the people access to the most popular sites but rather as a feature.I wouldnt be surprised if some of you were convinced to pay extra to not have Flash.Apple's stands have only to do with their pocketbook and the great part about it is they have millions of sheep willing to repeat the company mantra.I remember during the horrible OS 8 and 9 all the fanbois were talking about how the PowerPC architecture was taken from the deity's testicles and had magical powera  and that Intel sucked.
Same group did a full 180 a few years later.Then while most of the planet was using USB, the sheeple bleated how Firewire was the bestest evers and that visual professionals (because everyone who has a mac is an artist.
Or likes to see themselves as one) needed FW.As soon as Firewire was on its way out, the tune changed.I can guarantee that when Apple finally gets their way and add Flash, the same people will forget the refreshing stand and join the rest of the planet.
Heck, you might even visit this site called Youtube.But for now, you are proud of the refreshing stand and of having a diminished OS.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552128</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552532</id>
	<title>Apple's tablet is different from other tablets.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269082860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Apple's tablet is different from other tablets so far:</p><p>1. it does not have a user interface that follows the desktop metaphor, which is not appropriate for a tablet.<br>2. it has a multitouch interface, unlike other tablets.<br>3. it has quite a low price.<br>4. it boots way faster than other devices.<br>5. it is lighter than other devices.</p><p>For me, the only reason not considering an iPad is lack of Flash support and lack of openness. I think it's on the right path, and if these two are solved, I'll consider buying one.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Apple 's tablet is different from other tablets so far : 1. it does not have a user interface that follows the desktop metaphor , which is not appropriate for a tablet.2 .
it has a multitouch interface , unlike other tablets.3 .
it has quite a low price.4 .
it boots way faster than other devices.5 .
it is lighter than other devices.For me , the only reason not considering an iPad is lack of Flash support and lack of openness .
I think it 's on the right path , and if these two are solved , I 'll consider buying one .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Apple's tablet is different from other tablets so far:1. it does not have a user interface that follows the desktop metaphor, which is not appropriate for a tablet.2.
it has a multitouch interface, unlike other tablets.3.
it has quite a low price.4.
it boots way faster than other devices.5.
it is lighter than other devices.For me, the only reason not considering an iPad is lack of Flash support and lack of openness.
I think it's on the right path, and if these two are solved, I'll consider buying one.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552440</id>
	<title>Re:well duh</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269082200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>my purpose of a small tablet will be primarily for browsing and unfortunately that will require flash. though someone finally taking a stand against flash is refreshing.</p></div></blockquote><p>And thank God it didn't have to be you.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>my purpose of a small tablet will be primarily for browsing and unfortunately that will require flash .
though someone finally taking a stand against flash is refreshing.And thank God it did n't have to be you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>my purpose of a small tablet will be primarily for browsing and unfortunately that will require flash.
though someone finally taking a stand against flash is refreshing.And thank God it didn't have to be you.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552128</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31555616</id>
	<title>Re:Pfft</title>
	<author>feepness</author>
	<datestamp>1269114180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>But the iPad will specifically *not* be using existing apps</p></div><p>Like Flash?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>But the iPad will specifically * not * be using existing appsLike Flash ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But the iPad will specifically *not* be using existing appsLike Flash?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552916</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552362</id>
	<title>Small differences add up</title>
	<author>Zigurd</author>
	<datestamp>1269081660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Earlier tablet products were user interface disasters. Fiddly pen-based inputs. Bad handwriting recognition. Tiny, mouse-oriented buttons.</p><p>iPhone changed the set of expectations for a touch UI. iPhone, Android, Windows Phone 7, and other new-generation touch UIs will leave the old tablet UIs behind. iPad will pioneer a new generation of office productivity software specifically designed for touch interaction.</p><p>So, while there is no guarantee this is all enough to make tablets a success, it sure is not a rehash of previous failed products. Tablet prices are also low enough to encourage experimentation rather than to require a business case for a more expensive device.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Earlier tablet products were user interface disasters .
Fiddly pen-based inputs .
Bad handwriting recognition .
Tiny , mouse-oriented buttons.iPhone changed the set of expectations for a touch UI .
iPhone , Android , Windows Phone 7 , and other new-generation touch UIs will leave the old tablet UIs behind .
iPad will pioneer a new generation of office productivity software specifically designed for touch interaction.So , while there is no guarantee this is all enough to make tablets a success , it sure is not a rehash of previous failed products .
Tablet prices are also low enough to encourage experimentation rather than to require a business case for a more expensive device .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Earlier tablet products were user interface disasters.
Fiddly pen-based inputs.
Bad handwriting recognition.
Tiny, mouse-oriented buttons.iPhone changed the set of expectations for a touch UI.
iPhone, Android, Windows Phone 7, and other new-generation touch UIs will leave the old tablet UIs behind.
iPad will pioneer a new generation of office productivity software specifically designed for touch interaction.So, while there is no guarantee this is all enough to make tablets a success, it sure is not a rehash of previous failed products.
Tablet prices are also low enough to encourage experimentation rather than to require a business case for a more expensive device.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552146</id>
	<title>Tablets are mostly-output devices</title>
	<author>Animats</author>
	<datestamp>1269079860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
There's a class of devices which are mostly-output.  Game machines, e-readers, and smartphones without keyboards fall into this category.  Their primary function is to display content created elsewhere.  Input requirements are minimal.
</p><p>
Think of Apple's "iPad" as a big e-reader, with color and video, and it makes more sense.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's a class of devices which are mostly-output .
Game machines , e-readers , and smartphones without keyboards fall into this category .
Their primary function is to display content created elsewhere .
Input requirements are minimal .
Think of Apple 's " iPad " as a big e-reader , with color and video , and it makes more sense .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
There's a class of devices which are mostly-output.
Game machines, e-readers, and smartphones without keyboards fall into this category.
Their primary function is to display content created elsewhere.
Input requirements are minimal.
Think of Apple's "iPad" as a big e-reader, with color and video, and it makes more sense.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552270</id>
	<title>Enough with the speculative stories and discussion</title>
	<author>93 Escort Wagon</author>
	<datestamp>1269080880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Okay, we get it. Windows tablets never took off the way Microsoft thought they would. The iPad is a failure, even though it hasn't been released yet and we have no idea how well or poorly it will sell. Anyone who is excited about the iPad is a Mac Fanboi. Everyone who trashes the iPad is a Windows Zealot. Your opinion is silly and unsupportable because it differs from mine.</p><p>There, I saved you some reading.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Okay , we get it .
Windows tablets never took off the way Microsoft thought they would .
The iPad is a failure , even though it has n't been released yet and we have no idea how well or poorly it will sell .
Anyone who is excited about the iPad is a Mac Fanboi .
Everyone who trashes the iPad is a Windows Zealot .
Your opinion is silly and unsupportable because it differs from mine.There , I saved you some reading .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Okay, we get it.
Windows tablets never took off the way Microsoft thought they would.
The iPad is a failure, even though it hasn't been released yet and we have no idea how well or poorly it will sell.
Anyone who is excited about the iPad is a Mac Fanboi.
Everyone who trashes the iPad is a Windows Zealot.
Your opinion is silly and unsupportable because it differs from mine.There, I saved you some reading.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552224</id>
	<title>Author ignores the main reason tablets failed</title>
	<author>Totenglocke</author>
	<datestamp>1269080520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The biggest reason tablets have never succeeded more is because they've always been <i>expensive</i>.  I've seen some tablets I'd love to own, but they're in the $2,000 - $2,500 range, which is way more than I'll spend on a tablet.  Now that we're reaching the point where costs are low enough that they can make decently powered tablets in the $500-$700 range, which is where the typical laptop is (I said laptop, not netbook), I think that they'll sell a lot more.</p><p>Go throughout history and you see plenty of innovations that never catch on until a decade or so later when the prices drop significantly to where people don't view buying one as a major investment.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The biggest reason tablets have never succeeded more is because they 've always been expensive .
I 've seen some tablets I 'd love to own , but they 're in the $ 2,000 - $ 2,500 range , which is way more than I 'll spend on a tablet .
Now that we 're reaching the point where costs are low enough that they can make decently powered tablets in the $ 500- $ 700 range , which is where the typical laptop is ( I said laptop , not netbook ) , I think that they 'll sell a lot more.Go throughout history and you see plenty of innovations that never catch on until a decade or so later when the prices drop significantly to where people do n't view buying one as a major investment .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The biggest reason tablets have never succeeded more is because they've always been expensive.
I've seen some tablets I'd love to own, but they're in the $2,000 - $2,500 range, which is way more than I'll spend on a tablet.
Now that we're reaching the point where costs are low enough that they can make decently powered tablets in the $500-$700 range, which is where the typical laptop is (I said laptop, not netbook), I think that they'll sell a lot more.Go throughout history and you see plenty of innovations that never catch on until a decade or so later when the prices drop significantly to where people don't view buying one as a major investment.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553284</id>
	<title>Re:The article isn't talking about the iPad</title>
	<author>raddan</author>
	<datestamp>1269087960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think the key thing is that if you are going to take away flexibility, i.e, the general-purpose nature of a computer, you have to make it compelling in some other way.  I think a good touch interface does this.  There's nothing more frustrating than having to wade through menus with a stylus when, if the interface were designed correctly, you could just tap the right thing to begin with.  Menus imply lots of functionality; lots of hidden functionality.  Tablets should not work this way.
<br> <br>
I agree, I think the iPad really is going to be a game-changer.  Of course, I'm not getting one.  I need a <em>little</em> more flexibility, but also, I hate being pointed at an Apple-proprietary solution.  Instead, I've been following the <a href="http://gizmodo.com/5467447/notion-inks-adam-tablet-will-have-flash-output-at-1080p-and-have-battery-life-2x-longer-than-ipad" title="gizmodo.com">Notion Ink Adam</a> [gizmodo.com] with some interest, particularly because it uses a low-power screen that can be read in direct sunlight.  I'm thinking of it as a color e-book reader, and for that purpose, I suspect that it will be very handy.  I'm sick to death of having to carry textbooks around with me, and I am thrilled at the idea of being able to carry around my entire book collection like I do with my music collection.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think the key thing is that if you are going to take away flexibility , i.e , the general-purpose nature of a computer , you have to make it compelling in some other way .
I think a good touch interface does this .
There 's nothing more frustrating than having to wade through menus with a stylus when , if the interface were designed correctly , you could just tap the right thing to begin with .
Menus imply lots of functionality ; lots of hidden functionality .
Tablets should not work this way .
I agree , I think the iPad really is going to be a game-changer .
Of course , I 'm not getting one .
I need a little more flexibility , but also , I hate being pointed at an Apple-proprietary solution .
Instead , I 've been following the Notion Ink Adam [ gizmodo.com ] with some interest , particularly because it uses a low-power screen that can be read in direct sunlight .
I 'm thinking of it as a color e-book reader , and for that purpose , I suspect that it will be very handy .
I 'm sick to death of having to carry textbooks around with me , and I am thrilled at the idea of being able to carry around my entire book collection like I do with my music collection .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think the key thing is that if you are going to take away flexibility, i.e, the general-purpose nature of a computer, you have to make it compelling in some other way.
I think a good touch interface does this.
There's nothing more frustrating than having to wade through menus with a stylus when, if the interface were designed correctly, you could just tap the right thing to begin with.
Menus imply lots of functionality; lots of hidden functionality.
Tablets should not work this way.
I agree, I think the iPad really is going to be a game-changer.
Of course, I'm not getting one.
I need a little more flexibility, but also, I hate being pointed at an Apple-proprietary solution.
Instead, I've been following the Notion Ink Adam [gizmodo.com] with some interest, particularly because it uses a low-power screen that can be read in direct sunlight.
I'm thinking of it as a color e-book reader, and for that purpose, I suspect that it will be very handy.
I'm sick to death of having to carry textbooks around with me, and I am thrilled at the idea of being able to carry around my entire book collection like I do with my music collection.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552220</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553362</id>
	<title>Re:Tablets are mostly-output devices</title>
	<author>mysidia</author>
	<datestamp>1269088680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
Then why doesn't it have an eInk or other  non-backlit display suitable for staring at for long periods of time?
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Then why does n't it have an eInk or other non-backlit display suitable for staring at for long periods of time ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
Then why doesn't it have an eInk or other  non-backlit display suitable for staring at for long periods of time?
</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552146</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552386</id>
	<title>Ergonomics</title>
	<author>davepermen</author>
	<datestamp>1269081840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>they're not ergonomic. not for reading. not for writing.

that is why they (hopefully) will fail.

i have one right now to read/write stuff on. i can't lay it onto my legs on a chair to read nicely, like i could with a laptop. the angle is bad, i want to hold it to see directly onto it. but holding for more than some minutes is annoying. it weights (no matter if it's not much weight).

writing on it sucks, too. gladly, i have a windows option, where i have the option to use the pen input instead of the multitouch keyboard (which i will hate on the ipad). and while you type with your hands, you can nearly not see on the screen anymore anyways, filling it wiht your hands.

so when sitting, you want to write with one hand, hold it with the other. the keyboard doesn't fit your setup, then..



no, they really suck. i, too, have a convertible. next version will have slate mode, notebook mode, multitouch, pen input (capazitive) etc. it will allow me to use the best of normal laptop, tablet, pen, fingers etc. that will be awesome.

normal tablets, no thanks. they completely fail at ergonomics. MASSIVELY.

and when they do that, they should provide some good counterargument. phones do have that: you can take them always with you. doesn't matter then, that they're quite small, quite slow. the portability is a huge gain.

what PLUS do tablets actually have? what do i GAIN from having one? i still wait for the one simple answer showing me a reason i should get one.. (i know some specific cases where i most likely will get one.. in the car, and for home-automation. maybe for djing, too.. other than that, no idea.. for the ordinary user, no idea)</htmltext>
<tokenext>they 're not ergonomic .
not for reading .
not for writing .
that is why they ( hopefully ) will fail .
i have one right now to read/write stuff on .
i ca n't lay it onto my legs on a chair to read nicely , like i could with a laptop .
the angle is bad , i want to hold it to see directly onto it .
but holding for more than some minutes is annoying .
it weights ( no matter if it 's not much weight ) .
writing on it sucks , too .
gladly , i have a windows option , where i have the option to use the pen input instead of the multitouch keyboard ( which i will hate on the ipad ) .
and while you type with your hands , you can nearly not see on the screen anymore anyways , filling it wiht your hands .
so when sitting , you want to write with one hand , hold it with the other .
the keyboard does n't fit your setup , then. . no , they really suck .
i , too , have a convertible .
next version will have slate mode , notebook mode , multitouch , pen input ( capazitive ) etc .
it will allow me to use the best of normal laptop , tablet , pen , fingers etc .
that will be awesome .
normal tablets , no thanks .
they completely fail at ergonomics .
MASSIVELY . and when they do that , they should provide some good counterargument .
phones do have that : you can take them always with you .
does n't matter then , that they 're quite small , quite slow .
the portability is a huge gain .
what PLUS do tablets actually have ?
what do i GAIN from having one ?
i still wait for the one simple answer showing me a reason i should get one.. ( i know some specific cases where i most likely will get one.. in the car , and for home-automation .
maybe for djing , too.. other than that , no idea.. for the ordinary user , no idea )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>they're not ergonomic.
not for reading.
not for writing.
that is why they (hopefully) will fail.
i have one right now to read/write stuff on.
i can't lay it onto my legs on a chair to read nicely, like i could with a laptop.
the angle is bad, i want to hold it to see directly onto it.
but holding for more than some minutes is annoying.
it weights (no matter if it's not much weight).
writing on it sucks, too.
gladly, i have a windows option, where i have the option to use the pen input instead of the multitouch keyboard (which i will hate on the ipad).
and while you type with your hands, you can nearly not see on the screen anymore anyways, filling it wiht your hands.
so when sitting, you want to write with one hand, hold it with the other.
the keyboard doesn't fit your setup, then..



no, they really suck.
i, too, have a convertible.
next version will have slate mode, notebook mode, multitouch, pen input (capazitive) etc.
it will allow me to use the best of normal laptop, tablet, pen, fingers etc.
that will be awesome.
normal tablets, no thanks.
they completely fail at ergonomics.
MASSIVELY.

and when they do that, they should provide some good counterargument.
phones do have that: you can take them always with you.
doesn't matter then, that they're quite small, quite slow.
the portability is a huge gain.
what PLUS do tablets actually have?
what do i GAIN from having one?
i still wait for the one simple answer showing me a reason i should get one.. (i know some specific cases where i most likely will get one.. in the car, and for home-automation.
maybe for djing, too.. other than that, no idea.. for the ordinary user, no idea)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31554618</id>
	<title>Why we don't buy Tablets</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269099960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's really simple, they were/are more expensive then an ordinary laptop with less performance than it's laptop equivalent. If that wasn't the case I'd buy one, but when the tablet costs $2000-$3000 more than the equivalent laptop just because it's a tablet you don't buy it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's really simple , they were/are more expensive then an ordinary laptop with less performance than it 's laptop equivalent .
If that was n't the case I 'd buy one , but when the tablet costs $ 2000- $ 3000 more than the equivalent laptop just because it 's a tablet you do n't buy it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's really simple, they were/are more expensive then an ordinary laptop with less performance than it's laptop equivalent.
If that wasn't the case I'd buy one, but when the tablet costs $2000-$3000 more than the equivalent laptop just because it's a tablet you don't buy it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552406</id>
	<title>I have a tablet, but no idea who else would use it</title>
	<author>ilyag</author>
	<datestamp>1269081960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I use the tablet to take down mathematical lectures on it. It's very nice for lectures which use tons of math symbols and diagrams, especially because it doesn't clutter up my desk as much. I find it nicer to have tons of files that I almost never look at, than when I had tons of papers I almost never look at, then lost and couldn't find when I did need one.</p><p>However, I can't invent any other use for a tablet PC. If math lectures didn't have diagrams, I'd use Word or LaTeX. Typing is faster than writing on a tablet. Maybe art students have a use for it? Anybody know other uses?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I use the tablet to take down mathematical lectures on it .
It 's very nice for lectures which use tons of math symbols and diagrams , especially because it does n't clutter up my desk as much .
I find it nicer to have tons of files that I almost never look at , than when I had tons of papers I almost never look at , then lost and could n't find when I did need one.However , I ca n't invent any other use for a tablet PC .
If math lectures did n't have diagrams , I 'd use Word or LaTeX .
Typing is faster than writing on a tablet .
Maybe art students have a use for it ?
Anybody know other uses ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I use the tablet to take down mathematical lectures on it.
It's very nice for lectures which use tons of math symbols and diagrams, especially because it doesn't clutter up my desk as much.
I find it nicer to have tons of files that I almost never look at, than when I had tons of papers I almost never look at, then lost and couldn't find when I did need one.However, I can't invent any other use for a tablet PC.
If math lectures didn't have diagrams, I'd use Word or LaTeX.
Typing is faster than writing on a tablet.
Maybe art students have a use for it?
Anybody know other uses?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553636</id>
	<title>A niche app for a small niche</title>
	<author>MpVpRb</author>
	<datestamp>1269090840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just read Wired...

</p><p>Yet another prediction that tablets will rule the computing world.

</p><p>Well...I think they may eventually be good for some things, but I can't imagine doing any of the things that I use a computer for on a tiny screen with a crappy interface.

</p><p>I might carry one when I am out and about, but it will always be a crippled, second or third best alternative.

</p><p>BTW, my home computer screen is 30"...it's still too small</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just read Wired.. . Yet another prediction that tablets will rule the computing world .
Well...I think they may eventually be good for some things , but I ca n't imagine doing any of the things that I use a computer for on a tiny screen with a crappy interface .
I might carry one when I am out and about , but it will always be a crippled , second or third best alternative .
BTW , my home computer screen is 30 " ...it 's still too small</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just read Wired...

Yet another prediction that tablets will rule the computing world.
Well...I think they may eventually be good for some things, but I can't imagine doing any of the things that I use a computer for on a tiny screen with a crappy interface.
I might carry one when I am out and about, but it will always be a crippled, second or third best alternative.
BTW, my home computer screen is 30"...it's still too small</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553966</id>
	<title>Re:niches</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269093660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The former is because people chose not to due to the fact that getting actual TV/CABLE on your computer is not super easy/convenient (terrible software for such things), but for video/DVD it's more than sufficient.</p><p>The latter is a whole host of external reasons, despite the fact that the PC itself is far superior at actual gaming quality.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The former is because people chose not to due to the fact that getting actual TV/CABLE on your computer is not super easy/convenient ( terrible software for such things ) , but for video/DVD it 's more than sufficient.The latter is a whole host of external reasons , despite the fact that the PC itself is far superior at actual gaming quality .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The former is because people chose not to due to the fact that getting actual TV/CABLE on your computer is not super easy/convenient (terrible software for such things), but for video/DVD it's more than sufficient.The latter is a whole host of external reasons, despite the fact that the PC itself is far superior at actual gaming quality.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552602</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31555280</id>
	<title>I'm glad the RDF isn't targeting us</title>
	<author>ClosedSource</author>
	<datestamp>1269109140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So you're saying you know the direction that the reality distortion field is pointing and it's not oriented on us?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So you 're saying you know the direction that the reality distortion field is pointing and it 's not oriented on us ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So you're saying you know the direction that the reality distortion field is pointing and it's not oriented on us?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552942</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552396</id>
	<title>Re:niches</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269081900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Convergence happens all the time.  My home phone has an intercom and answering machine built in.  By refrigerator has a built-in water dispenser.  A typical TV is the convergence of a monitor, sound system, and receiver.  Some even have built-in DVD players.  How many all-in-one printer/scanner/fax/copier devices are on the market?  I have a stereo with a CD turntable and tape deck built in (yes, I'm old but not old enough to have a record player on top of it).  My desk has a filing cabinet built into it.  How many microwave ovens have vents to help vent fumes from the range they are positioned above?  In short, convergence happens when it makes sense.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Convergence happens all the time .
My home phone has an intercom and answering machine built in .
By refrigerator has a built-in water dispenser .
A typical TV is the convergence of a monitor , sound system , and receiver .
Some even have built-in DVD players .
How many all-in-one printer/scanner/fax/copier devices are on the market ?
I have a stereo with a CD turntable and tape deck built in ( yes , I 'm old but not old enough to have a record player on top of it ) .
My desk has a filing cabinet built into it .
How many microwave ovens have vents to help vent fumes from the range they are positioned above ?
In short , convergence happens when it makes sense .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Convergence happens all the time.
My home phone has an intercom and answering machine built in.
By refrigerator has a built-in water dispenser.
A typical TV is the convergence of a monitor, sound system, and receiver.
Some even have built-in DVD players.
How many all-in-one printer/scanner/fax/copier devices are on the market?
I have a stereo with a CD turntable and tape deck built in (yes, I'm old but not old enough to have a record player on top of it).
My desk has a filing cabinet built into it.
How many microwave ovens have vents to help vent fumes from the range they are positioned above?
In short, convergence happens when it makes sense.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552180</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552472</id>
	<title>Re:My problem with iPad</title>
	<author>99BottlesOfBeerInMyF</author>
	<datestamp>1269082440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Is that it's not an open platform.</p></div><p>That's an important point to many of us here.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>My issues are: No multitasking in the iPhone OS. Even cell phone OSes can do that.</p></div><p>...and you immediately drop yourself into the category of people who don't know what they're talking about.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is that it 's not an open platform.That 's an important point to many of us here.My issues are : No multitasking in the iPhone OS .
Even cell phone OSes can do that....and you immediately drop yourself into the category of people who do n't know what they 're talking about .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is that it's not an open platform.That's an important point to many of us here.My issues are: No multitasking in the iPhone OS.
Even cell phone OSes can do that....and you immediately drop yourself into the category of people who don't know what they're talking about.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552252</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553486</id>
	<title>Re:If Bill says it, it must be true</title>
	<author>emt377</author>
	<datestamp>1269089460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>"Within five years, I predict it will be the most popular form of PC sold in America.  It will come with a full 640 KB of RAM which should be enough for anybody.  We will continue to out-innovate Apple.  Then we're going to fscking kill Google."</p></div><p>I worked on Unix kernels and networking stacks in the mid 90s when Gates insisted IP serves no purpose and the Internet is a fad.  Back when Windows didn't even install TCP/IP by default, and the bundled one you could add yourself was horribly broken - I know, because I hacked our TCP implementation to get around many of its deficiencies.  Overall, his track record when it comes to predicting trends is worthless, and most of his wealth isn't based either on vision or any technical leadership; it's solely based on business skills.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Within five years , I predict it will be the most popular form of PC sold in America .
It will come with a full 640 KB of RAM which should be enough for anybody .
We will continue to out-innovate Apple .
Then we 're going to fscking kill Google .
" I worked on Unix kernels and networking stacks in the mid 90s when Gates insisted IP serves no purpose and the Internet is a fad .
Back when Windows did n't even install TCP/IP by default , and the bundled one you could add yourself was horribly broken - I know , because I hacked our TCP implementation to get around many of its deficiencies .
Overall , his track record when it comes to predicting trends is worthless , and most of his wealth is n't based either on vision or any technical leadership ; it 's solely based on business skills .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Within five years, I predict it will be the most popular form of PC sold in America.
It will come with a full 640 KB of RAM which should be enough for anybody.
We will continue to out-innovate Apple.
Then we're going to fscking kill Google.
"I worked on Unix kernels and networking stacks in the mid 90s when Gates insisted IP serves no purpose and the Internet is a fad.
Back when Windows didn't even install TCP/IP by default, and the bundled one you could add yourself was horribly broken - I know, because I hacked our TCP implementation to get around many of its deficiencies.
Overall, his track record when it comes to predicting trends is worthless, and most of his wealth isn't based either on vision or any technical leadership; it's solely based on business skills.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552204</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553906</id>
	<title>How many times? It's Not An E-reader</title>
	<author>mdwh2</author>
	<datestamp>1269093060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Except it's not an e-reader - it doesn't have the e-ink display, or the long battery life (i.e., only using power to change the display).</p><p>If you're okay reading books on it, then any tablet, phone or netbook will count as an e-reader. And they're already available, and costing far less than an Islate or whatever the rumourmongers are calling it this week.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Except it 's not an e-reader - it does n't have the e-ink display , or the long battery life ( i.e. , only using power to change the display ) .If you 're okay reading books on it , then any tablet , phone or netbook will count as an e-reader .
And they 're already available , and costing far less than an Islate or whatever the rumourmongers are calling it this week .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Except it's not an e-reader - it doesn't have the e-ink display, or the long battery life (i.e., only using power to change the display).If you're okay reading books on it, then any tablet, phone or netbook will count as an e-reader.
And they're already available, and costing far less than an Islate or whatever the rumourmongers are calling it this week.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552146</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552910</id>
	<title>Re:Not at all true</title>
	<author>im\_thatoneguy</author>
	<datestamp>1269085620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have a tablet and I would consider it a DIVERGENCE device as well.</p><p>I would never rely on my tablet but that's not why I bought it.  I mostly use it for browsing the web while watching TV (on my PC) and drawing while in a cafe.</p><p>It's taken 2 features of my PC and split them off for portability.</p><p>The reason the iPad is useless for me is that it only solves one of my two problems: browsing the web.  I can't use it as a laptop for normal apps on the go or draw on it.   So it's too divergent, it splits off sub features of my tablet.</p><p>Whether the iPad succeeds or fails will be imo the exact opposite of the gp's quote.  I think it's too divergent.   I think it solves too few problems.  I spent $600 on my tablet and it does everything and more.  I'm not going to spend $500 for something that ONLY solves my internet browsing needs.   Tablets are already in that awkward place between internet device and laptop (or in the case of my hybrid is a slightly larger, clunkier laptop).</p><p>If you fly a number of times every year though it'll be worth its weight in gold (assuming you don't also need to bring a laptop).   It browses the web.  It plays movies.  It has books and magazines. It's practically designed for an airplane seat.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have a tablet and I would consider it a DIVERGENCE device as well.I would never rely on my tablet but that 's not why I bought it .
I mostly use it for browsing the web while watching TV ( on my PC ) and drawing while in a cafe.It 's taken 2 features of my PC and split them off for portability.The reason the iPad is useless for me is that it only solves one of my two problems : browsing the web .
I ca n't use it as a laptop for normal apps on the go or draw on it .
So it 's too divergent , it splits off sub features of my tablet.Whether the iPad succeeds or fails will be imo the exact opposite of the gp 's quote .
I think it 's too divergent .
I think it solves too few problems .
I spent $ 600 on my tablet and it does everything and more .
I 'm not going to spend $ 500 for something that ONLY solves my internet browsing needs .
Tablets are already in that awkward place between internet device and laptop ( or in the case of my hybrid is a slightly larger , clunkier laptop ) .If you fly a number of times every year though it 'll be worth its weight in gold ( assuming you do n't also need to bring a laptop ) .
It browses the web .
It plays movies .
It has books and magazines .
It 's practically designed for an airplane seat .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have a tablet and I would consider it a DIVERGENCE device as well.I would never rely on my tablet but that's not why I bought it.
I mostly use it for browsing the web while watching TV (on my PC) and drawing while in a cafe.It's taken 2 features of my PC and split them off for portability.The reason the iPad is useless for me is that it only solves one of my two problems: browsing the web.
I can't use it as a laptop for normal apps on the go or draw on it.
So it's too divergent, it splits off sub features of my tablet.Whether the iPad succeeds or fails will be imo the exact opposite of the gp's quote.
I think it's too divergent.
I think it solves too few problems.
I spent $600 on my tablet and it does everything and more.
I'm not going to spend $500 for something that ONLY solves my internet browsing needs.
Tablets are already in that awkward place between internet device and laptop (or in the case of my hybrid is a slightly larger, clunkier laptop).If you fly a number of times every year though it'll be worth its weight in gold (assuming you don't also need to bring a laptop).
It browses the web.
It plays movies.
It has books and magazines.
It's practically designed for an airplane seat.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552580</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31555222</id>
	<title>Tablets don't suck at all!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269108060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I am an illustrator and I love the tablet I'm using.  It has revolutionized everything about my job.  I can't say enough good things about this tool.  Imagine having a universal paintbrush and an unlimited pallet?  It's spectacular!</p><p>But it's not for everybody.  It's like any art store.  tons of people buy art supplies they're never going to really use just to play with them, and that's fine, but only a professional is really going to see true value in some of the more expensive tools and paints.  It'd be the same if people got a set of art markers and complained when they found them inconvenient to use when writing a letter.</p><p>Stick to a ballpoint pen, but don't trash a tool just because it wasn't built for your needs.  The trouble I see is tablets were sold to the world as the next big revolution when they are only amazing for a small number of professionals who need to make digital artwork and do cad design jobs and other niche market things.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I am an illustrator and I love the tablet I 'm using .
It has revolutionized everything about my job .
I ca n't say enough good things about this tool .
Imagine having a universal paintbrush and an unlimited pallet ?
It 's spectacular ! But it 's not for everybody .
It 's like any art store .
tons of people buy art supplies they 're never going to really use just to play with them , and that 's fine , but only a professional is really going to see true value in some of the more expensive tools and paints .
It 'd be the same if people got a set of art markers and complained when they found them inconvenient to use when writing a letter.Stick to a ballpoint pen , but do n't trash a tool just because it was n't built for your needs .
The trouble I see is tablets were sold to the world as the next big revolution when they are only amazing for a small number of professionals who need to make digital artwork and do cad design jobs and other niche market things .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am an illustrator and I love the tablet I'm using.
It has revolutionized everything about my job.
I can't say enough good things about this tool.
Imagine having a universal paintbrush and an unlimited pallet?
It's spectacular!But it's not for everybody.
It's like any art store.
tons of people buy art supplies they're never going to really use just to play with them, and that's fine, but only a professional is really going to see true value in some of the more expensive tools and paints.
It'd be the same if people got a set of art markers and complained when they found them inconvenient to use when writing a letter.Stick to a ballpoint pen, but don't trash a tool just because it wasn't built for your needs.
The trouble I see is tablets were sold to the world as the next big revolution when they are only amazing for a small number of professionals who need to make digital artwork and do cad design jobs and other niche market things.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552660</id>
	<title>Re:Tablets are mostly-output devices</title>
	<author>migla</author>
	<datestamp>1269083820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And nowadays, more and more people might very well find themselves wanting/needing/having nothing against owning an "output device" (or one that isn't for writing theseses on, but perhaps for writing comments and other shorter things on.</p><p>The pool of people for whom the internet is something constantly at arms length (as opposed to their parents way of sometimes going into the study to turn on the computer to google something), is growing. Many might be ok with a phone with a browser. Others want more of a computer (I think the n900 is pretty neat) and I'd wager that the segment that considers a bigger tablet a sweet spot is growing. Bigger pockets or more flexible screens will be all the rage in the near(-ish) future.</p><p>So far this sounds like I'm defending the ipad. Fuck that. Proprietary code is satan, figuratively speaking. I want debian on mine and the opportunity to do anything the hardware can muster.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And nowadays , more and more people might very well find themselves wanting/needing/having nothing against owning an " output device " ( or one that is n't for writing theseses on , but perhaps for writing comments and other shorter things on.The pool of people for whom the internet is something constantly at arms length ( as opposed to their parents way of sometimes going into the study to turn on the computer to google something ) , is growing .
Many might be ok with a phone with a browser .
Others want more of a computer ( I think the n900 is pretty neat ) and I 'd wager that the segment that considers a bigger tablet a sweet spot is growing .
Bigger pockets or more flexible screens will be all the rage in the near ( -ish ) future.So far this sounds like I 'm defending the ipad .
Fuck that .
Proprietary code is satan , figuratively speaking .
I want debian on mine and the opportunity to do anything the hardware can muster .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And nowadays, more and more people might very well find themselves wanting/needing/having nothing against owning an "output device" (or one that isn't for writing theseses on, but perhaps for writing comments and other shorter things on.The pool of people for whom the internet is something constantly at arms length (as opposed to their parents way of sometimes going into the study to turn on the computer to google something), is growing.
Many might be ok with a phone with a browser.
Others want more of a computer (I think the n900 is pretty neat) and I'd wager that the segment that considers a bigger tablet a sweet spot is growing.
Bigger pockets or more flexible screens will be all the rage in the near(-ish) future.So far this sounds like I'm defending the ipad.
Fuck that.
Proprietary code is satan, figuratively speaking.
I want debian on mine and the opportunity to do anything the hardware can muster.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552146</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31555712</id>
	<title>Re:well duh</title>
	<author>shutdown -p now</author>
	<datestamp>1269202980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Mouse is very different from touch. For one thing, it's much more precise, so UI elements can be smaller. For another, it can do some things touch can't (e.g. hover, secondary mouse buttons), and some things that are very natural with mouse are much more awkward with touch (double-click). And vice versa - there are plenty of natural touch gestures that aren't easy to reproduce with a mouse, even leaving multitouch aside - e.g. the "flick" gesture.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Mouse is very different from touch .
For one thing , it 's much more precise , so UI elements can be smaller .
For another , it can do some things touch ca n't ( e.g .
hover , secondary mouse buttons ) , and some things that are very natural with mouse are much more awkward with touch ( double-click ) .
And vice versa - there are plenty of natural touch gestures that are n't easy to reproduce with a mouse , even leaving multitouch aside - e.g .
the " flick " gesture .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Mouse is very different from touch.
For one thing, it's much more precise, so UI elements can be smaller.
For another, it can do some things touch can't (e.g.
hover, secondary mouse buttons), and some things that are very natural with mouse are much more awkward with touch (double-click).
And vice versa - there are plenty of natural touch gestures that aren't easy to reproduce with a mouse, even leaving multitouch aside - e.g.
the "flick" gesture.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552568</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553428</id>
	<title>Re:niches</title>
	<author>jo42</author>
	<datestamp>1269089100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I was going to say that Jesse Schell is an idiot for not seeing past the "you have to sit in front of it and it has to have a keyboard and mouse" mentality that pervades computing today. But yeah, it's not for him - it's for his mom, dad, grandma and grandpa and any other NON geek/nerd/tech-head on the planet.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I was going to say that Jesse Schell is an idiot for not seeing past the " you have to sit in front of it and it has to have a keyboard and mouse " mentality that pervades computing today .
But yeah , it 's not for him - it 's for his mom , dad , grandma and grandpa and any other NON geek/nerd/tech-head on the planet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was going to say that Jesse Schell is an idiot for not seeing past the "you have to sit in front of it and it has to have a keyboard and mouse" mentality that pervades computing today.
But yeah, it's not for him - it's for his mom, dad, grandma and grandpa and any other NON geek/nerd/tech-head on the planet.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552942</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552866</id>
	<title>5 reasons because tablets as desktop pcs suck</title>
	<author>gmuslera</author>
	<datestamp>1269085320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>He is not trying to use tablets as tablets, but trying to using them as desktop PCs or notebooks. They are different kind of devices, better or more comfortable than PCs for some tasks, worse for others. Better than say why they suck as desktop computers, would be better to list for which tasks something like a tablet is good, for which ones regular, and for which will suck. And then see if what is or was offered fit into that (regarding price, features, form factor, etc)</htmltext>
<tokenext>He is not trying to use tablets as tablets , but trying to using them as desktop PCs or notebooks .
They are different kind of devices , better or more comfortable than PCs for some tasks , worse for others .
Better than say why they suck as desktop computers , would be better to list for which tasks something like a tablet is good , for which ones regular , and for which will suck .
And then see if what is or was offered fit into that ( regarding price , features , form factor , etc )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>He is not trying to use tablets as tablets, but trying to using them as desktop PCs or notebooks.
They are different kind of devices, better or more comfortable than PCs for some tasks, worse for others.
Better than say why they suck as desktop computers, would be better to list for which tasks something like a tablet is good, for which ones regular, and for which will suck.
And then see if what is or was offered fit into that (regarding price, features, form factor, etc)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553156</id>
	<title>reading</title>
	<author>pydev</author>
	<datestamp>1269087060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There's really only one thing I want a tablet for: reading.  For that, I want something that is extremely responsive and no hassle to use.</p><p>Those requirements mean that anything e-ink based is not suitable; the refresh rate on e-ink makes any attempt at a decent UI fail.  Neither is any Windows-based tablet; Windows is too sluggish even on high-end desktop hardware, let alone on a power-sipping tablet; Windows is also far too complex.</p><p>That leaves the iPad and maybe Android and Chrome-based tablets.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's really only one thing I want a tablet for : reading .
For that , I want something that is extremely responsive and no hassle to use.Those requirements mean that anything e-ink based is not suitable ; the refresh rate on e-ink makes any attempt at a decent UI fail .
Neither is any Windows-based tablet ; Windows is too sluggish even on high-end desktop hardware , let alone on a power-sipping tablet ; Windows is also far too complex.That leaves the iPad and maybe Android and Chrome-based tablets .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's really only one thing I want a tablet for: reading.
For that, I want something that is extremely responsive and no hassle to use.Those requirements mean that anything e-ink based is not suitable; the refresh rate on e-ink makes any attempt at a decent UI fail.
Neither is any Windows-based tablet; Windows is too sluggish even on high-end desktop hardware, let alone on a power-sipping tablet; Windows is also far too complex.That leaves the iPad and maybe Android and Chrome-based tablets.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552436</id>
	<title>Re:niches</title>
	<author>99BottlesOfBeerInMyF</author>
	<datestamp>1269082200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The Swiss Army knife is an example of convergence: it has scissors, tweezers, knives, files, screwdrivers, etc. It does nothing perfectly and everything adequately. The iPhone is like that. But if someone got you a "Swiss Army" kitchen utensil, with a spatula and a ladle and tongs and a couple knives in a single sheath, you would think it was the stupidest thing in the world. "And that's why everyone hates the iPad."</p></div><p>The problem is, Mr. Schell is trying to apply rules but doesn't really understand them at the heart of the matter. It's not just things that fit in our pockets that we want to converge, but items we carry in our daily lives, when we have limited space. Cars and stereo systems don't fit in our pockets, but for some reason cars all have built in stereos. We could all just bring boom boxes with us in the car, but we don't because the benefit of having the stereo there all the time outweighs the duplication and the fact that car stereos are usually not as high of quality due to space and cost concerns.</p><p>Ask college students if they want all their textbooks to converge into a single device, if it can be done so without increasing cost or removing important features. Items like backpacks, luggage, sunglasses, clothing, personal transport, etc. are instances where convergence is desired by the general public. When was the last time you saw a student carrying a laptop case and a separate bag for their books? Those have pretty much converged at this point... but contrary to Mr. Schell's assertion you can't fit either in your pocket.</p><p>Now I don't plan on buying an iPad anytime soon, nor would I venture to guess how successful of a product it is going to be without trying one out. But this sort of overgeneralization as a method of prediction is weak tea.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The Swiss Army knife is an example of convergence : it has scissors , tweezers , knives , files , screwdrivers , etc .
It does nothing perfectly and everything adequately .
The iPhone is like that .
But if someone got you a " Swiss Army " kitchen utensil , with a spatula and a ladle and tongs and a couple knives in a single sheath , you would think it was the stupidest thing in the world .
" And that 's why everyone hates the iPad .
" The problem is , Mr. Schell is trying to apply rules but does n't really understand them at the heart of the matter .
It 's not just things that fit in our pockets that we want to converge , but items we carry in our daily lives , when we have limited space .
Cars and stereo systems do n't fit in our pockets , but for some reason cars all have built in stereos .
We could all just bring boom boxes with us in the car , but we do n't because the benefit of having the stereo there all the time outweighs the duplication and the fact that car stereos are usually not as high of quality due to space and cost concerns.Ask college students if they want all their textbooks to converge into a single device , if it can be done so without increasing cost or removing important features .
Items like backpacks , luggage , sunglasses , clothing , personal transport , etc .
are instances where convergence is desired by the general public .
When was the last time you saw a student carrying a laptop case and a separate bag for their books ?
Those have pretty much converged at this point... but contrary to Mr. Schell 's assertion you ca n't fit either in your pocket.Now I do n't plan on buying an iPad anytime soon , nor would I venture to guess how successful of a product it is going to be without trying one out .
But this sort of overgeneralization as a method of prediction is weak tea .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Swiss Army knife is an example of convergence: it has scissors, tweezers, knives, files, screwdrivers, etc.
It does nothing perfectly and everything adequately.
The iPhone is like that.
But if someone got you a "Swiss Army" kitchen utensil, with a spatula and a ladle and tongs and a couple knives in a single sheath, you would think it was the stupidest thing in the world.
"And that's why everyone hates the iPad.
"The problem is, Mr. Schell is trying to apply rules but doesn't really understand them at the heart of the matter.
It's not just things that fit in our pockets that we want to converge, but items we carry in our daily lives, when we have limited space.
Cars and stereo systems don't fit in our pockets, but for some reason cars all have built in stereos.
We could all just bring boom boxes with us in the car, but we don't because the benefit of having the stereo there all the time outweighs the duplication and the fact that car stereos are usually not as high of quality due to space and cost concerns.Ask college students if they want all their textbooks to converge into a single device, if it can be done so without increasing cost or removing important features.
Items like backpacks, luggage, sunglasses, clothing, personal transport, etc.
are instances where convergence is desired by the general public.
When was the last time you saw a student carrying a laptop case and a separate bag for their books?
Those have pretty much converged at this point... but contrary to Mr. Schell's assertion you can't fit either in your pocket.Now I don't plan on buying an iPad anytime soon, nor would I venture to guess how successful of a product it is going to be without trying one out.
But this sort of overgeneralization as a method of prediction is weak tea.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552180</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31604268</id>
	<title>Re:well duh</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269427800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Tablets have failed, huh?</p><p>I'll keep that in mind I'm next happily using mine. I use mine for drawing, inking, video editing, and sound engineering. If I could have work pay for another one, I would use it to look at schematics, datasheets, source code, to take pictures, and compile reports.</p><p>Just because most people don't want one doesn't mean someone doesn't want it and won't pay for it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Tablets have failed , huh ? I 'll keep that in mind I 'm next happily using mine .
I use mine for drawing , inking , video editing , and sound engineering .
If I could have work pay for another one , I would use it to look at schematics , datasheets , source code , to take pictures , and compile reports.Just because most people do n't want one does n't mean someone does n't want it and wo n't pay for it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Tablets have failed, huh?I'll keep that in mind I'm next happily using mine.
I use mine for drawing, inking, video editing, and sound engineering.
If I could have work pay for another one, I would use it to look at schematics, datasheets, source code, to take pictures, and compile reports.Just because most people don't want one doesn't mean someone doesn't want it and won't pay for it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552128</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552602</id>
	<title>Re:niches</title>
	<author>Cyberax</author>
	<datestamp>1269083340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yet most people do not use PC to watch TV. And most people nowdays will just buy a console rather than build a gaming PC.</p><p>That's what grandparent was talking about.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yet most people do not use PC to watch TV .
And most people nowdays will just buy a console rather than build a gaming PC.That 's what grandparent was talking about .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yet most people do not use PC to watch TV.
And most people nowdays will just buy a console rather than build a gaming PC.That's what grandparent was talking about.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552402</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552514</id>
	<title>Re:Tablets are mostly-output devices</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269082740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Personally I'd like see tablets move into a thin-client direction. Instead of framing them as gimped laptops, make them out to be home/office appliances, that sit passively charged and function similar to those lcd picture frames/clocks when not in your hands. Have a built in camera/mic and you can do skype, or chat between several tablets networked together, with decent speakers you could do internet radio (like the chumby). I wonder how effective/cheap you could make them if all the IO and graphics are wrapped up in a wireless VNC connection.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Personally I 'd like see tablets move into a thin-client direction .
Instead of framing them as gimped laptops , make them out to be home/office appliances , that sit passively charged and function similar to those lcd picture frames/clocks when not in your hands .
Have a built in camera/mic and you can do skype , or chat between several tablets networked together , with decent speakers you could do internet radio ( like the chumby ) .
I wonder how effective/cheap you could make them if all the IO and graphics are wrapped up in a wireless VNC connection .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Personally I'd like see tablets move into a thin-client direction.
Instead of framing them as gimped laptops, make them out to be home/office appliances, that sit passively charged and function similar to those lcd picture frames/clocks when not in your hands.
Have a built in camera/mic and you can do skype, or chat between several tablets networked together, with decent speakers you could do internet radio (like the chumby).
I wonder how effective/cheap you could make them if all the IO and graphics are wrapped up in a wireless VNC connection.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552146</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31554816</id>
	<title>I have one</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269102120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I love my tablet PC. Currently running windows 7, I got it (Lenovo x61) as a replacement for my laptop nearly two years ago. I have a 12 inch screen, and my battery life is about 8 hrs. I added the max of 4 gigs of ram, it has core2duo, and threw in a half terabyte hard drive. Total cost: 1200.</p><p>I work at a university, and love correcting things with digital red pen. Also, I can sign<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.pdfs without mouse-penmanship. It's also great for D&amp;D.<br>OneNote is awesome.<br>It has an accelerometer (like iphone) but that is currently only utilized to orient the screen when it tablet mode, or to turn off the hdd if it thinks it's being bumped or falling.<br>Recently my desktop died, and I bought the docking station. Now my tablet is also my desktop. (I use 360 for gaming and no longer need a gaming pc).<br>Now why would I spend half that on an underpowered thing that does maybe 1/20th of what I can?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I love my tablet PC .
Currently running windows 7 , I got it ( Lenovo x61 ) as a replacement for my laptop nearly two years ago .
I have a 12 inch screen , and my battery life is about 8 hrs .
I added the max of 4 gigs of ram , it has core2duo , and threw in a half terabyte hard drive .
Total cost : 1200.I work at a university , and love correcting things with digital red pen .
Also , I can sign .pdfs without mouse-penmanship .
It 's also great for D&amp;D.OneNote is awesome.It has an accelerometer ( like iphone ) but that is currently only utilized to orient the screen when it tablet mode , or to turn off the hdd if it thinks it 's being bumped or falling.Recently my desktop died , and I bought the docking station .
Now my tablet is also my desktop .
( I use 360 for gaming and no longer need a gaming pc ) .Now why would I spend half that on an underpowered thing that does maybe 1/20th of what I can ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I love my tablet PC.
Currently running windows 7, I got it (Lenovo x61) as a replacement for my laptop nearly two years ago.
I have a 12 inch screen, and my battery life is about 8 hrs.
I added the max of 4 gigs of ram, it has core2duo, and threw in a half terabyte hard drive.
Total cost: 1200.I work at a university, and love correcting things with digital red pen.
Also, I can sign .pdfs without mouse-penmanship.
It's also great for D&amp;D.OneNote is awesome.It has an accelerometer (like iphone) but that is currently only utilized to orient the screen when it tablet mode, or to turn off the hdd if it thinks it's being bumped or falling.Recently my desktop died, and I bought the docking station.
Now my tablet is also my desktop.
(I use 360 for gaming and no longer need a gaming pc).Now why would I spend half that on an underpowered thing that does maybe 1/20th of what I can?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31562898</id>
	<title>Re:The article isn't talking about the iPad</title>
	<author>FrankieBaby1986</author>
	<datestamp>1269186120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think weight is another big factor. If it's supposed to be a "tablet", like say a clipboard with some papers on it i'm working-on/reading/checking-of-stuff then it needs to be nearly as light weight as one, so i can just hold it up in the air like a clipboard while using it. Holding an 5 lb laptop gets pretty tiring. Otherwise, it just becomes a hard-to-read desk with a screen on it, and not very convenient as a "tablet"</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think weight is another big factor .
If it 's supposed to be a " tablet " , like say a clipboard with some papers on it i 'm working-on/reading/checking-of-stuff then it needs to be nearly as light weight as one , so i can just hold it up in the air like a clipboard while using it .
Holding an 5 lb laptop gets pretty tiring .
Otherwise , it just becomes a hard-to-read desk with a screen on it , and not very convenient as a " tablet "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think weight is another big factor.
If it's supposed to be a "tablet", like say a clipboard with some papers on it i'm working-on/reading/checking-of-stuff then it needs to be nearly as light weight as one, so i can just hold it up in the air like a clipboard while using it.
Holding an 5 lb laptop gets pretty tiring.
Otherwise, it just becomes a hard-to-read desk with a screen on it, and not very convenient as a "tablet"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552220</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552252</id>
	<title>My problem with iPad</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269080760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
Is that it's <b>not an open platform</b>.
It doesn't matter that much to me that it isn't the sake as a desktop OS X install, I am OK with that.
</p><p>
My issues are:
</p><ul>
  <li>No multitasking in the iPhone OS.  Even cell phone OSes can do that.</li><li>No way to easily develop complex applications for it</li><li>The platform is closed: executables have to be signed, can't share or download software from third parties.</li><li>Closed APIs that the platform developer users for their own tools, but doesn't let anyone else use</li><li>
      Apple has to approve every frigging application.
  </li><li>
       The folks at Apple are total dicks about what applications they accept/refuse.
   </li><li>The folks at Apple can deactivate or tamper apps you have already purchaed, and tamper with your device's settings/experience at any time they feel like it.</li><li>
       The folks at Apple make retroactive rejections for stupid reasons, for example deactivating Commodore emulator after it was already approved.   Refusing Google Voice.
   </li><li>App approval process
It's not a simple "Is this program safe?", or has the developer tested it for stability check.
They demand apps meet a long list of criteria that are difficult to meet, <b>AND</b> ordinary people will want apps that inherently don't meet all their stringent criteria.
  </li></ul></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is that it 's not an open platform .
It does n't matter that much to me that it is n't the sake as a desktop OS X install , I am OK with that .
My issues are : No multitasking in the iPhone OS .
Even cell phone OSes can do that.No way to easily develop complex applications for itThe platform is closed : executables have to be signed , ca n't share or download software from third parties.Closed APIs that the platform developer users for their own tools , but does n't let anyone else use Apple has to approve every frigging application .
The folks at Apple are total dicks about what applications they accept/refuse .
The folks at Apple can deactivate or tamper apps you have already purchaed , and tamper with your device 's settings/experience at any time they feel like it .
The folks at Apple make retroactive rejections for stupid reasons , for example deactivating Commodore emulator after it was already approved .
Refusing Google Voice .
App approval process It 's not a simple " Is this program safe ?
" , or has the developer tested it for stability check .
They demand apps meet a long list of criteria that are difficult to meet , AND ordinary people will want apps that inherently do n't meet all their stringent criteria .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
Is that it's not an open platform.
It doesn't matter that much to me that it isn't the sake as a desktop OS X install, I am OK with that.
My issues are:

  No multitasking in the iPhone OS.
Even cell phone OSes can do that.No way to easily develop complex applications for itThe platform is closed: executables have to be signed, can't share or download software from third parties.Closed APIs that the platform developer users for their own tools, but doesn't let anyone else use
      Apple has to approve every frigging application.
The folks at Apple are total dicks about what applications they accept/refuse.
The folks at Apple can deactivate or tamper apps you have already purchaed, and tamper with your device's settings/experience at any time they feel like it.
The folks at Apple make retroactive rejections for stupid reasons, for example deactivating Commodore emulator after it was already approved.
Refusing Google Voice.
App approval process
It's not a simple "Is this program safe?
", or has the developer tested it for stability check.
They demand apps meet a long list of criteria that are difficult to meet, AND ordinary people will want apps that inherently don't meet all their stringent criteria.
  </sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552760</id>
	<title>Re:niches</title>
	<author>Fjandr</author>
	<datestamp>1269084660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Given a comparison between it and discrete component for any one of those uses and it doesn't measure up. In the beginning, it was divergent in that it was designed to do complex calculations that were difficult (and now some that would be impossible for all practical purposes) to perform using current tools. Further development was driven by the leveraged power of persistent two-way network connections, something also divergent from existing technologies. The convergence of a PC has been a result of that leveraged power coupled with the ability to do many things easily, though not nearly so well as using devices dedicated to a specific task.</p><p>Also, the statement was that technologies diverge <em>for the most part</em>. Yes, there are examples that run counter to the vast majority of things, even if this one isn't really one of those examples.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Given a comparison between it and discrete component for any one of those uses and it does n't measure up .
In the beginning , it was divergent in that it was designed to do complex calculations that were difficult ( and now some that would be impossible for all practical purposes ) to perform using current tools .
Further development was driven by the leveraged power of persistent two-way network connections , something also divergent from existing technologies .
The convergence of a PC has been a result of that leveraged power coupled with the ability to do many things easily , though not nearly so well as using devices dedicated to a specific task.Also , the statement was that technologies diverge for the most part .
Yes , there are examples that run counter to the vast majority of things , even if this one is n't really one of those examples .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Given a comparison between it and discrete component for any one of those uses and it doesn't measure up.
In the beginning, it was divergent in that it was designed to do complex calculations that were difficult (and now some that would be impossible for all practical purposes) to perform using current tools.
Further development was driven by the leveraged power of persistent two-way network connections, something also divergent from existing technologies.
The convergence of a PC has been a result of that leveraged power coupled with the ability to do many things easily, though not nearly so well as using devices dedicated to a specific task.Also, the statement was that technologies diverge for the most part.
Yes, there are examples that run counter to the vast majority of things, even if this one isn't really one of those examples.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552402</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552128</id>
	<title>well duh</title>
	<author>peragrin</author>
	<datestamp>1269079680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Windows is not and never has been a tablet OS.  a Tablet isn't a desktop, you can't use the two in the same fashion. the pointers are different(fingers/stylus, vs a mouse pointer)  You can't just graph touch inputs into a desktop GUI, and expect everything to work right.  MSFT has made one decent touch based app, That is why tablets have thus failed.  Everyone tries to treat them as notebooks with touch screens, not as tablets with their own gui designs.</p><p>Apple with their sometimes annoying closed systems, are breaking MSFT out of their bad habits.  It took 3-4 years but MSFT fianlly realized that putting a desktop Interface on their phones was a bad idea that limited usability.  With the Ipad maybe in 5 years MSFT will make a real windows tablet OS, that ditches a wide bar that eats up valuable real estate and come up with a new way to work with tablets.  I would say linux might get their first, but Linux devs while innovative seem to have no luck in advertising to manufacturers.</p><p>typing this on my mac, with my Iphone nearby i will say i won't get an ipad, my purpose of a small tablet will be primarily for browsing and unfortunately that will require flash.  though someone finally taking a stand against flash is refreshing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Windows is not and never has been a tablet OS .
a Tablet is n't a desktop , you ca n't use the two in the same fashion .
the pointers are different ( fingers/stylus , vs a mouse pointer ) You ca n't just graph touch inputs into a desktop GUI , and expect everything to work right .
MSFT has made one decent touch based app , That is why tablets have thus failed .
Everyone tries to treat them as notebooks with touch screens , not as tablets with their own gui designs.Apple with their sometimes annoying closed systems , are breaking MSFT out of their bad habits .
It took 3-4 years but MSFT fianlly realized that putting a desktop Interface on their phones was a bad idea that limited usability .
With the Ipad maybe in 5 years MSFT will make a real windows tablet OS , that ditches a wide bar that eats up valuable real estate and come up with a new way to work with tablets .
I would say linux might get their first , but Linux devs while innovative seem to have no luck in advertising to manufacturers.typing this on my mac , with my Iphone nearby i will say i wo n't get an ipad , my purpose of a small tablet will be primarily for browsing and unfortunately that will require flash .
though someone finally taking a stand against flash is refreshing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Windows is not and never has been a tablet OS.
a Tablet isn't a desktop, you can't use the two in the same fashion.
the pointers are different(fingers/stylus, vs a mouse pointer)  You can't just graph touch inputs into a desktop GUI, and expect everything to work right.
MSFT has made one decent touch based app, That is why tablets have thus failed.
Everyone tries to treat them as notebooks with touch screens, not as tablets with their own gui designs.Apple with their sometimes annoying closed systems, are breaking MSFT out of their bad habits.
It took 3-4 years but MSFT fianlly realized that putting a desktop Interface on their phones was a bad idea that limited usability.
With the Ipad maybe in 5 years MSFT will make a real windows tablet OS, that ditches a wide bar that eats up valuable real estate and come up with a new way to work with tablets.
I would say linux might get their first, but Linux devs while innovative seem to have no luck in advertising to manufacturers.typing this on my mac, with my Iphone nearby i will say i won't get an ipad, my purpose of a small tablet will be primarily for browsing and unfortunately that will require flash.
though someone finally taking a stand against flash is refreshing.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553732</id>
	<title>The user interface is not the OS.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269091680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Although I agree with most of what you say, we have good examples in the market of an OS that's "full enough," like the iPhone OS on this iPad and Android on the others, and yet has the UI goodies you want.  It's here, now.  It's good enough.  And at least the Androids will be flashable to a proper Linux and I'm sure somebody will gen up some multitouch widgets to go with it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Although I agree with most of what you say , we have good examples in the market of an OS that 's " full enough , " like the iPhone OS on this iPad and Android on the others , and yet has the UI goodies you want .
It 's here , now .
It 's good enough .
And at least the Androids will be flashable to a proper Linux and I 'm sure somebody will gen up some multitouch widgets to go with it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Although I agree with most of what you say, we have good examples in the market of an OS that's "full enough," like the iPhone OS on this iPad and Android on the others, and yet has the UI goodies you want.
It's here, now.
It's good enough.
And at least the Androids will be flashable to a proper Linux and I'm sure somebody will gen up some multitouch widgets to go with it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553062</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31554826</id>
	<title>Re:well duh</title>
	<author>sl149q</author>
	<datestamp>1269102240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; With the Ipad maybe in 5 years MSFT will make a real windows tablet OS,</p><p>Microsoft is fully capable of doing a real phone or tablet OS with a great GUI... but it will not happen in our lifetime as the OS and Office groups will never allow it to happen. It would impact their products and revenue streams far too much or at least that is what they would fear would happen. So they simply won't allow this to be built inside Microsoft.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; With the Ipad maybe in 5 years MSFT will make a real windows tablet OS,Microsoft is fully capable of doing a real phone or tablet OS with a great GUI... but it will not happen in our lifetime as the OS and Office groups will never allow it to happen .
It would impact their products and revenue streams far too much or at least that is what they would fear would happen .
So they simply wo n't allow this to be built inside Microsoft .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; With the Ipad maybe in 5 years MSFT will make a real windows tablet OS,Microsoft is fully capable of doing a real phone or tablet OS with a great GUI... but it will not happen in our lifetime as the OS and Office groups will never allow it to happen.
It would impact their products and revenue streams far too much or at least that is what they would fear would happen.
So they simply won't allow this to be built inside Microsoft.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552128</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552942</id>
	<title>Re:niches</title>
	<author>xtal</author>
	<datestamp>1269085860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Jesse Schell is wrong.</p><p>The iPad will succeed very well for it's targeted market. Here's a hint: it's not you.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Jesse Schell is wrong.The iPad will succeed very well for it 's targeted market .
Here 's a hint : it 's not you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Jesse Schell is wrong.The iPad will succeed very well for it's targeted market.
Here's a hint: it's not you.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552180</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552368</id>
	<title>Re:niches</title>
	<author>cyber-vandal</author>
	<datestamp>1269081660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I reckon that making a computer that only allows multi-tasking for certain applications is a pretty crap idea as well.  This, apparently, is the case for it:  <a href="http://smokingapples.com/opinion/multi-tasking-iphone-ipad/" title="smokingapples.com">http://smokingapples.com/opinion/multi-tasking-iphone-ipad/</a> [smokingapples.com] which makes perfect sense on a phone but zero sense on a computer.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I reckon that making a computer that only allows multi-tasking for certain applications is a pretty crap idea as well .
This , apparently , is the case for it : http : //smokingapples.com/opinion/multi-tasking-iphone-ipad/ [ smokingapples.com ] which makes perfect sense on a phone but zero sense on a computer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I reckon that making a computer that only allows multi-tasking for certain applications is a pretty crap idea as well.
This, apparently, is the case for it:  http://smokingapples.com/opinion/multi-tasking-iphone-ipad/ [smokingapples.com] which makes perfect sense on a phone but zero sense on a computer.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552180</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553332</id>
	<title>Re:niches</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269088380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Yet most people do not use PC to watch TV.</p></div></blockquote><p>More and more of them are, and it's snowballing. Even among us somewhat older people in our thirties, pretty much everyone I know uses Hulu or Netflix on demand. I know one person who uses a regular TV -- he is, of course, the only one who has cable. I think plane travel introduces computer-as-TV to many people who might otherwise eschew it, and younger, urban, and low income people (e.g., college students) are naturally going to prefer it. My house actually has a regular TV, but none of us use it more than one every couple of months (usually involving guests or house meetings).</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yet most people do not use PC to watch TV.More and more of them are , and it 's snowballing .
Even among us somewhat older people in our thirties , pretty much everyone I know uses Hulu or Netflix on demand .
I know one person who uses a regular TV -- he is , of course , the only one who has cable .
I think plane travel introduces computer-as-TV to many people who might otherwise eschew it , and younger , urban , and low income people ( e.g. , college students ) are naturally going to prefer it .
My house actually has a regular TV , but none of us use it more than one every couple of months ( usually involving guests or house meetings ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yet most people do not use PC to watch TV.More and more of them are, and it's snowballing.
Even among us somewhat older people in our thirties, pretty much everyone I know uses Hulu or Netflix on demand.
I know one person who uses a regular TV -- he is, of course, the only one who has cable.
I think plane travel introduces computer-as-TV to many people who might otherwise eschew it, and younger, urban, and low income people (e.g., college students) are naturally going to prefer it.
My house actually has a regular TV, but none of us use it more than one every couple of months (usually involving guests or house meetings).
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552602</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552138</id>
	<title>I gave tablets serious consideration</title>
	<author>ffreeloader</author>
	<datestamp>1269079800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I didn't get one though for one reason only: small monitors/screens.  My eyesight is getting worse as I get older, and I really need a monitor larger than 12.1".  I love the 17" monitor on my current laptop.  It's easy to read and doesn't strain my eyes even at 1440x900.</p><p>If tablets were made with 16"+ monitors I would have bought a tablet rather than my current laptop.  I really like the capabilities of a tablet, but until/unless they are made with larger monitors I'll never buy one.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I did n't get one though for one reason only : small monitors/screens .
My eyesight is getting worse as I get older , and I really need a monitor larger than 12.1 " .
I love the 17 " monitor on my current laptop .
It 's easy to read and does n't strain my eyes even at 1440x900.If tablets were made with 16 " + monitors I would have bought a tablet rather than my current laptop .
I really like the capabilities of a tablet , but until/unless they are made with larger monitors I 'll never buy one .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I didn't get one though for one reason only: small monitors/screens.
My eyesight is getting worse as I get older, and I really need a monitor larger than 12.1".
I love the 17" monitor on my current laptop.
It's easy to read and doesn't strain my eyes even at 1440x900.If tablets were made with 16"+ monitors I would have bought a tablet rather than my current laptop.
I really like the capabilities of a tablet, but until/unless they are made with larger monitors I'll never buy one.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552354</id>
	<title>Strange logic actually supports iPad success</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269081540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>While the abstract tries to bash the iPad, the article leaves all avenues open for the iPad to be a success. For example, the article touts the failure of the stylus and lack of tablet apps, when the iPad doesn't use a stylus, has a finger-based UI, and will have over a hundred thousand (iPhone) apps available at launch, with many specialized just for the iPad.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>While the abstract tries to bash the iPad , the article leaves all avenues open for the iPad to be a success .
For example , the article touts the failure of the stylus and lack of tablet apps , when the iPad does n't use a stylus , has a finger-based UI , and will have over a hundred thousand ( iPhone ) apps available at launch , with many specialized just for the iPad .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While the abstract tries to bash the iPad, the article leaves all avenues open for the iPad to be a success.
For example, the article touts the failure of the stylus and lack of tablet apps, when the iPad doesn't use a stylus, has a finger-based UI, and will have over a hundred thousand (iPhone) apps available at launch, with many specialized just for the iPad.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553062</id>
	<title>Re:Battery life</title>
	<author>node 3</author>
	<datestamp>1269086520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Yeah, a full OS on a tablet platform isn't going to fly - until the tablet is powerful enough and the OS light enough to do enough niche things that it has broad utility. That would be right about... now.</p></div><p>No, it's <i>never</i> going to fly, if you mean running a desktop OS mostly unaltered, on a tablet. Windows, Mac OS X and Linux. None of these are well suited for even <i>stylus</i> based interaction, let alone multitouch. Things like window titlebars, close and minimize buttons, menus. None of these are very usable in multitouch.</p><p>Apple's take on Mac OS X as the iPhone OS is the right direction. Similar is Google's take on Linux as Android. But the idea of running Windows, Mac OS X, or Linux on a tablet is doomed, no matter what the technology is that goes into the battery, processor and display.</p><p>It's the interface, stupid.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , a full OS on a tablet platform is n't going to fly - until the tablet is powerful enough and the OS light enough to do enough niche things that it has broad utility .
That would be right about... now.No , it 's never going to fly , if you mean running a desktop OS mostly unaltered , on a tablet .
Windows , Mac OS X and Linux .
None of these are well suited for even stylus based interaction , let alone multitouch .
Things like window titlebars , close and minimize buttons , menus .
None of these are very usable in multitouch.Apple 's take on Mac OS X as the iPhone OS is the right direction .
Similar is Google 's take on Linux as Android .
But the idea of running Windows , Mac OS X , or Linux on a tablet is doomed , no matter what the technology is that goes into the battery , processor and display.It 's the interface , stupid .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, a full OS on a tablet platform isn't going to fly - until the tablet is powerful enough and the OS light enough to do enough niche things that it has broad utility.
That would be right about... now.No, it's never going to fly, if you mean running a desktop OS mostly unaltered, on a tablet.
Windows, Mac OS X and Linux.
None of these are well suited for even stylus based interaction, let alone multitouch.
Things like window titlebars, close and minimize buttons, menus.
None of these are very usable in multitouch.Apple's take on Mac OS X as the iPhone OS is the right direction.
Similar is Google's take on Linux as Android.
But the idea of running Windows, Mac OS X, or Linux on a tablet is doomed, no matter what the technology is that goes into the battery, processor and display.It's the interface, stupid.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552020</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552962</id>
	<title>Re:My problem with iPad</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269086040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Nobody cares it's not an open platform. It is marketed towards people who just want to accomplish certain things, and it is designed to do those things \_very well\_.</p><p>When an open platform does those things, perhaps we have something to talk about.</p><p>For end user, polished applications, the open platform solutions have been total epic fail.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Nobody cares it 's not an open platform .
It is marketed towards people who just want to accomplish certain things , and it is designed to do those things \ _very well \ _.When an open platform does those things , perhaps we have something to talk about.For end user , polished applications , the open platform solutions have been total epic fail .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nobody cares it's not an open platform.
It is marketed towards people who just want to accomplish certain things, and it is designed to do those things \_very well\_.When an open platform does those things, perhaps we have something to talk about.For end user, polished applications, the open platform solutions have been total epic fail.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552252</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31555028</id>
	<title>Re:I Have a Tablet, and It's Brilliant!</title>
	<author>N!NJA</author>
	<datestamp>1269105120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>It's not really ironic that with deep discounts in addition to coupons you can get this cheaply, but it's hardly relevant to the average customer, who gets neither.</p></div><p>the average customer is screwed no matter what. he/she doesnt know the difference between a <b>Pentium II</b>, <b>Pentium Dual Core</b>, <b>Pentium D</b> and a <b>Core 2 Duo</b>. hell, even i would have to look for benchmarks on Tom's Hardware website in order to find out what is what.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's not really ironic that with deep discounts in addition to coupons you can get this cheaply , but it 's hardly relevant to the average customer , who gets neither.the average customer is screwed no matter what .
he/she doesnt know the difference between a Pentium II , Pentium Dual Core , Pentium D and a Core 2 Duo .
hell , even i would have to look for benchmarks on Tom 's Hardware website in order to find out what is what .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's not really ironic that with deep discounts in addition to coupons you can get this cheaply, but it's hardly relevant to the average customer, who gets neither.the average customer is screwed no matter what.
he/she doesnt know the difference between a Pentium II, Pentium Dual Core, Pentium D and a Core 2 Duo.
hell, even i would have to look for benchmarks on Tom's Hardware website in order to find out what is what.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31554838</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31581586</id>
	<title>Funny, that</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269348840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Because I already have a tablet PC.</p><p>I've had it since about 2003. It still works, and is still a pretty neat toy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Because I already have a tablet PC.I 've had it since about 2003 .
It still works , and is still a pretty neat toy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because I already have a tablet PC.I've had it since about 2003.
It still works, and is still a pretty neat toy.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552656</id>
	<title>Re:niches - fixed that for ya</title>
	<author>Vidar Leathershod</author>
	<datestamp>1269083820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Jesse Schell, known mostly to his friends and colleagues as a game designer, spoke at "DICE", where maybe a few hundred people heard him, and said the iPad, which has not yet been released, will not succeed.  He then went on to explain his theories regarding what makes a successful product, based on his experience in designing things that have unit sales measured in millions.</p><p>Then, some guy on Slashdot quoted him, which sent Apple's stock into a nose dive as everyone who read it decided not to buy an iPad because *the* Jesse Schell said they won't want to.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Jesse Schell , known mostly to his friends and colleagues as a game designer , spoke at " DICE " , where maybe a few hundred people heard him , and said the iPad , which has not yet been released , will not succeed .
He then went on to explain his theories regarding what makes a successful product , based on his experience in designing things that have unit sales measured in millions.Then , some guy on Slashdot quoted him , which sent Apple 's stock into a nose dive as everyone who read it decided not to buy an iPad because * the * Jesse Schell said they wo n't want to .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Jesse Schell, known mostly to his friends and colleagues as a game designer, spoke at "DICE", where maybe a few hundred people heard him, and said the iPad, which has not yet been released, will not succeed.
He then went on to explain his theories regarding what makes a successful product, based on his experience in designing things that have unit sales measured in millions.Then, some guy on Slashdot quoted him, which sent Apple's stock into a nose dive as everyone who read it decided not to buy an iPad because *the* Jesse Schell said they won't want to.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552180</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552478</id>
	<title>Re:well duh</title>
	<author>tclgeek</author>
	<datestamp>1269082440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>linux devs innovative? Since when? Most linux apps I use are just copies of established apps. Very, very little innovation from my perspective.</htmltext>
<tokenext>linux devs innovative ?
Since when ?
Most linux apps I use are just copies of established apps .
Very , very little innovation from my perspective .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>linux devs innovative?
Since when?
Most linux apps I use are just copies of established apps.
Very, very little innovation from my perspective.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552128</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552642</id>
	<title>Re:My problem with iPad</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269083700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><ul><li>No way to easily develop complex applications for it</li></ul></div><p>By the very nature of a complex application, wouldn't it not be easy to develop?</p><p>Or are you trying to call that managed, java-clone crap of<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.Net that Microsoft uses something that can easily create complex applications?</p><p>Last I checked, its quite <i>easy</i> to create complex applications in Objective-C, which is basically C with Smalltalk like message passing.</p><p>I'm glad there's no managed vm crap sitting on top of the OS, and that I can use virtually any standard C library I want.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>No way to easily develop complex applications for itBy the very nature of a complex application , would n't it not be easy to develop ? Or are you trying to call that managed , java-clone crap of .Net that Microsoft uses something that can easily create complex applications ? Last I checked , its quite easy to create complex applications in Objective-C , which is basically C with Smalltalk like message passing.I 'm glad there 's no managed vm crap sitting on top of the OS , and that I can use virtually any standard C library I want .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No way to easily develop complex applications for itBy the very nature of a complex application, wouldn't it not be easy to develop?Or are you trying to call that managed, java-clone crap of .Net that Microsoft uses something that can easily create complex applications?Last I checked, its quite easy to create complex applications in Objective-C, which is basically C with Smalltalk like message passing.I'm glad there's no managed vm crap sitting on top of the OS, and that I can use virtually any standard C library I want.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552252</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31558818</id>
	<title>why a tableet?</title>
	<author>multicsfan</author>
	<datestamp>1269199020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So far I've gotten along fine with my handspring prizm.  For all the normal things I want something portable it does or has applications that will do the functions I want.  The only time I really need more I want my full function laptop.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So far I 've gotten along fine with my handspring prizm .
For all the normal things I want something portable it does or has applications that will do the functions I want .
The only time I really need more I want my full function laptop .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So far I've gotten along fine with my handspring prizm.
For all the normal things I want something portable it does or has applications that will do the functions I want.
The only time I really need more I want my full function laptop.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552666</id>
	<title>technologies divert</title>
	<author>e**(i pi)-1</author>
	<datestamp>1269083820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>&gt; Convergence doesn't happen. Technologies diverge, for the most part.

<p>
That is exactly the reason why I ordered an iPad.
The iPod is great to read nontechnical books, write quick emails or have
a glance at news while away from the office. It does not replace the
desktop, where I can program, develop, write comfortably, where things
are backed up and synced with other computers, where I have reliability
and openness of the operating system and complete control, what process
is running.</p><p>

But I do not like to read technical books on the PC, nor on the iPod.
I want to have my library with me, on a different device. I imagine having
the iPod in my pocket, write on my laptop and have a tablet as a reference.
</p><p>
Yes, the interface will be key. The article very
well describes why tablet PCs have failed so far: they had
crappy, sucking interfaces so far.

It does not have to be Apple: also "Courier" from Microsoft looks
as if it is going to be a winner: because the interface looks nice.
Whether Apple or Microsoft will succeed is not yet clear. It is no
question for me that there will be something between a smart phone
and a laptop, which will stay to read journals, newspapers, books
or articles.</p><p>

Divergence will occur also naturally because
smart phones and tablets will be locked down pretty heavily. Nobody
who minds the future will bet entirely on a platform which is
closed. As for a book reader, I do not care as long as it displays
PDFs and Djvu files nicely, and in high quality.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; Convergence does n't happen .
Technologies diverge , for the most part .
That is exactly the reason why I ordered an iPad .
The iPod is great to read nontechnical books , write quick emails or have a glance at news while away from the office .
It does not replace the desktop , where I can program , develop , write comfortably , where things are backed up and synced with other computers , where I have reliability and openness of the operating system and complete control , what process is running .
But I do not like to read technical books on the PC , nor on the iPod .
I want to have my library with me , on a different device .
I imagine having the iPod in my pocket , write on my laptop and have a tablet as a reference .
Yes , the interface will be key .
The article very well describes why tablet PCs have failed so far : they had crappy , sucking interfaces so far .
It does not have to be Apple : also " Courier " from Microsoft looks as if it is going to be a winner : because the interface looks nice .
Whether Apple or Microsoft will succeed is not yet clear .
It is no question for me that there will be something between a smart phone and a laptop , which will stay to read journals , newspapers , books or articles .
Divergence will occur also naturally because smart phones and tablets will be locked down pretty heavily .
Nobody who minds the future will bet entirely on a platform which is closed .
As for a book reader , I do not care as long as it displays PDFs and Djvu files nicely , and in high quality .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; Convergence doesn't happen.
Technologies diverge, for the most part.
That is exactly the reason why I ordered an iPad.
The iPod is great to read nontechnical books, write quick emails or have
a glance at news while away from the office.
It does not replace the
desktop, where I can program, develop, write comfortably, where things
are backed up and synced with other computers, where I have reliability
and openness of the operating system and complete control, what process
is running.
But I do not like to read technical books on the PC, nor on the iPod.
I want to have my library with me, on a different device.
I imagine having
the iPod in my pocket, write on my laptop and have a tablet as a reference.
Yes, the interface will be key.
The article very
well describes why tablet PCs have failed so far: they had
crappy, sucking interfaces so far.
It does not have to be Apple: also "Courier" from Microsoft looks
as if it is going to be a winner: because the interface looks nice.
Whether Apple or Microsoft will succeed is not yet clear.
It is no
question for me that there will be something between a smart phone
and a laptop, which will stay to read journals, newspapers, books
or articles.
Divergence will occur also naturally because
smart phones and tablets will be locked down pretty heavily.
Nobody
who minds the future will bet entirely on a platform which is
closed.
As for a book reader, I do not care as long as it displays
PDFs and Djvu files nicely, and in high quality.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31556150</id>
	<title>iPad will easily outsell all previous tablets</title>
	<author>gig</author>
	<datestamp>1269168000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There were only 1 million TabletPC sold, and only 3 million Kindles. Apple has apparently ordered 5 million iPads for the first quarter of sales, and has sold half a million already, even though they have a 2-per-customer limit, no bulk sales yet, and no devices in stores yet. So they are fairly easily going to outsell all previous tablets within a very short time.</p><p>The key thing is that iPad can morph into any tablet-sized device. It's thousands of tablets, not just one tablet. Whatever you used a tablet for previously, or wished you could use one for, iPad can do that. It can even remote control any PC if you want a full PC on there. It even has a Kindle app to run those proprietary books, as well as many open book readers. It can be a photo album or a TV. And the Apple touch interface is like butter, it's smooth and responsive and doesn't misfire. It's accurate enough for professional artwork, same as iPhone. The software stack is incredibly deep: OS X, HTML5, Cocoa, iPod. Any 10 iPad buyers may buy for 10 different reasons. I can already see this in my friends who are planning to buy an iPad, they are from all walks of life, and only a few could be described as gadgety. Everyone has a really good uses for iPad. One friend wants it solely for presentations, another for photos. I probably want it most for the Web browser.</p><p>Another important thing is Apple did not try to make a PC-replacement. You're not supposed to ditch your PC for this, which was always a feature of TabletPC. Bill Gates used to say everyone will be using a stylus soon. Apple has clearly made iPad a secondary computer to your PC. If you have a PC and a tech book on your desk right now, iPad replaces the tech book, not the PC. I think they found exactly the right balance between ambition and humility in attempting to replace all the tablets but not attempting to replace a single PC.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There were only 1 million TabletPC sold , and only 3 million Kindles .
Apple has apparently ordered 5 million iPads for the first quarter of sales , and has sold half a million already , even though they have a 2-per-customer limit , no bulk sales yet , and no devices in stores yet .
So they are fairly easily going to outsell all previous tablets within a very short time.The key thing is that iPad can morph into any tablet-sized device .
It 's thousands of tablets , not just one tablet .
Whatever you used a tablet for previously , or wished you could use one for , iPad can do that .
It can even remote control any PC if you want a full PC on there .
It even has a Kindle app to run those proprietary books , as well as many open book readers .
It can be a photo album or a TV .
And the Apple touch interface is like butter , it 's smooth and responsive and does n't misfire .
It 's accurate enough for professional artwork , same as iPhone .
The software stack is incredibly deep : OS X , HTML5 , Cocoa , iPod .
Any 10 iPad buyers may buy for 10 different reasons .
I can already see this in my friends who are planning to buy an iPad , they are from all walks of life , and only a few could be described as gadgety .
Everyone has a really good uses for iPad .
One friend wants it solely for presentations , another for photos .
I probably want it most for the Web browser.Another important thing is Apple did not try to make a PC-replacement .
You 're not supposed to ditch your PC for this , which was always a feature of TabletPC .
Bill Gates used to say everyone will be using a stylus soon .
Apple has clearly made iPad a secondary computer to your PC .
If you have a PC and a tech book on your desk right now , iPad replaces the tech book , not the PC .
I think they found exactly the right balance between ambition and humility in attempting to replace all the tablets but not attempting to replace a single PC .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There were only 1 million TabletPC sold, and only 3 million Kindles.
Apple has apparently ordered 5 million iPads for the first quarter of sales, and has sold half a million already, even though they have a 2-per-customer limit, no bulk sales yet, and no devices in stores yet.
So they are fairly easily going to outsell all previous tablets within a very short time.The key thing is that iPad can morph into any tablet-sized device.
It's thousands of tablets, not just one tablet.
Whatever you used a tablet for previously, or wished you could use one for, iPad can do that.
It can even remote control any PC if you want a full PC on there.
It even has a Kindle app to run those proprietary books, as well as many open book readers.
It can be a photo album or a TV.
And the Apple touch interface is like butter, it's smooth and responsive and doesn't misfire.
It's accurate enough for professional artwork, same as iPhone.
The software stack is incredibly deep: OS X, HTML5, Cocoa, iPod.
Any 10 iPad buyers may buy for 10 different reasons.
I can already see this in my friends who are planning to buy an iPad, they are from all walks of life, and only a few could be described as gadgety.
Everyone has a really good uses for iPad.
One friend wants it solely for presentations, another for photos.
I probably want it most for the Web browser.Another important thing is Apple did not try to make a PC-replacement.
You're not supposed to ditch your PC for this, which was always a feature of TabletPC.
Bill Gates used to say everyone will be using a stylus soon.
Apple has clearly made iPad a secondary computer to your PC.
If you have a PC and a tech book on your desk right now, iPad replaces the tech book, not the PC.
I think they found exactly the right balance between ambition and humility in attempting to replace all the tablets but not attempting to replace a single PC.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553096</id>
	<title>Re:niches</title>
	<author>mdwh2</author>
	<datestamp>1269086700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't even see that - it's not an e-reader anyway, and costs far more than a netbook without offering anything extra. And basically, the whole idea of tablets in their current form (including the Islate) sucks for the reasons given in TFA.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't even see that - it 's not an e-reader anyway , and costs far more than a netbook without offering anything extra .
And basically , the whole idea of tablets in their current form ( including the Islate ) sucks for the reasons given in TFA .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't even see that - it's not an e-reader anyway, and costs far more than a netbook without offering anything extra.
And basically, the whole idea of tablets in their current form (including the Islate) sucks for the reasons given in TFA.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552374</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31554842</id>
	<title>Re:niches</title>
	<author>perlchild</author>
	<datestamp>1269102420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I can see both your point and the grandparents...</p><p>I think it's worthwhile to note that such multi-function devices happen more despite manufacturer's wishes, than because of them.</p><p>How often do you upgrade your pc? how often do you upgrade your tv?  Probably a lot less than people upgrade/lose/damange their cellphones(in absolute terms if not necessarily on slashdot).</p><p>There's a lot of hype for the ipad(normal,it's not even selling yet), I doubt that hype will stay after people actually get the device...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I can see both your point and the grandparents...I think it 's worthwhile to note that such multi-function devices happen more despite manufacturer 's wishes , than because of them.How often do you upgrade your pc ?
how often do you upgrade your tv ?
Probably a lot less than people upgrade/lose/damange their cellphones ( in absolute terms if not necessarily on slashdot ) .There 's a lot of hype for the ipad ( normal,it 's not even selling yet ) , I doubt that hype will stay after people actually get the device.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can see both your point and the grandparents...I think it's worthwhile to note that such multi-function devices happen more despite manufacturer's wishes, than because of them.How often do you upgrade your pc?
how often do you upgrade your tv?
Probably a lot less than people upgrade/lose/damange their cellphones(in absolute terms if not necessarily on slashdot).There's a lot of hype for the ipad(normal,it's not even selling yet), I doubt that hype will stay after people actually get the device...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552402</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31555612</id>
	<title>Apple has taken a different direction</title>
	<author>ThinkTwice</author>
	<datestamp>1269114120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Apple is going from the iPhone up and all the other tablet vendors are have gone from the desktop down. They are not trying to win over people that need a real computer. I am surprised how many people I know that own an iPhone and have never owned a Mac. The same holds true for the iPod and will probably be true with the iPad. People like the simplicity and the vast majority of computer users today only use a few apps most of the time, a browser, email and maybe games.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Apple is going from the iPhone up and all the other tablet vendors are have gone from the desktop down .
They are not trying to win over people that need a real computer .
I am surprised how many people I know that own an iPhone and have never owned a Mac .
The same holds true for the iPod and will probably be true with the iPad .
People like the simplicity and the vast majority of computer users today only use a few apps most of the time , a browser , email and maybe games .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Apple is going from the iPhone up and all the other tablet vendors are have gone from the desktop down.
They are not trying to win over people that need a real computer.
I am surprised how many people I know that own an iPhone and have never owned a Mac.
The same holds true for the iPod and will probably be true with the iPad.
People like the simplicity and the vast majority of computer users today only use a few apps most of the time, a browser, email and maybe games.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553408</id>
	<title>Re:niches</title>
	<author>VGPowerlord</author>
	<datestamp>1269088980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>The personal computer is a stereo, a TV, a typewriter, a calculator, and serves infinite other random functions. But I mean, who would want one of those? Oh sorry I guess you keep yours in your pocket.</p></div></blockquote><p>The point of a personal computer is to run one or more arbitrary programs.  The original killer app was the Spreadsheet, but we've gone beyond that now.  Each user's needs are different, too.</p><p>Windows is the dominant OS in the personal computing arena simply because that's what the most programs that users need and/or are familiar with.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The personal computer is a stereo , a TV , a typewriter , a calculator , and serves infinite other random functions .
But I mean , who would want one of those ?
Oh sorry I guess you keep yours in your pocket.The point of a personal computer is to run one or more arbitrary programs .
The original killer app was the Spreadsheet , but we 've gone beyond that now .
Each user 's needs are different , too.Windows is the dominant OS in the personal computing arena simply because that 's what the most programs that users need and/or are familiar with .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The personal computer is a stereo, a TV, a typewriter, a calculator, and serves infinite other random functions.
But I mean, who would want one of those?
Oh sorry I guess you keep yours in your pocket.The point of a personal computer is to run one or more arbitrary programs.
The original killer app was the Spreadsheet, but we've gone beyond that now.
Each user's needs are different, too.Windows is the dominant OS in the personal computing arena simply because that's what the most programs that users need and/or are familiar with.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552402</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553148</id>
	<title>Re:niches</title>
	<author>4iedBandit</author>
	<datestamp>1269087000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You seem to forget history.  The iPhone was not initially sold in a subsidized version and it still sold and sold a ton before Apple came out with a subsidized pricing plan.  What did it offer over other phones that made millions of people go out and buy it for full price?  It's widely accepted that feature wise the iPhone has lagged over the competition, and still it's been wildly popular.  </p><p>If you have great form but lousy function your product will fail.  If you have lousy form but fantastic function you may be successful, but only because people have to have your function.  If you pair fantastic form with fantastic function, you will own the market.</p><p>You can argue against that all you want but Apple's fast rise to prominence in the smart phone market tells the story.</p><p>Apple's been playing a long-term game here.  The ipod and iphone have been gateway gadgets to bring people to the realization that not all tech has to suck and merely be tolerated because it does something useful.  I wish other manufacturers  would learn that lesson.</p><p>The iPad is a harder sell because it's not a phone and bigger than a simple ipod, but I think it will sell.  And I think it will sell a ton when people see what kind of apps are available.  Apple is shifting the computing paradigm away from the desktop metaphor, and they're doing it fast.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You seem to forget history .
The iPhone was not initially sold in a subsidized version and it still sold and sold a ton before Apple came out with a subsidized pricing plan .
What did it offer over other phones that made millions of people go out and buy it for full price ?
It 's widely accepted that feature wise the iPhone has lagged over the competition , and still it 's been wildly popular .
If you have great form but lousy function your product will fail .
If you have lousy form but fantastic function you may be successful , but only because people have to have your function .
If you pair fantastic form with fantastic function , you will own the market.You can argue against that all you want but Apple 's fast rise to prominence in the smart phone market tells the story.Apple 's been playing a long-term game here .
The ipod and iphone have been gateway gadgets to bring people to the realization that not all tech has to suck and merely be tolerated because it does something useful .
I wish other manufacturers would learn that lesson.The iPad is a harder sell because it 's not a phone and bigger than a simple ipod , but I think it will sell .
And I think it will sell a ton when people see what kind of apps are available .
Apple is shifting the computing paradigm away from the desktop metaphor , and they 're doing it fast .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You seem to forget history.
The iPhone was not initially sold in a subsidized version and it still sold and sold a ton before Apple came out with a subsidized pricing plan.
What did it offer over other phones that made millions of people go out and buy it for full price?
It's widely accepted that feature wise the iPhone has lagged over the competition, and still it's been wildly popular.
If you have great form but lousy function your product will fail.
If you have lousy form but fantastic function you may be successful, but only because people have to have your function.
If you pair fantastic form with fantastic function, you will own the market.You can argue against that all you want but Apple's fast rise to prominence in the smart phone market tells the story.Apple's been playing a long-term game here.
The ipod and iphone have been gateway gadgets to bring people to the realization that not all tech has to suck and merely be tolerated because it does something useful.
I wish other manufacturers  would learn that lesson.The iPad is a harder sell because it's not a phone and bigger than a simple ipod, but I think it will sell.
And I think it will sell a ton when people see what kind of apps are available.
Apple is shifting the computing paradigm away from the desktop metaphor, and they're doing it fast.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552374</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552004</id>
	<title>UMPC</title>
	<author>sckirklan</author>
	<datestamp>1269078960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I like my Q1 Ultra Premium, which is tabletesq.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I like my Q1 Ultra Premium , which is tabletesq .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I like my Q1 Ultra Premium, which is tabletesq.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552220</id>
	<title>The article isn't talking about the iPad</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269080460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>I have no intention of getting an iPad, but all the reasons the article points out why tablets suck actually point to the possibility that the iPad might actually succeed.
<br> <br>
Unlike the other tablets, the iPad is designed with an interface done correctly for a tablet.  It's not trying to be a full OS because the interface wouldn't work correctly.  It's going with the iPhone OS which is a touch-centric OS.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have no intention of getting an iPad , but all the reasons the article points out why tablets suck actually point to the possibility that the iPad might actually succeed .
Unlike the other tablets , the iPad is designed with an interface done correctly for a tablet .
It 's not trying to be a full OS because the interface would n't work correctly .
It 's going with the iPhone OS which is a touch-centric OS .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have no intention of getting an iPad, but all the reasons the article points out why tablets suck actually point to the possibility that the iPad might actually succeed.
Unlike the other tablets, the iPad is designed with an interface done correctly for a tablet.
It's not trying to be a full OS because the interface wouldn't work correctly.
It's going with the iPhone OS which is a touch-centric OS.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31555302</id>
	<title>Re:The article isn't talking about the iPad</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269109440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>It's not trying to be a full OS because the interface wouldn't work correctly. It's going with the iPhone OS which is a touch-centric OS.</p></div><p>You've got some pretty basic concepts confused there. There is no such thing as a "touch-centric OS". There is also absolutely no reason Apple couldn't have used a touch-centric <i>interface</i> over real OS X, which is what everyone was expecting.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's not trying to be a full OS because the interface would n't work correctly .
It 's going with the iPhone OS which is a touch-centric OS.You 've got some pretty basic concepts confused there .
There is no such thing as a " touch-centric OS " .
There is also absolutely no reason Apple could n't have used a touch-centric interface over real OS X , which is what everyone was expecting .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's not trying to be a full OS because the interface wouldn't work correctly.
It's going with the iPhone OS which is a touch-centric OS.You've got some pretty basic concepts confused there.
There is no such thing as a "touch-centric OS".
There is also absolutely no reason Apple couldn't have used a touch-centric interface over real OS X, which is what everyone was expecting.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552220</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552258</id>
	<title>Pfft</title>
	<author>oGMo</author>
	<datestamp>1269080760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>From the article:</p><blockquote><div><p>Ever since tablets were usable, they've had full operating systems, primarily Windows.</p></div>
</blockquote><p>Windows is a "full operating system" in the sense a cheapass laundry machine is a "full cleaning solution".  It's a cobbled-together appliance with rusty parts you're lucky doesn't burn down your house.</p><p>The reason people don't want a tablet, especially the iPad, is because it <i>doesn't do anything special</i>.  It's pretty much the same "throw existing apps on something without a keyboard and call it a tablet" that everyone else has tried.  That's not how the iPod and iPhone were successful.  It's not how smartphones became successful in general, or even how netbooks became successful.  If you want to make a real tablet, you've got to have a focused, tablet-oriented system, and a pervasive tablet UI.  Unfortunately, the one possibly valid point in the article starts to hint at this and then veers back into clueless land.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>From the article : Ever since tablets were usable , they 've had full operating systems , primarily Windows .
Windows is a " full operating system " in the sense a cheapass laundry machine is a " full cleaning solution " .
It 's a cobbled-together appliance with rusty parts you 're lucky does n't burn down your house.The reason people do n't want a tablet , especially the iPad , is because it does n't do anything special .
It 's pretty much the same " throw existing apps on something without a keyboard and call it a tablet " that everyone else has tried .
That 's not how the iPod and iPhone were successful .
It 's not how smartphones became successful in general , or even how netbooks became successful .
If you want to make a real tablet , you 've got to have a focused , tablet-oriented system , and a pervasive tablet UI .
Unfortunately , the one possibly valid point in the article starts to hint at this and then veers back into clueless land .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From the article:Ever since tablets were usable, they've had full operating systems, primarily Windows.
Windows is a "full operating system" in the sense a cheapass laundry machine is a "full cleaning solution".
It's a cobbled-together appliance with rusty parts you're lucky doesn't burn down your house.The reason people don't want a tablet, especially the iPad, is because it doesn't do anything special.
It's pretty much the same "throw existing apps on something without a keyboard and call it a tablet" that everyone else has tried.
That's not how the iPod and iPhone were successful.
It's not how smartphones became successful in general, or even how netbooks became successful.
If you want to make a real tablet, you've got to have a focused, tablet-oriented system, and a pervasive tablet UI.
Unfortunately, the one possibly valid point in the article starts to hint at this and then veers back into clueless land.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31554470</id>
	<title>Please, Slashdot, Stop</title>
	<author>Kagetsuki</author>
	<datestamp>1269098400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm sick of constantly seeing articles defending criticisms of Apple products. If everyone is telling you they don't like something then they don't like it, accept that and either fix it or just market it to those who do like it.<br>
<br>
Also as it's been pointed out in a variety of situations tablets running full OS's work very well. WHAT REALLY BUGGED ME was the "That looks fun to use with a stylus/finger. Not." caption. I have a Sharp Z1, which has a small screen and runs basically an unmodified gnome. It's tiny and I use a stylus/finger to operate it and have not had ANY difficulty doing so. If you can write within the lines on notebook paper you can use a stylus just fine. If you can play a game on the Nintendo DS you are OK. Perhaps the people with muscle control disorders will have no choice but to use the big bright buttons on the iPad, but even my 2 year old daughter can play childrens DS games fine with a stylus so unless you have an actual medical reason normal OS's on tablets are in fact just fine.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm sick of constantly seeing articles defending criticisms of Apple products .
If everyone is telling you they do n't like something then they do n't like it , accept that and either fix it or just market it to those who do like it .
Also as it 's been pointed out in a variety of situations tablets running full OS 's work very well .
WHAT REALLY BUGGED ME was the " That looks fun to use with a stylus/finger .
Not. " caption .
I have a Sharp Z1 , which has a small screen and runs basically an unmodified gnome .
It 's tiny and I use a stylus/finger to operate it and have not had ANY difficulty doing so .
If you can write within the lines on notebook paper you can use a stylus just fine .
If you can play a game on the Nintendo DS you are OK. Perhaps the people with muscle control disorders will have no choice but to use the big bright buttons on the iPad , but even my 2 year old daughter can play childrens DS games fine with a stylus so unless you have an actual medical reason normal OS 's on tablets are in fact just fine .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm sick of constantly seeing articles defending criticisms of Apple products.
If everyone is telling you they don't like something then they don't like it, accept that and either fix it or just market it to those who do like it.
Also as it's been pointed out in a variety of situations tablets running full OS's work very well.
WHAT REALLY BUGGED ME was the "That looks fun to use with a stylus/finger.
Not." caption.
I have a Sharp Z1, which has a small screen and runs basically an unmodified gnome.
It's tiny and I use a stylus/finger to operate it and have not had ANY difficulty doing so.
If you can write within the lines on notebook paper you can use a stylus just fine.
If you can play a game on the Nintendo DS you are OK. Perhaps the people with muscle control disorders will have no choice but to use the big bright buttons on the iPad, but even my 2 year old daughter can play childrens DS games fine with a stylus so unless you have an actual medical reason normal OS's on tablets are in fact just fine.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552392</id>
	<title>Re:niches</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269081840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Are there any other things that converge in Jesse Schell's pocket?<br>(besides, I keep my Swiss Army knife in my backpack, not my pocket, which indicates that there is a 'backpack' convergence, does it not?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;-) )</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Are there any other things that converge in Jesse Schell 's pocket ?
( besides , I keep my Swiss Army knife in my backpack , not my pocket , which indicates that there is a 'backpack ' convergence , does it not ?
; - ) )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Are there any other things that converge in Jesse Schell's pocket?
(besides, I keep my Swiss Army knife in my backpack, not my pocket, which indicates that there is a 'backpack' convergence, does it not?
;-) )</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552180</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552268</id>
	<title>Tablets in the real world</title>
	<author>tverbeek</author>
	<datestamp>1269080880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A tablet or slate running OS X would suck (for most uses) as badly as a slate running Windows Tablet Edition does.  That's why Apple refused to make one: Jobs doesn't like to repeat the colossal, obvious mistakes of others, because that'd make him look mortal.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;) Tablets do have some things they're good for &ndash; I have an "hpad" (HP TC1100 slate) that I run Photoshop on, and it's a great drawing tablet; I work for a nursing facility that makes some decent use of TabletPC Thinkpads &ndash; but it's true: they simply aren't very good as general-purpose laptop replacements.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A tablet or slate running OS X would suck ( for most uses ) as badly as a slate running Windows Tablet Edition does .
That 's why Apple refused to make one : Jobs does n't like to repeat the colossal , obvious mistakes of others , because that 'd make him look mortal .
; ) Tablets do have some things they 're good for    I have an " hpad " ( HP TC1100 slate ) that I run Photoshop on , and it 's a great drawing tablet ; I work for a nursing facility that makes some decent use of TabletPC Thinkpads    but it 's true : they simply are n't very good as general-purpose laptop replacements .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A tablet or slate running OS X would suck (for most uses) as badly as a slate running Windows Tablet Edition does.
That's why Apple refused to make one: Jobs doesn't like to repeat the colossal, obvious mistakes of others, because that'd make him look mortal.
;) Tablets do have some things they're good for – I have an "hpad" (HP TC1100 slate) that I run Photoshop on, and it's a great drawing tablet; I work for a nursing facility that makes some decent use of TabletPC Thinkpads – but it's true: they simply aren't very good as general-purpose laptop replacements.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31554188</id>
	<title>Re:niches</title>
	<author>dangitman</author>
	<datestamp>1269095640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>But netbook market, IMO, is not going to curl up and die either. A netbook is a fully functioning portable computer.</p></div><p>I'm not so sure about that. Netbooks are so slow and annoying that I would consider them "partially functional" portable computers. A fully functional computer is fluid and empowering, not frustrating.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>But netbook market , IMO , is not going to curl up and die either .
A netbook is a fully functioning portable computer.I 'm not so sure about that .
Netbooks are so slow and annoying that I would consider them " partially functional " portable computers .
A fully functional computer is fluid and empowering , not frustrating .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But netbook market, IMO, is not going to curl up and die either.
A netbook is a fully functioning portable computer.I'm not so sure about that.
Netbooks are so slow and annoying that I would consider them "partially functional" portable computers.
A fully functional computer is fluid and empowering, not frustrating.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553412</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552492</id>
	<title>Re:Author ignores the main reason tablets failed</title>
	<author>iamhassi</author>
	<datestamp>1269082560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You're exactly right.  Reason the tablet hasn't succeded is because of the cost.  If they had tablets sitting next to tablets with same specs and price we'd all own tablets.  Give it time, ultra portable laptops were very expensive at one time untilthey were rebranded as netbooks and the price dropped.  People said laptops would never go anywhere either and now it's very common to replace your desktop with a laptop.  We'll see how 2015 goes, if they can cram a quad CPU and 10 hr life in one for $500 I think they'll sell well.  I love my pentium m equiped tablet.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You 're exactly right .
Reason the tablet has n't succeded is because of the cost .
If they had tablets sitting next to tablets with same specs and price we 'd all own tablets .
Give it time , ultra portable laptops were very expensive at one time untilthey were rebranded as netbooks and the price dropped .
People said laptops would never go anywhere either and now it 's very common to replace your desktop with a laptop .
We 'll see how 2015 goes , if they can cram a quad CPU and 10 hr life in one for $ 500 I think they 'll sell well .
I love my pentium m equiped tablet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You're exactly right.
Reason the tablet hasn't succeded is because of the cost.
If they had tablets sitting next to tablets with same specs and price we'd all own tablets.
Give it time, ultra portable laptops were very expensive at one time untilthey were rebranded as netbooks and the price dropped.
People said laptops would never go anywhere either and now it's very common to replace your desktop with a laptop.
We'll see how 2015 goes, if they can cram a quad CPU and 10 hr life in one for $500 I think they'll sell well.
I love my pentium m equiped tablet.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552224</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552876</id>
	<title>Re:Battery life</title>
	<author>Kral\_Blbec</author>
	<datestamp>1269085380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I upgraded from an eee 900 to the eee t91mt recently and absolutely love it. Its pretty much exactly what you are talking about. My only complaint is that they went with the 1.3 ghz atom instead of the more common 1.6ghz. They are releasing a 10in version in a few months as well, hopefully they up the processor while they are at it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I upgraded from an eee 900 to the eee t91mt recently and absolutely love it .
Its pretty much exactly what you are talking about .
My only complaint is that they went with the 1.3 ghz atom instead of the more common 1.6ghz .
They are releasing a 10in version in a few months as well , hopefully they up the processor while they are at it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I upgraded from an eee 900 to the eee t91mt recently and absolutely love it.
Its pretty much exactly what you are talking about.
My only complaint is that they went with the 1.3 ghz atom instead of the more common 1.6ghz.
They are releasing a 10in version in a few months as well, hopefully they up the processor while they are at it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552486</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553890</id>
	<title>So quick to judge</title>
	<author>Pincus</author>
	<datestamp>1269092940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Isn't it too soon to slam ipads (and tablets in general) as a flop?  There were mp3 players before the ipod, and they weren't must have.  People had CD players and radios just like now they have smartphones and laptops.  Were ipods an immediate must have?  Let's wait for the market to mature a little.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is n't it too soon to slam ipads ( and tablets in general ) as a flop ?
There were mp3 players before the ipod , and they were n't must have .
People had CD players and radios just like now they have smartphones and laptops .
Were ipods an immediate must have ?
Let 's wait for the market to mature a little .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Isn't it too soon to slam ipads (and tablets in general) as a flop?
There were mp3 players before the ipod, and they weren't must have.
People had CD players and radios just like now they have smartphones and laptops.
Were ipods an immediate must have?
Let's wait for the market to mature a little.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553982</id>
	<title>Re:If Bill says it, it must be true</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269093840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It was Steve Jobs who said that 64K was enough.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It was Steve Jobs who said that 64K was enough .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It was Steve Jobs who said that 64K was enough.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552204</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552020</id>
	<title>Battery life</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269079020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The thing is, it's not about the widget.  It's about the opportunities it enables, the possibilities it creates.  A tablet that plays 10 hours of hi-def video and audio on one battery charge definitely has its niche.  One that does so on a screen that you can actually use with Citrix or RDP over wireless or cellular wireless?  Another niche.  Ebooks too?  You can use it to carry your reference materials?  And you can keep up with your social media at the same time?  What about navi?  Will it find me the closest theatre that's playing the movie I want to see, even if I'm in a strange town, give me showtimes and navigate me to it?
</p><p>Yeah, a full OS on a tablet platform isn't going to fly - until the tablet is powerful enough and the OS light enough to do enough niche things that it has broad utility.  That would be right about... now.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The thing is , it 's not about the widget .
It 's about the opportunities it enables , the possibilities it creates .
A tablet that plays 10 hours of hi-def video and audio on one battery charge definitely has its niche .
One that does so on a screen that you can actually use with Citrix or RDP over wireless or cellular wireless ?
Another niche .
Ebooks too ?
You can use it to carry your reference materials ?
And you can keep up with your social media at the same time ?
What about navi ?
Will it find me the closest theatre that 's playing the movie I want to see , even if I 'm in a strange town , give me showtimes and navigate me to it ?
Yeah , a full OS on a tablet platform is n't going to fly - until the tablet is powerful enough and the OS light enough to do enough niche things that it has broad utility .
That would be right about... now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The thing is, it's not about the widget.
It's about the opportunities it enables, the possibilities it creates.
A tablet that plays 10 hours of hi-def video and audio on one battery charge definitely has its niche.
One that does so on a screen that you can actually use with Citrix or RDP over wireless or cellular wireless?
Another niche.
Ebooks too?
You can use it to carry your reference materials?
And you can keep up with your social media at the same time?
What about navi?
Will it find me the closest theatre that's playing the movie I want to see, even if I'm in a strange town, give me showtimes and navigate me to it?
Yeah, a full OS on a tablet platform isn't going to fly - until the tablet is powerful enough and the OS light enough to do enough niche things that it has broad utility.
That would be right about... now.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552580</id>
	<title>Not at all true</title>
	<author>mosb1000</author>
	<datestamp>1269083220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>First of all, who said that the iPad is a "convergence" device?  It's not meant to replace desktops and laptops (in fact, it requires one!) it's meant to supplement them.</p><p>Secondly, broad generalizations rarely make accurate predictions.  This argument makes no sense because it makes no real consideration of the merits and potential uses for the device.  As long as it fills an unfilled niche, or works better than existing alternatives it will find success.</p><p>For example, I currently have a laptop, but is it not convenient enough for me to use it as such (It basically sits at home and waits for me to use it there).  I do most of my computing on my iPhone.  With the iPad, I will be able to access the internet anywhere, and produce documents on the go.  So it may be a good fit for me, and I may be able to sell my macbook and buy a mac mini instead.  Of course, I'm going to have to hold one in my hands and play with it for a while before I will be willing to shell out $$$ for one.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>First of all , who said that the iPad is a " convergence " device ?
It 's not meant to replace desktops and laptops ( in fact , it requires one !
) it 's meant to supplement them.Secondly , broad generalizations rarely make accurate predictions .
This argument makes no sense because it makes no real consideration of the merits and potential uses for the device .
As long as it fills an unfilled niche , or works better than existing alternatives it will find success.For example , I currently have a laptop , but is it not convenient enough for me to use it as such ( It basically sits at home and waits for me to use it there ) .
I do most of my computing on my iPhone .
With the iPad , I will be able to access the internet anywhere , and produce documents on the go .
So it may be a good fit for me , and I may be able to sell my macbook and buy a mac mini instead .
Of course , I 'm going to have to hold one in my hands and play with it for a while before I will be willing to shell out $ $ $ for one .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>First of all, who said that the iPad is a "convergence" device?
It's not meant to replace desktops and laptops (in fact, it requires one!
) it's meant to supplement them.Secondly, broad generalizations rarely make accurate predictions.
This argument makes no sense because it makes no real consideration of the merits and potential uses for the device.
As long as it fills an unfilled niche, or works better than existing alternatives it will find success.For example, I currently have a laptop, but is it not convenient enough for me to use it as such (It basically sits at home and waits for me to use it there).
I do most of my computing on my iPhone.
With the iPad, I will be able to access the internet anywhere, and produce documents on the go.
So it may be a good fit for me, and I may be able to sell my macbook and buy a mac mini instead.
Of course, I'm going to have to hold one in my hands and play with it for a while before I will be willing to shell out $$$ for one.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552180</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552796</id>
	<title>Misleading title</title>
	<author>Graham J - XVI</author>
	<datestamp>1269084780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The title is wrong - the article tells us why tablets have failed in the past but also how the iPad has corrected those mistakes. The upshot is that this tablet WON'T suck, and a lot of people WILL buy one.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The title is wrong - the article tells us why tablets have failed in the past but also how the iPad has corrected those mistakes .
The upshot is that this tablet WO N'T suck , and a lot of people WILL buy one .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The title is wrong - the article tells us why tablets have failed in the past but also how the iPad has corrected those mistakes.
The upshot is that this tablet WON'T suck, and a lot of people WILL buy one.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31556222</id>
	<title>Re:Apple's tablet is different from other tablets.</title>
	<author>TuringTest</author>
	<datestamp>1269169200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There are two reasons why I'm not considering an iPad, lack of Flash support and lack of openness. And it doesn't have any USB ports.</p><p>Ok, there are three reasons why I'm not considering an iPad: lack of Flash support, lack of openness, and lack of USB ports. And no webcam.</p><p>Oh wait...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There are two reasons why I 'm not considering an iPad , lack of Flash support and lack of openness .
And it does n't have any USB ports.Ok , there are three reasons why I 'm not considering an iPad : lack of Flash support , lack of openness , and lack of USB ports .
And no webcam.Oh wait.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are two reasons why I'm not considering an iPad, lack of Flash support and lack of openness.
And it doesn't have any USB ports.Ok, there are three reasons why I'm not considering an iPad: lack of Flash support, lack of openness, and lack of USB ports.
And no webcam.Oh wait...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552532</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552456</id>
	<title>Same can be said of the iPhone, but...</title>
	<author>oneTheory</author>
	<datestamp>1269082320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>...unfortunately apple is one of the only companies that is willing to invest in creating new interfaces for new devices instead of slapping windows on there and expecting that it will be useful.
<br> <br>
Hence the iPhone for 2 years was one of the only devices with an interface allowing the best use of the hardware.  Tons of other phones had great hardware features but crappy interfaces that made the overall device cumbersome.</htmltext>
<tokenext>...unfortunately apple is one of the only companies that is willing to invest in creating new interfaces for new devices instead of slapping windows on there and expecting that it will be useful .
Hence the iPhone for 2 years was one of the only devices with an interface allowing the best use of the hardware .
Tons of other phones had great hardware features but crappy interfaces that made the overall device cumbersome .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...unfortunately apple is one of the only companies that is willing to invest in creating new interfaces for new devices instead of slapping windows on there and expecting that it will be useful.
Hence the iPhone for 2 years was one of the only devices with an interface allowing the best use of the hardware.
Tons of other phones had great hardware features but crappy interfaces that made the overall device cumbersome.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552252</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553512</id>
	<title>Re:Battery life</title>
	<author>mikael\_j</author>
	<datestamp>1269089640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>It's also about the price.</p></div><p>Indeed, or to be more specific it's what you get for your money, the big problem I've had in the past when I've shopped around for a good tablet has been that I've wanted a few things:</p><ol>
<li>Wacom "Penabled"</li><li>Good monitor.</li><li>Decent price</li></ol><p>Last time I looked around most manufacturers seemed to almost make it a point not to mention anything other than "it has a stylus" (are you sure? wow! I thought I would have to operate it by throwing rocks at it!) and the monitor's quality is at best an afterthought. The exception to this was the "executive" tablet market, the ones marketed and CxOs and PHBs who think it makes perfect sense to blow $4k on a top of the line laptop that can also be used as a tablet when showing powerpoint slides, but since all I wanted was a combined "sofa surf tablet" and an electronic sketchbook (to cut out the scanner as the middleman as well as allowing me to have a much more comfortable workflow compared to sketching with a pencil (just undo and an eraser that doesn't slowly destroy the "paper" are enough for me to want this)) these are way too much.</p><p>I had high hopes for the iPad but without a <b>proper</b> stylus it's useless to me (no, "fingerpainting" with one of those "iPhone stylus" sticks isn't anywhere near good enough unless they've somehow managed to build one that equips the touchscreen with 500+ level pressure sensitivity and sub-pixel precision (no, they don't have this)).</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's also about the price.Indeed , or to be more specific it 's what you get for your money , the big problem I 've had in the past when I 've shopped around for a good tablet has been that I 've wanted a few things : Wacom " Penabled " Good monitor.Decent priceLast time I looked around most manufacturers seemed to almost make it a point not to mention anything other than " it has a stylus " ( are you sure ?
wow ! I thought I would have to operate it by throwing rocks at it !
) and the monitor 's quality is at best an afterthought .
The exception to this was the " executive " tablet market , the ones marketed and CxOs and PHBs who think it makes perfect sense to blow $ 4k on a top of the line laptop that can also be used as a tablet when showing powerpoint slides , but since all I wanted was a combined " sofa surf tablet " and an electronic sketchbook ( to cut out the scanner as the middleman as well as allowing me to have a much more comfortable workflow compared to sketching with a pencil ( just undo and an eraser that does n't slowly destroy the " paper " are enough for me to want this ) ) these are way too much.I had high hopes for the iPad but without a proper stylus it 's useless to me ( no , " fingerpainting " with one of those " iPhone stylus " sticks is n't anywhere near good enough unless they 've somehow managed to build one that equips the touchscreen with 500 + level pressure sensitivity and sub-pixel precision ( no , they do n't have this ) ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's also about the price.Indeed, or to be more specific it's what you get for your money, the big problem I've had in the past when I've shopped around for a good tablet has been that I've wanted a few things:
Wacom "Penabled"Good monitor.Decent priceLast time I looked around most manufacturers seemed to almost make it a point not to mention anything other than "it has a stylus" (are you sure?
wow! I thought I would have to operate it by throwing rocks at it!
) and the monitor's quality is at best an afterthought.
The exception to this was the "executive" tablet market, the ones marketed and CxOs and PHBs who think it makes perfect sense to blow $4k on a top of the line laptop that can also be used as a tablet when showing powerpoint slides, but since all I wanted was a combined "sofa surf tablet" and an electronic sketchbook (to cut out the scanner as the middleman as well as allowing me to have a much more comfortable workflow compared to sketching with a pencil (just undo and an eraser that doesn't slowly destroy the "paper" are enough for me to want this)) these are way too much.I had high hopes for the iPad but without a proper stylus it's useless to me (no, "fingerpainting" with one of those "iPhone stylus" sticks isn't anywhere near good enough unless they've somehow managed to build one that equips the touchscreen with 500+ level pressure sensitivity and sub-pixel precision (no, they don't have this)).
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552486</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552632</id>
	<title>Re:niches</title>
	<author>TheSHAD0W</author>
	<datestamp>1269083580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>TFA is mainly about the iPad, but TSA is talking about tablets in general - and so am I.  I think the iPad is too heavily locked down to meet its full potential, and am waiting for sub-$200 Linux-based devices to take the fore.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>TFA is mainly about the iPad , but TSA is talking about tablets in general - and so am I. I think the iPad is too heavily locked down to meet its full potential , and am waiting for sub- $ 200 Linux-based devices to take the fore .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>TFA is mainly about the iPad, but TSA is talking about tablets in general - and so am I.  I think the iPad is too heavily locked down to meet its full potential, and am waiting for sub-$200 Linux-based devices to take the fore.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552180</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31562048</id>
	<title>Do somethings and do them well</title>
	<author>kentsin</author>
	<datestamp>1269179640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you are looking for a tablet to do everything, ask your desktop to walk your dog.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you are looking for a tablet to do everything , ask your desktop to walk your dog .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you are looking for a tablet to do everything, ask your desktop to walk your dog.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31554732</id>
	<title>Re:The article isn't talking about the iPad</title>
	<author>feepness</author>
	<datestamp>1269101220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Unlike the other tablets, the iPad is designed with an interface done correctly for a tablet</p></div><p>How do you know it's done correctly?  Are you from the future?  Admit it, you're from the future, aren't you?!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Unlike the other tablets , the iPad is designed with an interface done correctly for a tabletHow do you know it 's done correctly ?
Are you from the future ?
Admit it , you 're from the future , are n't you ?
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unlike the other tablets, the iPad is designed with an interface done correctly for a tabletHow do you know it's done correctly?
Are you from the future?
Admit it, you're from the future, aren't you?
!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552220</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553752</id>
	<title>Wacom Confirmed</title>
	<author>meehawl</author>
	<datestamp>1269091920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>At half the price and half the weight this would be kick-ass.</i></p><p>Light, cheap or thin: pick any one. You can spend 2x-3x as much as I paid and get a Lenovo or Fujitsu that is close to your weight requirements. Too rich for my blood.</p><p><i>I do not see anything about Wacom active digitizer, without which this thing is useless for drawing or taking notes. The word stylus is not even on the linked<br>page.</i></p><p>Haven't you heard? After Iphone fetish gadget sites like engadget and gizmodo and all the Apple Polishers have gone gaga for multitouch, it's become fashionable for clueless newbies to touch to get their hate on for the humble-but-useful stylus. Stylii are now basically marketing poison.</p><p>However, I can tell you mie came with a stylus and if you look at the HP sales page, there are replacement stylii for sale... Google: <a href="http://www.google.com/webhp#num=100&amp;hl=en&amp;safe=off&amp;q=tm2+wacom" title="google.com">tm2 wacom</a> [google.com]. For more confirmation, look at the drivers on <a href="http://h10025.www1.hp.com/ewfrf/wc/softwareList?os=4063&amp;lc=en&amp;dlc=en&amp;cc=us&amp;product=4121373&amp;lang=en" title="hp.com">this page</a> [hp.com] - Wacom confirmed there and via PC Magic and lspci. There's even an extensive new <a href="https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/linux/+bug/516777" title="launchpad.net">bug/patch workup for the Wacom on Lucid</a> [launchpad.net].</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>At half the price and half the weight this would be kick-ass.Light , cheap or thin : pick any one .
You can spend 2x-3x as much as I paid and get a Lenovo or Fujitsu that is close to your weight requirements .
Too rich for my blood.I do not see anything about Wacom active digitizer , without which this thing is useless for drawing or taking notes .
The word stylus is not even on the linkedpage.Have n't you heard ?
After Iphone fetish gadget sites like engadget and gizmodo and all the Apple Polishers have gone gaga for multitouch , it 's become fashionable for clueless newbies to touch to get their hate on for the humble-but-useful stylus .
Stylii are now basically marketing poison.However , I can tell you mie came with a stylus and if you look at the HP sales page , there are replacement stylii for sale... Google : tm2 wacom [ google.com ] .
For more confirmation , look at the drivers on this page [ hp.com ] - Wacom confirmed there and via PC Magic and lspci .
There 's even an extensive new bug/patch workup for the Wacom on Lucid [ launchpad.net ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At half the price and half the weight this would be kick-ass.Light, cheap or thin: pick any one.
You can spend 2x-3x as much as I paid and get a Lenovo or Fujitsu that is close to your weight requirements.
Too rich for my blood.I do not see anything about Wacom active digitizer, without which this thing is useless for drawing or taking notes.
The word stylus is not even on the linkedpage.Haven't you heard?
After Iphone fetish gadget sites like engadget and gizmodo and all the Apple Polishers have gone gaga for multitouch, it's become fashionable for clueless newbies to touch to get their hate on for the humble-but-useful stylus.
Stylii are now basically marketing poison.However, I can tell you mie came with a stylus and if you look at the HP sales page, there are replacement stylii for sale... Google: tm2 wacom [google.com].
For more confirmation, look at the drivers on this page [hp.com] - Wacom confirmed there and via PC Magic and lspci.
There's even an extensive new bug/patch workup for the Wacom on Lucid [launchpad.net].</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553440</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553776</id>
	<title>Price is important</title>
	<author>symbolset</author>
	<datestamp>1269092100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm with you there.  The Android slates look to come in at about this number, or less depending on what you get.  The Always Innovating slate in the above reply comes in at $300 without the keyboard so that looks about right, though at 600MHz the CPU looks a little light for what I want. It might do, though.  I may give it a go.
</p><p>$500 isn't that much in the US, but the world is not the US.  A $300 price point will go a good distance in a lot of places in the world where that's Serious Money.  And in schools.
</p><p>Certainly the low-wattage and long battery life thing is a boon in places where power is unavailable, unreliable or intermittent - which it is for about half of the people on the planet.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm with you there .
The Android slates look to come in at about this number , or less depending on what you get .
The Always Innovating slate in the above reply comes in at $ 300 without the keyboard so that looks about right , though at 600MHz the CPU looks a little light for what I want .
It might do , though .
I may give it a go .
$ 500 is n't that much in the US , but the world is not the US .
A $ 300 price point will go a good distance in a lot of places in the world where that 's Serious Money .
And in schools .
Certainly the low-wattage and long battery life thing is a boon in places where power is unavailable , unreliable or intermittent - which it is for about half of the people on the planet .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm with you there.
The Android slates look to come in at about this number, or less depending on what you get.
The Always Innovating slate in the above reply comes in at $300 without the keyboard so that looks about right, though at 600MHz the CPU looks a little light for what I want.
It might do, though.
I may give it a go.
$500 isn't that much in the US, but the world is not the US.
A $300 price point will go a good distance in a lot of places in the world where that's Serious Money.
And in schools.
Certainly the low-wattage and long battery life thing is a boon in places where power is unavailable, unreliable or intermittent - which it is for about half of the people on the planet.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552486</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31555114</id>
	<title>5 Reasons Tech Reporter Suck</title>
	<author>evilviper</author>
	<datestamp>1269106560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> 5 Reasons Tech Reporter Suck, and You Shouldn't Listen to Them:</p><p>1. If they had any skill or talent, they'd be making big bucks advising a company that actually designs and sells products.<br>2.  They're wrong almost constantly.<br>3.  They're rewarded for provocative stories that bring in readers, no matter how factually flawed they are.<br>4.  There's hundreds of them, and no two that agree on anything, so who do you believe?<br>5.  Random chance, and the utterly unpredictable dominate the market more than reasoning, so even if they were geniuses, they'd still just be guessing.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>5 Reasons Tech Reporter Suck , and You Should n't Listen to Them : 1 .
If they had any skill or talent , they 'd be making big bucks advising a company that actually designs and sells products.2 .
They 're wrong almost constantly.3 .
They 're rewarded for provocative stories that bring in readers , no matter how factually flawed they are.4 .
There 's hundreds of them , and no two that agree on anything , so who do you believe ? 5 .
Random chance , and the utterly unpredictable dominate the market more than reasoning , so even if they were geniuses , they 'd still just be guessing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> 5 Reasons Tech Reporter Suck, and You Shouldn't Listen to Them:1.
If they had any skill or talent, they'd be making big bucks advising a company that actually designs and sells products.2.
They're wrong almost constantly.3.
They're rewarded for provocative stories that bring in readers, no matter how factually flawed they are.4.
There's hundreds of them, and no two that agree on anything, so who do you believe?5.
Random chance, and the utterly unpredictable dominate the market more than reasoning, so even if they were geniuses, they'd still just be guessing.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552374</id>
	<title>Re:niches</title>
	<author>LtGordon</author>
	<datestamp>1269081720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Also, the iPhone had a huge advantage simply in that most people already owned phones, and so the iPhone was really just a cool upgrade from what they had, and can cost as little as $99 upfront. For the iPad to succeed, Apple will have to convince people that now they need to go out and buy a tablet computer for ~$500. At best, I see them dominating the eBook-reader and netbook markets, which are in themselves relatively small. Sales will never be on the same order of magnitude as the iPhone.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Also , the iPhone had a huge advantage simply in that most people already owned phones , and so the iPhone was really just a cool upgrade from what they had , and can cost as little as $ 99 upfront .
For the iPad to succeed , Apple will have to convince people that now they need to go out and buy a tablet computer for ~ $ 500 .
At best , I see them dominating the eBook-reader and netbook markets , which are in themselves relatively small .
Sales will never be on the same order of magnitude as the iPhone .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Also, the iPhone had a huge advantage simply in that most people already owned phones, and so the iPhone was really just a cool upgrade from what they had, and can cost as little as $99 upfront.
For the iPad to succeed, Apple will have to convince people that now they need to go out and buy a tablet computer for ~$500.
At best, I see them dominating the eBook-reader and netbook markets, which are in themselves relatively small.
Sales will never be on the same order of magnitude as the iPhone.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552180</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31556266</id>
	<title>Re:My problem with iPad</title>
	<author>nbahi15</author>
	<datestamp>1269169740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><ul><li>No multitasking in the iPhone OS.  Even cell phone OSes can do that.</li><li>No way to easily develop complex applications for it</li></ul> </div><p>iPhone OS is a cell phone OS and multitasking is a core part of the problem with other phones. Apple sees apps on a phone as being of a fundamentally different nature than apps on a desktop. Quick, get-in get-out, move on. That is really a innovation all by itself.</p><p>Your second point is part of the first. They never intended you to design complicated apps for it. I have this problem at work because the product managers always want to shoehorn our entire Windows app into the iPhone. But then these are people who are concerned about branding and taking up valuable real-estate on a 320px by 480px device with 10-20px of our app name and company. 'Complicated' apps have no business being on a cellphone.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>I will summarize the rest of your argument as, "I don't like the app store and Apple telling me that app X doesn't make the cut."</p></div><p>I think a part of the app store's long-term success is making sure apps are of higher-quality than simply garbage. The store could easily become clogged with low-utility apps, and that would be the end of it. You are more than welcome to jailbreak your iPhone and load anything you like. However, despite the objections to their business model people still buy and develop for the iPhone because it provides a better ecosystem than their competitors and in the end people only care if their phone does what they expect it to do, does it in a sensible way, and is low maintenance.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>No multitasking in the iPhone OS .
Even cell phone OSes can do that.No way to easily develop complex applications for it iPhone OS is a cell phone OS and multitasking is a core part of the problem with other phones .
Apple sees apps on a phone as being of a fundamentally different nature than apps on a desktop .
Quick , get-in get-out , move on .
That is really a innovation all by itself.Your second point is part of the first .
They never intended you to design complicated apps for it .
I have this problem at work because the product managers always want to shoehorn our entire Windows app into the iPhone .
But then these are people who are concerned about branding and taking up valuable real-estate on a 320px by 480px device with 10-20px of our app name and company .
'Complicated ' apps have no business being on a cellphone.I will summarize the rest of your argument as , " I do n't like the app store and Apple telling me that app X does n't make the cut .
" I think a part of the app store 's long-term success is making sure apps are of higher-quality than simply garbage .
The store could easily become clogged with low-utility apps , and that would be the end of it .
You are more than welcome to jailbreak your iPhone and load anything you like .
However , despite the objections to their business model people still buy and develop for the iPhone because it provides a better ecosystem than their competitors and in the end people only care if their phone does what they expect it to do , does it in a sensible way , and is low maintenance .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No multitasking in the iPhone OS.
Even cell phone OSes can do that.No way to easily develop complex applications for it iPhone OS is a cell phone OS and multitasking is a core part of the problem with other phones.
Apple sees apps on a phone as being of a fundamentally different nature than apps on a desktop.
Quick, get-in get-out, move on.
That is really a innovation all by itself.Your second point is part of the first.
They never intended you to design complicated apps for it.
I have this problem at work because the product managers always want to shoehorn our entire Windows app into the iPhone.
But then these are people who are concerned about branding and taking up valuable real-estate on a 320px by 480px device with 10-20px of our app name and company.
'Complicated' apps have no business being on a cellphone.I will summarize the rest of your argument as, "I don't like the app store and Apple telling me that app X doesn't make the cut.
"I think a part of the app store's long-term success is making sure apps are of higher-quality than simply garbage.
The store could easily become clogged with low-utility apps, and that would be the end of it.
You are more than welcome to jailbreak your iPhone and load anything you like.
However, despite the objections to their business model people still buy and develop for the iPhone because it provides a better ecosystem than their competitors and in the end people only care if their phone does what they expect it to do, does it in a sensible way, and is low maintenance.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552252</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552304</id>
	<title>I have Samsung Q1 UMPC</title>
	<author>tftp</author>
	<datestamp>1269081120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
Those "five reasons" are somewhat stupid. Let's see:
</p><p>
<i>they're unable to do everything you can do on a laptop</i> - sure, and the laptop is unable to do everything that you can do on a quantum computer. So what? The only requirement here is for the tablet to do what you need it to do.
</p><p>
<i>They've shipped with stylus-pointing devices that were frankly not that easy to use</i> - does this mean that a greasy finger that covers what you press is any better?
</p><p>
<i>Because full desktop/laptop operating systems don't work on a tablet device</i> - that's certainly news (or another, deeper level of cluelessness on part of the author.) As matter of fact, they work just fine.
</p><p>
<i>All user-interface mechanics on a full-blown OS are designed to work with a mouse, not your finger/stylus</i> - leaving dirty fingers alone, the stylus and the mouse are the same to the tablet.
</p><p>
<i>This is why phones have interfaces designed specifically for usage on their screen sizes and device sizes</i> - and what does this have to do with tablets?
</p><p>
<i>Can you imagine pecking around with your finger on ultra-thin scroll bars and tiny buttons?</i> - the author clearly has a finger mania.
</p><p>
<i>Very few people have one, let alone know of or even care about the device</i> - I have a tablet, and other people have theirs, because they have a specific need for a tablet. A tablet is not a solution to all world's ills, it is a niche product - but if you have a niche application then it fits nicely.
</p><p>
<i>The point isn't to cram as much technology into a tablet as physically possible. It's far better to make the tablet really intuitive to use in a way that makes sense for that kind of form factor.</i> - No, it's far more important to preserve compatibility with existing software. You can learn how to use a tablet in minutes, and you need to do it only once. However you can't write software that fast, and you need to do it every time you need a new application.
</p><p>
<i>Tablet makers: please, don't try to pump insane hardware specs into your tablets and bloat up prices.</i> - the author is obviously unaware that most of PC functions are nowadays built into the same chip that has the CPU and memory interface and Ethernet and USB... it will cost more to have less.
</p><p>
<i>Then when you need to type, you have to put the stylus down and use your fingers or peck at the virtual keys with the thing</i> - why do you need to "put the stylus down", I wonder? Besides, typing on any tablet, beyond a few words, is ill-advised. Typing requires a keyboard. However it is interesting that the author ignores existence of pretty good handwriting recognition systems for tablets. Perhaps because they require a stylus, and not fingers?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-)
</p><p>
<i>The fact that most tablets run on Windows or another non-tablet friendly OS means that pretty much most applications are not going to be tablet and finger friendly</i> - it means just the opposite. A Windows or Linux tablet has access to all the apps that exist for those platforms, and all of those apps run just fine when controlled with a stylus. Granted, you'd have to have a frag wish if you control a FPS game with a stylus or your finger. But a USB mouse is what, $10 these days?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Those " five reasons " are somewhat stupid .
Let 's see : they 're unable to do everything you can do on a laptop - sure , and the laptop is unable to do everything that you can do on a quantum computer .
So what ?
The only requirement here is for the tablet to do what you need it to do .
They 've shipped with stylus-pointing devices that were frankly not that easy to use - does this mean that a greasy finger that covers what you press is any better ?
Because full desktop/laptop operating systems do n't work on a tablet device - that 's certainly news ( or another , deeper level of cluelessness on part of the author .
) As matter of fact , they work just fine .
All user-interface mechanics on a full-blown OS are designed to work with a mouse , not your finger/stylus - leaving dirty fingers alone , the stylus and the mouse are the same to the tablet .
This is why phones have interfaces designed specifically for usage on their screen sizes and device sizes - and what does this have to do with tablets ?
Can you imagine pecking around with your finger on ultra-thin scroll bars and tiny buttons ?
- the author clearly has a finger mania .
Very few people have one , let alone know of or even care about the device - I have a tablet , and other people have theirs , because they have a specific need for a tablet .
A tablet is not a solution to all world 's ills , it is a niche product - but if you have a niche application then it fits nicely .
The point is n't to cram as much technology into a tablet as physically possible .
It 's far better to make the tablet really intuitive to use in a way that makes sense for that kind of form factor .
- No , it 's far more important to preserve compatibility with existing software .
You can learn how to use a tablet in minutes , and you need to do it only once .
However you ca n't write software that fast , and you need to do it every time you need a new application .
Tablet makers : please , do n't try to pump insane hardware specs into your tablets and bloat up prices .
- the author is obviously unaware that most of PC functions are nowadays built into the same chip that has the CPU and memory interface and Ethernet and USB... it will cost more to have less .
Then when you need to type , you have to put the stylus down and use your fingers or peck at the virtual keys with the thing - why do you need to " put the stylus down " , I wonder ?
Besides , typing on any tablet , beyond a few words , is ill-advised .
Typing requires a keyboard .
However it is interesting that the author ignores existence of pretty good handwriting recognition systems for tablets .
Perhaps because they require a stylus , and not fingers ?
: - ) The fact that most tablets run on Windows or another non-tablet friendly OS means that pretty much most applications are not going to be tablet and finger friendly - it means just the opposite .
A Windows or Linux tablet has access to all the apps that exist for those platforms , and all of those apps run just fine when controlled with a stylus .
Granted , you 'd have to have a frag wish if you control a FPS game with a stylus or your finger .
But a USB mouse is what , $ 10 these days ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
Those "five reasons" are somewhat stupid.
Let's see:

they're unable to do everything you can do on a laptop - sure, and the laptop is unable to do everything that you can do on a quantum computer.
So what?
The only requirement here is for the tablet to do what you need it to do.
They've shipped with stylus-pointing devices that were frankly not that easy to use - does this mean that a greasy finger that covers what you press is any better?
Because full desktop/laptop operating systems don't work on a tablet device - that's certainly news (or another, deeper level of cluelessness on part of the author.
) As matter of fact, they work just fine.
All user-interface mechanics on a full-blown OS are designed to work with a mouse, not your finger/stylus - leaving dirty fingers alone, the stylus and the mouse are the same to the tablet.
This is why phones have interfaces designed specifically for usage on their screen sizes and device sizes - and what does this have to do with tablets?
Can you imagine pecking around with your finger on ultra-thin scroll bars and tiny buttons?
- the author clearly has a finger mania.
Very few people have one, let alone know of or even care about the device - I have a tablet, and other people have theirs, because they have a specific need for a tablet.
A tablet is not a solution to all world's ills, it is a niche product - but if you have a niche application then it fits nicely.
The point isn't to cram as much technology into a tablet as physically possible.
It's far better to make the tablet really intuitive to use in a way that makes sense for that kind of form factor.
- No, it's far more important to preserve compatibility with existing software.
You can learn how to use a tablet in minutes, and you need to do it only once.
However you can't write software that fast, and you need to do it every time you need a new application.
Tablet makers: please, don't try to pump insane hardware specs into your tablets and bloat up prices.
- the author is obviously unaware that most of PC functions are nowadays built into the same chip that has the CPU and memory interface and Ethernet and USB... it will cost more to have less.
Then when you need to type, you have to put the stylus down and use your fingers or peck at the virtual keys with the thing - why do you need to "put the stylus down", I wonder?
Besides, typing on any tablet, beyond a few words, is ill-advised.
Typing requires a keyboard.
However it is interesting that the author ignores existence of pretty good handwriting recognition systems for tablets.
Perhaps because they require a stylus, and not fingers?
:-)

The fact that most tablets run on Windows or another non-tablet friendly OS means that pretty much most applications are not going to be tablet and finger friendly - it means just the opposite.
A Windows or Linux tablet has access to all the apps that exist for those platforms, and all of those apps run just fine when controlled with a stylus.
Granted, you'd have to have a frag wish if you control a FPS game with a stylus or your finger.
But a USB mouse is what, $10 these days?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553296</id>
	<title>Re:niches</title>
	<author>4iedBandit</author>
	<datestamp>1269088080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Plus you bought this functionality for the price of lacking half the functionality and freedom of any other smartphone on the market.</p></div><p>Well considering I paid about $500 for two other smart phones, gray market ones from Japan in fact, and still bought an iPhone before the price was subsidized means one of two things:</p><ol>
<li>I'm stupid, which I'm sure many people will agree with.</li><li>The iPhone, despite not having all the features of the other smart phones I owned, did everything I wanted it to do phenomenally better.  So much better that paying the unsubsidized cost was not a deterrent.</li></ol><p>Freedom is not merely the possibility to do things. It is the ability to do what I want and do it well. </p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Plus you bought this functionality for the price of lacking half the functionality and freedom of any other smartphone on the market.Well considering I paid about $ 500 for two other smart phones , gray market ones from Japan in fact , and still bought an iPhone before the price was subsidized means one of two things : I 'm stupid , which I 'm sure many people will agree with.The iPhone , despite not having all the features of the other smart phones I owned , did everything I wanted it to do phenomenally better .
So much better that paying the unsubsidized cost was not a deterrent.Freedom is not merely the possibility to do things .
It is the ability to do what I want and do it well .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Plus you bought this functionality for the price of lacking half the functionality and freedom of any other smartphone on the market.Well considering I paid about $500 for two other smart phones, gray market ones from Japan in fact, and still bought an iPhone before the price was subsidized means one of two things:
I'm stupid, which I'm sure many people will agree with.The iPhone, despite not having all the features of the other smart phones I owned, did everything I wanted it to do phenomenally better.
So much better that paying the unsubsidized cost was not a deterrent.Freedom is not merely the possibility to do things.
It is the ability to do what I want and do it well. 
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552520</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552328</id>
	<title>see also</title>
	<author>beefubermensch</author>
	<datestamp>1269081300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I said pretty much the same things, but much better:</p><p><a href="http://lumma.org/microwave/#2010.02.25" title="lumma.org" rel="nofollow">http://lumma.org/microwave/#2010.02.25</a> [lumma.org]</p><p>-Carl</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I said pretty much the same things , but much better : http : //lumma.org/microwave/ # 2010.02.25 [ lumma.org ] -Carl</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I said pretty much the same things, but much better:http://lumma.org/microwave/#2010.02.25 [lumma.org]-Carl</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553002</id>
	<title>Corrections, repeated</title>
	<author>SuperKendall</author>
	<datestamp>1269086280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>By now you'd think people would stop repeating the same old errors with regard to the iPhone OS as used by the iPad/iPhone/Touch.</p><p><i>No multitasking in the iPhone OS. Even cell phone OSes can do that.</i></p><p>Plenty of multitasking.  Just limited forms for third party apps.  But apps can be multi-threaded.</p><p><i>No way to easily develop complex applications for it</i></p><p>This is, to put it simply, bullshit.  The iPhone tools and libraries are very mature and feature rich.  Between CoreData, and Interface Builder you can develop complex applications very quickly.  And with a little more effort, you can make them less complex again while supporting the same features which should be your goal.  I've worked on quite a few applications that had a large range of scope, with multiple internal databases and a ton of server calls to fetch data.</p><p><i>The platform is closed: executables have to be signed, can't share or download software from third parties.</i></p><p>Unless you jailbreak.</p><p><i>The folks at Apple are total dicks about what applications they accept/refuse.</i></p><p>Actually they have very clear guidelines.  I've never had any app denied store access after fixing any bugs the Apple testers found.</p><p><i>The folks at Apple can deactivate or tamper apps you have already purchaed, and tamper with your device's settings/experience at any time they feel like it.</i></p><p>(a) They can but they don't, (b) as a user of the device I say - thank god they can do that!</p><p><i>App approval process It's not a simple "Is this program safe?", or has the developer tested it for stability check. They demand apps meet a long list of criteria that are difficult to meet...</i></p><p>Back to bullshit.  The criteria in fact are super simple to meet, since all you have to do is not use undocumented API's (that are inherently harder to find anyway) or make an application that falls into a category they will not approve.  This is not rocket science.</p><p>All the whiners like you that lay down so many reasons it's so hard to get into the app store always ignore the fact there are far north of 100k applications at this point.  If anything was as difficult as people like you claimed it was, there wouldn't be 150 applications, much less 150,000.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>By now you 'd think people would stop repeating the same old errors with regard to the iPhone OS as used by the iPad/iPhone/Touch.No multitasking in the iPhone OS .
Even cell phone OSes can do that.Plenty of multitasking .
Just limited forms for third party apps .
But apps can be multi-threaded.No way to easily develop complex applications for itThis is , to put it simply , bullshit .
The iPhone tools and libraries are very mature and feature rich .
Between CoreData , and Interface Builder you can develop complex applications very quickly .
And with a little more effort , you can make them less complex again while supporting the same features which should be your goal .
I 've worked on quite a few applications that had a large range of scope , with multiple internal databases and a ton of server calls to fetch data.The platform is closed : executables have to be signed , ca n't share or download software from third parties.Unless you jailbreak.The folks at Apple are total dicks about what applications they accept/refuse.Actually they have very clear guidelines .
I 've never had any app denied store access after fixing any bugs the Apple testers found.The folks at Apple can deactivate or tamper apps you have already purchaed , and tamper with your device 's settings/experience at any time they feel like it .
( a ) They can but they do n't , ( b ) as a user of the device I say - thank god they can do that ! App approval process It 's not a simple " Is this program safe ?
" , or has the developer tested it for stability check .
They demand apps meet a long list of criteria that are difficult to meet...Back to bullshit .
The criteria in fact are super simple to meet , since all you have to do is not use undocumented API 's ( that are inherently harder to find anyway ) or make an application that falls into a category they will not approve .
This is not rocket science.All the whiners like you that lay down so many reasons it 's so hard to get into the app store always ignore the fact there are far north of 100k applications at this point .
If anything was as difficult as people like you claimed it was , there would n't be 150 applications , much less 150,000 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>By now you'd think people would stop repeating the same old errors with regard to the iPhone OS as used by the iPad/iPhone/Touch.No multitasking in the iPhone OS.
Even cell phone OSes can do that.Plenty of multitasking.
Just limited forms for third party apps.
But apps can be multi-threaded.No way to easily develop complex applications for itThis is, to put it simply, bullshit.
The iPhone tools and libraries are very mature and feature rich.
Between CoreData, and Interface Builder you can develop complex applications very quickly.
And with a little more effort, you can make them less complex again while supporting the same features which should be your goal.
I've worked on quite a few applications that had a large range of scope, with multiple internal databases and a ton of server calls to fetch data.The platform is closed: executables have to be signed, can't share or download software from third parties.Unless you jailbreak.The folks at Apple are total dicks about what applications they accept/refuse.Actually they have very clear guidelines.
I've never had any app denied store access after fixing any bugs the Apple testers found.The folks at Apple can deactivate or tamper apps you have already purchaed, and tamper with your device's settings/experience at any time they feel like it.
(a) They can but they don't, (b) as a user of the device I say - thank god they can do that!App approval process It's not a simple "Is this program safe?
", or has the developer tested it for stability check.
They demand apps meet a long list of criteria that are difficult to meet...Back to bullshit.
The criteria in fact are super simple to meet, since all you have to do is not use undocumented API's (that are inherently harder to find anyway) or make an application that falls into a category they will not approve.
This is not rocket science.All the whiners like you that lay down so many reasons it's so hard to get into the app store always ignore the fact there are far north of 100k applications at this point.
If anything was as difficult as people like you claimed it was, there wouldn't be 150 applications, much less 150,000.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552252</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552890</id>
	<title>Re:I Have a Tablet, and It's Brilliant!</title>
	<author>N!NJA</author>
	<datestamp>1269085440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>i have a TC1100 and will get a tm2 next!<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-) i agree with you 100\%. i cannot see myself using a regular laptop anymore. a TabletPC covers all bases. and it's great for reading! be it online news, comic books or ebooks!<br> <br>

most of those people dissing the TabletPC have never used one. the only reason why Tablets never got popular is because Dell, HP, Lenovo and Fujitsu never cared (or gave a damn) about promoting the technology! Apple's fanfare over the iPad will payoff with the selling of zillions of units (despite the lack of a real OS or USB!). Apple can sell a fridge to an eskimo!<br> <br>

now it's too late for Dell and the others.... iPads will become synonym of Tablets and no one will ever know that other manufacturers have been making Tablets for more than 5 years.<br> <br>

Apple wasnt the first to make MP3 Players, but they marketed the iPod heavily. on the other hand, Creative, who is one of the pioneers on the field of MP3 devices, has been relegated to oblivion.... <br> <br>

the story will repeat itself with the Tablets. being the first to produce something is pointless if no ones knows about it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>i have a TC1100 and will get a tm2 next !
: - ) i agree with you 100 \ % .
i can not see myself using a regular laptop anymore .
a TabletPC covers all bases .
and it 's great for reading !
be it online news , comic books or ebooks !
most of those people dissing the TabletPC have never used one .
the only reason why Tablets never got popular is because Dell , HP , Lenovo and Fujitsu never cared ( or gave a damn ) about promoting the technology !
Apple 's fanfare over the iPad will payoff with the selling of zillions of units ( despite the lack of a real OS or USB ! ) .
Apple can sell a fridge to an eskimo !
now it 's too late for Dell and the others.... iPads will become synonym of Tablets and no one will ever know that other manufacturers have been making Tablets for more than 5 years .
Apple wasnt the first to make MP3 Players , but they marketed the iPod heavily .
on the other hand , Creative , who is one of the pioneers on the field of MP3 devices , has been relegated to oblivion... . the story will repeat itself with the Tablets .
being the first to produce something is pointless if no ones knows about it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>i have a TC1100 and will get a tm2 next!
:-) i agree with you 100\%.
i cannot see myself using a regular laptop anymore.
a TabletPC covers all bases.
and it's great for reading!
be it online news, comic books or ebooks!
most of those people dissing the TabletPC have never used one.
the only reason why Tablets never got popular is because Dell, HP, Lenovo and Fujitsu never cared (or gave a damn) about promoting the technology!
Apple's fanfare over the iPad will payoff with the selling of zillions of units (despite the lack of a real OS or USB!).
Apple can sell a fridge to an eskimo!
now it's too late for Dell and the others.... iPads will become synonym of Tablets and no one will ever know that other manufacturers have been making Tablets for more than 5 years.
Apple wasnt the first to make MP3 Players, but they marketed the iPod heavily.
on the other hand, Creative, who is one of the pioneers on the field of MP3 devices, has been relegated to oblivion....  

the story will repeat itself with the Tablets.
being the first to produce something is pointless if no ones knows about it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552260</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552982</id>
	<title>full OS tablets existed before the iPad</title>
	<author>Culture20</author>
	<datestamp>1269086160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>These same people said 'I would have bought it if it had a full OS,' but in reality full OS tablets existed before the iPad rumors even started.</p></div><p>Full *nix tablets (with slick UIs and lots of software designed for tablet-use)?  Full MacOSX?  Oh, no, they were *doze and Linux with tablet as an afterthought.   I'm not paying $99 extra to use a sub-laptop tablet with the software I want (not to mention the pain of having to compile it all the time for updates which is what I'd have to do with iPhone OS).  iPhone OS is okay for an iPhone, but not for a bigger computer (which is what the iPad is).</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>These same people said 'I would have bought it if it had a full OS, ' but in reality full OS tablets existed before the iPad rumors even started.Full * nix tablets ( with slick UIs and lots of software designed for tablet-use ) ?
Full MacOSX ?
Oh , no , they were * doze and Linux with tablet as an afterthought .
I 'm not paying $ 99 extra to use a sub-laptop tablet with the software I want ( not to mention the pain of having to compile it all the time for updates which is what I 'd have to do with iPhone OS ) .
iPhone OS is okay for an iPhone , but not for a bigger computer ( which is what the iPad is ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>These same people said 'I would have bought it if it had a full OS,' but in reality full OS tablets existed before the iPad rumors even started.Full *nix tablets (with slick UIs and lots of software designed for tablet-use)?
Full MacOSX?
Oh, no, they were *doze and Linux with tablet as an afterthought.
I'm not paying $99 extra to use a sub-laptop tablet with the software I want (not to mention the pain of having to compile it all the time for updates which is what I'd have to do with iPhone OS).
iPhone OS is okay for an iPhone, but not for a bigger computer (which is what the iPad is).
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31555120</id>
	<title>Re:Apple's tablet is different from other tablets.</title>
	<author>cbhacking</author>
	<datestamp>1269106560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>FYI, most tablet computers from the last 18 months or so have offered multi-touch displays. Lenovo was the first big name to do so, over two years ago. With the announcement that Win7 would have native multi-touch support, lots of other manufacturers added the capability.</p><p>The iPad has a low price (though not amazingly low) for a full convertible-laptop tablet computer. It has a high price for an over-sized iPod Touch or N800. It also costs a lot more than a netbook.</p><p>Most devices, tablets included reboot very rarely these days. When a device will happily sit in sleep mode for over a week, why would you bother to shit it down entirely? My (Win7) tablet comes out of sleep mode in roughly a second.</p><p>It is lighter than a traditional tablet computer. It is heavier than an iPod Touch that has the same capabilities except for a smaller display. It is heavier than a Kindle that gets far better battery life and costs less too. It's light enough to carry around, but too big for a pocket.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>FYI , most tablet computers from the last 18 months or so have offered multi-touch displays .
Lenovo was the first big name to do so , over two years ago .
With the announcement that Win7 would have native multi-touch support , lots of other manufacturers added the capability.The iPad has a low price ( though not amazingly low ) for a full convertible-laptop tablet computer .
It has a high price for an over-sized iPod Touch or N800 .
It also costs a lot more than a netbook.Most devices , tablets included reboot very rarely these days .
When a device will happily sit in sleep mode for over a week , why would you bother to shit it down entirely ?
My ( Win7 ) tablet comes out of sleep mode in roughly a second.It is lighter than a traditional tablet computer .
It is heavier than an iPod Touch that has the same capabilities except for a smaller display .
It is heavier than a Kindle that gets far better battery life and costs less too .
It 's light enough to carry around , but too big for a pocket .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>FYI, most tablet computers from the last 18 months or so have offered multi-touch displays.
Lenovo was the first big name to do so, over two years ago.
With the announcement that Win7 would have native multi-touch support, lots of other manufacturers added the capability.The iPad has a low price (though not amazingly low) for a full convertible-laptop tablet computer.
It has a high price for an over-sized iPod Touch or N800.
It also costs a lot more than a netbook.Most devices, tablets included reboot very rarely these days.
When a device will happily sit in sleep mode for over a week, why would you bother to shit it down entirely?
My (Win7) tablet comes out of sleep mode in roughly a second.It is lighter than a traditional tablet computer.
It is heavier than an iPod Touch that has the same capabilities except for a smaller display.
It is heavier than a Kindle that gets far better battery life and costs less too.
It's light enough to carry around, but too big for a pocket.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552532</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553462</id>
	<title>I love my tablet</title>
	<author>Wolfraider</author>
	<datestamp>1269089340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I have an old HP TC1100 with a detachable keyboard that I installed windows 7 on. I know its not a full blown laptop and I don't try to use it as one. For me, it's nice to have the keyboard attached and use it as a netbook for surfing the web or other general tasks. Then I can also detach the keyboard and use the tablet as a slate. I use it for white boarding new ideas, taking notes and drawing. I also have a full blown laptop for programming or other tasks that require a bigger screen and keyboard. It's just nice to have what's essentially a netbook that I can also scribble on with a pen when I want to.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have an old HP TC1100 with a detachable keyboard that I installed windows 7 on .
I know its not a full blown laptop and I do n't try to use it as one .
For me , it 's nice to have the keyboard attached and use it as a netbook for surfing the web or other general tasks .
Then I can also detach the keyboard and use the tablet as a slate .
I use it for white boarding new ideas , taking notes and drawing .
I also have a full blown laptop for programming or other tasks that require a bigger screen and keyboard .
It 's just nice to have what 's essentially a netbook that I can also scribble on with a pen when I want to .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have an old HP TC1100 with a detachable keyboard that I installed windows 7 on.
I know its not a full blown laptop and I don't try to use it as one.
For me, it's nice to have the keyboard attached and use it as a netbook for surfing the web or other general tasks.
Then I can also detach the keyboard and use the tablet as a slate.
I use it for white boarding new ideas, taking notes and drawing.
I also have a full blown laptop for programming or other tasks that require a bigger screen and keyboard.
It's just nice to have what's essentially a netbook that I can also scribble on with a pen when I want to.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552498</id>
	<title>Re:niches</title>
	<author>ground.zero.612</author>
	<datestamp>1269082560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I don't understand. Could you make a car analogy instead of a swiss army knife analogy please?</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't understand .
Could you make a car analogy instead of a swiss army knife analogy please ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't understand.
Could you make a car analogy instead of a swiss army knife analogy please?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552180</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553026</id>
	<title>5 reasons tablets are great and you will buy one</title>
	<author>obarthelemy</author>
	<datestamp>1269086400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>1- you probably already have one: what's a smartphone if not a small tablet on which you can browse the web, read books, view video, type emails... on top of placing calls ? There's not that much difference between a 4"3 HD2 and a 5" Archos. It's very telling that Dell is marketing the upcoming mini 5 as a tablet, not a phone, though it is.. well... both.</p><p>2- At last, content. The success of smaller and bigger content-consumption devices (smartphones and PCs) has enabled the creation of plenty of downloadable content. Tablets are the perfect medium to consume that, with fast downloads, portability, comfortable viewing... This is a relatively recent development, basically impulsed by the iTunes Store, especially for video.</p><p>3- The right devices. Upcoming ARM-based tablets have the power to handle any media including video, at a very reasonable price ($150-$500). Form factor is essentially a marketing choice, from 3" to 11", with extra features at will (wifi, 3g, bluetooth, cameras, built-in or detached or wireless keyboard, battery life...). Compare that to the clunky, over-expensive, fragile rotating touchscreen $2000 laptops masquerading as tablets of yore, and watch them getting "netbooked".</p><p>4- The right UI and ecosystem. Apple, Android, even Windows Mobile have evolved interfaces and content distribution systems as well as dev toolchains that make using, populating, and developing for tablets very easy and convenient. Tablets are no longer notebooks with a touchscreen no OS nor Apps know what to do with, but oversized smartphones with more breathing space for UI and content.</p><p>5- Apple is hyping one. Watch them presell in 2 months more than MS managed to sell in 5 years, and shake up the tablet market like they shook up the smartphone one. Only this time the competitors are reacting faster and better, mostly because they're no longer in thrall to MS "let's copy iPhone OS 1.0, warts and all, 5 years late" thanks to Android, and because the changes from smartphone to tablet are mainly cosmetic ones. Competition from below (smaller screen/specs), above (bigger screen//specs) and sideways (more features, same size) will help build a complete range of products ato fit every niche, almost overnight.</p><p>I'm getting one.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>1- you probably already have one : what 's a smartphone if not a small tablet on which you can browse the web , read books , view video , type emails... on top of placing calls ?
There 's not that much difference between a 4 " 3 HD2 and a 5 " Archos .
It 's very telling that Dell is marketing the upcoming mini 5 as a tablet , not a phone , though it is.. well... both.2- At last , content .
The success of smaller and bigger content-consumption devices ( smartphones and PCs ) has enabled the creation of plenty of downloadable content .
Tablets are the perfect medium to consume that , with fast downloads , portability , comfortable viewing... This is a relatively recent development , basically impulsed by the iTunes Store , especially for video.3- The right devices .
Upcoming ARM-based tablets have the power to handle any media including video , at a very reasonable price ( $ 150- $ 500 ) .
Form factor is essentially a marketing choice , from 3 " to 11 " , with extra features at will ( wifi , 3g , bluetooth , cameras , built-in or detached or wireless keyboard , battery life... ) .
Compare that to the clunky , over-expensive , fragile rotating touchscreen $ 2000 laptops masquerading as tablets of yore , and watch them getting " netbooked " .4- The right UI and ecosystem .
Apple , Android , even Windows Mobile have evolved interfaces and content distribution systems as well as dev toolchains that make using , populating , and developing for tablets very easy and convenient .
Tablets are no longer notebooks with a touchscreen no OS nor Apps know what to do with , but oversized smartphones with more breathing space for UI and content.5- Apple is hyping one .
Watch them presell in 2 months more than MS managed to sell in 5 years , and shake up the tablet market like they shook up the smartphone one .
Only this time the competitors are reacting faster and better , mostly because they 're no longer in thrall to MS " let 's copy iPhone OS 1.0 , warts and all , 5 years late " thanks to Android , and because the changes from smartphone to tablet are mainly cosmetic ones .
Competition from below ( smaller screen/specs ) , above ( bigger screen//specs ) and sideways ( more features , same size ) will help build a complete range of products ato fit every niche , almost overnight.I 'm getting one .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>1- you probably already have one: what's a smartphone if not a small tablet on which you can browse the web, read books, view video, type emails... on top of placing calls ?
There's not that much difference between a 4"3 HD2 and a 5" Archos.
It's very telling that Dell is marketing the upcoming mini 5 as a tablet, not a phone, though it is.. well... both.2- At last, content.
The success of smaller and bigger content-consumption devices (smartphones and PCs) has enabled the creation of plenty of downloadable content.
Tablets are the perfect medium to consume that, with fast downloads, portability, comfortable viewing... This is a relatively recent development, basically impulsed by the iTunes Store, especially for video.3- The right devices.
Upcoming ARM-based tablets have the power to handle any media including video, at a very reasonable price ($150-$500).
Form factor is essentially a marketing choice, from 3" to 11", with extra features at will (wifi, 3g, bluetooth, cameras, built-in or detached or wireless keyboard, battery life...).
Compare that to the clunky, over-expensive, fragile rotating touchscreen $2000 laptops masquerading as tablets of yore, and watch them getting "netbooked".4- The right UI and ecosystem.
Apple, Android, even Windows Mobile have evolved interfaces and content distribution systems as well as dev toolchains that make using, populating, and developing for tablets very easy and convenient.
Tablets are no longer notebooks with a touchscreen no OS nor Apps know what to do with, but oversized smartphones with more breathing space for UI and content.5- Apple is hyping one.
Watch them presell in 2 months more than MS managed to sell in 5 years, and shake up the tablet market like they shook up the smartphone one.
Only this time the competitors are reacting faster and better, mostly because they're no longer in thrall to MS "let's copy iPhone OS 1.0, warts and all, 5 years late" thanks to Android, and because the changes from smartphone to tablet are mainly cosmetic ones.
Competition from below (smaller screen/specs), above (bigger screen//specs) and sideways (more features, same size) will help build a complete range of products ato fit every niche, almost overnight.I'm getting one.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31554594</id>
	<title>Re:Apple's tablet is different from other tablets.</title>
	<author>Kagetsuki</author>
	<datestamp>1269099780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>1. Toshiba and Fujitsu have been producing successful full Windows tablets for years, and they are VERY easy to use. The desktop metaphor is perfectly appropriate if the tablet is good.<br>
2. There is a "multitouch" like mode in Ubuntu for trackpads and compatible touch screens. My Netwalker Z1 works just find with the "multitouch" but personally I don't really like it (eg I like to scroll with the arrow keys instead of obstructing my view with my fingers) so I don't have it turned on.<br>
3. The price is reasonable, but I would not say it is "quite low".<br>
4. My Z1 resumes within 3 seconds. Windows tablets often have sleep memory that lets them resume in about 3 to 5 seconds. Even if the iPad resumes instantly I doubt you're going to notice much difference as 3 seconds is obscenely short anyway.<br>
5. What? What devices are you comparing this to? Other tablets?<br>
<br>
Also, I hate Flash and applaud Apple for not going out of their way to support it and Steve for knocking Adobe for being lazy slow complainers. 64Bit Flash is still atrocious, Linux flash is still broken, and Flash it easily the number one cause of browser lockups on any *nix OS including OSX. If anything immediately good can come out of blind Apple fanaticism it will be reduction in the use of Flash and increase in the use of HTML5 technologies.<br>
<br>
Also I totally agree with you on the lack of openness. Linux tablets would really be great, I'd like to see more of them and more availability. For now I'm hooked to my Z1, which while not a tablet runs Ubuntu, has a keyboard, and I can use it to code standing up on the train and compile right there. My kids watch videos on it in the car, I play games and read the news on it, and I have yet to have to purchase an "App" for it. Oh, and it is much cheaper than the iPad. I actually really don't see any appeal for the iPad and I don't understand what Apple is trying to achieve by releasing it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>1 .
Toshiba and Fujitsu have been producing successful full Windows tablets for years , and they are VERY easy to use .
The desktop metaphor is perfectly appropriate if the tablet is good .
2. There is a " multitouch " like mode in Ubuntu for trackpads and compatible touch screens .
My Netwalker Z1 works just find with the " multitouch " but personally I do n't really like it ( eg I like to scroll with the arrow keys instead of obstructing my view with my fingers ) so I do n't have it turned on .
3. The price is reasonable , but I would not say it is " quite low " .
4. My Z1 resumes within 3 seconds .
Windows tablets often have sleep memory that lets them resume in about 3 to 5 seconds .
Even if the iPad resumes instantly I doubt you 're going to notice much difference as 3 seconds is obscenely short anyway .
5. What ?
What devices are you comparing this to ?
Other tablets ?
Also , I hate Flash and applaud Apple for not going out of their way to support it and Steve for knocking Adobe for being lazy slow complainers .
64Bit Flash is still atrocious , Linux flash is still broken , and Flash it easily the number one cause of browser lockups on any * nix OS including OSX .
If anything immediately good can come out of blind Apple fanaticism it will be reduction in the use of Flash and increase in the use of HTML5 technologies .
Also I totally agree with you on the lack of openness .
Linux tablets would really be great , I 'd like to see more of them and more availability .
For now I 'm hooked to my Z1 , which while not a tablet runs Ubuntu , has a keyboard , and I can use it to code standing up on the train and compile right there .
My kids watch videos on it in the car , I play games and read the news on it , and I have yet to have to purchase an " App " for it .
Oh , and it is much cheaper than the iPad .
I actually really do n't see any appeal for the iPad and I do n't understand what Apple is trying to achieve by releasing it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>1.
Toshiba and Fujitsu have been producing successful full Windows tablets for years, and they are VERY easy to use.
The desktop metaphor is perfectly appropriate if the tablet is good.
2. There is a "multitouch" like mode in Ubuntu for trackpads and compatible touch screens.
My Netwalker Z1 works just find with the "multitouch" but personally I don't really like it (eg I like to scroll with the arrow keys instead of obstructing my view with my fingers) so I don't have it turned on.
3. The price is reasonable, but I would not say it is "quite low".
4. My Z1 resumes within 3 seconds.
Windows tablets often have sleep memory that lets them resume in about 3 to 5 seconds.
Even if the iPad resumes instantly I doubt you're going to notice much difference as 3 seconds is obscenely short anyway.
5. What?
What devices are you comparing this to?
Other tablets?
Also, I hate Flash and applaud Apple for not going out of their way to support it and Steve for knocking Adobe for being lazy slow complainers.
64Bit Flash is still atrocious, Linux flash is still broken, and Flash it easily the number one cause of browser lockups on any *nix OS including OSX.
If anything immediately good can come out of blind Apple fanaticism it will be reduction in the use of Flash and increase in the use of HTML5 technologies.
Also I totally agree with you on the lack of openness.
Linux tablets would really be great, I'd like to see more of them and more availability.
For now I'm hooked to my Z1, which while not a tablet runs Ubuntu, has a keyboard, and I can use it to code standing up on the train and compile right there.
My kids watch videos on it in the car, I play games and read the news on it, and I have yet to have to purchase an "App" for it.
Oh, and it is much cheaper than the iPad.
I actually really don't see any appeal for the iPad and I don't understand what Apple is trying to achieve by releasing it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552532</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553886</id>
	<title>Re:well duh</title>
	<author>mdwh2</author>
	<datestamp>1269092940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Apple with their sometimes annoying closed systems, are breaking MSFT out of their bad habits. It took 3-4 years but MSFT fianlly realized that putting a desktop Interface on their phones was a bad idea that limited usability.</i></p><p>It's absurd to claim they realised that because of Apple, when there are much larger phone OS platforms (e.g., Symbian).</p><p>And what are Apple now doing - putting a phone OS onto a tablet? Like that's any better.</p><p>And I love that not supporting basic features is now "taking a stand". I should have thought of that when arguing for the Amiga a few years ago: "What's that, it doesn't support Java or Flash? Well that's good, the Amiga is <i>taking a stand</i>".</p><p>Typing this on my laptop with Intel Core Duo processor *ding dong ding dong* running Windows XP, with my 5800 nearby. I will say I won't get Duke Nukem Forever, because I'm not interested in vaporware.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Apple with their sometimes annoying closed systems , are breaking MSFT out of their bad habits .
It took 3-4 years but MSFT fianlly realized that putting a desktop Interface on their phones was a bad idea that limited usability.It 's absurd to claim they realised that because of Apple , when there are much larger phone OS platforms ( e.g. , Symbian ) .And what are Apple now doing - putting a phone OS onto a tablet ?
Like that 's any better.And I love that not supporting basic features is now " taking a stand " .
I should have thought of that when arguing for the Amiga a few years ago : " What 's that , it does n't support Java or Flash ?
Well that 's good , the Amiga is taking a stand " .Typing this on my laptop with Intel Core Duo processor * ding dong ding dong * running Windows XP , with my 5800 nearby .
I will say I wo n't get Duke Nukem Forever , because I 'm not interested in vaporware .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Apple with their sometimes annoying closed systems, are breaking MSFT out of their bad habits.
It took 3-4 years but MSFT fianlly realized that putting a desktop Interface on their phones was a bad idea that limited usability.It's absurd to claim they realised that because of Apple, when there are much larger phone OS platforms (e.g., Symbian).And what are Apple now doing - putting a phone OS onto a tablet?
Like that's any better.And I love that not supporting basic features is now "taking a stand".
I should have thought of that when arguing for the Amiga a few years ago: "What's that, it doesn't support Java or Flash?
Well that's good, the Amiga is taking a stand".Typing this on my laptop with Intel Core Duo processor *ding dong ding dong* running Windows XP, with my 5800 nearby.
I will say I won't get Duke Nukem Forever, because I'm not interested in vaporware.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552128</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553700</id>
	<title>Re:I Have a Tablet, and It's Brilliant!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269091440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>OK, I read some reviews. Yes it has a stylus but the reviews say the screen sensors are slow. This is troubling. In my experience, no tablet screen can capture my handwriting like a pen because I write very fast. I keep hoping the technology would get better but multitouch is stealing the active digitizer thunder and the tech seems to not advance much. Sensor speed is another major issue holding tablets back because they don't feel right.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>OK , I read some reviews .
Yes it has a stylus but the reviews say the screen sensors are slow .
This is troubling .
In my experience , no tablet screen can capture my handwriting like a pen because I write very fast .
I keep hoping the technology would get better but multitouch is stealing the active digitizer thunder and the tech seems to not advance much .
Sensor speed is another major issue holding tablets back because they do n't feel right .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>OK, I read some reviews.
Yes it has a stylus but the reviews say the screen sensors are slow.
This is troubling.
In my experience, no tablet screen can capture my handwriting like a pen because I write very fast.
I keep hoping the technology would get better but multitouch is stealing the active digitizer thunder and the tech seems to not advance much.
Sensor speed is another major issue holding tablets back because they don't feel right.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553440</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31567650</id>
	<title>Re:niches</title>
	<author>CAIMLAS</author>
	<datestamp>1269270900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ok, so what matter of convenience would an iPad provide?</p><p>I can see only a handful of things you would want to reasonably perform on a tablet:<br>- watch movies by yourself and/or while traveling/camping<br>- play cards<br>- watch porn in the bathroom<br>- read books (for which there are cheaper, better/more appropriate devices)<br>- use as a kitchen kiosk for (say) looking up recipes</p><p>For all other things, existing technology - specifically, laptops or desktops - fill that role. Nobody is going to have an iPad w/o a laptop or desktop, and the price of the iPad is likely to make it not much more than a novelty (due to its cost). The iPad isn't even going to be good for common web surfing.</p><p>Of course, that all changes if APple gets a contract or four with major schools and/or book publishers to provide books digitally via the iPad. I wouldn't hold my breath, though; as has been said recently (I think on<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/.), colleges/universities/schools have somewhat soured on the whole idea of a 'digitally connected classroom'. There are enough distractions for students as it is. The only substantial market this thing will have will be within schools which have already largely gone 'digital' and provide laptops for all their students currently.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ok , so what matter of convenience would an iPad provide ? I can see only a handful of things you would want to reasonably perform on a tablet : - watch movies by yourself and/or while traveling/camping- play cards- watch porn in the bathroom- read books ( for which there are cheaper , better/more appropriate devices ) - use as a kitchen kiosk for ( say ) looking up recipesFor all other things , existing technology - specifically , laptops or desktops - fill that role .
Nobody is going to have an iPad w/o a laptop or desktop , and the price of the iPad is likely to make it not much more than a novelty ( due to its cost ) .
The iPad is n't even going to be good for common web surfing.Of course , that all changes if APple gets a contract or four with major schools and/or book publishers to provide books digitally via the iPad .
I would n't hold my breath , though ; as has been said recently ( I think on / .
) , colleges/universities/schools have somewhat soured on the whole idea of a 'digitally connected classroom' .
There are enough distractions for students as it is .
The only substantial market this thing will have will be within schools which have already largely gone 'digital ' and provide laptops for all their students currently .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ok, so what matter of convenience would an iPad provide?I can see only a handful of things you would want to reasonably perform on a tablet:- watch movies by yourself and/or while traveling/camping- play cards- watch porn in the bathroom- read books (for which there are cheaper, better/more appropriate devices)- use as a kitchen kiosk for (say) looking up recipesFor all other things, existing technology - specifically, laptops or desktops - fill that role.
Nobody is going to have an iPad w/o a laptop or desktop, and the price of the iPad is likely to make it not much more than a novelty (due to its cost).
The iPad isn't even going to be good for common web surfing.Of course, that all changes if APple gets a contract or four with major schools and/or book publishers to provide books digitally via the iPad.
I wouldn't hold my breath, though; as has been said recently (I think on /.
), colleges/universities/schools have somewhat soured on the whole idea of a 'digitally connected classroom'.
There are enough distractions for students as it is.
The only substantial market this thing will have will be within schools which have already largely gone 'digital' and provide laptops for all their students currently.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552436</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31554852</id>
	<title>Re:niches</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269102720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>There is a comment, just above, doubting iPad's impact in eBook market. I also see it this way, given that Kindle or Sony or B&amp;N readers cost half that much, and 3G is included for free.</p></div></blockquote><p>I owned a Kindle2.  You CAN'T DO anything with that whispernet/"3G" except buy more books.  It's slow, slower than actual 3G for one.</p><p>But also another reason is that the browser sucks.  Absolutely abysmal!!!  Reading even wikipedia on it is a pain (as well as not being able to touch links but having to use a keyboard to do it) but at least it has a reader for wikipedia.</p><p>The kindle is okay for reading books (except I don't like the dark grey on light grey contrast) but make no mistake, it is a single purpose device.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>There is a comment , just above , doubting iPad 's impact in eBook market .
I also see it this way , given that Kindle or Sony or B&amp;N readers cost half that much , and 3G is included for free.I owned a Kindle2 .
You CA N'T DO anything with that whispernet/ " 3G " except buy more books .
It 's slow , slower than actual 3G for one.But also another reason is that the browser sucks .
Absolutely abysmal ! ! !
Reading even wikipedia on it is a pain ( as well as not being able to touch links but having to use a keyboard to do it ) but at least it has a reader for wikipedia.The kindle is okay for reading books ( except I do n't like the dark grey on light grey contrast ) but make no mistake , it is a single purpose device .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is a comment, just above, doubting iPad's impact in eBook market.
I also see it this way, given that Kindle or Sony or B&amp;N readers cost half that much, and 3G is included for free.I owned a Kindle2.
You CAN'T DO anything with that whispernet/"3G" except buy more books.
It's slow, slower than actual 3G for one.But also another reason is that the browser sucks.
Absolutely abysmal!!!
Reading even wikipedia on it is a pain (as well as not being able to touch links but having to use a keyboard to do it) but at least it has a reader for wikipedia.The kindle is okay for reading books (except I don't like the dark grey on light grey contrast) but make no mistake, it is a single purpose device.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553412</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31555248</id>
	<title>Re:niches</title>
	<author>ClosedSource</author>
	<datestamp>1269108420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"By refrigerator has a built-in water dispenser."</p><p>Yes, I hated having that separate water dispenser.</p><p>"A typical TV is the convergence of a monitor, sound system, and receiver."</p><p>Right, I hated those old 1960s TVs that didn't have sound and couldn't receive TV signals.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" By refrigerator has a built-in water dispenser .
" Yes , I hated having that separate water dispenser .
" A typical TV is the convergence of a monitor , sound system , and receiver .
" Right , I hated those old 1960s TVs that did n't have sound and could n't receive TV signals .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"By refrigerator has a built-in water dispenser.
"Yes, I hated having that separate water dispenser.
"A typical TV is the convergence of a monitor, sound system, and receiver.
"Right, I hated those old 1960s TVs that didn't have sound and couldn't receive TV signals.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552396</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31555068</id>
	<title>Re:Author ignores the main reason tablets failed</title>
	<author>cbhacking</author>
	<datestamp>1269105780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The problem you're having with portability (heavy, hot, etc.) is because you're using HP's consumer-grade tablets. They're cheaper than the business-grade ones, and offer more features (optical drives, processors above 1.5 GHz, etc.) but also have much worse battery life and weigh far more. My university campus is well over a mile on a side, and the distance between my classes can be upwards of half a mile. I've walked that entire distance with the tablet (in slate mode) on one arm, interacting using the stylus, with no discomfort (typically the fan won't even turn on, which of course helps with battery life). In full sunlight, for that matter - the screen is very clear but non-glossy, and bright enough to be daylight-viewable easily. As for battery life, this is after an hour-long lecture where I was taking a bunch of notes, and on my way to a 2-hour lecture where I took a bunch more. At the end of that, the battery will still be at roughly 1/3 charge, and I may or may not charge it before going to the first of my hour-long lectures the next day.</p><p>Granted, my tablet only has 1.2GHz CPU, although it's a Core 2 Duo so the performance is still really quite adequate (and it runs Win7 x64 very nicely). The Intel integrated graphics limit it to very light gaming only, but are fine for everything else. The 1.8" HDD is tiny (80GB) and slow (4200 RPM, sequential access speed of ~40 MB/s) but cuts down greatly on size and weight. All in all, it's a bit over 3 lb (call it 1.5 kg) and I'm about as fit as your average computer engineering student, yet upon reaching my next class my arm was not actually tired.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem you 're having with portability ( heavy , hot , etc .
) is because you 're using HP 's consumer-grade tablets .
They 're cheaper than the business-grade ones , and offer more features ( optical drives , processors above 1.5 GHz , etc .
) but also have much worse battery life and weigh far more .
My university campus is well over a mile on a side , and the distance between my classes can be upwards of half a mile .
I 've walked that entire distance with the tablet ( in slate mode ) on one arm , interacting using the stylus , with no discomfort ( typically the fan wo n't even turn on , which of course helps with battery life ) .
In full sunlight , for that matter - the screen is very clear but non-glossy , and bright enough to be daylight-viewable easily .
As for battery life , this is after an hour-long lecture where I was taking a bunch of notes , and on my way to a 2-hour lecture where I took a bunch more .
At the end of that , the battery will still be at roughly 1/3 charge , and I may or may not charge it before going to the first of my hour-long lectures the next day.Granted , my tablet only has 1.2GHz CPU , although it 's a Core 2 Duo so the performance is still really quite adequate ( and it runs Win7 x64 very nicely ) .
The Intel integrated graphics limit it to very light gaming only , but are fine for everything else .
The 1.8 " HDD is tiny ( 80GB ) and slow ( 4200 RPM , sequential access speed of ~ 40 MB/s ) but cuts down greatly on size and weight .
All in all , it 's a bit over 3 lb ( call it 1.5 kg ) and I 'm about as fit as your average computer engineering student , yet upon reaching my next class my arm was not actually tired .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem you're having with portability (heavy, hot, etc.
) is because you're using HP's consumer-grade tablets.
They're cheaper than the business-grade ones, and offer more features (optical drives, processors above 1.5 GHz, etc.
) but also have much worse battery life and weigh far more.
My university campus is well over a mile on a side, and the distance between my classes can be upwards of half a mile.
I've walked that entire distance with the tablet (in slate mode) on one arm, interacting using the stylus, with no discomfort (typically the fan won't even turn on, which of course helps with battery life).
In full sunlight, for that matter - the screen is very clear but non-glossy, and bright enough to be daylight-viewable easily.
As for battery life, this is after an hour-long lecture where I was taking a bunch of notes, and on my way to a 2-hour lecture where I took a bunch more.
At the end of that, the battery will still be at roughly 1/3 charge, and I may or may not charge it before going to the first of my hour-long lectures the next day.Granted, my tablet only has 1.2GHz CPU, although it's a Core 2 Duo so the performance is still really quite adequate (and it runs Win7 x64 very nicely).
The Intel integrated graphics limit it to very light gaming only, but are fine for everything else.
The 1.8" HDD is tiny (80GB) and slow (4200 RPM, sequential access speed of ~40 MB/s) but cuts down greatly on size and weight.
All in all, it's a bit over 3 lb (call it 1.5 kg) and I'm about as fit as your average computer engineering student, yet upon reaching my next class my arm was not actually tired.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552806</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553144</id>
	<title>wtf</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269086940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I don't want a tablet that's also a laptop. I want a pure tablet like the iPad or the... JooJoo (wtf!?), that has a full OS.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't want a tablet that 's also a laptop .
I want a pure tablet like the iPad or the... JooJoo ( wtf ! ?
) , that has a full OS .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't want a tablet that's also a laptop.
I want a pure tablet like the iPad or the... JooJoo (wtf!?
), that has a full OS.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31554808</id>
	<title>Re:Corrections, repeated</title>
	<author>feepness</author>
	<datestamp>1269102000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Plenty of multitasking. Just limited forms for third party apps. But apps can be multi-threaded.</p></div><p>Call me when I can run a third party alarm clock of my choosing while browsing.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Plenty of multitasking .
Just limited forms for third party apps .
But apps can be multi-threaded.Call me when I can run a third party alarm clock of my choosing while browsing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Plenty of multitasking.
Just limited forms for third party apps.
But apps can be multi-threaded.Call me when I can run a third party alarm clock of my choosing while browsing.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553002</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31556542</id>
	<title>Support Okudarams and audio icons</title>
	<author>sinewalker</author>
	<datestamp>1269174180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Forget Microsoft or Apple trying to get get a full OS to work.  The Big Company that really could make a killing on these would be Paramount.  Get Mike Okuda to design a touch interface similar to the Star Trek PADD -- pannel based, not multiple overlapping windows, customisable layout with generic controls.  Voice would be a bonus but shouldn't be necessary. Audio Icons (a la Emacspeak / LCARS) would be a bonus for visually impared (or fully visual enabled but distracted people).  Then make it support Apple / Java app store applications and I'd buy one.  Oh, and all that the iPad really misses at the moment is a built-in SD card reader -(yes I know the doc has one, but it's not portable, is it?) - that alone would make it much more useful.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Forget Microsoft or Apple trying to get get a full OS to work .
The Big Company that really could make a killing on these would be Paramount .
Get Mike Okuda to design a touch interface similar to the Star Trek PADD -- pannel based , not multiple overlapping windows , customisable layout with generic controls .
Voice would be a bonus but should n't be necessary .
Audio Icons ( a la Emacspeak / LCARS ) would be a bonus for visually impared ( or fully visual enabled but distracted people ) .
Then make it support Apple / Java app store applications and I 'd buy one .
Oh , and all that the iPad really misses at the moment is a built-in SD card reader - ( yes I know the doc has one , but it 's not portable , is it ?
) - that alone would make it much more useful .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Forget Microsoft or Apple trying to get get a full OS to work.
The Big Company that really could make a killing on these would be Paramount.
Get Mike Okuda to design a touch interface similar to the Star Trek PADD -- pannel based, not multiple overlapping windows, customisable layout with generic controls.
Voice would be a bonus but shouldn't be necessary.
Audio Icons (a la Emacspeak / LCARS) would be a bonus for visually impared (or fully visual enabled but distracted people).
Then make it support Apple / Java app store applications and I'd buy one.
Oh, and all that the iPad really misses at the moment is a built-in SD card reader -(yes I know the doc has one, but it's not portable, is it?
) - that alone would make it much more useful.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552572</id>
	<title>Re:My problem with iPad</title>
	<author>repetty</author>
	<datestamp>1269083160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You're a funny guy. Really.</p><p>Are your parents making you pay rent, yet?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You 're a funny guy .
Really.Are your parents making you pay rent , yet ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You're a funny guy.
Really.Are your parents making you pay rent, yet?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552252</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553230</id>
	<title>Re:Why not a slide out keyboard?</title>
	<author>obarthelemy</author>
	<datestamp>1269087420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>i'd rather have my choice of bluetooth keyboards (credit card-, blackberry-, netbook-, full-sized) than have to carry a specific one at all times. Anything but the iPad will allow me that choice and capability.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>i 'd rather have my choice of bluetooth keyboards ( credit card- , blackberry- , netbook- , full-sized ) than have to carry a specific one at all times .
Anything but the iPad will allow me that choice and capability .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>i'd rather have my choice of bluetooth keyboards (credit card-, blackberry-, netbook-, full-sized) than have to carry a specific one at all times.
Anything but the iPad will allow me that choice and capability.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552444</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553044</id>
	<title>Re:Not at all true</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269086460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Schnell's assertion could be a rather broad generalization, but:</p><p>It specifies technologies diverge <strong>for the most part</strong>, so it's true that there's also a lot of convergence all the time (it'd be a crazy world otherwise) BUT, it is also true that techologies diverge a lot more! I wouldn't go and say "orders of magnitude" of anything, but it is an easily observable phenomenon</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Schnell 's assertion could be a rather broad generalization , but : It specifies technologies diverge for the most part , so it 's true that there 's also a lot of convergence all the time ( it 'd be a crazy world otherwise ) BUT , it is also true that techologies diverge a lot more !
I would n't go and say " orders of magnitude " of anything , but it is an easily observable phenomenon</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Schnell's assertion could be a rather broad generalization, but:It specifies technologies diverge for the most part, so it's true that there's also a lot of convergence all the time (it'd be a crazy world otherwise) BUT, it is also true that techologies diverge a lot more!
I wouldn't go and say "orders of magnitude" of anything, but it is an easily observable phenomenon</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552580</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552944</id>
	<title>I agree.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269085920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I agree with this article 100\%.  This is exactly what people will be using for most computing needs.  I think while the world may not be quite ready for the iPad right now.. it soon will be.  I believe Apples philosophy here is spot on.  Build something people can actually use.. the vast majority will be using a device like this on a daily basis and will opt for an iPad instead of a computer because it takes even more hassle out of the tool.. You can do 99 percent of the things on it that people want, which is to simply  communicate, gather information, consume and buy without any distractions. They dont care about having a million different options or nobs to make it happen.. Like any other device a washing machine, a car, most people do not care how it works they want to push a button to make it happen to get a result.  The iPad philosophy does this.. a couple taps and you have checked movies and bought tickets, checked weather, read the paper.  It is a device that actually allows technology to make things easier for once. It was not until recently that traditional computers have even become reliable, easy enough to use for most people.  Now is there a case to have a little more complexity in the picture? Yes, but that I believe is reserved mostly for the contributors and in that case get a computer.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I agree with this article 100 \ % .
This is exactly what people will be using for most computing needs .
I think while the world may not be quite ready for the iPad right now.. it soon will be .
I believe Apples philosophy here is spot on .
Build something people can actually use.. the vast majority will be using a device like this on a daily basis and will opt for an iPad instead of a computer because it takes even more hassle out of the tool.. You can do 99 percent of the things on it that people want , which is to simply communicate , gather information , consume and buy without any distractions .
They dont care about having a million different options or nobs to make it happen.. Like any other device a washing machine , a car , most people do not care how it works they want to push a button to make it happen to get a result .
The iPad philosophy does this.. a couple taps and you have checked movies and bought tickets , checked weather , read the paper .
It is a device that actually allows technology to make things easier for once .
It was not until recently that traditional computers have even become reliable , easy enough to use for most people .
Now is there a case to have a little more complexity in the picture ?
Yes , but that I believe is reserved mostly for the contributors and in that case get a computer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I agree with this article 100\%.
This is exactly what people will be using for most computing needs.
I think while the world may not be quite ready for the iPad right now.. it soon will be.
I believe Apples philosophy here is spot on.
Build something people can actually use.. the vast majority will be using a device like this on a daily basis and will opt for an iPad instead of a computer because it takes even more hassle out of the tool.. You can do 99 percent of the things on it that people want, which is to simply  communicate, gather information, consume and buy without any distractions.
They dont care about having a million different options or nobs to make it happen.. Like any other device a washing machine, a car, most people do not care how it works they want to push a button to make it happen to get a result.
The iPad philosophy does this.. a couple taps and you have checked movies and bought tickets, checked weather, read the paper.
It is a device that actually allows technology to make things easier for once.
It was not until recently that traditional computers have even become reliable, easy enough to use for most people.
Now is there a case to have a little more complexity in the picture?
Yes, but that I believe is reserved mostly for the contributors and in that case get a computer.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31554434</id>
	<title>iPhone does multitask</title>
	<author>tgibbs</author>
	<datestamp>1269098040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>No multitasking in the iPhone OS. Even cell phone OSes can do that</p></div></blockquote><p>Common misconception. The iPhone does multitask, otherwise, you wouldn't be able to read your email while listening to music. What the current iPhone OS doesn't do right now is allow 3rd party applications to run in the background.</p><p>Apple will eventually allow multitasking for 3rd party applications. They will have to do so to remain competitive. But they would be nuts to do it at the same time as they release the iPad, because 3rd party multitasking introduces the potential for performance and security problems--not the sort of thing Apple wants to worry about when they're trying to get a new product to catch on. Remember, the iPhone didn't allow 3rd party applications at all when first release. Only once the iPhone was launched did Apple open the door to 3rd party developers, and now there are a huge number. We'll probably see 3rd party multitasking on the next major OS revision after the iPad is released. There's really no rush at the moment, since as the article makes clear, Apple has no real competition in this arena, and lack of 3rd party multitasking (or the other restrictions Apple has placed on app development) has not prevented the iPhone and Touch from accumulating a huge app library. Even then, I doubt if Apple will throw the multitasking door wide open. Most likely, there will be an additional approval step for apps that want to multitask apps. Remember, people who buy Apple products expect them to "just work." They will not put up with having to keep track of how many and which apps they can have running in the background before the phone's interface starts to bog down. So there will doubtless be additional hoops that developers will have to jump through to demonstrate that multitasking provides major additional functionality for their app, with minimal drain on the tablet's resources.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>No multitasking in the iPhone OS .
Even cell phone OSes can do thatCommon misconception .
The iPhone does multitask , otherwise , you would n't be able to read your email while listening to music .
What the current iPhone OS does n't do right now is allow 3rd party applications to run in the background.Apple will eventually allow multitasking for 3rd party applications .
They will have to do so to remain competitive .
But they would be nuts to do it at the same time as they release the iPad , because 3rd party multitasking introduces the potential for performance and security problems--not the sort of thing Apple wants to worry about when they 're trying to get a new product to catch on .
Remember , the iPhone did n't allow 3rd party applications at all when first release .
Only once the iPhone was launched did Apple open the door to 3rd party developers , and now there are a huge number .
We 'll probably see 3rd party multitasking on the next major OS revision after the iPad is released .
There 's really no rush at the moment , since as the article makes clear , Apple has no real competition in this arena , and lack of 3rd party multitasking ( or the other restrictions Apple has placed on app development ) has not prevented the iPhone and Touch from accumulating a huge app library .
Even then , I doubt if Apple will throw the multitasking door wide open .
Most likely , there will be an additional approval step for apps that want to multitask apps .
Remember , people who buy Apple products expect them to " just work .
" They will not put up with having to keep track of how many and which apps they can have running in the background before the phone 's interface starts to bog down .
So there will doubtless be additional hoops that developers will have to jump through to demonstrate that multitasking provides major additional functionality for their app , with minimal drain on the tablet 's resources .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No multitasking in the iPhone OS.
Even cell phone OSes can do thatCommon misconception.
The iPhone does multitask, otherwise, you wouldn't be able to read your email while listening to music.
What the current iPhone OS doesn't do right now is allow 3rd party applications to run in the background.Apple will eventually allow multitasking for 3rd party applications.
They will have to do so to remain competitive.
But they would be nuts to do it at the same time as they release the iPad, because 3rd party multitasking introduces the potential for performance and security problems--not the sort of thing Apple wants to worry about when they're trying to get a new product to catch on.
Remember, the iPhone didn't allow 3rd party applications at all when first release.
Only once the iPhone was launched did Apple open the door to 3rd party developers, and now there are a huge number.
We'll probably see 3rd party multitasking on the next major OS revision after the iPad is released.
There's really no rush at the moment, since as the article makes clear, Apple has no real competition in this arena, and lack of 3rd party multitasking (or the other restrictions Apple has placed on app development) has not prevented the iPhone and Touch from accumulating a huge app library.
Even then, I doubt if Apple will throw the multitasking door wide open.
Most likely, there will be an additional approval step for apps that want to multitask apps.
Remember, people who buy Apple products expect them to "just work.
" They will not put up with having to keep track of how many and which apps they can have running in the background before the phone's interface starts to bog down.
So there will doubtless be additional hoops that developers will have to jump through to demonstrate that multitasking provides major additional functionality for their app, with minimal drain on the tablet's resources.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552252</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31554010</id>
	<title>Speak for yourselves.</title>
	<author>geminidomino</author>
	<datestamp>1269094200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They forgot reason #0, or "the reason *I* haven't bought one".</p><p>Price. "Real"-OS tablets aren't capable enough to serve as my main system (nor should they be) but they're still too expensive for me to afford as an ancillary system.</p><p>TFA seems to be specifically crafted as a weak (I'm sure "cost" is more of an issue to adoption than "lack of tablet apps") attempt to discredit those who are uninspired by the iPad's limitations.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They forgot reason # 0 , or " the reason * I * have n't bought one " .Price .
" Real " -OS tablets are n't capable enough to serve as my main system ( nor should they be ) but they 're still too expensive for me to afford as an ancillary system.TFA seems to be specifically crafted as a weak ( I 'm sure " cost " is more of an issue to adoption than " lack of tablet apps " ) attempt to discredit those who are uninspired by the iPad 's limitations .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They forgot reason #0, or "the reason *I* haven't bought one".Price.
"Real"-OS tablets aren't capable enough to serve as my main system (nor should they be) but they're still too expensive for me to afford as an ancillary system.TFA seems to be specifically crafted as a weak (I'm sure "cost" is more of an issue to adoption than "lack of tablet apps") attempt to discredit those who are uninspired by the iPad's limitations.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31554500</id>
	<title>Re:Author ignores the main reason tablets failed</title>
	<author>YojimboJango</author>
	<datestamp>1269098820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I spent a number of years looking for a tablet PC that would run Photoshop, even badly, for around $500-$700. The potential for drawing on the screen is huge, and yet the only viable options I've ever seen is Wacom stuff that you have to hook to a desktop, and mount somewhere. I just want to sit on the couch and draw, and maybe get a tiny usb keyboard (like the fold out ones that attach to palms) to sit next to me for when I need to use keyboard shortcuts. I'd like it to have a dual core processor and 2-3 gigs of ram (depending on what OS it's running). I've yet to see a tablet that does that at any weight or configuration for under $1500.</p><p>Also for the one that I saw that would meet these requirements was a HP listed at around $1,800, but right next to it there was a laptop with BETTER hardware specs listed for $450. Does a 13" touch screen really cost $1350?</p><p>And people wonder why tablets haven't taken off.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I spent a number of years looking for a tablet PC that would run Photoshop , even badly , for around $ 500- $ 700 .
The potential for drawing on the screen is huge , and yet the only viable options I 've ever seen is Wacom stuff that you have to hook to a desktop , and mount somewhere .
I just want to sit on the couch and draw , and maybe get a tiny usb keyboard ( like the fold out ones that attach to palms ) to sit next to me for when I need to use keyboard shortcuts .
I 'd like it to have a dual core processor and 2-3 gigs of ram ( depending on what OS it 's running ) .
I 've yet to see a tablet that does that at any weight or configuration for under $ 1500.Also for the one that I saw that would meet these requirements was a HP listed at around $ 1,800 , but right next to it there was a laptop with BETTER hardware specs listed for $ 450 .
Does a 13 " touch screen really cost $ 1350 ? And people wonder why tablets have n't taken off .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I spent a number of years looking for a tablet PC that would run Photoshop, even badly, for around $500-$700.
The potential for drawing on the screen is huge, and yet the only viable options I've ever seen is Wacom stuff that you have to hook to a desktop, and mount somewhere.
I just want to sit on the couch and draw, and maybe get a tiny usb keyboard (like the fold out ones that attach to palms) to sit next to me for when I need to use keyboard shortcuts.
I'd like it to have a dual core processor and 2-3 gigs of ram (depending on what OS it's running).
I've yet to see a tablet that does that at any weight or configuration for under $1500.Also for the one that I saw that would meet these requirements was a HP listed at around $1,800, but right next to it there was a laptop with BETTER hardware specs listed for $450.
Does a 13" touch screen really cost $1350?And people wonder why tablets haven't taken off.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552224</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31555834</id>
	<title>they're just show off devices</title>
	<author>ILuvRamen</author>
	<datestamp>1269162420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I used tablets in a job at a hospital where all the doctors got flipping screen lenovo laptops and I have one thing to say about tablets after that experience.  It comes down to the simple fact that they're only for flashy show off sprees and have no real use.  They don't provide anything at all that's better than a laptop.  I don't buy the portability thing because the slight weight difference and way you carry it are insignificant.  Also, NOTHING can even come close to touching the speed of me with a wired, optical mouse in my hand.  After this many years, I don't care what you put in my hand, I'm going to be at most half the speed with it.  And the handwriting recognition is a cute trick but too slow and inaccurate and stupid to be used in any real environment where you need to actually do real things.  Picking up and holding a computer in your arm like a clipboard to use it is a stupid idea and that's all it really boils down to.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I used tablets in a job at a hospital where all the doctors got flipping screen lenovo laptops and I have one thing to say about tablets after that experience .
It comes down to the simple fact that they 're only for flashy show off sprees and have no real use .
They do n't provide anything at all that 's better than a laptop .
I do n't buy the portability thing because the slight weight difference and way you carry it are insignificant .
Also , NOTHING can even come close to touching the speed of me with a wired , optical mouse in my hand .
After this many years , I do n't care what you put in my hand , I 'm going to be at most half the speed with it .
And the handwriting recognition is a cute trick but too slow and inaccurate and stupid to be used in any real environment where you need to actually do real things .
Picking up and holding a computer in your arm like a clipboard to use it is a stupid idea and that 's all it really boils down to .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I used tablets in a job at a hospital where all the doctors got flipping screen lenovo laptops and I have one thing to say about tablets after that experience.
It comes down to the simple fact that they're only for flashy show off sprees and have no real use.
They don't provide anything at all that's better than a laptop.
I don't buy the portability thing because the slight weight difference and way you carry it are insignificant.
Also, NOTHING can even come close to touching the speed of me with a wired, optical mouse in my hand.
After this many years, I don't care what you put in my hand, I'm going to be at most half the speed with it.
And the handwriting recognition is a cute trick but too slow and inaccurate and stupid to be used in any real environment where you need to actually do real things.
Picking up and holding a computer in your arm like a clipboard to use it is a stupid idea and that's all it really boils down to.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31554524</id>
	<title>Re:Enough with the speculative stories and discuss</title>
	<author>martin-boundary</author>
	<datestamp>1269099060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>  There, I saved you some reading.</p></div>
</blockquote><p>
As a smart and sophisticated Linux user, let me be the first to congratulate you on your very insightful and extremely
interesting commentary about
those sad deluded mac fanbois and those crazy boring windows addicts...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>There , I saved you some reading .
As a smart and sophisticated Linux user , let me be the first to congratulate you on your very insightful and extremely interesting commentary about those sad deluded mac fanbois and those crazy boring windows addicts.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>  There, I saved you some reading.
As a smart and sophisticated Linux user, let me be the first to congratulate you on your very insightful and extremely
interesting commentary about
those sad deluded mac fanbois and those crazy boring windows addicts...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552270</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31554184</id>
	<title>i love my tablet, and would have loved ipad...</title>
	<author>zarkill</author>
	<datestamp>1269095520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>i'm a designer and illustrator and i own a toshiba satellite tablet PC - i love it; it's got a big screen (14 inches) and it runs photoshop and all the other art/drawing tools i want, and drawing directly on the screen is so much nicer to me than using a wacom pad or something.
</p><p>
but it's getting old, and it's starting to show its age, and full-OS tablet PCs nowadays are just getting smaller (hard to find one with more than a 12-inch screen anymore) and more expensive ( i paid about $1100 for mine), while the cheaper ones are less useful. i was excited by the rumors of a mac tablet, because i thought maybe given apple's traditional position with designers and artists that the mac tablet might be something i could actually use.
</p><p>
it's true that tablets are a niche product, but it's MY niche, and it bums me out that it's not being better served.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>i 'm a designer and illustrator and i own a toshiba satellite tablet PC - i love it ; it 's got a big screen ( 14 inches ) and it runs photoshop and all the other art/drawing tools i want , and drawing directly on the screen is so much nicer to me than using a wacom pad or something .
but it 's getting old , and it 's starting to show its age , and full-OS tablet PCs nowadays are just getting smaller ( hard to find one with more than a 12-inch screen anymore ) and more expensive ( i paid about $ 1100 for mine ) , while the cheaper ones are less useful .
i was excited by the rumors of a mac tablet , because i thought maybe given apple 's traditional position with designers and artists that the mac tablet might be something i could actually use .
it 's true that tablets are a niche product , but it 's MY niche , and it bums me out that it 's not being better served .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>i'm a designer and illustrator and i own a toshiba satellite tablet PC - i love it; it's got a big screen (14 inches) and it runs photoshop and all the other art/drawing tools i want, and drawing directly on the screen is so much nicer to me than using a wacom pad or something.
but it's getting old, and it's starting to show its age, and full-OS tablet PCs nowadays are just getting smaller (hard to find one with more than a 12-inch screen anymore) and more expensive ( i paid about $1100 for mine), while the cheaper ones are less useful.
i was excited by the rumors of a mac tablet, because i thought maybe given apple's traditional position with designers and artists that the mac tablet might be something i could actually use.
it's true that tablets are a niche product, but it's MY niche, and it bums me out that it's not being better served.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31554020</id>
	<title>Re:niches</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269094260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Being a bit pedantic, don't you think?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Being a bit pedantic , do n't you think ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Being a bit pedantic, don't you think?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552436</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553936</id>
	<title>You Fools</title>
	<author>Carrot007</author>
	<datestamp>1269093360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Juts because current "REAL" os's as they stand can not run on a tablet does not mean that I want a gimped halfassed os on a tablet.</p><p>Plesase design me a useable input mechanisam for a full proepr os for mny tablet thanks.</p><p>(Yes I know I am in the sane minoroty there)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Juts because current " REAL " os 's as they stand can not run on a tablet does not mean that I want a gimped halfassed os on a tablet.Plesase design me a useable input mechanisam for a full proepr os for mny tablet thanks .
( Yes I know I am in the sane minoroty there )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Juts because current "REAL" os's as they stand can not run on a tablet does not mean that I want a gimped halfassed os on a tablet.Plesase design me a useable input mechanisam for a full proepr os for mny tablet thanks.
(Yes I know I am in the sane minoroty there)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553196</id>
	<title>Re:niches - fixed that for ya</title>
	<author>emt377</author>
	<datestamp>1269087240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Jesse Schell, known mostly to his friends and colleagues as a game designer, spoke at "DICE"</p></div><p>Wow, known mostly to his friends and colleagues as a game designer!  Such credentials!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Jesse Schell , known mostly to his friends and colleagues as a game designer , spoke at " DICE " Wow , known mostly to his friends and colleagues as a game designer !
Such credentials !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Jesse Schell, known mostly to his friends and colleagues as a game designer, spoke at "DICE"Wow, known mostly to his friends and colleagues as a game designer!
Such credentials!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552656</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31557872</id>
	<title>Re:My problem with iPad</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269189660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>No way to easily develop complex applications for it</p></div><p>Uh what? XCode is a fantastic development environment for very complex applications... I take it you are not a software developer though, you just somehow want these capabilities?</p><p><div class="quote"><p>The platform is closed: executables have to be signed, can't share or download software from third parties.</p></div><p>$99 gets you the ability to sign apps for you and up to 100 people. Grab an app like reMail from google code, build it for you and you're closest 100 buddies.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Closed APIs that the platform developer users for their own tools, but doesn't let anyone else use</p></div><p>True but you can use these on your self-signed non appstore apps no problem. Apple doesn't care about these for adhoc or enterprise deployment.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>Apple has to approve every frigging application.</p></div><p>Without justification, some people can take this as a benefit.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>The folks at Apple are total dicks about what applications they accept/refuse.</p></div><p>Is that a separate point or the previous one. How did this get modded +4 insightful.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>The folks at Apple can deactivate or tamper apps you have already purchaed, and tamper with your device's settings/experience at any time they feel like it.</p></div><p>Got any proof of this?</p><p><div class="quote"><p>The folks at Apple make retroactive rejections for stupid reasons, for example deactivating Commodore emulator after it was already approved.   Refusing Google Voice.</p></div><p>Google voice is a bit of a disaster, but the Commodore64 emulator is still on the appstore. I just checked in fact. And its on my iPhone, fancy that.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>App approval process<br>It's not a simple "Is this program safe?", or has the developer tested it for stability check.<br>They demand apps meet a long list of criteria that are difficult to meet, <b>AND</b> ordinary people will want apps that inherently don't meet all their stringent criteria.</p></div><p>What ordinary people do you speak of. The slashdot crowd is not ordinary. I still think you wrote this same point 3x in different ways.</p><p>Congrats, keep on hating Apple, its pretty trendy these days to do so on forums and chat rooms. (Which is amusingly the same reason most of you kids hate Apple) Don't buy their products. The multitasking is a user interface paradigm. I don't always agree with it but atleast theyre trying something new instead of jamming age old desktop paradigms onto tiny fat-finger devices. Stop thinking a mobile phone or a tablet MUST be your desktop Linux workstation to be useful to anyone. Frankly I used to be interested in putting Linux on every device I had too, but then I grew up and had to start making productive use of my time outside of work for real life, and could focus putting Linux on things at work<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:P</p><p>I develop for the iPhone as well as many other mobile (and desktop) platforms. Frankly I love the iPhone SDK and have had no issues with the approval process.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>No way to easily develop complex applications for itUh what ?
XCode is a fantastic development environment for very complex applications... I take it you are not a software developer though , you just somehow want these capabilities ? The platform is closed : executables have to be signed , ca n't share or download software from third parties. $ 99 gets you the ability to sign apps for you and up to 100 people .
Grab an app like reMail from google code , build it for you and you 're closest 100 buddies.Closed APIs that the platform developer users for their own tools , but does n't let anyone else useTrue but you can use these on your self-signed non appstore apps no problem .
Apple does n't care about these for adhoc or enterprise deployment.Apple has to approve every frigging application.Without justification , some people can take this as a benefit.The folks at Apple are total dicks about what applications they accept/refuse.Is that a separate point or the previous one .
How did this get modded + 4 insightful.The folks at Apple can deactivate or tamper apps you have already purchaed , and tamper with your device 's settings/experience at any time they feel like it.Got any proof of this ? The folks at Apple make retroactive rejections for stupid reasons , for example deactivating Commodore emulator after it was already approved .
Refusing Google Voice.Google voice is a bit of a disaster , but the Commodore64 emulator is still on the appstore .
I just checked in fact .
And its on my iPhone , fancy that.App approval processIt 's not a simple " Is this program safe ?
" , or has the developer tested it for stability check.They demand apps meet a long list of criteria that are difficult to meet , AND ordinary people will want apps that inherently do n't meet all their stringent criteria.What ordinary people do you speak of .
The slashdot crowd is not ordinary .
I still think you wrote this same point 3x in different ways.Congrats , keep on hating Apple , its pretty trendy these days to do so on forums and chat rooms .
( Which is amusingly the same reason most of you kids hate Apple ) Do n't buy their products .
The multitasking is a user interface paradigm .
I do n't always agree with it but atleast theyre trying something new instead of jamming age old desktop paradigms onto tiny fat-finger devices .
Stop thinking a mobile phone or a tablet MUST be your desktop Linux workstation to be useful to anyone .
Frankly I used to be interested in putting Linux on every device I had too , but then I grew up and had to start making productive use of my time outside of work for real life , and could focus putting Linux on things at work : PI develop for the iPhone as well as many other mobile ( and desktop ) platforms .
Frankly I love the iPhone SDK and have had no issues with the approval process .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No way to easily develop complex applications for itUh what?
XCode is a fantastic development environment for very complex applications... I take it you are not a software developer though, you just somehow want these capabilities?The platform is closed: executables have to be signed, can't share or download software from third parties.$99 gets you the ability to sign apps for you and up to 100 people.
Grab an app like reMail from google code, build it for you and you're closest 100 buddies.Closed APIs that the platform developer users for their own tools, but doesn't let anyone else useTrue but you can use these on your self-signed non appstore apps no problem.
Apple doesn't care about these for adhoc or enterprise deployment.Apple has to approve every frigging application.Without justification, some people can take this as a benefit.The folks at Apple are total dicks about what applications they accept/refuse.Is that a separate point or the previous one.
How did this get modded +4 insightful.The folks at Apple can deactivate or tamper apps you have already purchaed, and tamper with your device's settings/experience at any time they feel like it.Got any proof of this?The folks at Apple make retroactive rejections for stupid reasons, for example deactivating Commodore emulator after it was already approved.
Refusing Google Voice.Google voice is a bit of a disaster, but the Commodore64 emulator is still on the appstore.
I just checked in fact.
And its on my iPhone, fancy that.App approval processIt's not a simple "Is this program safe?
", or has the developer tested it for stability check.They demand apps meet a long list of criteria that are difficult to meet, AND ordinary people will want apps that inherently don't meet all their stringent criteria.What ordinary people do you speak of.
The slashdot crowd is not ordinary.
I still think you wrote this same point 3x in different ways.Congrats, keep on hating Apple, its pretty trendy these days to do so on forums and chat rooms.
(Which is amusingly the same reason most of you kids hate Apple) Don't buy their products.
The multitasking is a user interface paradigm.
I don't always agree with it but atleast theyre trying something new instead of jamming age old desktop paradigms onto tiny fat-finger devices.
Stop thinking a mobile phone or a tablet MUST be your desktop Linux workstation to be useful to anyone.
Frankly I used to be interested in putting Linux on every device I had too, but then I grew up and had to start making productive use of my time outside of work for real life, and could focus putting Linux on things at work :PI develop for the iPhone as well as many other mobile (and desktop) platforms.
Frankly I love the iPhone SDK and have had no issues with the approval process.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552252</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553868</id>
	<title>Re:Tablets are mostly-output devices</title>
	<author>CopaceticOpus</author>
	<datestamp>1269092820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's a good point. I can think of a few output-only uses for a tablet that would make it useful for me:</p><ul> <li>Quick check of the weather, news headlines, etc. from any room.</li><li>Displaying recipes in the kitchen</li><li>An mp3 player with a more robust interface, for use in my car or while traveling</li><li>Take it to the gym, play a TV show from a<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.avi file while I use the stationary bike.</li><li>Show photos to friends.</li></ul><p>The key here is that the device needs to be cheap and simple. It should boot in &lt; 3 seconds, cost &lt; $200, and require little thought or maintenance. The tablet-as-a-PC-replacement is just too much.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's a good point .
I can think of a few output-only uses for a tablet that would make it useful for me : Quick check of the weather , news headlines , etc .
from any room.Displaying recipes in the kitchenAn mp3 player with a more robust interface , for use in my car or while travelingTake it to the gym , play a TV show from a .avi file while I use the stationary bike.Show photos to friends.The key here is that the device needs to be cheap and simple .
It should boot in</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's a good point.
I can think of a few output-only uses for a tablet that would make it useful for me: Quick check of the weather, news headlines, etc.
from any room.Displaying recipes in the kitchenAn mp3 player with a more robust interface, for use in my car or while travelingTake it to the gym, play a TV show from a .avi file while I use the stationary bike.Show photos to friends.The key here is that the device needs to be cheap and simple.
It should boot in </sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552146</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552520</id>
	<title>Re:niches</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1269082740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I&rsquo;m sorry, but what does all that have to do with the iPhone in particular, rather than smartphones in general?<br>Maybe it looks like that for Americans, since your providers kept you in the dark ages.</p><p>I had smartphones that were nothing short of full computers back in 2003. Of course the sound was still mono, the memory was small, and it still lacked a touch screen. But it had video/audio, a browser, file manager, e-mail, Java, the ability to install what you like, a camera, Putty, games, bluetooth, a scientific calculator, a PIM suite, removable storage, copy/paste with a separate button (worked like shift on PCs).</p><p>The only novelty of the iPhone was a touch screen with a fitting UI, and... well... that&rsquo;s about it.<br>And actually it wasn&rsquo;t even a novelty at all, by Japanese standards. Rather a late contender.<br>Plus you bought this functionality for the price of lacking half the functionality and freedom of any other smartphone on the market.</p><p>The iPhone is just. another. phone. And a pretty mediocre one.<br>So get out of your delusion. You too Mr. Schell!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I    m sorry , but what does all that have to do with the iPhone in particular , rather than smartphones in general ? Maybe it looks like that for Americans , since your providers kept you in the dark ages.I had smartphones that were nothing short of full computers back in 2003 .
Of course the sound was still mono , the memory was small , and it still lacked a touch screen .
But it had video/audio , a browser , file manager , e-mail , Java , the ability to install what you like , a camera , Putty , games , bluetooth , a scientific calculator , a PIM suite , removable storage , copy/paste with a separate button ( worked like shift on PCs ) .The only novelty of the iPhone was a touch screen with a fitting UI , and... well... that    s about it.And actually it wasn    t even a novelty at all , by Japanese standards .
Rather a late contender.Plus you bought this functionality for the price of lacking half the functionality and freedom of any other smartphone on the market.The iPhone is just .
another. phone .
And a pretty mediocre one.So get out of your delusion .
You too Mr. Schell !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I’m sorry, but what does all that have to do with the iPhone in particular, rather than smartphones in general?Maybe it looks like that for Americans, since your providers kept you in the dark ages.I had smartphones that were nothing short of full computers back in 2003.
Of course the sound was still mono, the memory was small, and it still lacked a touch screen.
But it had video/audio, a browser, file manager, e-mail, Java, the ability to install what you like, a camera, Putty, games, bluetooth, a scientific calculator, a PIM suite, removable storage, copy/paste with a separate button (worked like shift on PCs).The only novelty of the iPhone was a touch screen with a fitting UI, and... well... that’s about it.And actually it wasn’t even a novelty at all, by Japanese standards.
Rather a late contender.Plus you bought this functionality for the price of lacking half the functionality and freedom of any other smartphone on the market.The iPhone is just.
another. phone.
And a pretty mediocre one.So get out of your delusion.
You too Mr. Schell!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552180</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552180</id>
	<title>Re:niches</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269080100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Jesse Schell, in his famous DICE talk, explained why the iPhone succeeded and the iPad will flop. Paraphrased:</p><p>Convergence doesn't happen. Technologies diverge, for the most part. The PVR diverged from the desktop computer which diverged from the game console. The only reason why the iPhone, a case of convergence, was so successful was what he called the "pocket exception" - things that go in your pocket converge with each other.</p><p>The Swiss Army knife is an example of convergence: it has scissors, tweezers, knives, files, screwdrivers, etc. It does nothing perfectly and everything adequately. The iPhone is like that. But if someone got you a "Swiss Army" kitchen utensil, with a spatula and a ladle and tongs and a couple knives in a single sheath, you would think it was the stupidest thing in the world. "And that's why everyone hates the iPad."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Jesse Schell , in his famous DICE talk , explained why the iPhone succeeded and the iPad will flop .
Paraphrased : Convergence does n't happen .
Technologies diverge , for the most part .
The PVR diverged from the desktop computer which diverged from the game console .
The only reason why the iPhone , a case of convergence , was so successful was what he called the " pocket exception " - things that go in your pocket converge with each other.The Swiss Army knife is an example of convergence : it has scissors , tweezers , knives , files , screwdrivers , etc .
It does nothing perfectly and everything adequately .
The iPhone is like that .
But if someone got you a " Swiss Army " kitchen utensil , with a spatula and a ladle and tongs and a couple knives in a single sheath , you would think it was the stupidest thing in the world .
" And that 's why everyone hates the iPad .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Jesse Schell, in his famous DICE talk, explained why the iPhone succeeded and the iPad will flop.
Paraphrased:Convergence doesn't happen.
Technologies diverge, for the most part.
The PVR diverged from the desktop computer which diverged from the game console.
The only reason why the iPhone, a case of convergence, was so successful was what he called the "pocket exception" - things that go in your pocket converge with each other.The Swiss Army knife is an example of convergence: it has scissors, tweezers, knives, files, screwdrivers, etc.
It does nothing perfectly and everything adequately.
The iPhone is like that.
But if someone got you a "Swiss Army" kitchen utensil, with a spatula and a ladle and tongs and a couple knives in a single sheath, you would think it was the stupidest thing in the world.
"And that's why everyone hates the iPad.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552028</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552028
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552180
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552498
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_91</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552028
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552180
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552374
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553412
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31554852
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552252
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31556266
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552028
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552180
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552824
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_77</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552260
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31554838
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31555028
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_68</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552028
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552180
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552402
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552602
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553332
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_82</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552028
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552180
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552632
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552020
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552486
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31554084
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31557008
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552146
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553906
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552532
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31556222
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552028
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552180
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552580
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553044
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552532
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31554594
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552020
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553062
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553732
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552362
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31556134
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_69</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552204
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553982
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_97</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552146
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552660
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552028
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552180
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552656
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553196
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_74</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552028
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552180
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552374
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553412
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31554188
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_76</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552252
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552572
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552128
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31555312
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552028
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552180
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552402
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31554842
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552252
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552962
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_81</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552028
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552180
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552942
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31555280
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552252
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553002
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31554808
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_64</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552224
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552970
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_66</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552028
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552180
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552396
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31555248
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_80</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552260
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553440
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553752
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552028
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552180
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552396
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31555888
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_71</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552224
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552492
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552020
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553062
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31555686
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552252
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31557872
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552020
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553062
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31554344
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31565138
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552128
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31554826
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552020
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553062
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31554276
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552028
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552180
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552392
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552128
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31554216
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_95</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552260
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553440
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553700
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552444
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553230
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_72</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552204
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552578
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_63</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552204
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31555718
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_86</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552028
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552180
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552520
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553060
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_88</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552028
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552180
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552580
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552910
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_59</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552146
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31554912
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552260
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552890
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_62</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552028
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552180
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552402
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552618
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552128
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552888
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552146
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552514
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552252
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552472
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31555950
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552252
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552456
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552128
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552440
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_92</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552252
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552678
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553644
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552020
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552486
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31556200
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_85</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552028
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552180
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552402
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552602
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31558332
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_61</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552252
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553778
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_84</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552204
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552310
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_75</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552020
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552486
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552876
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552020
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552486
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553512
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552146
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553362
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552028
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552180
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31567650
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552020
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552848
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552146
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553444
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552028
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552180
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552520
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553296
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552532
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31555120
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_90</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552220
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31557822
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552028
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552180
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552368
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_67</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552028
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552180
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552402
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553408
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552128
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553886
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_83</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552028
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552180
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552728
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552270
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31554524
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_73</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552028
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552180
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552402
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552760
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552252
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31554434
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552128
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552478
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_96</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552028
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552180
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552656
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31558576
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552258
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552916
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31555616
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552128
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31604268
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552252
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31556850
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552128
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31555720
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_89</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552028
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552180
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31554020
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552362
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31554106
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_65</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552220
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31562898
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_93</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552220
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31555302
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552028
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552180
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552942
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553428
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_79</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552020
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552486
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553776
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_70</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552204
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553486
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552028
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552180
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552942
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553624
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552220
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31554732
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_60</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552224
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31554500
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552028
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552180
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552374
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553148
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552252
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553002
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31554858
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_94</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552224
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552806
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31555068
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552146
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553868
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552532
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31556630
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552128
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552568
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31555712
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552220
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553284
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552028
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552180
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552402
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552602
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553966
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552028
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552180
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552374
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553096
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_87</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552146
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553946
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_20_191237_78</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552252
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552642
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_20_191237.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552444
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553230
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_20_191237.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552318
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_20_191237.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31554184
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_20_191237.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552666
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_20_191237.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552194
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_20_191237.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552270
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31554524
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_20_191237.27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552146
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31554912
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553868
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552660
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553906
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553946
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553362
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553444
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552514
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_20_191237.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553026
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_20_191237.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552304
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_20_191237.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31557328
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_20_191237.25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553782
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_20_191237.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552260
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552890
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553440
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553700
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553752
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31554838
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31555028
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_20_191237.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552020
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552486
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553776
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31556200
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552876
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31554084
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31557008
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553512
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552848
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553062
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553732
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31554276
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31554344
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31565138
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31555686
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_20_191237.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552220
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31555302
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553284
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31554732
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31562898
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31557822
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_20_191237.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552204
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553982
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552578
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552310
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31555718
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553486
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_20_191237.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552252
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31557872
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552962
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553002
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31554808
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31554858
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552456
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552642
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552678
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553644
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31556266
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31554434
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552472
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31555950
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553778
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552572
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31556850
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_20_191237.28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552224
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552806
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31555068
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552492
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552970
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31554500
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_20_191237.23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552406
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_20_191237.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552362
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31556134
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31554106
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_20_191237.26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552258
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552916
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31555616
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_20_191237.21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552268
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_20_191237.24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552128
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31554826
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552568
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31555712
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552440
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552478
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552888
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31555312
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553886
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31554216
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31604268
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31555720
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_20_191237.22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552328
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_20_191237.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552352
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_20_191237.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552394
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_20_191237.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552028
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552180
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552392
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552580
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553044
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552910
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552436
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552728
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31567650
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552824
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31554020
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552368
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552520
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553296
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553060
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552396
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31555888
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31555248
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552656
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553196
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31558576
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552942
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31555280
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553624
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553428
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552402
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552618
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553408
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552602
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553332
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553966
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31558332
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552760
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31554842
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552374
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553148
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553096
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31553412
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31554188
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31554852
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552498
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552632
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_20_191237.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552386
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_20_191237.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552532
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31556630
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31554594
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31556222
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31555120
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_20_191237.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_20_191237.31552866
</commentlist>
</conversation>
