<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_03_23_1946223</id>
	<title>Opera Mini For iPhone Submitted To App Store Today</title>
	<author>CmdrTaco</author>
	<datestamp>1269335640000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>An anonymous reader writes <i>"Opera Mini for iPhone was <a href="http://my.opera.com/community/countup/">officially submitted to the Apple iPhone App store</a> today. A select few first saw it at Mobile World Congress 2010 in February. Now, the 'fast like a rocket' browser is taking its first big step towards giving users a new way to browse on the iPhone."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>An anonymous reader writes " Opera Mini for iPhone was officially submitted to the Apple iPhone App store today .
A select few first saw it at Mobile World Congress 2010 in February .
Now , the 'fast like a rocket ' browser is taking its first big step towards giving users a new way to browse on the iPhone .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An anonymous reader writes "Opera Mini for iPhone was officially submitted to the Apple iPhone App store today.
A select few first saw it at Mobile World Congress 2010 in February.
Now, the 'fast like a rocket' browser is taking its first big step towards giving users a new way to browse on the iPhone.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31592458</id>
	<title>Re:Apple isn't an open platform. Deal with it.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269354360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>He tells you what you can have, and you either accept it or you don't.</p></div><p> (&#169; Chuck Norris Facts)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>He tells you what you can have , and you either accept it or you do n't .
(   Chuck Norris Facts )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>He tells you what you can have, and you either accept it or you don't.
(© Chuck Norris Facts)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589450</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31593250</id>
	<title>Re:DOA</title>
	<author>Jackie\_Chan\_Fan</author>
	<datestamp>1269359820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Apple people will defend the very same behaviors they endlessly trash Microsoft for...</p><p>And you linux zealots are all guilty as well<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p><p>I'm just pointing out where its unfair for Apple to do many things that Microsoft would get RAPED IN COURTS FOR DOING.... and EVERYONE of you would complain to no end if MS did the same thing...</p><p>and you have been complaining for years.</p><p>Rightfully so I might add... but what makes Apple immune to your criticism?</p><p>Oh thats right... No one picks on the pretty chick because you all hope that you'll fuck her.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Apple people will defend the very same behaviors they endlessly trash Microsoft for...And you linux zealots are all guilty as well : ) I 'm just pointing out where its unfair for Apple to do many things that Microsoft would get RAPED IN COURTS FOR DOING.... and EVERYONE of you would complain to no end if MS did the same thing...and you have been complaining for years.Rightfully so I might add... but what makes Apple immune to your criticism ? Oh thats right... No one picks on the pretty chick because you all hope that you 'll fuck her .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Apple people will defend the very same behaviors they endlessly trash Microsoft for...And you linux zealots are all guilty as well :)I'm just pointing out where its unfair for Apple to do many things that Microsoft would get RAPED IN COURTS FOR DOING.... and EVERYONE of you would complain to no end if MS did the same thing...and you have been complaining for years.Rightfully so I might add... but what makes Apple immune to your criticism?Oh thats right... No one picks on the pretty chick because you all hope that you'll fuck her.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589594</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590048</id>
	<title>Fp mar3!?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269342540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><A HREF="http://goat.cx/" title="goat.cx" rel="nofollow">to predict *BSD's in ratio of 5 to and some of the from now on or Long term survival you are a scReaming it a break, if had become like than a fraction they are Come on</a> [goat.cx]</htmltext>
<tokenext>to predict * BSD 's in ratio of 5 to and some of the from now on or Long term survival you are a scReaming it a break , if had become like than a fraction they are Come on [ goat.cx ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>to predict *BSD's in ratio of 5 to and some of the from now on or Long term survival you are a scReaming it a break, if had become like than a fraction they are Come on [goat.cx]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31594720</id>
	<title>Re:DOA</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269461640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Apple is leveraging its position to extort money and control from users and developers at the expense of the best interests of people who have bought iphones and itouches.</i> <br>If you already bought an iphone or itouch, you already handed over control - you decided at that time that your "best interest" was to dispense with some control. I don't care a fig about Apple, but they're not EXTORTING anything. You don't want to be in a closed garden, then don't buy a fucking iphone. You don't want to pay for apps, then don't pay for them, you stupid consumer. You're not forced to buy anything, you stupid fucking twat, so there's no coercion or force being exerted by anyone.<br>
&nbsp; <br>It's streets from what Microsoft did, since MS actually DID coerce and extort other companies to make sure IE was the only browser shipped with company X PCs, or more recently, they "coerced" other manufacturers to make sure Windows was the only O/S shipped on the "netbooks". So far, Apple is far in the dim distance when you look at the "evil" race that MS has been fucking CONVICTed for leading.</p><p>By the way, in a "boolean" world, either something is, or isn't, at least that's what boolean meant when I went to school. Maybe universities these days teach that boolean now encompasses: "totally, utterly, completely false", "really false", "sort of false", "a little false", "a little true", "kind of true", "true-ish", "pepsi true", and now "totally, utterly completely Apple true".<br>
&nbsp; <br>You talk like a fag and your' shit's all fucked up....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Apple is leveraging its position to extort money and control from users and developers at the expense of the best interests of people who have bought iphones and itouches .
If you already bought an iphone or itouch , you already handed over control - you decided at that time that your " best interest " was to dispense with some control .
I do n't care a fig about Apple , but they 're not EXTORTING anything .
You do n't want to be in a closed garden , then do n't buy a fucking iphone .
You do n't want to pay for apps , then do n't pay for them , you stupid consumer .
You 're not forced to buy anything , you stupid fucking twat , so there 's no coercion or force being exerted by anyone .
  It 's streets from what Microsoft did , since MS actually DID coerce and extort other companies to make sure IE was the only browser shipped with company X PCs , or more recently , they " coerced " other manufacturers to make sure Windows was the only O/S shipped on the " netbooks " .
So far , Apple is far in the dim distance when you look at the " evil " race that MS has been fucking CONVICTed for leading.By the way , in a " boolean " world , either something is , or is n't , at least that 's what boolean meant when I went to school .
Maybe universities these days teach that boolean now encompasses : " totally , utterly , completely false " , " really false " , " sort of false " , " a little false " , " a little true " , " kind of true " , " true-ish " , " pepsi true " , and now " totally , utterly completely Apple true " .
  You talk like a fag and your ' shit 's all fucked up... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Apple is leveraging its position to extort money and control from users and developers at the expense of the best interests of people who have bought iphones and itouches.
If you already bought an iphone or itouch, you already handed over control - you decided at that time that your "best interest" was to dispense with some control.
I don't care a fig about Apple, but they're not EXTORTING anything.
You don't want to be in a closed garden, then don't buy a fucking iphone.
You don't want to pay for apps, then don't pay for them, you stupid consumer.
You're not forced to buy anything, you stupid fucking twat, so there's no coercion or force being exerted by anyone.
  It's streets from what Microsoft did, since MS actually DID coerce and extort other companies to make sure IE was the only browser shipped with company X PCs, or more recently, they "coerced" other manufacturers to make sure Windows was the only O/S shipped on the "netbooks".
So far, Apple is far in the dim distance when you look at the "evil" race that MS has been fucking CONVICTed for leading.By the way, in a "boolean" world, either something is, or isn't, at least that's what boolean meant when I went to school.
Maybe universities these days teach that boolean now encompasses: "totally, utterly, completely false", "really false", "sort of false", "a little false", "a little true", "kind of true", "true-ish", "pepsi true", and now "totally, utterly completely Apple true".
  You talk like a fag and your' shit's all fucked up....</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31591748</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590034</id>
	<title>Re:DOA</title>
	<author>mjwalshe</author>
	<datestamp>1269342480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>or Opera have prepped some Norweigien MEP's to ask some pointed Questions / Refer apple to the competition commission. Dont forget that Opera comes out of Telenor.</htmltext>
<tokenext>or Opera have prepped some Norweigien MEP 's to ask some pointed Questions / Refer apple to the competition commission .
Dont forget that Opera comes out of Telenor .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>or Opera have prepped some Norweigien MEP's to ask some pointed Questions / Refer apple to the competition commission.
Dont forget that Opera comes out of Telenor.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589590</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31593102</id>
	<title>It may be approved</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269358620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I saw today in the iPhone app store several other third-party browsers.  They were no-name browsers thought, not like IE. However If Apple already approved other browsers,I don't see why they won't approve Opera.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I saw today in the iPhone app store several other third-party browsers .
They were no-name browsers thought , not like IE .
However If Apple already approved other browsers,I do n't see why they wo n't approve Opera .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I saw today in the iPhone app store several other third-party browsers.
They were no-name browsers thought, not like IE.
However If Apple already approved other browsers,I don't see why they won't approve Opera.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590796</id>
	<title>Re:DOA</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269345600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's not going to cost any money. They give it away for free</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's not going to cost any money .
They give it away for free</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's not going to cost any money.
They give it away for free</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590138</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590288</id>
	<title>Re:DOA</title>
	<author>Draek</author>
	<datestamp>1269343500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't think *you* know what "evil" means. "Evil" is a moral qualifier, and morality being entirely subjective, you *cannot* state "this practice is not evil" without suffixing it with an "in my opinion".</p><p>Apple's control-obsessed tendencies may not be evil for *you*, but that does not mean they aren't for anybody else. Stop trying to push your own opinion onto everybody else.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't think * you * know what " evil " means .
" Evil " is a moral qualifier , and morality being entirely subjective , you * can not * state " this practice is not evil " without suffixing it with an " in my opinion " .Apple 's control-obsessed tendencies may not be evil for * you * , but that does not mean they are n't for anybody else .
Stop trying to push your own opinion onto everybody else .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't think *you* know what "evil" means.
"Evil" is a moral qualifier, and morality being entirely subjective, you *cannot* state "this practice is not evil" without suffixing it with an "in my opinion".Apple's control-obsessed tendencies may not be evil for *you*, but that does not mean they aren't for anybody else.
Stop trying to push your own opinion onto everybody else.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589594</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590112</id>
	<title>Re:DOA</title>
	<author>Monkeedude1212</author>
	<datestamp>1269342840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well then you've justified why Microsoft wouldn't be evil.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well then you 've justified why Microsoft would n't be evil .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well then you've justified why Microsoft wouldn't be evil.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589594</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589566</id>
	<title>Re:Meh</title>
	<author>rbb</author>
	<datestamp>1269340260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I don't know if it will ever match the speed of Safari considering they don't have access to the private API's that Apple does</p></div><p>Actually, there's <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OpTCS3g-cBY" title="youtube.com">a video</a> [youtube.com] showing it to be quite a bit faster than Safari in a side-by-side comparison.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't know if it will ever match the speed of Safari considering they do n't have access to the private API 's that Apple doesActually , there 's a video [ youtube.com ] showing it to be quite a bit faster than Safari in a side-by-side comparison .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't know if it will ever match the speed of Safari considering they don't have access to the private API's that Apple doesActually, there's a video [youtube.com] showing it to be quite a bit faster than Safari in a side-by-side comparison.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589404</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590520</id>
	<title>Re:Force Their Hand</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269344460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Dare Apple look any more evil than their dictatorship at the app store has made them out to be?</p></div><p>Every iPhone article and nearly every Apple article we get dozens of posters who attempt to paint Apple as the spawn of Satan.  I'm perfectly willing to assume it's true, but what those clueless posters haven't yet grasped is Apple doesn't care, and neither do their millions of customers.<br> <br>

Apple doesn't care because slashdot posters are theoretically more technical and do <i>not</i> represent the vast majority of Apple's target market.  And it's not like they're hurting for developers to support their platforms.<br> <br>

Their typical customer doesn't care because they probably don't know and certainly don't care about pretty much everything Apple rejects from their Store.  They just want a phone that looks nice and works.  If you try to tell them how evil Apple is, they'll return blank stares.  They'll have no idea what you mean.  They're not even going to know anything about Opera because it certainly isn't going to be "publicized" in anything they're going to view or read.  That tangent isn't worth following anyway since it will probably be accepted into the Store.<br> <br>

I don't have an iPhone, and I don't even have a Mac anymore, but I'm willing to bet that quite a few slashdotters who are the most vocal about the terrible evils of Apple don't even have one.  It's fine for them (and you) to express your opinion of the "evil dictator" Apple, but try to keep in mind how little that particular opinion matters.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Dare Apple look any more evil than their dictatorship at the app store has made them out to be ? Every iPhone article and nearly every Apple article we get dozens of posters who attempt to paint Apple as the spawn of Satan .
I 'm perfectly willing to assume it 's true , but what those clueless posters have n't yet grasped is Apple does n't care , and neither do their millions of customers .
Apple does n't care because slashdot posters are theoretically more technical and do not represent the vast majority of Apple 's target market .
And it 's not like they 're hurting for developers to support their platforms .
Their typical customer does n't care because they probably do n't know and certainly do n't care about pretty much everything Apple rejects from their Store .
They just want a phone that looks nice and works .
If you try to tell them how evil Apple is , they 'll return blank stares .
They 'll have no idea what you mean .
They 're not even going to know anything about Opera because it certainly is n't going to be " publicized " in anything they 're going to view or read .
That tangent is n't worth following anyway since it will probably be accepted into the Store .
I do n't have an iPhone , and I do n't even have a Mac anymore , but I 'm willing to bet that quite a few slashdotters who are the most vocal about the terrible evils of Apple do n't even have one .
It 's fine for them ( and you ) to express your opinion of the " evil dictator " Apple , but try to keep in mind how little that particular opinion matters .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dare Apple look any more evil than their dictatorship at the app store has made them out to be?Every iPhone article and nearly every Apple article we get dozens of posters who attempt to paint Apple as the spawn of Satan.
I'm perfectly willing to assume it's true, but what those clueless posters haven't yet grasped is Apple doesn't care, and neither do their millions of customers.
Apple doesn't care because slashdot posters are theoretically more technical and do not represent the vast majority of Apple's target market.
And it's not like they're hurting for developers to support their platforms.
Their typical customer doesn't care because they probably don't know and certainly don't care about pretty much everything Apple rejects from their Store.
They just want a phone that looks nice and works.
If you try to tell them how evil Apple is, they'll return blank stares.
They'll have no idea what you mean.
They're not even going to know anything about Opera because it certainly isn't going to be "publicized" in anything they're going to view or read.
That tangent isn't worth following anyway since it will probably be accepted into the Store.
I don't have an iPhone, and I don't even have a Mac anymore, but I'm willing to bet that quite a few slashdotters who are the most vocal about the terrible evils of Apple don't even have one.
It's fine for them (and you) to express your opinion of the "evil dictator" Apple, but try to keep in mind how little that particular opinion matters.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589454</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589404</id>
	<title>Meh</title>
	<author>WrongSizeGlass</author>
	<datestamp>1269339360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'd give it a try if Apple 'blessed' it (which I doubt they will considering how 'fair' they are) but I don't know if it will ever match the speed of Safari considering they don't have access to the private API's that Apple does (and forbids everyone else from using).</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd give it a try if Apple 'blessed ' it ( which I doubt they will considering how 'fair ' they are ) but I do n't know if it will ever match the speed of Safari considering they do n't have access to the private API 's that Apple does ( and forbids everyone else from using ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd give it a try if Apple 'blessed' it (which I doubt they will considering how 'fair' they are) but I don't know if it will ever match the speed of Safari considering they don't have access to the private API's that Apple does (and forbids everyone else from using).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590228</id>
	<title>This is probably legal manoeuvering</title>
	<author>obarthelemy</author>
	<datestamp>1269343260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My guess is Opera have no hope of getting it approved, buyt are starting to build a case to force the iGarden open the same way they forced the Wintel one. Will take a while, though.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My guess is Opera have no hope of getting it approved , buyt are starting to build a case to force the iGarden open the same way they forced the Wintel one .
Will take a while , though .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My guess is Opera have no hope of getting it approved, buyt are starting to build a case to force the iGarden open the same way they forced the Wintel one.
Will take a while, though.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590306</id>
	<title>Re:DOA</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269343560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Microsoft is evil because they're anti-competitive, not because they run an app store. It's only been a few years now that you could, say, connect to a Windows share properly or open an Excel spreadsheet on a non-Windows platform. And no thanks to Microsoft. When Apple locks down the desktop, and does it by subverting standards rather than contributing to them, then you can bitch.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Microsoft is evil because they 're anti-competitive , not because they run an app store .
It 's only been a few years now that you could , say , connect to a Windows share properly or open an Excel spreadsheet on a non-Windows platform .
And no thanks to Microsoft .
When Apple locks down the desktop , and does it by subverting standards rather than contributing to them , then you can bitch .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Microsoft is evil because they're anti-competitive, not because they run an app store.
It's only been a few years now that you could, say, connect to a Windows share properly or open an Excel spreadsheet on a non-Windows platform.
And no thanks to Microsoft.
When Apple locks down the desktop, and does it by subverting standards rather than contributing to them, then you can bitch.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589436</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589428</id>
	<title>A few moments later...</title>
	<author>genghisjahn</author>
	<datestamp>1269339480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>....Opera Mini rejected from app store.

Oops, sorry, jumped the gun.</htmltext>
<tokenext>....Opera Mini rejected from app store .
Oops , sorry , jumped the gun .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>....Opera Mini rejected from app store.
Oops, sorry, jumped the gun.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589644</id>
	<title>Free iPhone for Release Date!</title>
	<author>Ksevio</author>
	<datestamp>1269340680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Looks like they're giving out a free iPhone if you guess closest to the release time on the link in the summary.  Looks like "Never" isn't an option so they're optimistic.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Looks like they 're giving out a free iPhone if you guess closest to the release time on the link in the summary .
Looks like " Never " is n't an option so they 're optimistic .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Looks like they're giving out a free iPhone if you guess closest to the release time on the link in the summary.
Looks like "Never" isn't an option so they're optimistic.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590892</id>
	<title>B&amp;N</title>
	<author>Chris Burke</author>
	<datestamp>1269345960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I just went to Barnes &amp; Nobles' website, and I can't find the Kindle <b>anywhere</b>!</p><p>I don't know why you are talking about Microsoft or Apple, when B&amp;N is so evil as to not sell a competitor's product in their own store!</p><p>Why is the government not stopping them?!</p><p>P.S. Hope Opera doesn't get rejected, but seriously, if it does...  "Store doesn't sell product that competes with store owner" is hardly news and hardly evil.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I just went to Barnes &amp; Nobles ' website , and I ca n't find the Kindle anywhere ! I do n't know why you are talking about Microsoft or Apple , when B&amp;N is so evil as to not sell a competitor 's product in their own store ! Why is the government not stopping them ? ! P.S .
Hope Opera does n't get rejected , but seriously , if it does... " Store does n't sell product that competes with store owner " is hardly news and hardly evil .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I just went to Barnes &amp; Nobles' website, and I can't find the Kindle anywhere!I don't know why you are talking about Microsoft or Apple, when B&amp;N is so evil as to not sell a competitor's product in their own store!Why is the government not stopping them?!P.S.
Hope Opera doesn't get rejected, but seriously, if it does...  "Store doesn't sell product that competes with store owner" is hardly news and hardly evil.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589436</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31601978</id>
	<title>Re:No privacy or security in Opera Mini; reject it</title>
	<author>hkmwbz</author>
	<datestamp>1269461760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yes, this is indeed the Opera web browser.

<p>You are assuming that Opera is logging everything you do, but they would be in violation with their own principles then, and of course the extremely harsh privacy laws in Norway.

</p><p>Of course Opera doesn't know that Apple won't approve it. They have explained very clearly why they don't think it violates any guidelines for the App Store. Again you are making completely nonsensical assumptions.

</p><p>And yes, Opera is indeed the most used web browser on mobile phones. Those 50 million users are just the ones who installed it directly from Opera. Opera is also bundled on hundreds of mobile phone every year.

</p><p>Apple may have sold 50 million handsets, but all those phones are not still in use. Millions of them have simply bought a newer iPhone. And you can't assume that all of them browse the web. On the other han, 50 million is the actual number of active Opera Mini users.

</p><p>How are PR stunts like these "disingenuous"? Where were you when Apple lied in their ads?

</p><p>Opera Mini violates the core principles of the web? That's just a laughable claim, considering Opera's track record.

</p><p>Opera brought desktop-class browsing to phones before WebKit even existed.

</p><p>If anyone is a hypocrite here, it is you. An ignorant hypocrite. Apple fanboy much?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , this is indeed the Opera web browser .
You are assuming that Opera is logging everything you do , but they would be in violation with their own principles then , and of course the extremely harsh privacy laws in Norway .
Of course Opera does n't know that Apple wo n't approve it .
They have explained very clearly why they do n't think it violates any guidelines for the App Store .
Again you are making completely nonsensical assumptions .
And yes , Opera is indeed the most used web browser on mobile phones .
Those 50 million users are just the ones who installed it directly from Opera .
Opera is also bundled on hundreds of mobile phone every year .
Apple may have sold 50 million handsets , but all those phones are not still in use .
Millions of them have simply bought a newer iPhone .
And you ca n't assume that all of them browse the web .
On the other han , 50 million is the actual number of active Opera Mini users .
How are PR stunts like these " disingenuous " ?
Where were you when Apple lied in their ads ?
Opera Mini violates the core principles of the web ?
That 's just a laughable claim , considering Opera 's track record .
Opera brought desktop-class browsing to phones before WebKit even existed .
If anyone is a hypocrite here , it is you .
An ignorant hypocrite .
Apple fanboy much ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, this is indeed the Opera web browser.
You are assuming that Opera is logging everything you do, but they would be in violation with their own principles then, and of course the extremely harsh privacy laws in Norway.
Of course Opera doesn't know that Apple won't approve it.
They have explained very clearly why they don't think it violates any guidelines for the App Store.
Again you are making completely nonsensical assumptions.
And yes, Opera is indeed the most used web browser on mobile phones.
Those 50 million users are just the ones who installed it directly from Opera.
Opera is also bundled on hundreds of mobile phone every year.
Apple may have sold 50 million handsets, but all those phones are not still in use.
Millions of them have simply bought a newer iPhone.
And you can't assume that all of them browse the web.
On the other han, 50 million is the actual number of active Opera Mini users.
How are PR stunts like these "disingenuous"?
Where were you when Apple lied in their ads?
Opera Mini violates the core principles of the web?
That's just a laughable claim, considering Opera's track record.
Opera brought desktop-class browsing to phones before WebKit even existed.
If anyone is a hypocrite here, it is you.
An ignorant hypocrite.
Apple fanboy much?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31594902</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589654</id>
	<title>Re:Apple isn't an open platform. Deal with it.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269340680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Sounds kind of like Obama.<br> <br>Isn't it funny that the health care law forces restaurants to post nutritional information right on the menu but we still can't get transparency from his administration like he promised he would? I thought that he wasn't going to push legislation like this without transparency?<br> <br>Obama lied. America died.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sounds kind of like Obama .
Is n't it funny that the health care law forces restaurants to post nutritional information right on the menu but we still ca n't get transparency from his administration like he promised he would ?
I thought that he was n't going to push legislation like this without transparency ?
Obama lied .
America died .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sounds kind of like Obama.
Isn't it funny that the health care law forces restaurants to post nutritional information right on the menu but we still can't get transparency from his administration like he promised he would?
I thought that he wasn't going to push legislation like this without transparency?
Obama lied.
America died.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589450</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31593486</id>
	<title>Mouse gestures</title>
	<author>^\_^x</author>
	<datestamp>1269361680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hopefully it supports some kind of gesture system - maybe touch a corner and then draw the shape? After getting used to mouse gestures, I can't go to any other browser; it just feels clunky, like browsing without a scroll wheel.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hopefully it supports some kind of gesture system - maybe touch a corner and then draw the shape ?
After getting used to mouse gestures , I ca n't go to any other browser ; it just feels clunky , like browsing without a scroll wheel .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hopefully it supports some kind of gesture system - maybe touch a corner and then draw the shape?
After getting used to mouse gestures, I can't go to any other browser; it just feels clunky, like browsing without a scroll wheel.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589890</id>
	<title>Re:Opera Marketing Win</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269341880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Next up: all the users start noticing their data comes via a proxy... wow... there goes my bankaccount...<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p><p>or is https:// excluded?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Next up : all the users start noticing their data comes via a proxy... wow... there goes my bankaccount... : ) or is https : // excluded ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Next up: all the users start noticing their data comes via a proxy... wow... there goes my bankaccount... :)or is https:// excluded?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589560</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31593658</id>
	<title>Re:Force Their Hand</title>
	<author>iron-kurton</author>
	<datestamp>1269363300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>So what's so bad about that?</htmltext>
<tokenext>So what 's so bad about that ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So what's so bad about that?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590346</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31594420</id>
	<title>Re:Meh</title>
	<author>Lars T.</author>
	<datestamp>1269370560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p><div class="quote"><p>I don't know if it will ever match the speed of Safari considering they don't have access to the private API's that Apple does</p></div><p>Actually, there's <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OpTCS3g-cBY" title="youtube.com" rel="nofollow">a video</a> [youtube.com] showing it to be quite a bit faster than Safari in a side-by-side comparison.</p></div><p>When using 2G - isn't it odd they only test that?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't know if it will ever match the speed of Safari considering they do n't have access to the private API 's that Apple doesActually , there 's a video [ youtube.com ] showing it to be quite a bit faster than Safari in a side-by-side comparison.When using 2G - is n't it odd they only test that ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't know if it will ever match the speed of Safari considering they don't have access to the private API's that Apple doesActually, there's a video [youtube.com] showing it to be quite a bit faster than Safari in a side-by-side comparison.When using 2G - isn't it odd they only test that?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589566</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590472</id>
	<title>Re:DOA</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269344340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Fuck off faggot.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Fuck off faggot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Fuck off faggot.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589594</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31594716</id>
	<title>Re:Meh</title>
	<author>Hamsterdan</author>
	<datestamp>1269461580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Wasn't Microsoft guilty of using private APIs and not disclosing them to Lotus and Wordperfect back in Win 3.x era?<br><br>But I wouldn't sweat it, Apple would never allow a better browser on the iPhone/touch/pad/tampon</htmltext>
<tokenext>Was n't Microsoft guilty of using private APIs and not disclosing them to Lotus and Wordperfect back in Win 3.x era ? But I would n't sweat it , Apple would never allow a better browser on the iPhone/touch/pad/tampon</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wasn't Microsoft guilty of using private APIs and not disclosing them to Lotus and Wordperfect back in Win 3.x era?But I wouldn't sweat it, Apple would never allow a better browser on the iPhone/touch/pad/tampon</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589404</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590140</id>
	<title>Apple, please reject this quickly</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269342900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I really hope Apple rejects it quickly so Opera tosses it up on the jailbroken software distribution channels (Cydia/Rock). All the more stuff to show my friends to get them interested in breaking Apple's chokehold on their hardware.</p><p>It's not like I'd refuse to use it if it was on the Apple Store, I'd actually be rather happy if it was for all the people who choose not to jailbreak, but I imagine that Opera is waiting to see if they get Apple's blessing before rolling it out by other means. And I bet that Apple will likely delay their "decision" as long as possible (indefinitely?) until people/media forget about it, then quietly deny it if pushed to a decision.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I really hope Apple rejects it quickly so Opera tosses it up on the jailbroken software distribution channels ( Cydia/Rock ) .
All the more stuff to show my friends to get them interested in breaking Apple 's chokehold on their hardware.It 's not like I 'd refuse to use it if it was on the Apple Store , I 'd actually be rather happy if it was for all the people who choose not to jailbreak , but I imagine that Opera is waiting to see if they get Apple 's blessing before rolling it out by other means .
And I bet that Apple will likely delay their " decision " as long as possible ( indefinitely ?
) until people/media forget about it , then quietly deny it if pushed to a decision .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I really hope Apple rejects it quickly so Opera tosses it up on the jailbroken software distribution channels (Cydia/Rock).
All the more stuff to show my friends to get them interested in breaking Apple's chokehold on their hardware.It's not like I'd refuse to use it if it was on the Apple Store, I'd actually be rather happy if it was for all the people who choose not to jailbreak, but I imagine that Opera is waiting to see if they get Apple's blessing before rolling it out by other means.
And I bet that Apple will likely delay their "decision" as long as possible (indefinitely?
) until people/media forget about it, then quietly deny it if pushed to a decision.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589948</id>
	<title>Re:Meh</title>
	<author>0100010001010011</author>
	<datestamp>1269342120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How hard would it be to set up your own server? I've used ziproxy quite a bit when I was at my parents dial up.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How hard would it be to set up your own server ?
I 've used ziproxy quite a bit when I was at my parents dial up .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How hard would it be to set up your own server?
I've used ziproxy quite a bit when I was at my parents dial up.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589742</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31591870</id>
	<title>Re:DOA</title>
	<author>theaveng</author>
	<datestamp>1269350400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>not evil</p></div><p>   That's a morality call.  I consider it evil to be anti-competitive (like when Microsoft blocked Netscape and Opera from accessing their msn.com site</p><p>And your argument for saying "It's Apple's platform" doesn't jive with your previous posts about how you think the PS3, X360, and Nintendo Wii platforms should be open and modifiable with the user's software or hardware.  After all the user owns the unit - he should have the right to modify it or load different software (like any other computer).  Same with the Apple phone.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>not evil That 's a morality call .
I consider it evil to be anti-competitive ( like when Microsoft blocked Netscape and Opera from accessing their msn.com siteAnd your argument for saying " It 's Apple 's platform " does n't jive with your previous posts about how you think the PS3 , X360 , and Nintendo Wii platforms should be open and modifiable with the user 's software or hardware .
After all the user owns the unit - he should have the right to modify it or load different software ( like any other computer ) .
Same with the Apple phone .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>not evil   That's a morality call.
I consider it evil to be anti-competitive (like when Microsoft blocked Netscape and Opera from accessing their msn.com siteAnd your argument for saying "It's Apple's platform" doesn't jive with your previous posts about how you think the PS3, X360, and Nintendo Wii platforms should be open and modifiable with the user's software or hardware.
After all the user owns the unit - he should have the right to modify it or load different software (like any other computer).
Same with the Apple phone.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589590</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589448</id>
	<title>Duplicate Functionality?</title>
	<author>Xanavi</author>
	<datestamp>1269339600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The problem here is this should not have to be a story. Apple could have just competed on their own platform rather than hold it by its neck.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem here is this should not have to be a story .
Apple could have just competed on their own platform rather than hold it by its neck .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem here is this should not have to be a story.
Apple could have just competed on their own platform rather than hold it by its neck.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590178</id>
	<title>Re:Meh</title>
	<author>citizenr</author>
	<datestamp>1269343080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I'd give it a try if Apple 'blessed' it (which I doubt they will considering how 'fair' they are)</p></div><p>They better, or Apple will end up like MS with EU slapping penalties and making demands.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd give it a try if Apple 'blessed ' it ( which I doubt they will considering how 'fair ' they are ) They better , or Apple will end up like MS with EU slapping penalties and making demands .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd give it a try if Apple 'blessed' it (which I doubt they will considering how 'fair' they are)They better, or Apple will end up like MS with EU slapping penalties and making demands.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589404</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31602282</id>
	<title>Re:Force Their Hand</title>
	<author>hkmwbz</author>
	<datestamp>1269462960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I don't see how the count-up is passive-aggressive. It's more like all those other fun publicity stunts Opera has been doing through the years. It's not being done to make a point. It's just there to make the most out of the PR with a fun "game".

<p>Opera doesn't have a history of suing anyone, so if it's rejected I'm pretty sure they will try to change the application to comply with whatever rules they broke and re-submit. That, or be thrilled about PR no money could have bought them. So any resources spent on an iPhone version would not have been wasted due to the massive PR they are getting.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't see how the count-up is passive-aggressive .
It 's more like all those other fun publicity stunts Opera has been doing through the years .
It 's not being done to make a point .
It 's just there to make the most out of the PR with a fun " game " .
Opera does n't have a history of suing anyone , so if it 's rejected I 'm pretty sure they will try to change the application to comply with whatever rules they broke and re-submit .
That , or be thrilled about PR no money could have bought them .
So any resources spent on an iPhone version would not have been wasted due to the massive PR they are getting .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't see how the count-up is passive-aggressive.
It's more like all those other fun publicity stunts Opera has been doing through the years.
It's not being done to make a point.
It's just there to make the most out of the PR with a fun "game".
Opera doesn't have a history of suing anyone, so if it's rejected I'm pretty sure they will try to change the application to comply with whatever rules they broke and re-submit.
That, or be thrilled about PR no money could have bought them.
So any resources spent on an iPhone version would not have been wasted due to the massive PR they are getting.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589688</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31602374</id>
	<title>Re:Meh</title>
	<author>tokul</author>
	<datestamp>1269463320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>There are downsides, of course, to having no client-side javascript.</p></div>
</blockquote><p>
Javascript works in opera mini. Some versions of opera mini (or proxy used by opera mini) reacted to javascript based controls. My problem was that it reacted by automatically clicking OK button and correct action was to hit Cancel.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>There are downsides , of course , to having no client-side javascript .
Javascript works in opera mini .
Some versions of opera mini ( or proxy used by opera mini ) reacted to javascript based controls .
My problem was that it reacted by automatically clicking OK button and correct action was to hit Cancel .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are downsides, of course, to having no client-side javascript.
Javascript works in opera mini.
Some versions of opera mini (or proxy used by opera mini) reacted to javascript based controls.
My problem was that it reacted by automatically clicking OK button and correct action was to hit Cancel.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589742</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590380</id>
	<title>Re:DOA</title>
	<author>JohnG</author>
	<datestamp>1269343920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If you had a chicken wing restaurant, would you let another chicken wing restaurant serve its wings in your parking lot? Now, are you evil, or just a hypocrite?</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you had a chicken wing restaurant , would you let another chicken wing restaurant serve its wings in your parking lot ?
Now , are you evil , or just a hypocrite ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you had a chicken wing restaurant, would you let another chicken wing restaurant serve its wings in your parking lot?
Now, are you evil, or just a hypocrite?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589436</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589548</id>
	<title>Re:Meh</title>
	<author>MikeFM</author>
	<datestamp>1269340200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>They'd have to offer some reason to choose Opera over Safari. As Safari already does a good job of rendering pages it'd have to be features. Maybe better prediction of what I want in text fields.</htmltext>
<tokenext>They 'd have to offer some reason to choose Opera over Safari .
As Safari already does a good job of rendering pages it 'd have to be features .
Maybe better prediction of what I want in text fields .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They'd have to offer some reason to choose Opera over Safari.
As Safari already does a good job of rendering pages it'd have to be features.
Maybe better prediction of what I want in text fields.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589404</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589660</id>
	<title>Re:Duplicate Functionality?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269340740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Can you run Firefox on your Nintendo Wii?  No, only Opera.</p><p>This is a non-story because it's a closed platform and there's nothing surprising about it.  Not because "OMG THERES A PLATFORM THAT ISNT OPEN TO EVERYTHING Q.Q"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Can you run Firefox on your Nintendo Wii ?
No , only Opera.This is a non-story because it 's a closed platform and there 's nothing surprising about it .
Not because " OMG THERES A PLATFORM THAT ISNT OPEN TO EVERYTHING Q.Q "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can you run Firefox on your Nintendo Wii?
No, only Opera.This is a non-story because it's a closed platform and there's nothing surprising about it.
Not because "OMG THERES A PLATFORM THAT ISNT OPEN TO EVERYTHING Q.Q"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589448</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31591574</id>
	<title>Re:DOA</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269348900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Because they are not the only store in town! If I am allowed to buy from only a single store and they dont stock certain products, I would be pretty pissed off. If they specifically reject products that compete with their own products, I would consider them pretty much EVIL.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Because they are not the only store in town !
If I am allowed to buy from only a single store and they dont stock certain products , I would be pretty pissed off .
If they specifically reject products that compete with their own products , I would consider them pretty much EVIL .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because they are not the only store in town!
If I am allowed to buy from only a single store and they dont stock certain products, I would be pretty pissed off.
If they specifically reject products that compete with their own products, I would consider them pretty much EVIL.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589594</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31594296</id>
	<title>Re:DOA</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269368940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm not a fan of Apple's practices, but it's not mandatory to buy an Apple iPod Touch/iPhone and therefore not mandatory to deal with the restrictions that Apple uses on being the only store in town.  To their credit Apple has done enough right obviously to make it seem like they're the only option in town.</p><p>Don't let others influence your decision to concede on a stand against a product.  If you do not like something enough don't buy it, but more importantly don't take it as in insult.  I got a refund on Assassins Creed 2 collectors edition after I found out about the internet connection DRM, and I'll be damned if I put up with it even if everyone on that planet purchases it; it bothers me that much.  I have also done this with Square's "The Last Remnant" which requires steam to play a single player game.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not a fan of Apple 's practices , but it 's not mandatory to buy an Apple iPod Touch/iPhone and therefore not mandatory to deal with the restrictions that Apple uses on being the only store in town .
To their credit Apple has done enough right obviously to make it seem like they 're the only option in town.Do n't let others influence your decision to concede on a stand against a product .
If you do not like something enough do n't buy it , but more importantly do n't take it as in insult .
I got a refund on Assassins Creed 2 collectors edition after I found out about the internet connection DRM , and I 'll be damned if I put up with it even if everyone on that planet purchases it ; it bothers me that much .
I have also done this with Square 's " The Last Remnant " which requires steam to play a single player game .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not a fan of Apple's practices, but it's not mandatory to buy an Apple iPod Touch/iPhone and therefore not mandatory to deal with the restrictions that Apple uses on being the only store in town.
To their credit Apple has done enough right obviously to make it seem like they're the only option in town.Don't let others influence your decision to concede on a stand against a product.
If you do not like something enough don't buy it, but more importantly don't take it as in insult.
I got a refund on Assassins Creed 2 collectors edition after I found out about the internet connection DRM, and I'll be damned if I put up with it even if everyone on that planet purchases it; it bothers me that much.
I have also done this with Square's "The Last Remnant" which requires steam to play a single player game.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31591748</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31616794</id>
	<title>Re:Force Their Hand</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269508680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... and it would run Android.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... and it would run Android .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... and it would run Android.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590346</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31591890</id>
	<title>Re:DOA</title>
	<author>beakerMeep</author>
	<datestamp>1269350460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Wow, dude chill with the Apple fanboyism.   You need a break from slashdot or something.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Wow , dude chill with the Apple fanboyism .
You need a break from slashdot or something .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wow, dude chill with the Apple fanboyism.
You need a break from slashdot or something.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589594</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589626</id>
	<title>Re:Aside from Flash....</title>
	<author>PitneFor</author>
	<datestamp>1269340560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>seriously?</htmltext>
<tokenext>seriously ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>seriously?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589508</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31593184</id>
	<title>Re:Duplicate Functionality?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269359220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why yes, <a href="http://gbatemp.net/index.php?showtopic=118672" title="gbatemp.net" rel="nofollow">yes you can</a> [gbatemp.net].</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why yes , yes you can [ gbatemp.net ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why yes, yes you can [gbatemp.net].</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589660</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31595122</id>
	<title>Re:Meh</title>
	<author>rumkee</author>
	<datestamp>1269427440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>note- the side by side speed comparisons are via an Edge data connection. I wonder what the results would be like over wifi ? or 3G ? I doubt the difference would still be that much</htmltext>
<tokenext>note- the side by side speed comparisons are via an Edge data connection .
I wonder what the results would be like over wifi ?
or 3G ?
I doubt the difference would still be that much</tokentext>
<sentencetext>note- the side by side speed comparisons are via an Edge data connection.
I wonder what the results would be like over wifi ?
or 3G ?
I doubt the difference would still be that much</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589566</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31591458</id>
	<title>Re:Meh</title>
	<author>node 3</author>
	<datestamp>1269348240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I'd give it a try if Apple 'blessed' it (which I doubt they will considering how 'fair' they are) but I don't know if it will ever match the speed of Safari considering they don't have access to the private API's that Apple does (and forbids everyone else from using).</p></div><p>What API's would those be? Safari uses WebKit, just like any other app on the iPhone that wants to serve up web pages.</p><p>As far as WebKit goes, what do you suppose it can do that some other rendering engine won't be able to do? It can be written in C, can use OpenGL (as well as things like CoreAnimation)...</p><p>So, really, what super-secret APIs are you thinking of here?</p><p>Apple keeps APIs private for only two reasons:</p><p>1. They aren't finished yet.<br>2. Security/Privacy.</p><p>As for the "fairness" of Apple, and whether they'll approve Opera, they probably won't. It's not because (like so many people think) that they don't want the competition, it's because they believe Safari is the best browser out there, and want to keep the iPhone experience fairly consistent in terms of core functionality.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd give it a try if Apple 'blessed ' it ( which I doubt they will considering how 'fair ' they are ) but I do n't know if it will ever match the speed of Safari considering they do n't have access to the private API 's that Apple does ( and forbids everyone else from using ) .What API 's would those be ?
Safari uses WebKit , just like any other app on the iPhone that wants to serve up web pages.As far as WebKit goes , what do you suppose it can do that some other rendering engine wo n't be able to do ?
It can be written in C , can use OpenGL ( as well as things like CoreAnimation ) ...So , really , what super-secret APIs are you thinking of here ? Apple keeps APIs private for only two reasons : 1 .
They are n't finished yet.2 .
Security/Privacy.As for the " fairness " of Apple , and whether they 'll approve Opera , they probably wo n't .
It 's not because ( like so many people think ) that they do n't want the competition , it 's because they believe Safari is the best browser out there , and want to keep the iPhone experience fairly consistent in terms of core functionality .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd give it a try if Apple 'blessed' it (which I doubt they will considering how 'fair' they are) but I don't know if it will ever match the speed of Safari considering they don't have access to the private API's that Apple does (and forbids everyone else from using).What API's would those be?
Safari uses WebKit, just like any other app on the iPhone that wants to serve up web pages.As far as WebKit goes, what do you suppose it can do that some other rendering engine won't be able to do?
It can be written in C, can use OpenGL (as well as things like CoreAnimation)...So, really, what super-secret APIs are you thinking of here?Apple keeps APIs private for only two reasons:1.
They aren't finished yet.2.
Security/Privacy.As for the "fairness" of Apple, and whether they'll approve Opera, they probably won't.
It's not because (like so many people think) that they don't want the competition, it's because they believe Safari is the best browser out there, and want to keep the iPhone experience fairly consistent in terms of core functionality.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589404</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589450</id>
	<title>Apple isn't an open platform. Deal with it.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269339600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah, and Apple is going to remove it "fast as a rocket" too.</p><p>Steve doesn't compete. He tells you what you can have, and you either accept it or you don't. If you don't like it, go buy a Droid.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , and Apple is going to remove it " fast as a rocket " too.Steve does n't compete .
He tells you what you can have , and you either accept it or you do n't .
If you do n't like it , go buy a Droid .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, and Apple is going to remove it "fast as a rocket" too.Steve doesn't compete.
He tells you what you can have, and you either accept it or you don't.
If you don't like it, go buy a Droid.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31593684</id>
	<title>Looks faster</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269363540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The video is misleading. The Opera side begins browsing and clicking on links before the page is done loading, thus the entire page is not loaded, but they count the page twoards the total.</p></div><p>You sure?</p><p>It looks to me like while they start <b>moving around the page</b> before it finishes loading, in each case there is a perceptible time between when the "progress spinner" stops before they click to the next page. The user on the opera side isn't actually leaving the current page before it says it's loaded.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The video is misleading .
The Opera side begins browsing and clicking on links before the page is done loading , thus the entire page is not loaded , but they count the page twoards the total.You sure ? It looks to me like while they start moving around the page before it finishes loading , in each case there is a perceptible time between when the " progress spinner " stops before they click to the next page .
The user on the opera side is n't actually leaving the current page before it says it 's loaded .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The video is misleading.
The Opera side begins browsing and clicking on links before the page is done loading, thus the entire page is not loaded, but they count the page twoards the total.You sure?It looks to me like while they start moving around the page before it finishes loading, in each case there is a perceptible time between when the "progress spinner" stops before they click to the next page.
The user on the opera side isn't actually leaving the current page before it says it's loaded.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590586</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589962</id>
	<title>Re:Apple isn't an open platform. Deal with it.</title>
	<author>grumpyman</author>
	<datestamp>1269342180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'll be a bit surprised if the Opera guys didn't communicate with Apple about their plan.  I can't imagine they just code away the whole way and now just hold their breath and cross their fingers...</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'll be a bit surprised if the Opera guys did n't communicate with Apple about their plan .
I ca n't imagine they just code away the whole way and now just hold their breath and cross their fingers.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'll be a bit surprised if the Opera guys didn't communicate with Apple about their plan.
I can't imagine they just code away the whole way and now just hold their breath and cross their fingers...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589450</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590030</id>
	<title>Re:Meh</title>
	<author>shoehornjob</author>
	<datestamp>1269342480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Honestly I'm amazed that Apple even allowed them to put it in the app store. I'd trade a decent amount of browser speed for an inefficient browser loaded down with crapware any day.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Honestly I 'm amazed that Apple even allowed them to put it in the app store .
I 'd trade a decent amount of browser speed for an inefficient browser loaded down with crapware any day .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Honestly I'm amazed that Apple even allowed them to put it in the app store.
I'd trade a decent amount of browser speed for an inefficient browser loaded down with crapware any day.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589404</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31593376</id>
	<title>Re:This is probably legal manoeuvering</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269360720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Oh boy! So now people's PHONES can be spambots! Yay!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh boy !
So now people 's PHONES can be spambots !
Yay !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh boy!
So now people's PHONES can be spambots!
Yay!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590228</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31593386</id>
	<title>Re:Meh</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269360840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>It more than matches the speed of Safari, it destroys it. Safari is a traditional browser; establish a connection to the web server (some round trips right there), request and download the requested HTML page (another round trip), download any first-tier needed assets (JS, CSS, images, etc) (likely not all done in parallel, more round trips), download any second-tier assets (example, images from CSS, anything dynamically written by the JS, etc), and so on. All in all, you're probably adding in dozens of round trips at the least. The latency on the 3G link alone (ignoring internet latency) is probably 100+ms for a round trip, so you're adding multiple seconds worth of latency just by being on 3G.</p><p>Opera, on the other hand, does absolutely everything server-side.</p></div><p>Which means you now get to deal with the roundtrip time of the wireless connection + the roundtrip time between the proxy and the client. Awesome!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It more than matches the speed of Safari , it destroys it .
Safari is a traditional browser ; establish a connection to the web server ( some round trips right there ) , request and download the requested HTML page ( another round trip ) , download any first-tier needed assets ( JS , CSS , images , etc ) ( likely not all done in parallel , more round trips ) , download any second-tier assets ( example , images from CSS , anything dynamically written by the JS , etc ) , and so on .
All in all , you 're probably adding in dozens of round trips at the least .
The latency on the 3G link alone ( ignoring internet latency ) is probably 100 + ms for a round trip , so you 're adding multiple seconds worth of latency just by being on 3G.Opera , on the other hand , does absolutely everything server-side.Which means you now get to deal with the roundtrip time of the wireless connection + the roundtrip time between the proxy and the client .
Awesome !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It more than matches the speed of Safari, it destroys it.
Safari is a traditional browser; establish a connection to the web server (some round trips right there), request and download the requested HTML page (another round trip), download any first-tier needed assets (JS, CSS, images, etc) (likely not all done in parallel, more round trips), download any second-tier assets (example, images from CSS, anything dynamically written by the JS, etc), and so on.
All in all, you're probably adding in dozens of round trips at the least.
The latency on the 3G link alone (ignoring internet latency) is probably 100+ms for a round trip, so you're adding multiple seconds worth of latency just by being on 3G.Opera, on the other hand, does absolutely everything server-side.Which means you now get to deal with the roundtrip time of the wireless connection + the roundtrip time between the proxy and the client.
Awesome!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589742</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589824</id>
	<title>Re:DOA</title>
	<author>Em Emalb</author>
	<datestamp>1269341520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As an Apple shareholder, I'm absolutely fine with that.  It's their phone, their applications.  Let's force them to open it up to competition.</p><p>I'm all for that....<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-/</p><p>Sometimes I feel like people think they're forced to buy Apple's products or something.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As an Apple shareholder , I 'm absolutely fine with that .
It 's their phone , their applications .
Let 's force them to open it up to competition.I 'm all for that.... : -/Sometimes I feel like people think they 're forced to buy Apple 's products or something .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As an Apple shareholder, I'm absolutely fine with that.
It's their phone, their applications.
Let's force them to open it up to competition.I'm all for that.... :-/Sometimes I feel like people think they're forced to buy Apple's products or something.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589614</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31592718</id>
	<title>Re:DOA</title>
	<author>exomondo</author>
	<datestamp>1269355800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You might as well say - for example - it's ok for a car manufacturer to mandate that your car can ONLY be serviced at the dealership and you can ONLY fill up with fuel from selected petrol stations.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You might as well say - for example - it 's ok for a car manufacturer to mandate that your car can ONLY be serviced at the dealership and you can ONLY fill up with fuel from selected petrol stations .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You might as well say - for example - it's ok for a car manufacturer to mandate that your car can ONLY be serviced at the dealership and you can ONLY fill up with fuel from selected petrol stations.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589594</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589560</id>
	<title>Opera Marketing Win</title>
	<author>VoxMagis</author>
	<datestamp>1269340200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Whether accepted or not, Opera has gained a lot of basically free publicity with this.  That's what it is about, and good for them.</p><p>I am not absolutely sure that Apple will reject it.  If I was Apple though, I would make them change the name to, for example, 'Opera Web Viewer', and not allow it to access https pages at all.  Then they get to claim user-security and still let this thing in.</p><p>I love Opera and all, but I'm not sure I would use it myself.  I'll look at it when it's available, no reason to worry until then.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Whether accepted or not , Opera has gained a lot of basically free publicity with this .
That 's what it is about , and good for them.I am not absolutely sure that Apple will reject it .
If I was Apple though , I would make them change the name to , for example , 'Opera Web Viewer ' , and not allow it to access https pages at all .
Then they get to claim user-security and still let this thing in.I love Opera and all , but I 'm not sure I would use it myself .
I 'll look at it when it 's available , no reason to worry until then .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Whether accepted or not, Opera has gained a lot of basically free publicity with this.
That's what it is about, and good for them.I am not absolutely sure that Apple will reject it.
If I was Apple though, I would make them change the name to, for example, 'Opera Web Viewer', and not allow it to access https pages at all.
Then they get to claim user-security and still let this thing in.I love Opera and all, but I'm not sure I would use it myself.
I'll look at it when it's available, no reason to worry until then.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590302</id>
	<title>Re:DOA</title>
	<author>cgenman</author>
	<datestamp>1269343500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>My favorite is that it <i>competes</i> with something that is already purchased.  That means it's not about manipulating purchasing decisions, but controlling the medium.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>My favorite is that it competes with something that is already purchased .
That means it 's not about manipulating purchasing decisions , but controlling the medium .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My favorite is that it competes with something that is already purchased.
That means it's not about manipulating purchasing decisions, but controlling the medium.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589614</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589742</id>
	<title>Re:Meh</title>
	<author>Guspaz</author>
	<datestamp>1269341100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It more than matches the speed of Safari, it destroys it. Safari is a traditional browser; establish a connection to the web server (some round trips right there), request and download the requested HTML page (another round trip), download any first-tier needed assets (JS, CSS, images, etc) (likely not all done in parallel, more round trips), download any second-tier assets (example, images from CSS, anything dynamically written by the JS, etc), and so on. All in all, you're probably adding in dozens of round trips at the least. The latency on the 3G link alone (ignoring internet latency) is probably 100+ms for a round trip, so you're adding multiple seconds worth of latency just by being on 3G.</p><p>Opera, on the other hand, does absolutely everything server-side. Any requests are being made from a connection that isn't sitting on the other side of a 100+ms wireless link, and they probably do a lot of caching on top of that. The actual data is sent to the client browser in the minimum number of round trips; enough to establish the connection and make the request. All content comes back in one single compressed glob. A page that might have taken 10 seconds to load before can suddenly load in half a second.</p><p>There are downsides, of course, to having no client-side javascript. Most web apps require connections to the server to do what was before a local operation. You're effectively streaming any changes to the page from the server to the client (presumably keeping the connection open while looking at the page in case any changes need to be sent), and this is not ideal.</p><p>Unfortunately, it's mandatory; Apple won't allow javascript execution locally.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It more than matches the speed of Safari , it destroys it .
Safari is a traditional browser ; establish a connection to the web server ( some round trips right there ) , request and download the requested HTML page ( another round trip ) , download any first-tier needed assets ( JS , CSS , images , etc ) ( likely not all done in parallel , more round trips ) , download any second-tier assets ( example , images from CSS , anything dynamically written by the JS , etc ) , and so on .
All in all , you 're probably adding in dozens of round trips at the least .
The latency on the 3G link alone ( ignoring internet latency ) is probably 100 + ms for a round trip , so you 're adding multiple seconds worth of latency just by being on 3G.Opera , on the other hand , does absolutely everything server-side .
Any requests are being made from a connection that is n't sitting on the other side of a 100 + ms wireless link , and they probably do a lot of caching on top of that .
The actual data is sent to the client browser in the minimum number of round trips ; enough to establish the connection and make the request .
All content comes back in one single compressed glob .
A page that might have taken 10 seconds to load before can suddenly load in half a second.There are downsides , of course , to having no client-side javascript .
Most web apps require connections to the server to do what was before a local operation .
You 're effectively streaming any changes to the page from the server to the client ( presumably keeping the connection open while looking at the page in case any changes need to be sent ) , and this is not ideal.Unfortunately , it 's mandatory ; Apple wo n't allow javascript execution locally .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It more than matches the speed of Safari, it destroys it.
Safari is a traditional browser; establish a connection to the web server (some round trips right there), request and download the requested HTML page (another round trip), download any first-tier needed assets (JS, CSS, images, etc) (likely not all done in parallel, more round trips), download any second-tier assets (example, images from CSS, anything dynamically written by the JS, etc), and so on.
All in all, you're probably adding in dozens of round trips at the least.
The latency on the 3G link alone (ignoring internet latency) is probably 100+ms for a round trip, so you're adding multiple seconds worth of latency just by being on 3G.Opera, on the other hand, does absolutely everything server-side.
Any requests are being made from a connection that isn't sitting on the other side of a 100+ms wireless link, and they probably do a lot of caching on top of that.
The actual data is sent to the client browser in the minimum number of round trips; enough to establish the connection and make the request.
All content comes back in one single compressed glob.
A page that might have taken 10 seconds to load before can suddenly load in half a second.There are downsides, of course, to having no client-side javascript.
Most web apps require connections to the server to do what was before a local operation.
You're effectively streaming any changes to the page from the server to the client (presumably keeping the connection open while looking at the page in case any changes need to be sent), and this is not ideal.Unfortunately, it's mandatory; Apple won't allow javascript execution locally.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589404</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31596732</id>
	<title>Reorganizes text on slashdot.org to fit screen.</title>
	<author>tigueraje</author>
	<datestamp>1269441420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I enjoy the fact that Opera mobile reorganizes the text to fit the screen of my Windows mobile phone when I zoom in to read Slashdot. Zoomin in using Safari on my iPod Touch causes me to have to scroll to the sides (text doesn't get reorganized to fit and I have to scroll to read every single line), which is why I haven't used it in about 4 months. If Opera mobile (which supports flash) or Opera mini existed for this platform I might start using it again, otherwise, I'll keep using my WinMo device.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I enjoy the fact that Opera mobile reorganizes the text to fit the screen of my Windows mobile phone when I zoom in to read Slashdot .
Zoomin in using Safari on my iPod Touch causes me to have to scroll to the sides ( text does n't get reorganized to fit and I have to scroll to read every single line ) , which is why I have n't used it in about 4 months .
If Opera mobile ( which supports flash ) or Opera mini existed for this platform I might start using it again , otherwise , I 'll keep using my WinMo device .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I enjoy the fact that Opera mobile reorganizes the text to fit the screen of my Windows mobile phone when I zoom in to read Slashdot.
Zoomin in using Safari on my iPod Touch causes me to have to scroll to the sides (text doesn't get reorganized to fit and I have to scroll to read every single line), which is why I haven't used it in about 4 months.
If Opera mobile (which supports flash) or Opera mini existed for this platform I might start using it again, otherwise, I'll keep using my WinMo device.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31593232</id>
	<title>Re:DOA</title>
	<author>Jackie\_Chan\_Fan</author>
	<datestamp>1269359640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Apple has made that rule clear, and it's their platform (and they don't have a monopoly) so it's not really evil."</p><p>Ok... So Microsoft can do the same right? Windows is their platform. They can dicate which browsers can be on it. For example. Microsoft has decided no more browsers are allowed because they duplicate Internet Explorer's functionality?</p><p>Sounds fair right?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Apple has made that rule clear , and it 's their platform ( and they do n't have a monopoly ) so it 's not really evil. " Ok.. .
So Microsoft can do the same right ?
Windows is their platform .
They can dicate which browsers can be on it .
For example .
Microsoft has decided no more browsers are allowed because they duplicate Internet Explorer 's functionality ? Sounds fair right ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Apple has made that rule clear, and it's their platform (and they don't have a monopoly) so it's not really evil."Ok...
So Microsoft can do the same right?
Windows is their platform.
They can dicate which browsers can be on it.
For example.
Microsoft has decided no more browsers are allowed because they duplicate Internet Explorer's functionality?Sounds fair right?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589590</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31591748</id>
	<title>Re:DOA</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269349800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Your analogy is dumb.  The app store is the only store that exists in this case.  Nobody cares all that much if Starbucks carries the NYT as its only newspaper, because you can go just about anywhere else you want to buy any other kind of newspaper.  If Starbucks were the only place in the world you could buy newspapers, and they refused to carry certain ones -- especially with spurious reasoning as to why some are rejected and others are not -- it would be evil.</p><p>Apple is leveraging its position to extort money and control from users and developers at the expense of the best interests of people who have bought iphones and itouches.  It's not very much different from Microsoft's IE maneuvers in the late 90s and early 2000s.</p><p>It's not genocide evil, but if you're going to judge evil in a boolean manner, it's totally, utterly, completely evil.  The only way it is by being pedantic about what is or is not evil and defining it so as to only includes things you decide, which is pretty ironic, given the content of your post.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Your analogy is dumb .
The app store is the only store that exists in this case .
Nobody cares all that much if Starbucks carries the NYT as its only newspaper , because you can go just about anywhere else you want to buy any other kind of newspaper .
If Starbucks were the only place in the world you could buy newspapers , and they refused to carry certain ones -- especially with spurious reasoning as to why some are rejected and others are not -- it would be evil.Apple is leveraging its position to extort money and control from users and developers at the expense of the best interests of people who have bought iphones and itouches .
It 's not very much different from Microsoft 's IE maneuvers in the late 90s and early 2000s.It 's not genocide evil , but if you 're going to judge evil in a boolean manner , it 's totally , utterly , completely evil .
The only way it is by being pedantic about what is or is not evil and defining it so as to only includes things you decide , which is pretty ironic , given the content of your post .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Your analogy is dumb.
The app store is the only store that exists in this case.
Nobody cares all that much if Starbucks carries the NYT as its only newspaper, because you can go just about anywhere else you want to buy any other kind of newspaper.
If Starbucks were the only place in the world you could buy newspapers, and they refused to carry certain ones -- especially with spurious reasoning as to why some are rejected and others are not -- it would be evil.Apple is leveraging its position to extort money and control from users and developers at the expense of the best interests of people who have bought iphones and itouches.
It's not very much different from Microsoft's IE maneuvers in the late 90s and early 2000s.It's not genocide evil, but if you're going to judge evil in a boolean manner, it's totally, utterly, completely evil.
The only way it is by being pedantic about what is or is not evil and defining it so as to only includes things you decide, which is pretty ironic, given the content of your post.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589594</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589594</id>
	<title>Re:DOA</title>
	<author>whisper\_jeff</author>
	<datestamp>1269340440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>You keep using this word evil but I don't think you know what it means. <br> <br>
Creating a "walled garden" for an app store is \_NOT\_ evil. Deal with it. In case you hadn't noticed, virtually every store on the planet practices that every day. They don't just stock products because they exist - they only stock products that match their store's motif if they think they can sell it. Sorry. Not evil. Totally, utterly, not evil.<br> <br>
Just because you don't like it doesn't make it "evil".</htmltext>
<tokenext>You keep using this word evil but I do n't think you know what it means .
Creating a " walled garden " for an app store is \ _NOT \ _ evil .
Deal with it .
In case you had n't noticed , virtually every store on the planet practices that every day .
They do n't just stock products because they exist - they only stock products that match their store 's motif if they think they can sell it .
Sorry. Not evil .
Totally , utterly , not evil .
Just because you do n't like it does n't make it " evil " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You keep using this word evil but I don't think you know what it means.
Creating a "walled garden" for an app store is \_NOT\_ evil.
Deal with it.
In case you hadn't noticed, virtually every store on the planet practices that every day.
They don't just stock products because they exist - they only stock products that match their store's motif if they think they can sell it.
Sorry. Not evil.
Totally, utterly, not evil.
Just because you don't like it doesn't make it "evil".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589436</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589688</id>
	<title>Re:Force Their Hand</title>
	<author>MBCook</author>
	<datestamp>1269340800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This whole this is pretty passive-agressive. The count-up clock of how long they've been waiting for approval is <i>really</i> passive-agressive.
</p><p>I don't really care about Opera myself, but this is going to be so much fun to watch. Opera has been doing a good job setting up their case that they are being unfairly denied when it happens.
</p><p>So does Apple deny, look bad, and get hit with a lawsuit, or cave in? I can't see Steve caving.
</p><p>FIGHT!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This whole this is pretty passive-agressive .
The count-up clock of how long they 've been waiting for approval is really passive-agressive .
I do n't really care about Opera myself , but this is going to be so much fun to watch .
Opera has been doing a good job setting up their case that they are being unfairly denied when it happens .
So does Apple deny , look bad , and get hit with a lawsuit , or cave in ?
I ca n't see Steve caving .
FIGHT !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This whole this is pretty passive-agressive.
The count-up clock of how long they've been waiting for approval is really passive-agressive.
I don't really care about Opera myself, but this is going to be so much fun to watch.
Opera has been doing a good job setting up their case that they are being unfairly denied when it happens.
So does Apple deny, look bad, and get hit with a lawsuit, or cave in?
I can't see Steve caving.
FIGHT!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589454</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31591412</id>
	<title>Re:DOA</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269348000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you don't like Lucky jeans, you can buy Gap, or Levis, or any of a hundred different options. There is no alternative to the Apple Store for iPhone apps (short of all out hacking) so you can't really make the "free market" argument on this. I agree it is not EVIL, but I think it is a closed system, and when they start blocking stuff for strictly competitive reasons (or what *appear* to be competitive reasons) then it certainly reeks.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you do n't like Lucky jeans , you can buy Gap , or Levis , or any of a hundred different options .
There is no alternative to the Apple Store for iPhone apps ( short of all out hacking ) so you ca n't really make the " free market " argument on this .
I agree it is not EVIL , but I think it is a closed system , and when they start blocking stuff for strictly competitive reasons ( or what * appear * to be competitive reasons ) then it certainly reeks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you don't like Lucky jeans, you can buy Gap, or Levis, or any of a hundred different options.
There is no alternative to the Apple Store for iPhone apps (short of all out hacking) so you can't really make the "free market" argument on this.
I agree it is not EVIL, but I think it is a closed system, and when they start blocking stuff for strictly competitive reasons (or what *appear* to be competitive reasons) then it certainly reeks.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589594</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31602370</id>
	<title>Re:Duplicate Functionality?</title>
	<author>hkmwbz</author>
	<datestamp>1269463260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Opera Software did not make the Wii. Nintendo did. Nintendo licensed Opera for the Wii.

<p>This is a story because it is not unlikely that Opera Mini will be approved.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Opera Software did not make the Wii .
Nintendo did .
Nintendo licensed Opera for the Wii .
This is a story because it is not unlikely that Opera Mini will be approved .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Opera Software did not make the Wii.
Nintendo did.
Nintendo licensed Opera for the Wii.
This is a story because it is not unlikely that Opera Mini will be approved.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589660</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589774</id>
	<title>Re:Apple isn't an open platform. Deal with it.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269341280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I didn't properly test drive my iphone and stupidly made too many assumptions about what it could do, or I'd never have bought it, so yes, I'm going to buy a Droid when my contract's up. The whole closed thing is just too annoying, and although the physical design and parts of the UI of the iphone are nice it's just a shiny toy with ridiculously limited functionality if you want to use it for business purposes. For one example: Calendar alarms that you can't snooze? Pathetic! I never thought I'd miss a Microsoft product but the Windows Mobile phone I had before the iphone did simple and obvious things that the iphone simply cannot.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I did n't properly test drive my iphone and stupidly made too many assumptions about what it could do , or I 'd never have bought it , so yes , I 'm going to buy a Droid when my contract 's up .
The whole closed thing is just too annoying , and although the physical design and parts of the UI of the iphone are nice it 's just a shiny toy with ridiculously limited functionality if you want to use it for business purposes .
For one example : Calendar alarms that you ca n't snooze ?
Pathetic ! I never thought I 'd miss a Microsoft product but the Windows Mobile phone I had before the iphone did simple and obvious things that the iphone simply can not .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I didn't properly test drive my iphone and stupidly made too many assumptions about what it could do, or I'd never have bought it, so yes, I'm going to buy a Droid when my contract's up.
The whole closed thing is just too annoying, and although the physical design and parts of the UI of the iphone are nice it's just a shiny toy with ridiculously limited functionality if you want to use it for business purposes.
For one example: Calendar alarms that you can't snooze?
Pathetic! I never thought I'd miss a Microsoft product but the Windows Mobile phone I had before the iphone did simple and obvious things that the iphone simply cannot.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589450</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589614</id>
	<title>Re:DOA</title>
	<author>v1</author>
	<datestamp>1269340560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Apple will say that it duplicates existing iPhone functions and will refuse to accept it.</i></p><p>yepyep.  that's their favorite rejection reason.  "it competes with us".  Most businesses can't just tell someone else entering their market "nope, that would <i>compete</i> with us, you can't do that."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Apple will say that it duplicates existing iPhone functions and will refuse to accept it.yepyep .
that 's their favorite rejection reason .
" it competes with us " .
Most businesses ca n't just tell someone else entering their market " nope , that would compete with us , you ca n't do that .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Apple will say that it duplicates existing iPhone functions and will refuse to accept it.yepyep.
that's their favorite rejection reason.
"it competes with us".
Most businesses can't just tell someone else entering their market "nope, that would compete with us, you can't do that.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589436</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589760</id>
	<title>Re:DOA</title>
	<author>Omnifarious</author>
	<datestamp>1269341160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah, I had the same thought.  This has about as much chance of making it to the iPhone as Microsoft has of officially declaring that Linux doesn't infringe any of its patents tomorrow.</p><p>And Apple and Microsoft are both evil.  Years ago, when I didn't consider Apple evil I knew they had the potential to become so, and they have fulfilled that potential, though not in quite the way I would've guessed they would years ago.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , I had the same thought .
This has about as much chance of making it to the iPhone as Microsoft has of officially declaring that Linux does n't infringe any of its patents tomorrow.And Apple and Microsoft are both evil .
Years ago , when I did n't consider Apple evil I knew they had the potential to become so , and they have fulfilled that potential , though not in quite the way I would 've guessed they would years ago .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, I had the same thought.
This has about as much chance of making it to the iPhone as Microsoft has of officially declaring that Linux doesn't infringe any of its patents tomorrow.And Apple and Microsoft are both evil.
Years ago, when I didn't consider Apple evil I knew they had the potential to become so, and they have fulfilled that potential, though not in quite the way I would've guessed they would years ago.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589436</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589454</id>
	<title>Force Their Hand</title>
	<author>eldavojohn</author>
	<datestamp>1269339600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>from the thats-not-gonna-work dept.</p> </div><p>Publicize it like they (and you) are doing and actually it just might work.  Dare Apple look any more evil than their dictatorship at the app store has made them out to be?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>from the thats-not-gon na-work dept .
Publicize it like they ( and you ) are doing and actually it just might work .
Dare Apple look any more evil than their dictatorship at the app store has made them out to be ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>from the thats-not-gonna-work dept.
Publicize it like they (and you) are doing and actually it just might work.
Dare Apple look any more evil than their dictatorship at the app store has made them out to be?
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31593330</id>
	<title>Re:Meh</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269360420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The video is misleading. The Opera side begins browsing and clicking on links before the page is done loading, thus the entire page is not loaded, but they count the page twoards the total.</p></div><p>Actually, if you look at the spinning circle in the red title bar area, you will see it is an indicator of progress. Once it stops spinning, the page has finished loading. You see an example where the circle is still spinning after he touches the screen to zoom in (1:23 - 1:24). The blue progress bar also doesn't seem to be affected by touching of the screen in in this example. I don't think touching the screen stops the page from loading honestly. I have Opera Mini and Opera Mobile on my Nokia, and you can pan around the page, and zoom in while the page is loading, especially if you're on a slow connection and images are still finishing downloading. I think they're just a little too close to the servers that dish up the compressed pages.<br>
&nbsp;</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The video is misleading .
The Opera side begins browsing and clicking on links before the page is done loading , thus the entire page is not loaded , but they count the page twoards the total.Actually , if you look at the spinning circle in the red title bar area , you will see it is an indicator of progress .
Once it stops spinning , the page has finished loading .
You see an example where the circle is still spinning after he touches the screen to zoom in ( 1 : 23 - 1 : 24 ) .
The blue progress bar also does n't seem to be affected by touching of the screen in in this example .
I do n't think touching the screen stops the page from loading honestly .
I have Opera Mini and Opera Mobile on my Nokia , and you can pan around the page , and zoom in while the page is loading , especially if you 're on a slow connection and images are still finishing downloading .
I think they 're just a little too close to the servers that dish up the compressed pages .
 </tokentext>
<sentencetext>The video is misleading.
The Opera side begins browsing and clicking on links before the page is done loading, thus the entire page is not loaded, but they count the page twoards the total.Actually, if you look at the spinning circle in the red title bar area, you will see it is an indicator of progress.
Once it stops spinning, the page has finished loading.
You see an example where the circle is still spinning after he touches the screen to zoom in (1:23 - 1:24).
The blue progress bar also doesn't seem to be affected by touching of the screen in in this example.
I don't think touching the screen stops the page from loading honestly.
I have Opera Mini and Opera Mobile on my Nokia, and you can pan around the page, and zoom in while the page is loading, especially if you're on a slow connection and images are still finishing downloading.
I think they're just a little too close to the servers that dish up the compressed pages.
 
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590586</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31591344</id>
	<title>Re:Apple isn't an open platform. Deal with it.</title>
	<author>bill\_mcgonigle</author>
	<datestamp>1269347700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Steve doesn't compete. He tells you what you can have, and you either accept it or you don't. If you don't like it, go buy a Droid.</i></p><p>The trick is you don't have all of the information up front.  They sometimes decide down the road that they don't like an app, or they chose to enter a new app space and kick out the old player.  After they have your money.</p><p>Granted, by now all the geeks know this.  Most of their customers don't, though.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Steve does n't compete .
He tells you what you can have , and you either accept it or you do n't .
If you do n't like it , go buy a Droid.The trick is you do n't have all of the information up front .
They sometimes decide down the road that they do n't like an app , or they chose to enter a new app space and kick out the old player .
After they have your money.Granted , by now all the geeks know this .
Most of their customers do n't , though .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Steve doesn't compete.
He tells you what you can have, and you either accept it or you don't.
If you don't like it, go buy a Droid.The trick is you don't have all of the information up front.
They sometimes decide down the road that they don't like an app, or they chose to enter a new app space and kick out the old player.
After they have your money.Granted, by now all the geeks know this.
Most of their customers don't, though.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589450</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31596786</id>
	<title>Re:DOA</title>
	<author>ukyoCE</author>
	<datestamp>1269441720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As long as we're making poor analogies -</p><p>This is like Wal-mart ONLY selling Wal-mart brand toilet paper.  If you want Charmin you have to go to Target.</p><p>Apple in this case is Wal-mart, and Target is an Android phone.  Feel free to pick the store you want.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As long as we 're making poor analogies -This is like Wal-mart ONLY selling Wal-mart brand toilet paper .
If you want Charmin you have to go to Target.Apple in this case is Wal-mart , and Target is an Android phone .
Feel free to pick the store you want .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As long as we're making poor analogies -This is like Wal-mart ONLY selling Wal-mart brand toilet paper.
If you want Charmin you have to go to Target.Apple in this case is Wal-mart, and Target is an Android phone.
Feel free to pick the store you want.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31591574</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589714</id>
	<title>Re:Meh</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269340980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I don't know if it will ever match the speed of Safari</p> </div><p>   Apparently you didn't RTFA or watch the included youtube video.  Opera Mini loaded 5 pages in the same time as it took Safari to load 1.  Of course it does that using compression.</p><p>You can read more about the compression technology here.  It's somewhat similar to Opera Turbo for dialup users, but much more efficient:<br><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opera\_mini#Functionality" title="wikipedia.org">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opera\_mini#Functionality</a> [wikipedia.org]</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't know if it will ever match the speed of Safari Apparently you did n't RTFA or watch the included youtube video .
Opera Mini loaded 5 pages in the same time as it took Safari to load 1 .
Of course it does that using compression.You can read more about the compression technology here .
It 's somewhat similar to Opera Turbo for dialup users , but much more efficient : http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opera \ _mini # Functionality [ wikipedia.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't know if it will ever match the speed of Safari    Apparently you didn't RTFA or watch the included youtube video.
Opera Mini loaded 5 pages in the same time as it took Safari to load 1.
Of course it does that using compression.You can read more about the compression technology here.
It's somewhat similar to Opera Turbo for dialup users, but much more efficient:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opera\_mini#Functionality [wikipedia.org]
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589404</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590206</id>
	<title>Re:DOA</title>
	<author>Chris Burke</author>
	<datestamp>1269343200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Most businesses can't just tell someone else entering their market "nope, that would compete with us, you can't do that."</i></p><p>Uh yes most businesses <b>can</b> say "nope" to a competitor who wants to sell their product through the businesses' own store.</p><p>Lowes doesn't sell Home Depot's brand of power tools; Best Buy doesn't sell computers using Fry's brand of motherboards.  The brick-and-mortar Apple store doesn't sell Windows-based PCs.  All shocking instances of anti-competitive behavior, I know.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:P</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Most businesses ca n't just tell someone else entering their market " nope , that would compete with us , you ca n't do that .
" Uh yes most businesses can say " nope " to a competitor who wants to sell their product through the businesses ' own store.Lowes does n't sell Home Depot 's brand of power tools ; Best Buy does n't sell computers using Fry 's brand of motherboards .
The brick-and-mortar Apple store does n't sell Windows-based PCs .
All shocking instances of anti-competitive behavior , I know .
: P</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Most businesses can't just tell someone else entering their market "nope, that would compete with us, you can't do that.
"Uh yes most businesses can say "nope" to a competitor who wants to sell their product through the businesses' own store.Lowes doesn't sell Home Depot's brand of power tools; Best Buy doesn't sell computers using Fry's brand of motherboards.
The brick-and-mortar Apple store doesn't sell Windows-based PCs.
All shocking instances of anti-competitive behavior, I know.
:P</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589614</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31592742</id>
	<title>Re:Apple isn't an open platform. Deal with it.</title>
	<author>exomondo</author>
	<datestamp>1269355920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Yeah, and Apple is going to remove it "fast as a rocket" too.</p></div><p>So sure about that? What about all the other web browsers on the iPhone?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , and Apple is going to remove it " fast as a rocket " too.So sure about that ?
What about all the other web browsers on the iPhone ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, and Apple is going to remove it "fast as a rocket" too.So sure about that?
What about all the other web browsers on the iPhone?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589450</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31600594</id>
	<title>Re:Meh</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269456600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>spoken like a true apple apologist.  "It's the BeSt brwsar EVAR!!11!!1"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>spoken like a true apple apologist .
" It 's the BeSt brwsar EVAR ! ! 11 !
! 1 "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>spoken like a true apple apologist.
"It's the BeSt brwsar EVAR!!11!
!1"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31591458</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31595396</id>
	<title>Apple approved my browser in about 24 hrs</title>
	<author>ConfusedVorlon</author>
	<datestamp>1269430740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It is similar to opera in many ways;</p><p>It has a turbo mode that loads pages faster (reroutes the urls via google's compression service)</p><p>displays tabs graphically (though I use a coverflow-style interface)</p><p>and the key part: the actual pages are rendered by apple's UIWebView</p><p>it went live this morning...</p><p><a href="http://hobbyistsoftware.com/eyebrowse" title="hobbyistsoftware.com">http://hobbyistsoftware.com/eyebrowse</a> [hobbyistsoftware.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It is similar to opera in many ways ; It has a turbo mode that loads pages faster ( reroutes the urls via google 's compression service ) displays tabs graphically ( though I use a coverflow-style interface ) and the key part : the actual pages are rendered by apple 's UIWebViewit went live this morning...http : //hobbyistsoftware.com/eyebrowse [ hobbyistsoftware.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It is similar to opera in many ways;It has a turbo mode that loads pages faster (reroutes the urls via google's compression service)displays tabs graphically (though I use a coverflow-style interface)and the key part: the actual pages are rendered by apple's UIWebViewit went live this morning...http://hobbyistsoftware.com/eyebrowse [hobbyistsoftware.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589460</id>
	<title>Re:Meh</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269339600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It uses server side rendering via Opera's farm, it's not Opera Mobile, but Opera Mini. It's designed for slow connections, so it should do well on our shit 3G networks.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It uses server side rendering via Opera 's farm , it 's not Opera Mobile , but Opera Mini .
It 's designed for slow connections , so it should do well on our shit 3G networks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It uses server side rendering via Opera's farm, it's not Opera Mobile, but Opera Mini.
It's designed for slow connections, so it should do well on our shit 3G networks.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589404</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589748</id>
	<title>Think they will allow it</title>
	<author>SuperKendall</author>
	<datestamp>1269341100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Opera mini is a curious thing that does no parsing on the device, it does it all on the Opera server...</p><p>Apple will not disallow it, as it does not do anything like add an alternate Javascript parser on the phone - nor does it really duplicate Safari much, as the rendering is not really the same.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Opera mini is a curious thing that does no parsing on the device , it does it all on the Opera server...Apple will not disallow it , as it does not do anything like add an alternate Javascript parser on the phone - nor does it really duplicate Safari much , as the rendering is not really the same .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Opera mini is a curious thing that does no parsing on the device, it does it all on the Opera server...Apple will not disallow it, as it does not do anything like add an alternate Javascript parser on the phone - nor does it really duplicate Safari much, as the rendering is not really the same.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589436</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31592866</id>
	<title>will it support some client side caching?</title>
	<author>cpotoso</author>
	<datestamp>1269356940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>One of the things I find TRULY ANNOYING about the iphone is that there is virtually no caching of information (incredible if you think that sometimes your network connection isn't that great).  You load one page in safari and back to the previous page requires a complete reload from the server.  This is STUPID.  Hopefully Opera will bring this to us, then again ievil iapple will probably never allow Opera... And then... hopefully Opera will migrate to the cydia store, showing again why the jailbroken community rules!</htmltext>
<tokenext>One of the things I find TRULY ANNOYING about the iphone is that there is virtually no caching of information ( incredible if you think that sometimes your network connection is n't that great ) .
You load one page in safari and back to the previous page requires a complete reload from the server .
This is STUPID .
Hopefully Opera will bring this to us , then again ievil iapple will probably never allow Opera... And then... hopefully Opera will migrate to the cydia store , showing again why the jailbroken community rules !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One of the things I find TRULY ANNOYING about the iphone is that there is virtually no caching of information (incredible if you think that sometimes your network connection isn't that great).
You load one page in safari and back to the previous page requires a complete reload from the server.
This is STUPID.
Hopefully Opera will bring this to us, then again ievil iapple will probably never allow Opera... And then... hopefully Opera will migrate to the cydia store, showing again why the jailbroken community rules!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590040</id>
	<title>Another anti-competitive suit?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269342480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Was it not Opera who kick started Microsoft into offering users a choice when it comes to browsers?
Perhaps a similar suit is in Apple's future...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Was it not Opera who kick started Microsoft into offering users a choice when it comes to browsers ?
Perhaps a similar suit is in Apple 's future.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Was it not Opera who kick started Microsoft into offering users a choice when it comes to browsers?
Perhaps a similar suit is in Apple's future...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589656</id>
	<title>Re:Apple isn't an open platform. Deal with it.</title>
	<author>GlassHeart</author>
	<datestamp>1269340740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Steve doesn't compete. [...] If you don't like it, go buy a Droid.</p></div></blockquote><p>...and how exactly is that not "competition"?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Steve does n't compete .
[ ... ] If you do n't like it , go buy a Droid....and how exactly is that not " competition " ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Steve doesn't compete.
[...] If you don't like it, go buy a Droid....and how exactly is that not "competition"?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589450</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31597834</id>
	<title>Re:This is probably legal manoeuvering</title>
	<author>mdwh2</author>
	<datestamp>1269446520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Although note that the particular issue was Wintel was it being a monopoly (and an illegally acting one, at that). The Iphone isn't anywhere remotely near that, not anywhere close - we can be thankful that the market leaders such as Nokia aren't locked down like this.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Although note that the particular issue was Wintel was it being a monopoly ( and an illegally acting one , at that ) .
The Iphone is n't anywhere remotely near that , not anywhere close - we can be thankful that the market leaders such as Nokia are n't locked down like this .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Although note that the particular issue was Wintel was it being a monopoly (and an illegally acting one, at that).
The Iphone isn't anywhere remotely near that, not anywhere close - we can be thankful that the market leaders such as Nokia aren't locked down like this.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590228</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589820</id>
	<title>Re:Apple isn't an open platform. Deal with it.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269341520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Steve is selling a device, not a browser.  If opera wants to compete, they can do it by making their own phone, or by trying to sell Opera on any open devices out there.  Nothing new here.</p><p>It's like saying "Whirlpool doesn't compete" because I can't load my own software onto my dishwasher.  Yeah, no duh dumbass.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Steve is selling a device , not a browser .
If opera wants to compete , they can do it by making their own phone , or by trying to sell Opera on any open devices out there .
Nothing new here.It 's like saying " Whirlpool does n't compete " because I ca n't load my own software onto my dishwasher .
Yeah , no duh dumbass .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Steve is selling a device, not a browser.
If opera wants to compete, they can do it by making their own phone, or by trying to sell Opera on any open devices out there.
Nothing new here.It's like saying "Whirlpool doesn't compete" because I can't load my own software onto my dishwasher.
Yeah, no duh dumbass.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589450</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31593986</id>
	<title>Re:Droid does...</title>
	<author>mjwx</author>
	<datestamp>1269365880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Too bad this will fail just like google failed.</p></div></blockquote><p>

Care to elaborate where Google failed, <a href="http://www.mobilecrunch.com/2010/02/16/google-now-shipping-60000-android-handsets-per-day/" title="mobilecrunch.com">shipping 60,000 Android units a day</a> [mobilecrunch.com] is hardly what I'd call an unmitigated disaster.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Too bad this will fail just like google failed .
Care to elaborate where Google failed , shipping 60,000 Android units a day [ mobilecrunch.com ] is hardly what I 'd call an unmitigated disaster .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Too bad this will fail just like google failed.
Care to elaborate where Google failed, shipping 60,000 Android units a day [mobilecrunch.com] is hardly what I'd call an unmitigated disaster.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589624</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31594872</id>
	<title>Re:Apple isn't an open platform. Deal with it.</title>
	<author>cerberusss</author>
	<datestamp>1269464280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If you don't like it, go buy a Droid.</p></div><p>[robotic voice]<br>D-R-O-O-O-O-I-I-D<br>[/robotic voice]</p><p>I love this shit.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you do n't like it , go buy a Droid .
[ robotic voice ] D-R-O-O-O-O-I-I-D [ /robotic voice ] I love this shit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you don't like it, go buy a Droid.
[robotic voice]D-R-O-O-O-O-I-I-D[/robotic voice]I love this shit.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589450</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31592422</id>
	<title>Re:Apple isn't an open platform. Deal with it.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269354180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Yeah, and Apple is going to remove it "fast as a rocket" too.</p><p>Steve doesn't compete. He tells you what you can have, and you either accept it or you don't. If you don't like it, go buy a Droid.</p></div><p>I bought a Droid.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , and Apple is going to remove it " fast as a rocket " too.Steve does n't compete .
He tells you what you can have , and you either accept it or you do n't .
If you do n't like it , go buy a Droid.I bought a Droid .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, and Apple is going to remove it "fast as a rocket" too.Steve doesn't compete.
He tells you what you can have, and you either accept it or you don't.
If you don't like it, go buy a Droid.I bought a Droid.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589450</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589830</id>
	<title>You don't understand what Opera Mini is</title>
	<author>SuperKendall</author>
	<datestamp>1269341580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>I don't know if it will ever match the speed of Safari considering they don't have access to the private API's that Apple does (and forbids everyone else from using).</i></p><p>Private API's are mostly irrelevant - Opera Mini works by rendering your request on a server and returning the results to you.  Browsing speed is all about caching on the server plus it being able to get the complete page data faster than you can.</p><p>On Edge Opera mini would probably be faster, but on 3G I'm not sure it would really be that much better - I'd prefer having the browser all local in that case.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't know if it will ever match the speed of Safari considering they do n't have access to the private API 's that Apple does ( and forbids everyone else from using ) .Private API 's are mostly irrelevant - Opera Mini works by rendering your request on a server and returning the results to you .
Browsing speed is all about caching on the server plus it being able to get the complete page data faster than you can.On Edge Opera mini would probably be faster , but on 3G I 'm not sure it would really be that much better - I 'd prefer having the browser all local in that case .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't know if it will ever match the speed of Safari considering they don't have access to the private API's that Apple does (and forbids everyone else from using).Private API's are mostly irrelevant - Opera Mini works by rendering your request on a server and returning the results to you.
Browsing speed is all about caching on the server plus it being able to get the complete page data faster than you can.On Edge Opera mini would probably be faster, but on 3G I'm not sure it would really be that much better - I'd prefer having the browser all local in that case.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589404</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590106</id>
	<title>Re:Meh</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269342780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I don't know if it will ever match the speed of Safari considering they don't have access to the private API's that Apple does (and forbids everyone else from using).</p></div><p>How is this any different from what Microsoft did? MS didn't even forbid developers from using them; it just didn't tell them about it.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't know if it will ever match the speed of Safari considering they do n't have access to the private API 's that Apple does ( and forbids everyone else from using ) .How is this any different from what Microsoft did ?
MS did n't even forbid developers from using them ; it just did n't tell them about it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't know if it will ever match the speed of Safari considering they don't have access to the private API's that Apple does (and forbids everyone else from using).How is this any different from what Microsoft did?
MS didn't even forbid developers from using them; it just didn't tell them about it.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589404</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590346</id>
	<title>Re:Force Their Hand</title>
	<author>Low Ranked Craig</author>
	<datestamp>1269343800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Apple doesn't care what a tiny minority of geeks thinks.  If they did the iPad would have 2 cameras, 4 media card slots, 5 usb ports, 2 removable batteries,  a combo OLED / eInk screen and would run Linux.  And it would cost under $300.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Apple does n't care what a tiny minority of geeks thinks .
If they did the iPad would have 2 cameras , 4 media card slots , 5 usb ports , 2 removable batteries , a combo OLED / eInk screen and would run Linux .
And it would cost under $ 300 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Apple doesn't care what a tiny minority of geeks thinks.
If they did the iPad would have 2 cameras, 4 media card slots, 5 usb ports, 2 removable batteries,  a combo OLED / eInk screen and would run Linux.
And it would cost under $300.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589454</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589590</id>
	<title>Re:DOA</title>
	<author>ukyoCE</author>
	<datestamp>1269340440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Apple has made that rule clear, and it's their platform (and they don't have a monopoly) so it's not really evil.</p><p>The obvious question though is did anyone at Opera <i>ask</i> Apple before putting all the effort into creating the browser on the iPhone?</p><p>If Opera asked and Apple said "make it and find out the hard way", that would be evil.</p><p>If Opera asked and Apple said "We'll reject it. We don't want to support multiple browsers on our proprietary platform", then so be it.  It's Opera's own fault if it gets rejected.</p><p>If they asked and Apple refused to answer, I'd file that under the first category of "make it and find out the hard way" evilness.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Apple has made that rule clear , and it 's their platform ( and they do n't have a monopoly ) so it 's not really evil.The obvious question though is did anyone at Opera ask Apple before putting all the effort into creating the browser on the iPhone ? If Opera asked and Apple said " make it and find out the hard way " , that would be evil.If Opera asked and Apple said " We 'll reject it .
We do n't want to support multiple browsers on our proprietary platform " , then so be it .
It 's Opera 's own fault if it gets rejected.If they asked and Apple refused to answer , I 'd file that under the first category of " make it and find out the hard way " evilness .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Apple has made that rule clear, and it's their platform (and they don't have a monopoly) so it's not really evil.The obvious question though is did anyone at Opera ask Apple before putting all the effort into creating the browser on the iPhone?If Opera asked and Apple said "make it and find out the hard way", that would be evil.If Opera asked and Apple said "We'll reject it.
We don't want to support multiple browsers on our proprietary platform", then so be it.
It's Opera's own fault if it gets rejected.If they asked and Apple refused to answer, I'd file that under the first category of "make it and find out the hard way" evilness.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589436</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31602724</id>
	<title>Re:Meh</title>
	<author>hkmwbz</author>
	<datestamp>1269421560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>What browser "loaded down with crapware" are you referring to?</htmltext>
<tokenext>What browser " loaded down with crapware " are you referring to ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What browser "loaded down with crapware" are you referring to?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590030</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31594902</id>
	<title>No privacy or security in Opera Mini; reject it</title>
	<author>gig</author>
	<datestamp>1269422940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is not "Opera" the Web browser. This is "Opera Mini," which is a feature phone pseudo-browser that makes up for the lack of resources on a feature phone by essentially running the Web browser on a server at Opera, rendering the pages there and sending photos of them back to the user. The problem is, that means you have absolutely no privacy, and absolutely no security. Opera not only knows your history, they know your passwords, they sit in-between you and authenticated servers. Maybe on a feature phone where you have no other choice, it's worth it to give that up. But on a smartphone where you already have an HTML5 browser, it's not a good idea.</p><p>Well, let the user choose, you say. If you are technically advanced enough to install Opera Mini on your feature phone, then maybe you also understand what privacy and security you're giving up. Somewhere in the arduous process of installing the app you read a terms of service and were warned about the implications of using the browser. But on iPhone, you only have to know how to click "INSTALL" and users who are accustomed to a private, secure browsing experience will assume that is what they're getting in Opera, not realizing it is "Opera Mini." When users install native apps, they're putting your trust in Apple. iPhone users expect the apps they get at the App Store to be 100\% malware free and to be 100\% respectful of their privacy and security. The example that is used is the app should not upload your address book. How much worse is it that the app uploads every password you give it, that the app sits between you and your bank, that the app uploads every single URL you give it, sees every single email? Knows your Facebook login, your Gmail login, and so on?</p><p>The reason Opera is doing this big "they won't approve it" PR campaign is that Opera knows full well Apple won't approve it because of the privacy and security issues, and they want to make PR hay with the implication that Apple can't compete with Opera. But if they really wanted to put a browser on iPhone, where is "Opera," the desktop-class Web browser? That is what they should be offering users who have OS X in their phone if they offer anything at all. There are dozens of alternative browsers on iPhone. Why isn't one of them "Opera" by now? Why didn't they ship that years ago already? Why would you possibly offer users of a smartphone that has had a desktop-class browser for 3+ years the pseudo-browser from a feature phone? Unless you were being disingenuous from the start.</p><p>What's more, Opera says that Opera Mini is the most used mobile Web browser, when that is clearly not true. Apple Safari for iPhone is responsible for the vast majority of mobile Web browsing in every study. Opera says that Opera Mini is the most popular mobile Web browser, on 50 million handsets. But there are more than 50 million iPhones, and Safari for iPhone is also on another 50 million iPods, and now a million iPads have been sold already as well. So their disingenuous behavior extends to every aspect of this PR stunt.</p><p>The most foolish part about this is people here saying "evil Apple" when Opera Mini violates the core principles of the Web, and Apple WebKit has brought desktop-class HTML5 browsing to phones, including Nokia, Android, Palm, and soon Blackberry. Get a grip. You ought to be ashamed of your hypocrisy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is not " Opera " the Web browser .
This is " Opera Mini , " which is a feature phone pseudo-browser that makes up for the lack of resources on a feature phone by essentially running the Web browser on a server at Opera , rendering the pages there and sending photos of them back to the user .
The problem is , that means you have absolutely no privacy , and absolutely no security .
Opera not only knows your history , they know your passwords , they sit in-between you and authenticated servers .
Maybe on a feature phone where you have no other choice , it 's worth it to give that up .
But on a smartphone where you already have an HTML5 browser , it 's not a good idea.Well , let the user choose , you say .
If you are technically advanced enough to install Opera Mini on your feature phone , then maybe you also understand what privacy and security you 're giving up .
Somewhere in the arduous process of installing the app you read a terms of service and were warned about the implications of using the browser .
But on iPhone , you only have to know how to click " INSTALL " and users who are accustomed to a private , secure browsing experience will assume that is what they 're getting in Opera , not realizing it is " Opera Mini .
" When users install native apps , they 're putting your trust in Apple .
iPhone users expect the apps they get at the App Store to be 100 \ % malware free and to be 100 \ % respectful of their privacy and security .
The example that is used is the app should not upload your address book .
How much worse is it that the app uploads every password you give it , that the app sits between you and your bank , that the app uploads every single URL you give it , sees every single email ?
Knows your Facebook login , your Gmail login , and so on ? The reason Opera is doing this big " they wo n't approve it " PR campaign is that Opera knows full well Apple wo n't approve it because of the privacy and security issues , and they want to make PR hay with the implication that Apple ca n't compete with Opera .
But if they really wanted to put a browser on iPhone , where is " Opera , " the desktop-class Web browser ?
That is what they should be offering users who have OS X in their phone if they offer anything at all .
There are dozens of alternative browsers on iPhone .
Why is n't one of them " Opera " by now ?
Why did n't they ship that years ago already ?
Why would you possibly offer users of a smartphone that has had a desktop-class browser for 3 + years the pseudo-browser from a feature phone ?
Unless you were being disingenuous from the start.What 's more , Opera says that Opera Mini is the most used mobile Web browser , when that is clearly not true .
Apple Safari for iPhone is responsible for the vast majority of mobile Web browsing in every study .
Opera says that Opera Mini is the most popular mobile Web browser , on 50 million handsets .
But there are more than 50 million iPhones , and Safari for iPhone is also on another 50 million iPods , and now a million iPads have been sold already as well .
So their disingenuous behavior extends to every aspect of this PR stunt.The most foolish part about this is people here saying " evil Apple " when Opera Mini violates the core principles of the Web , and Apple WebKit has brought desktop-class HTML5 browsing to phones , including Nokia , Android , Palm , and soon Blackberry .
Get a grip .
You ought to be ashamed of your hypocrisy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is not "Opera" the Web browser.
This is "Opera Mini," which is a feature phone pseudo-browser that makes up for the lack of resources on a feature phone by essentially running the Web browser on a server at Opera, rendering the pages there and sending photos of them back to the user.
The problem is, that means you have absolutely no privacy, and absolutely no security.
Opera not only knows your history, they know your passwords, they sit in-between you and authenticated servers.
Maybe on a feature phone where you have no other choice, it's worth it to give that up.
But on a smartphone where you already have an HTML5 browser, it's not a good idea.Well, let the user choose, you say.
If you are technically advanced enough to install Opera Mini on your feature phone, then maybe you also understand what privacy and security you're giving up.
Somewhere in the arduous process of installing the app you read a terms of service and were warned about the implications of using the browser.
But on iPhone, you only have to know how to click "INSTALL" and users who are accustomed to a private, secure browsing experience will assume that is what they're getting in Opera, not realizing it is "Opera Mini.
" When users install native apps, they're putting your trust in Apple.
iPhone users expect the apps they get at the App Store to be 100\% malware free and to be 100\% respectful of their privacy and security.
The example that is used is the app should not upload your address book.
How much worse is it that the app uploads every password you give it, that the app sits between you and your bank, that the app uploads every single URL you give it, sees every single email?
Knows your Facebook login, your Gmail login, and so on?The reason Opera is doing this big "they won't approve it" PR campaign is that Opera knows full well Apple won't approve it because of the privacy and security issues, and they want to make PR hay with the implication that Apple can't compete with Opera.
But if they really wanted to put a browser on iPhone, where is "Opera," the desktop-class Web browser?
That is what they should be offering users who have OS X in their phone if they offer anything at all.
There are dozens of alternative browsers on iPhone.
Why isn't one of them "Opera" by now?
Why didn't they ship that years ago already?
Why would you possibly offer users of a smartphone that has had a desktop-class browser for 3+ years the pseudo-browser from a feature phone?
Unless you were being disingenuous from the start.What's more, Opera says that Opera Mini is the most used mobile Web browser, when that is clearly not true.
Apple Safari for iPhone is responsible for the vast majority of mobile Web browsing in every study.
Opera says that Opera Mini is the most popular mobile Web browser, on 50 million handsets.
But there are more than 50 million iPhones, and Safari for iPhone is also on another 50 million iPods, and now a million iPads have been sold already as well.
So their disingenuous behavior extends to every aspect of this PR stunt.The most foolish part about this is people here saying "evil Apple" when Opera Mini violates the core principles of the Web, and Apple WebKit has brought desktop-class HTML5 browsing to phones, including Nokia, Android, Palm, and soon Blackberry.
Get a grip.
You ought to be ashamed of your hypocrisy.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31592834</id>
	<title>Re:Apple, please reject this quickly</title>
	<author>shutdown -p now</author>
	<datestamp>1269356640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I really hope Apple rejects it quickly so Opera tosses it up on the jailbroken software distribution channels (Cydia/Rock).</p></div><p>Do you seriously expect Opera to do that?</p><p>I would rather expect them to come up with a press release that basically says, "fuck Apple, everyone buy Android".</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I really hope Apple rejects it quickly so Opera tosses it up on the jailbroken software distribution channels ( Cydia/Rock ) .Do you seriously expect Opera to do that ? I would rather expect them to come up with a press release that basically says , " fuck Apple , everyone buy Android " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I really hope Apple rejects it quickly so Opera tosses it up on the jailbroken software distribution channels (Cydia/Rock).Do you seriously expect Opera to do that?I would rather expect them to come up with a press release that basically says, "fuck Apple, everyone buy Android".
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590140</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31594758</id>
	<title>How long until</title>
	<author>Hamsterdan</author>
	<datestamp>1269462240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's available on Cydia after being rejected?</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's available on Cydia after being rejected ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's available on Cydia after being rejected?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31591174</id>
	<title>Re:DOA</title>
	<author>MobileTatsu-NJG</author>
	<datestamp>1269347040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Most businesses can't just tell someone else entering their market "nope, that would compete with us, you can't do that."</p></div><p>Yeah, that's why Gateway stores sold Dell Computers. Oh wait...</p><p>Who mods these comments up?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Most businesses ca n't just tell someone else entering their market " nope , that would compete with us , you ca n't do that .
" Yeah , that 's why Gateway stores sold Dell Computers .
Oh wait...Who mods these comments up ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Most businesses can't just tell someone else entering their market "nope, that would compete with us, you can't do that.
"Yeah, that's why Gateway stores sold Dell Computers.
Oh wait...Who mods these comments up?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589614</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590138</id>
	<title>Re:DOA</title>
	<author>Monkeedude1212</author>
	<datestamp>1269342900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why not though? If the App costs money - wouldn't Apple take its cut, make money off of it? It's not like they make money selling Safari, a product that comes free on every Apple Product.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why not though ?
If the App costs money - would n't Apple take its cut , make money off of it ?
It 's not like they make money selling Safari , a product that comes free on every Apple Product .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why not though?
If the App costs money - wouldn't Apple take its cut, make money off of it?
It's not like they make money selling Safari, a product that comes free on every Apple Product.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589436</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31591936</id>
	<title>Re:DOA</title>
	<author>EEPROMS</author>
	<datestamp>1269350700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>They don't just stock products because they exist - they only stock products that match their store's motif if they think they can sell it. Sorry. Not evil. Totally, utterly, not evil.</i> <br> <br> Accept when I buy lets say a T-Shirt from a GAP store that only stocks GAP branded clothing they don't then turn around and tell me I can wear a "I LOVE BUTT SEX" button on it because it doesn't go with GAP's family friendly policies. Apple is literally telling it's consumers how it can use goods purchased from them, now that is evil.</htmltext>
<tokenext>They do n't just stock products because they exist - they only stock products that match their store 's motif if they think they can sell it .
Sorry. Not evil .
Totally , utterly , not evil .
Accept when I buy lets say a T-Shirt from a GAP store that only stocks GAP branded clothing they do n't then turn around and tell me I can wear a " I LOVE BUTT SEX " button on it because it does n't go with GAP 's family friendly policies .
Apple is literally telling it 's consumers how it can use goods purchased from them , now that is evil .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They don't just stock products because they exist - they only stock products that match their store's motif if they think they can sell it.
Sorry. Not evil.
Totally, utterly, not evil.
Accept when I buy lets say a T-Shirt from a GAP store that only stocks GAP branded clothing they don't then turn around and tell me I can wear a "I LOVE BUTT SEX" button on it because it doesn't go with GAP's family friendly policies.
Apple is literally telling it's consumers how it can use goods purchased from them, now that is evil.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589594</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589508</id>
	<title>Aside from Flash....</title>
	<author>787style</author>
	<datestamp>1269339900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>What major deficiency is there in the Safari browser?  It works quite well, performance is good, tight integration with all internal and third party apps.  And scores 100 on Acid 3.  Unless you have a 2G iPhone or live in an area with really bad service, I fail to see what this offers.
<br> <br>
And I'm quite happy without Flash, TYVM.</htmltext>
<tokenext>What major deficiency is there in the Safari browser ?
It works quite well , performance is good , tight integration with all internal and third party apps .
And scores 100 on Acid 3 .
Unless you have a 2G iPhone or live in an area with really bad service , I fail to see what this offers .
And I 'm quite happy without Flash , TYVM .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What major deficiency is there in the Safari browser?
It works quite well, performance is good, tight integration with all internal and third party apps.
And scores 100 on Acid 3.
Unless you have a 2G iPhone or live in an area with really bad service, I fail to see what this offers.
And I'm quite happy without Flash, TYVM.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589886</id>
	<title>Re:Droid does...</title>
	<author>fredrik70</author>
	<datestamp>1269341880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>indeed, this version is the dogs bollocks. The old Opera was quite crap and I mostly used the built in browser on my G1, now, Opera is *the* browser, so fast... only  niggle I found is that it doesn't seem to direct youtube videos to the youtube app, just showing the youtube page itself with an non working video on it Oh well, I can live with that!<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>indeed , this version is the dogs bollocks .
The old Opera was quite crap and I mostly used the built in browser on my G1 , now , Opera is * the * browser , so fast... only niggle I found is that it does n't seem to direct youtube videos to the youtube app , just showing the youtube page itself with an non working video on it Oh well , I can live with that !
: - )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>indeed, this version is the dogs bollocks.
The old Opera was quite crap and I mostly used the built in browser on my G1, now, Opera is *the* browser, so fast... only  niggle I found is that it doesn't seem to direct youtube videos to the youtube app, just showing the youtube page itself with an non working video on it Oh well, I can live with that!
:-)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589624</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590148</id>
	<title>Re:DOA</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269342960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Apple will say that it duplicates existing iPhone functions and will refuse to accept it.</p></div><p>Actually, that's a popular misconception.  There are plenty of browsers already in the Store.  A more truthful reason as to why <i>some</i> browsers have been rejected is the long-standing rule against virtual machines and language interpreters (i.e. no Javascript), and that's understandable.<br> <br>

It's fine to jump on the bandwagon of the growing anti-Apple sentiment, but let's at least try to stick with actual truth.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Apple will say that it duplicates existing iPhone functions and will refuse to accept it.Actually , that 's a popular misconception .
There are plenty of browsers already in the Store .
A more truthful reason as to why some browsers have been rejected is the long-standing rule against virtual machines and language interpreters ( i.e .
no Javascript ) , and that 's understandable .
It 's fine to jump on the bandwagon of the growing anti-Apple sentiment , but let 's at least try to stick with actual truth .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Apple will say that it duplicates existing iPhone functions and will refuse to accept it.Actually, that's a popular misconception.
There are plenty of browsers already in the Store.
A more truthful reason as to why some browsers have been rejected is the long-standing rule against virtual machines and language interpreters (i.e.
no Javascript), and that's understandable.
It's fine to jump on the bandwagon of the growing anti-Apple sentiment, but let's at least try to stick with actual truth.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589436</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590724</id>
	<title>Re:DOA</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269345300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Flip the scenario and imagine Microsoft or any flavor of Linux not allowing apps that "duplicated functionality" onto their hallowed grounds.  How's that taste?  Tastes like hypocrisy to me.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Flip the scenario and imagine Microsoft or any flavor of Linux not allowing apps that " duplicated functionality " onto their hallowed grounds .
How 's that taste ?
Tastes like hypocrisy to me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Flip the scenario and imagine Microsoft or any flavor of Linux not allowing apps that "duplicated functionality" onto their hallowed grounds.
How's that taste?
Tastes like hypocrisy to me.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589594</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31593876</id>
	<title>Re:Meh</title>
	<author>mjwx</author>
	<datestamp>1269364920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>1:17 - page stops loading when screen is pressed.<br>
1:26 - browsing begins before page is finished loading, appears to end when pressed.<br>
1:33 - page stops loading when screen is pressed. (full page does appear to load however)<br>
1:44 - page stops loading when screen is pressed.<br>
1:53 - page loads completely<br> <br>

It looks fast, but still misleading.</p></div></blockquote><p>

So...<br> <br>

It complies with Apple's code of advertising then.<br> <br>

Just to be pedantic, users don't wait until a page is fully loaded before trying to use it, so getting a page to the point where it is displayed and barely usable is more important then having the whole thing loaded.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>1 : 17 - page stops loading when screen is pressed .
1 : 26 - browsing begins before page is finished loading , appears to end when pressed .
1 : 33 - page stops loading when screen is pressed .
( full page does appear to load however ) 1 : 44 - page stops loading when screen is pressed .
1 : 53 - page loads completely It looks fast , but still misleading .
So.. . It complies with Apple 's code of advertising then .
Just to be pedantic , users do n't wait until a page is fully loaded before trying to use it , so getting a page to the point where it is displayed and barely usable is more important then having the whole thing loaded .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>1:17 - page stops loading when screen is pressed.
1:26 - browsing begins before page is finished loading, appears to end when pressed.
1:33 - page stops loading when screen is pressed.
(full page does appear to load however)
1:44 - page stops loading when screen is pressed.
1:53 - page loads completely 

It looks fast, but still misleading.
So... 

It complies with Apple's code of advertising then.
Just to be pedantic, users don't wait until a page is fully loaded before trying to use it, so getting a page to the point where it is displayed and barely usable is more important then having the whole thing loaded.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590586</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31593110</id>
	<title>Re:DOA</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269358680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>IE matches the Windows motif perfectly too, yet MS have to offer other browsers on their OS.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>IE matches the Windows motif perfectly too , yet MS have to offer other browsers on their OS .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>IE matches the Windows motif perfectly too, yet MS have to offer other browsers on their OS.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589594</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590296</id>
	<title>Re:Aside from Flash....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269343500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Considering that Safari the only app that has ever caused my phone to hard lock to the point of needing a hard reset, and as far as I understand all non-Apple apps aren't allowed to dive deep enough into the OS to even hope to cause anything other than the app itself to crash, a browser that doesn't kill my phone constantly is good enough reason for me.</p><p>Not to mention that while roaming in the US I get billed at the wonderful rate of 3 cents per 1KB (Yes you read that right, $30.72 per 1MB) Opera stands to save me a LOT of money if I have to use my data in a pinch.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Considering that Safari the only app that has ever caused my phone to hard lock to the point of needing a hard reset , and as far as I understand all non-Apple apps are n't allowed to dive deep enough into the OS to even hope to cause anything other than the app itself to crash , a browser that does n't kill my phone constantly is good enough reason for me.Not to mention that while roaming in the US I get billed at the wonderful rate of 3 cents per 1KB ( Yes you read that right , $ 30.72 per 1MB ) Opera stands to save me a LOT of money if I have to use my data in a pinch .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Considering that Safari the only app that has ever caused my phone to hard lock to the point of needing a hard reset, and as far as I understand all non-Apple apps aren't allowed to dive deep enough into the OS to even hope to cause anything other than the app itself to crash, a browser that doesn't kill my phone constantly is good enough reason for me.Not to mention that while roaming in the US I get billed at the wonderful rate of 3 cents per 1KB (Yes you read that right, $30.72 per 1MB) Opera stands to save me a LOT of money if I have to use my data in a pinch.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589508</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590734</id>
	<title>Re:Meh</title>
	<author>Chris Burke</author>
	<datestamp>1269345300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Safari is a traditional browser; establish a connection to the web server (some round trips right there), request and download the requested HTML page (another round trip), download any first-tier needed assets (JS, CSS, images, etc) (likely not all done in parallel, more round trips), download any second-tier assets (example, images from CSS, anything dynamically written by the JS, etc), and so on. All in all, you're probably adding in dozens of round trips at the least.</i></p><p>Hasn't worked that way since HTTP v1.0, when each thing you wanted had to be requested individually, which sucked which is why they changed it.  Now browsers can request many elements at once, and the server can send them all back in the same stream.  There are multiple round trips needed for establishing the connection and making the initial http request, and any elements that the browser only knows it needs until after processing a script of course have to wait for the script to be received and processed.  But there should not be seconds of latency merely due to mandatory round-trip times because there aren't that many.</p><p>Obviously the way Opera does it is still going to be way faster.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Safari is a traditional browser ; establish a connection to the web server ( some round trips right there ) , request and download the requested HTML page ( another round trip ) , download any first-tier needed assets ( JS , CSS , images , etc ) ( likely not all done in parallel , more round trips ) , download any second-tier assets ( example , images from CSS , anything dynamically written by the JS , etc ) , and so on .
All in all , you 're probably adding in dozens of round trips at the least.Has n't worked that way since HTTP v1.0 , when each thing you wanted had to be requested individually , which sucked which is why they changed it .
Now browsers can request many elements at once , and the server can send them all back in the same stream .
There are multiple round trips needed for establishing the connection and making the initial http request , and any elements that the browser only knows it needs until after processing a script of course have to wait for the script to be received and processed .
But there should not be seconds of latency merely due to mandatory round-trip times because there are n't that many.Obviously the way Opera does it is still going to be way faster .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Safari is a traditional browser; establish a connection to the web server (some round trips right there), request and download the requested HTML page (another round trip), download any first-tier needed assets (JS, CSS, images, etc) (likely not all done in parallel, more round trips), download any second-tier assets (example, images from CSS, anything dynamically written by the JS, etc), and so on.
All in all, you're probably adding in dozens of round trips at the least.Hasn't worked that way since HTTP v1.0, when each thing you wanted had to be requested individually, which sucked which is why they changed it.
Now browsers can request many elements at once, and the server can send them all back in the same stream.
There are multiple round trips needed for establishing the connection and making the initial http request, and any elements that the browser only knows it needs until after processing a script of course have to wait for the script to be received and processed.
But there should not be seconds of latency merely due to mandatory round-trip times because there aren't that many.Obviously the way Opera does it is still going to be way faster.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589742</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590226</id>
	<title>Re:DOA</title>
	<author>fermion</author>
	<datestamp>1269343260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>If this was a gecko based browser I might care.  I still recall when Opera had no credible version for the Mac.  Now everyone is saying how great they are because the have a browser that no one has seen for the iPhone.  Opera does not even seem to have a built in flash blocker(not content blocking, I don't care about that), not useful for iPhone, but if I want a new browser I want it to do something different, not just be faster.  My browser experience is just not that slow.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. opens in a few seconds.
<p>
I have nearly all 11 screens full of relatively useful apps on my iPhone. Pretty soon I am going to have pick and choose.  I certainly would not sub a browser.
</p><p>
And there can be more than one evil company.  One can have MS, Google, and Apple all be evil.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If this was a gecko based browser I might care .
I still recall when Opera had no credible version for the Mac .
Now everyone is saying how great they are because the have a browser that no one has seen for the iPhone .
Opera does not even seem to have a built in flash blocker ( not content blocking , I do n't care about that ) , not useful for iPhone , but if I want a new browser I want it to do something different , not just be faster .
My browser experience is just not that slow .
/. opens in a few seconds .
I have nearly all 11 screens full of relatively useful apps on my iPhone .
Pretty soon I am going to have pick and choose .
I certainly would not sub a browser .
And there can be more than one evil company .
One can have MS , Google , and Apple all be evil .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If this was a gecko based browser I might care.
I still recall when Opera had no credible version for the Mac.
Now everyone is saying how great they are because the have a browser that no one has seen for the iPhone.
Opera does not even seem to have a built in flash blocker(not content blocking, I don't care about that), not useful for iPhone, but if I want a new browser I want it to do something different, not just be faster.
My browser experience is just not that slow.
/. opens in a few seconds.
I have nearly all 11 screens full of relatively useful apps on my iPhone.
Pretty soon I am going to have pick and choose.
I certainly would not sub a browser.
And there can be more than one evil company.
One can have MS, Google, and Apple all be evil.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589436</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31597562</id>
	<title>Re:This is probably legal manoeuvering</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269445380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>build a case to force the iGarden open</p></div><p>Apple doesn't have anywhere near the smart phone marketshare to be declared a monopoly and have competition regulations forced on them.  At least not in the US -- but then the US barely slapped Microsoft on the wrist when they had &gt;90\% market share and started taking over every PC software market.  How do you expect Apple to get "forced open"?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>build a case to force the iGarden openApple does n't have anywhere near the smart phone marketshare to be declared a monopoly and have competition regulations forced on them .
At least not in the US -- but then the US barely slapped Microsoft on the wrist when they had &gt; 90 \ % market share and started taking over every PC software market .
How do you expect Apple to get " forced open " ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>build a case to force the iGarden openApple doesn't have anywhere near the smart phone marketshare to be declared a monopoly and have competition regulations forced on them.
At least not in the US -- but then the US barely slapped Microsoft on the wrist when they had &gt;90\% market share and started taking over every PC software market.
How do you expect Apple to get "forced open"?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590228</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589598</id>
	<title>Re:DOA</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269340500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Bah Microsoft is evil, as is Apple, and even Google sometimes. I will let the fact that Google is stopping there censoring of Chinese search results speak for it's self.<br>The difference is that Microsoft is Super BIG and Evil. Google and Apple are just big and evil.<br>The other difference is at least we are Microsoft and Apple's customers. We are Google's product.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Bah Microsoft is evil , as is Apple , and even Google sometimes .
I will let the fact that Google is stopping there censoring of Chinese search results speak for it 's self.The difference is that Microsoft is Super BIG and Evil .
Google and Apple are just big and evil.The other difference is at least we are Microsoft and Apple 's customers .
We are Google 's product .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bah Microsoft is evil, as is Apple, and even Google sometimes.
I will let the fact that Google is stopping there censoring of Chinese search results speak for it's self.The difference is that Microsoft is Super BIG and Evil.
Google and Apple are just big and evil.The other difference is at least we are Microsoft and Apple's customers.
We are Google's product.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589436</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589412</id>
	<title>Please let me be the first to say ...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269339420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Good luck with that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Good luck with that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Good luck with that.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31593234</id>
	<title>iPhone Browser Ballot?</title>
	<author>rschuetzler</author>
	<datestamp>1269359640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I smell another browser-ballot lawsuit from Opera if this app doesn't get approved. And if Apple's App store policies are consistent (a stretch, I know), it won't be.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I smell another browser-ballot lawsuit from Opera if this app does n't get approved .
And if Apple 's App store policies are consistent ( a stretch , I know ) , it wo n't be .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I smell another browser-ballot lawsuit from Opera if this app doesn't get approved.
And if Apple's App store policies are consistent (a stretch, I know), it won't be.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589436</id>
	<title>DOA</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269339540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Apple will say that it duplicates existing iPhone functions and will refuse to accept it.</p><p>But lets all keep saying Microsoft is evil.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Apple will say that it duplicates existing iPhone functions and will refuse to accept it.But lets all keep saying Microsoft is evil .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Apple will say that it duplicates existing iPhone functions and will refuse to accept it.But lets all keep saying Microsoft is evil.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590176</id>
	<title>Re:DOA</title>
	<author>cgenman</author>
	<datestamp>1269343080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Apple has made that rule clear, and it's their platform (and they don't have a monopoly) so it's not really evil.</i></p><p>Just because a rule is a rule, doesn't mean it can't be an evil rule.  There has been repeated abuses of this rule in the past, including banning apps for duplicating functionality that Apple hadn't yet implemented or told anyone about, and banning apps for duplicating functionality that doesn't exist, etc.</p><p>Also, apple is notoriously unreachable about prior approval or feedback in any form.  Build the app, submit it, and be approved or not.</p><p>In this case Opera already has Opera Mini running on multiple platforms, with the backend handling the heavy lifting.  They mostly needed to create an interpreter for their markup language, which their existing back end engine creates.  Being the first non-safari browser on the iPhone would be a significant coup.  Even then, the publicity of a rejection might be worth significantly more than the cost of creating the interpreter.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Apple has made that rule clear , and it 's their platform ( and they do n't have a monopoly ) so it 's not really evil.Just because a rule is a rule , does n't mean it ca n't be an evil rule .
There has been repeated abuses of this rule in the past , including banning apps for duplicating functionality that Apple had n't yet implemented or told anyone about , and banning apps for duplicating functionality that does n't exist , etc.Also , apple is notoriously unreachable about prior approval or feedback in any form .
Build the app , submit it , and be approved or not.In this case Opera already has Opera Mini running on multiple platforms , with the backend handling the heavy lifting .
They mostly needed to create an interpreter for their markup language , which their existing back end engine creates .
Being the first non-safari browser on the iPhone would be a significant coup .
Even then , the publicity of a rejection might be worth significantly more than the cost of creating the interpreter .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Apple has made that rule clear, and it's their platform (and they don't have a monopoly) so it's not really evil.Just because a rule is a rule, doesn't mean it can't be an evil rule.
There has been repeated abuses of this rule in the past, including banning apps for duplicating functionality that Apple hadn't yet implemented or told anyone about, and banning apps for duplicating functionality that doesn't exist, etc.Also, apple is notoriously unreachable about prior approval or feedback in any form.
Build the app, submit it, and be approved or not.In this case Opera already has Opera Mini running on multiple platforms, with the backend handling the heavy lifting.
They mostly needed to create an interpreter for their markup language, which their existing back end engine creates.
Being the first non-safari browser on the iPhone would be a significant coup.
Even then, the publicity of a rejection might be worth significantly more than the cost of creating the interpreter.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589590</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590586</id>
	<title>Re:Meh</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269344700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The video is misleading. The Opera side begins browsing and clicking on links before the page is done loading, thus the entire page is not loaded, but they count the page twoards the total.</p><p>1:17 - page stops loading when screen is pressed.<br>1:26 - browsing begins before page is finished loading, appears to end when pressed.<br>1:33 - page stops loading when screen is pressed. (full page does appear to load however)<br>1:44 - page stops loading when screen is pressed.<br>1:53 - page loads completely</p><p>It looks fast, but still misleading.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The video is misleading .
The Opera side begins browsing and clicking on links before the page is done loading , thus the entire page is not loaded , but they count the page twoards the total.1 : 17 - page stops loading when screen is pressed.1 : 26 - browsing begins before page is finished loading , appears to end when pressed.1 : 33 - page stops loading when screen is pressed .
( full page does appear to load however ) 1 : 44 - page stops loading when screen is pressed.1 : 53 - page loads completelyIt looks fast , but still misleading .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The video is misleading.
The Opera side begins browsing and clicking on links before the page is done loading, thus the entire page is not loaded, but they count the page twoards the total.1:17 - page stops loading when screen is pressed.1:26 - browsing begins before page is finished loading, appears to end when pressed.1:33 - page stops loading when screen is pressed.
(full page does appear to load however)1:44 - page stops loading when screen is pressed.1:53 - page loads completelyIt looks fast, but still misleading.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589566</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589456</id>
	<title>Re:Meh</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269339600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If Opera figures out how to get flash support into the damn thing, I expect that no amount of reality distortion will be able to protect Jobs from the wrath of the users should they reject the app.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If Opera figures out how to get flash support into the damn thing , I expect that no amount of reality distortion will be able to protect Jobs from the wrath of the users should they reject the app .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If Opera figures out how to get flash support into the damn thing, I expect that no amount of reality distortion will be able to protect Jobs from the wrath of the users should they reject the app.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589404</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590500</id>
	<title>Re:Droid does...</title>
	<author>Smurf</author>
	<datestamp>1269344400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Opera mini is blazing on android.</p> </div><p>Cool. Too bad it doesn't support Flash, which makes it completely useless as a web browser according to most here (not me!).</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Opera mini is blazing on android .
Cool. Too bad it does n't support Flash , which makes it completely useless as a web browser according to most here ( not me !
) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Opera mini is blazing on android.
Cool. Too bad it doesn't support Flash, which makes it completely useless as a web browser according to most here (not me!
).
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589624</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31603398</id>
	<title>Re:This is probably legal manoeuvering</title>
	<author>hkmwbz</author>
	<datestamp>1269424140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Opera didn't force Microsoft to do anything, nor do they have the power to. The ballot screen was Microsoft's own idea.
<p>And there's no case to build. Apple didn't break any laws, unlike Microsoft.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Opera did n't force Microsoft to do anything , nor do they have the power to .
The ballot screen was Microsoft 's own idea .
And there 's no case to build .
Apple did n't break any laws , unlike Microsoft .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Opera didn't force Microsoft to do anything, nor do they have the power to.
The ballot screen was Microsoft's own idea.
And there's no case to build.
Apple didn't break any laws, unlike Microsoft.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590228</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589716</id>
	<title>They put Apple between a rock and a hard place</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269340980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If Apple rejects there will be an uproar from everyone, if they accept everyone well say it was because of all the publicity Opera did before they submitted the app.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If Apple rejects there will be an uproar from everyone , if they accept everyone well say it was because of all the publicity Opera did before they submitted the app .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If Apple rejects there will be an uproar from everyone, if they accept everyone well say it was because of all the publicity Opera did before they submitted the app.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31591240</id>
	<title>Re:DOA</title>
	<author>exomondo</author>
	<datestamp>1269347340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Apple will say that it duplicates existing iPhone functions and will refuse to accept it.</p><p>But lets all keep saying Microsoft is evil.</p></div><p>How do you know that? There are plenty of other web browsers available on the iphone, why reject Opera?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Apple will say that it duplicates existing iPhone functions and will refuse to accept it.But lets all keep saying Microsoft is evil.How do you know that ?
There are plenty of other web browsers available on the iphone , why reject Opera ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Apple will say that it duplicates existing iPhone functions and will refuse to accept it.But lets all keep saying Microsoft is evil.How do you know that?
There are plenty of other web browsers available on the iphone, why reject Opera?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589436</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31594190</id>
	<title>Re:DOA</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269367620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>it is flagrantly evil. perhaps we should create a "walled garden" around east germany... ahh dammitt - prior art.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>it is flagrantly evil .
perhaps we should create a " walled garden " around east germany... ahh dammitt - prior art .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>it is flagrantly evil.
perhaps we should create a "walled garden" around east germany... ahh dammitt - prior art.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589594</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589682</id>
	<title>Re:Aside from Flash....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269340800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Things like "Find" maybe?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Things like " Find " maybe ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Things like "Find" maybe?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589508</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589864</id>
	<title>Re:DOA</title>
	<author>twidarkling</author>
	<datestamp>1269341700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"It's not evil because they said upfront what the rules are!"</p><p>So, evil is only evil when it's a surprise. Do I have to explain what a moronic statement that is? Apple is all about trying to maintain a vertical monopoly, which is still a type of monopoly, and just as bad as a horizontal one, even if slightly less common.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" It 's not evil because they said upfront what the rules are !
" So , evil is only evil when it 's a surprise .
Do I have to explain what a moronic statement that is ?
Apple is all about trying to maintain a vertical monopoly , which is still a type of monopoly , and just as bad as a horizontal one , even if slightly less common .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"It's not evil because they said upfront what the rules are!
"So, evil is only evil when it's a surprise.
Do I have to explain what a moronic statement that is?
Apple is all about trying to maintain a vertical monopoly, which is still a type of monopoly, and just as bad as a horizontal one, even if slightly less common.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589590</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31593922</id>
	<title>Re:DOA</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269365340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wtf! Walled Garden?!? LOL</p><p>Grass is always greener mate, where?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wtf !
Walled Garden ? ! ?
LOLGrass is always greener mate , where ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wtf!
Walled Garden?!?
LOLGrass is always greener mate, where?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589594</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31597222</id>
	<title>Re:Meh</title>
	<author>mdwh2</author>
	<datestamp>1269444000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm also curious how this runs at all - did Apple finally catch up with the 1990s by adding Java support? Or did Opera waste the time writing a custom version for the minority of Iphone users, because it can't support that basic standard?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm also curious how this runs at all - did Apple finally catch up with the 1990s by adding Java support ?
Or did Opera waste the time writing a custom version for the minority of Iphone users , because it ca n't support that basic standard ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm also curious how this runs at all - did Apple finally catch up with the 1990s by adding Java support?
Or did Opera waste the time writing a custom version for the minority of Iphone users, because it can't support that basic standard?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589456</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589624</id>
	<title>Droid does...</title>
	<author>michael1221988</author>
	<datestamp>1269340560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Opera mini is blazing on android.  Too bad this will fail just like google failed.  Apple is a rotten company.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Opera mini is blazing on android .
Too bad this will fail just like google failed .
Apple is a rotten company .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Opera mini is blazing on android.
Too bad this will fail just like google failed.
Apple is a rotten company.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31594236</id>
	<title>iCab best alternative browser</title>
	<author>iliketrash</author>
	<datestamp>1269368460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I haven't seen Opera Mini but notwithstanding that the best alternative browser for iPhone and iPod Touch is iCab. This is from a longtime developer of an excellent OS X browser, and I'm sure it uses Webkit.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have n't seen Opera Mini but notwithstanding that the best alternative browser for iPhone and iPod Touch is iCab .
This is from a longtime developer of an excellent OS X browser , and I 'm sure it uses Webkit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I haven't seen Opera Mini but notwithstanding that the best alternative browser for iPhone and iPod Touch is iCab.
This is from a longtime developer of an excellent OS X browser, and I'm sure it uses Webkit.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589726</id>
	<title>Engadget'sideo comparison</title>
	<author>jigamo</author>
	<datestamp>1269341040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Engadget has an <a href="http://www.engadget.com/2010/03/23/opera-submits-opera-mini-for-iphone-to-apple-for-approval-video/" title="engadget.com" rel="nofollow">interesting write-up</a> [engadget.com] on this with a video comparing page-load times on an Edge connection between Safari and Opera Mini.  The article also links to a page Opera has up with a timer showing how long it's been since the app was submitted.

If the video is legitimate, I could see this getting a lot of people to move to Opera Mini (if Apple accepts this app).</htmltext>
<tokenext>Engadget has an interesting write-up [ engadget.com ] on this with a video comparing page-load times on an Edge connection between Safari and Opera Mini .
The article also links to a page Opera has up with a timer showing how long it 's been since the app was submitted .
If the video is legitimate , I could see this getting a lot of people to move to Opera Mini ( if Apple accepts this app ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Engadget has an interesting write-up [engadget.com] on this with a video comparing page-load times on an Edge connection between Safari and Opera Mini.
The article also links to a page Opera has up with a timer showing how long it's been since the app was submitted.
If the video is legitimate, I could see this getting a lot of people to move to Opera Mini (if Apple accepts this app).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31609834</id>
	<title>Re:DOA</title>
	<author>petermgreen</author>
	<datestamp>1269528300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Apple seems to be really into the two product lockin model. First with the ipod and itunes music store that one got broken by the music industry dropping DRM). Now they are doing it even harder with the appstore (this one doesn't look like it will get broken any time soon.</p><p>It's like a car vendor not only voiding your warranty for installing third party performance parts but also going out of thier way to make it virtually impossible to do so.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Apple seems to be really into the two product lockin model .
First with the ipod and itunes music store that one got broken by the music industry dropping DRM ) .
Now they are doing it even harder with the appstore ( this one does n't look like it will get broken any time soon.It 's like a car vendor not only voiding your warranty for installing third party performance parts but also going out of thier way to make it virtually impossible to do so .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Apple seems to be really into the two product lockin model.
First with the ipod and itunes music store that one got broken by the music industry dropping DRM).
Now they are doing it even harder with the appstore (this one doesn't look like it will get broken any time soon.It's like a car vendor not only voiding your warranty for installing third party performance parts but also going out of thier way to make it virtually impossible to do so.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590206</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589418</id>
	<title>Existing Functionality?</title>
	<author>X-Power</author>
	<datestamp>1269339480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Or did hell freeze over during my -20000 Terrible Karma reign?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Or did hell freeze over during my -20000 Terrible Karma reign ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or did hell freeze over during my -20000 Terrible Karma reign?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31591074</id>
	<title>Re:Opera Marketing Win</title>
	<author>bigNuns</author>
	<datestamp>1269346620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So, writing an application for the iPhone is free now? I mean, it probably only took them an hour or so right? Seems like a pretty simple solution they have come up with couldn't have taken them more than two.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So , writing an application for the iPhone is free now ?
I mean , it probably only took them an hour or so right ?
Seems like a pretty simple solution they have come up with could n't have taken them more than two .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So, writing an application for the iPhone is free now?
I mean, it probably only took them an hour or so right?
Seems like a pretty simple solution they have come up with couldn't have taken them more than two.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589560</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589658</id>
	<title>Re:Force Their Hand</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269340740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p><div class="quote"><p>from the thats-not-gonna-work dept.</p></div><p>Publicize it like they (and you) are doing and actually it just might work.  Dare Apple look any more evil than their dictatorship at the app store has made them out to be?</p></div><p>You give most Apple users too much credit. Outside of the techies who are Apple fanbois and know what Apple is doing, the rest of them, don't care. I'll paraphrase the line that will come from Apple, "The Opera application doesn't follow Apple's experience and usability guidelines and therefore doesn't offer the experience that people expect form Apple."</p><p>The non-tech fonbois will accept it and forget about it.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>from the thats-not-gon na-work dept.Publicize it like they ( and you ) are doing and actually it just might work .
Dare Apple look any more evil than their dictatorship at the app store has made them out to be ? You give most Apple users too much credit .
Outside of the techies who are Apple fanbois and know what Apple is doing , the rest of them , do n't care .
I 'll paraphrase the line that will come from Apple , " The Opera application does n't follow Apple 's experience and usability guidelines and therefore does n't offer the experience that people expect form Apple .
" The non-tech fonbois will accept it and forget about it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>from the thats-not-gonna-work dept.Publicize it like they (and you) are doing and actually it just might work.
Dare Apple look any more evil than their dictatorship at the app store has made them out to be?You give most Apple users too much credit.
Outside of the techies who are Apple fanbois and know what Apple is doing, the rest of them, don't care.
I'll paraphrase the line that will come from Apple, "The Opera application doesn't follow Apple's experience and usability guidelines and therefore doesn't offer the experience that people expect form Apple.
"The non-tech fonbois will accept it and forget about it.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589454</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589998</id>
	<title>Won't this get rejected?</title>
	<author>billsayswow</author>
	<datestamp>1269342300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Doesn't Apple reject apps that do what the iPhone itself can already do, for better or for worse?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Does n't Apple reject apps that do what the iPhone itself can already do , for better or for worse ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Doesn't Apple reject apps that do what the iPhone itself can already do, for better or for worse?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31591212</id>
	<title>Re:Aside from Flash....</title>
	<author>Culture20</author>
	<datestamp>1269347220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>What major deficiency is there in the Safari browser?</p></div><p>Try viewing large animated gifs like the weather radar on <a href="http://radar.weather.gov/Conus/index\_loop.php" title="weather.gov">http://radar.weather.gov/Conus/index\_loop.php</a> [weather.gov]
I can grab the image on a server, split it into parts, and have javascript show me each image, but somehow, an animated gif larger than 2MB is blocked by safari.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>What major deficiency is there in the Safari browser ? Try viewing large animated gifs like the weather radar on http : //radar.weather.gov/Conus/index \ _loop.php [ weather.gov ] I can grab the image on a server , split it into parts , and have javascript show me each image , but somehow , an animated gif larger than 2MB is blocked by safari .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What major deficiency is there in the Safari browser?Try viewing large animated gifs like the weather radar on http://radar.weather.gov/Conus/index\_loop.php [weather.gov]
I can grab the image on a server, split it into parts, and have javascript show me each image, but somehow, an animated gif larger than 2MB is blocked by safari.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589508</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31591952</id>
	<title>Re:DOA</title>
	<author>theaveng</author>
	<datestamp>1269350820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>P.S.</p><p>I forgot to mention that Opera didn't really put a lot of effort into the iPhone ap.  They already had the Opera Mini browser for other cellphones, so all they needed to do was copy it over.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>P.S.I forgot to mention that Opera did n't really put a lot of effort into the iPhone ap .
They already had the Opera Mini browser for other cellphones , so all they needed to do was copy it over .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>P.S.I forgot to mention that Opera didn't really put a lot of effort into the iPhone ap.
They already had the Opera Mini browser for other cellphones, so all they needed to do was copy it over.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589590</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31593328</id>
	<title>Re:DOA</title>
	<author>nine-times</author>
	<datestamp>1269360420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You're right, it's not evil.  It's merely troubling and problematic.  On the plus side, requiring distribution to go through Apple's store creates a central known-good repository of apps, allows Apple to provide a consistent and controlled user experience, and helps Apple maintain their relationship with AT&amp;T.
</p><p>On the other hand, it prevents developers from distributing applications that they want to distribute, and prevents users from getting applications that they might want.  I have an iPhone.  I'd like to try out this Opera browser.  I'd like to try out Google's "Google Voice" application too.  They developed it but Apple wouldn't distribute it.  There are a number of perfectly valid applications that have been developed, but that I can't get because Apple decided they didn't want me to have it.  It's power that Apple doesn't need to have and which is bound to be abused.
</p><p>What I find much more chilling, though, is the idea of the applications that are not even being developed because of the approval process.  Apple has created an environment where a developer might pour a lot of time and money into creating an application only to find that Apple rejected it.  If I were a developer, that would give me pause.
</p><p>Since I'm an Apple fan, I'd like to think that Apple is forced into this sort of thing because their agreement with AT&amp;T prevents them from allowing people to install certain types of apps (e.g. tethering).  After all, even the Nexus One, a Linux phone which isn't locked to any carrier, doesn't allow you to simply install any application you want.  Either way, this setup is bad for users, bad for developers, and ultimately it's even bad for Apple.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You 're right , it 's not evil .
It 's merely troubling and problematic .
On the plus side , requiring distribution to go through Apple 's store creates a central known-good repository of apps , allows Apple to provide a consistent and controlled user experience , and helps Apple maintain their relationship with AT&amp;T .
On the other hand , it prevents developers from distributing applications that they want to distribute , and prevents users from getting applications that they might want .
I have an iPhone .
I 'd like to try out this Opera browser .
I 'd like to try out Google 's " Google Voice " application too .
They developed it but Apple would n't distribute it .
There are a number of perfectly valid applications that have been developed , but that I ca n't get because Apple decided they did n't want me to have it .
It 's power that Apple does n't need to have and which is bound to be abused .
What I find much more chilling , though , is the idea of the applications that are not even being developed because of the approval process .
Apple has created an environment where a developer might pour a lot of time and money into creating an application only to find that Apple rejected it .
If I were a developer , that would give me pause .
Since I 'm an Apple fan , I 'd like to think that Apple is forced into this sort of thing because their agreement with AT&amp;T prevents them from allowing people to install certain types of apps ( e.g .
tethering ) . After all , even the Nexus One , a Linux phone which is n't locked to any carrier , does n't allow you to simply install any application you want .
Either way , this setup is bad for users , bad for developers , and ultimately it 's even bad for Apple .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You're right, it's not evil.
It's merely troubling and problematic.
On the plus side, requiring distribution to go through Apple's store creates a central known-good repository of apps, allows Apple to provide a consistent and controlled user experience, and helps Apple maintain their relationship with AT&amp;T.
On the other hand, it prevents developers from distributing applications that they want to distribute, and prevents users from getting applications that they might want.
I have an iPhone.
I'd like to try out this Opera browser.
I'd like to try out Google's "Google Voice" application too.
They developed it but Apple wouldn't distribute it.
There are a number of perfectly valid applications that have been developed, but that I can't get because Apple decided they didn't want me to have it.
It's power that Apple doesn't need to have and which is bound to be abused.
What I find much more chilling, though, is the idea of the applications that are not even being developed because of the approval process.
Apple has created an environment where a developer might pour a lot of time and money into creating an application only to find that Apple rejected it.
If I were a developer, that would give me pause.
Since I'm an Apple fan, I'd like to think that Apple is forced into this sort of thing because their agreement with AT&amp;T prevents them from allowing people to install certain types of apps (e.g.
tethering).  After all, even the Nexus One, a Linux phone which isn't locked to any carrier, doesn't allow you to simply install any application you want.
Either way, this setup is bad for users, bad for developers, and ultimately it's even bad for Apple.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589594</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31593222</id>
	<title>Re:Meh</title>
	<author>Lars T.</author>
	<datestamp>1269359580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>If Opera figures out how to get flash support into the damn thing, I expect that no amount of reality distortion will be able to protect Jobs from the wrath of the users should they reject the app.</p></div><p>By "the damn thing", I guess you must mean Opera Mini, the browser we are talking about - for it never supported Flash.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If Opera figures out how to get flash support into the damn thing , I expect that no amount of reality distortion will be able to protect Jobs from the wrath of the users should they reject the app.By " the damn thing " , I guess you must mean Opera Mini , the browser we are talking about - for it never supported Flash .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If Opera figures out how to get flash support into the damn thing, I expect that no amount of reality distortion will be able to protect Jobs from the wrath of the users should they reject the app.By "the damn thing", I guess you must mean Opera Mini, the browser we are talking about - for it never supported Flash.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589456</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590820</id>
	<title>Re:Apple isn't an open platform. Deal with it.</title>
	<author>exomondo</author>
	<datestamp>1269345660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Steve is selling a device, not a browser.  If opera wants to compete, they can do it by making their own phone, or by trying to sell Opera on any open devices out there.  Nothing new here.</p><p>It's like saying "Whirlpool doesn't compete" because I can't load my own software onto my dishwasher.  Yeah, no duh dumbass.</p></div><p>MS is selling an operating system, not a browser. If Opera wants to compete they can do it by making their own operating system or by trying to sell opera on any open source operating systems out there. Nothing new here.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Steve is selling a device , not a browser .
If opera wants to compete , they can do it by making their own phone , or by trying to sell Opera on any open devices out there .
Nothing new here.It 's like saying " Whirlpool does n't compete " because I ca n't load my own software onto my dishwasher .
Yeah , no duh dumbass.MS is selling an operating system , not a browser .
If Opera wants to compete they can do it by making their own operating system or by trying to sell opera on any open source operating systems out there .
Nothing new here .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Steve is selling a device, not a browser.
If opera wants to compete, they can do it by making their own phone, or by trying to sell Opera on any open devices out there.
Nothing new here.It's like saying "Whirlpool doesn't compete" because I can't load my own software onto my dishwasher.
Yeah, no duh dumbass.MS is selling an operating system, not a browser.
If Opera wants to compete they can do it by making their own operating system or by trying to sell opera on any open source operating systems out there.
Nothing new here.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589820</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590232</id>
	<title>Re:Aside from Flash....</title>
	<author>Arty2</author>
	<datestamp>1269343260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>"It works quite well, performance is good, tight integration with all internal and third party apps"

Isn't that IE6 all over again?</htmltext>
<tokenext>" It works quite well , performance is good , tight integration with all internal and third party apps " Is n't that IE6 all over again ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"It works quite well, performance is good, tight integration with all internal and third party apps"

Isn't that IE6 all over again?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589508</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589856</id>
	<title>Re:Meh</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269341700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>They'd have to offer some reason to choose Opera over Safari. As Safari already does a good job of rendering pages it'd have to be features. Maybe better prediction of what I want in text fields.</p></div></blockquote><p>I don't know about Opera mini, and I know even less about Opera mini for the iPhone, but Opera has the best support of any browser that I know of(iPhone Safari is a close second) for HTML5's specialized input fields in forms, so I wouldn't be surprised.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>They 'd have to offer some reason to choose Opera over Safari .
As Safari already does a good job of rendering pages it 'd have to be features .
Maybe better prediction of what I want in text fields.I do n't know about Opera mini , and I know even less about Opera mini for the iPhone , but Opera has the best support of any browser that I know of ( iPhone Safari is a close second ) for HTML5 's specialized input fields in forms , so I would n't be surprised .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They'd have to offer some reason to choose Opera over Safari.
As Safari already does a good job of rendering pages it'd have to be features.
Maybe better prediction of what I want in text fields.I don't know about Opera mini, and I know even less about Opera mini for the iPhone, but Opera has the best support of any browser that I know of(iPhone Safari is a close second) for HTML5's specialized input fields in forms, so I wouldn't be surprised.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589548</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590348</id>
	<title>Re:Aside from Flash....</title>
	<author>Locke2005</author>
	<datestamp>1269343800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>And I'm quite happy without Flash, TYVM.</i> You've obviously never tried to view porn on your iPhone... That's why I use an Android phone; it let's me view porn, even while driving! For living in a Disneyfied world of illusion, there's iPhone. For everything else, there's Android.</htmltext>
<tokenext>And I 'm quite happy without Flash , TYVM .
You 've obviously never tried to view porn on your iPhone... That 's why I use an Android phone ; it let 's me view porn , even while driving !
For living in a Disneyfied world of illusion , there 's iPhone .
For everything else , there 's Android .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And I'm quite happy without Flash, TYVM.
You've obviously never tried to view porn on your iPhone... That's why I use an Android phone; it let's me view porn, even while driving!
For living in a Disneyfied world of illusion, there's iPhone.
For everything else, there's Android.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589508</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31603848</id>
	<title>Re:DOA</title>
	<author>Lakitu</author>
	<datestamp>1269425940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>If you already bought an iphone or itouch, you already handed over control - you decided at that time that your "best interest" was to dispense with some control. I don't care a fig about Apple, but they're not EXTORTING anything.</p></div></blockquote><p>People buy them under certain premises only for Apple to renege on (some of) them later.  While most of us here may know that Apple's one rule is "we can do whatever we want", that's not exactly what they advertise.</p><blockquote><div><p>You don't want to be in a closed garden, then don't buy a fucking iphone. You don't want to pay for apps, then don't pay for them, you stupid consumer. You're not forced to buy anything, you stupid fucking twat, so there's no coercion or force being exerted by anyone.</p><p>It's streets from what Microsoft did, since MS actually DID coerce and extort other companies to make sure IE was the only browser shipped with company X PCs, or more recently, they "coerced" other manufacturers to make sure Windows was the only O/S shipped on the "netbooks".</p></div></blockquote><p>You don't want to use MSIE, don't buy fucking Windows, you fucking twat consumer.</p><blockquote><div><p>By the way, in a "boolean" world, either something is, or isn't, at least that's what boolean meant when I went to school. Maybe universities these days teach that boolean now encompasses: "totally, utterly, completely false", "really false", "sort of false", "a little false", "a little true", "kind of true", "true-ish", "pepsi true", and now "totally, utterly completely Apple true".</p></div></blockquote><p>I'm not the one who tried to portray it as being black-and-white, the post I replied to did.  I responded by showing him that if you choose to pigeonhole it into binary values, then Apple most certainly is "totally, utterly, completely" evil, because that's the only kind of evil you can be in that system of judgment.  Those are his words, not mine.  Apple's behavior is most definitely somewhat evil, ergo, it's completely evil.  That's why you don't try to do stupid things like you and he are doing -- and doing wrong -- by pigeonholing Apple into a certain type of behavior and then whitewashing it as if it's perfectly fine when it is patently obvious that it is not perfectly fine.</p><p>I expect your reply in a few years when you've worked on your reading comprehension a little bit and have a better system of values.  Thanks for the nice talk!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you already bought an iphone or itouch , you already handed over control - you decided at that time that your " best interest " was to dispense with some control .
I do n't care a fig about Apple , but they 're not EXTORTING anything.People buy them under certain premises only for Apple to renege on ( some of ) them later .
While most of us here may know that Apple 's one rule is " we can do whatever we want " , that 's not exactly what they advertise.You do n't want to be in a closed garden , then do n't buy a fucking iphone .
You do n't want to pay for apps , then do n't pay for them , you stupid consumer .
You 're not forced to buy anything , you stupid fucking twat , so there 's no coercion or force being exerted by anyone.It 's streets from what Microsoft did , since MS actually DID coerce and extort other companies to make sure IE was the only browser shipped with company X PCs , or more recently , they " coerced " other manufacturers to make sure Windows was the only O/S shipped on the " netbooks " .You do n't want to use MSIE , do n't buy fucking Windows , you fucking twat consumer.By the way , in a " boolean " world , either something is , or is n't , at least that 's what boolean meant when I went to school .
Maybe universities these days teach that boolean now encompasses : " totally , utterly , completely false " , " really false " , " sort of false " , " a little false " , " a little true " , " kind of true " , " true-ish " , " pepsi true " , and now " totally , utterly completely Apple true " .I 'm not the one who tried to portray it as being black-and-white , the post I replied to did .
I responded by showing him that if you choose to pigeonhole it into binary values , then Apple most certainly is " totally , utterly , completely " evil , because that 's the only kind of evil you can be in that system of judgment .
Those are his words , not mine .
Apple 's behavior is most definitely somewhat evil , ergo , it 's completely evil .
That 's why you do n't try to do stupid things like you and he are doing -- and doing wrong -- by pigeonholing Apple into a certain type of behavior and then whitewashing it as if it 's perfectly fine when it is patently obvious that it is not perfectly fine.I expect your reply in a few years when you 've worked on your reading comprehension a little bit and have a better system of values .
Thanks for the nice talk !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you already bought an iphone or itouch, you already handed over control - you decided at that time that your "best interest" was to dispense with some control.
I don't care a fig about Apple, but they're not EXTORTING anything.People buy them under certain premises only for Apple to renege on (some of) them later.
While most of us here may know that Apple's one rule is "we can do whatever we want", that's not exactly what they advertise.You don't want to be in a closed garden, then don't buy a fucking iphone.
You don't want to pay for apps, then don't pay for them, you stupid consumer.
You're not forced to buy anything, you stupid fucking twat, so there's no coercion or force being exerted by anyone.It's streets from what Microsoft did, since MS actually DID coerce and extort other companies to make sure IE was the only browser shipped with company X PCs, or more recently, they "coerced" other manufacturers to make sure Windows was the only O/S shipped on the "netbooks".You don't want to use MSIE, don't buy fucking Windows, you fucking twat consumer.By the way, in a "boolean" world, either something is, or isn't, at least that's what boolean meant when I went to school.
Maybe universities these days teach that boolean now encompasses: "totally, utterly, completely false", "really false", "sort of false", "a little false", "a little true", "kind of true", "true-ish", "pepsi true", and now "totally, utterly completely Apple true".I'm not the one who tried to portray it as being black-and-white, the post I replied to did.
I responded by showing him that if you choose to pigeonhole it into binary values, then Apple most certainly is "totally, utterly, completely" evil, because that's the only kind of evil you can be in that system of judgment.
Those are his words, not mine.
Apple's behavior is most definitely somewhat evil, ergo, it's completely evil.
That's why you don't try to do stupid things like you and he are doing -- and doing wrong -- by pigeonholing Apple into a certain type of behavior and then whitewashing it as if it's perfectly fine when it is patently obvious that it is not perfectly fine.I expect your reply in a few years when you've worked on your reading comprehension a little bit and have a better system of values.
Thanks for the nice talk!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31594720</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_1946223_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589454
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590346
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31616794
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_1946223_60</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589594
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590472
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_1946223_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590228
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31597562
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_1946223_74</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589594
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590288
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_1946223_76</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589594
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590724
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_1946223_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589508
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589682
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_1946223_81</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589404
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590030
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31602724
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_1946223_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589624
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589886
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_1946223_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589508
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589626
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_1946223_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589508
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31591212
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_1946223_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589404
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589456
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31597222
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_1946223_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589590
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31591952
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_1946223_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589594
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590112
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_1946223_68</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589450
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589820
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590820
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_1946223_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589450
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31591344
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_1946223_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589450
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589656
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_1946223_82</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589594
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31594190
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_1946223_73</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589594
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31591748
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31594720
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31603848
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_1946223_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589404
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590178
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_1946223_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589404
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589548
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589856
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_1946223_72</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589404
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589566
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590586
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31593876
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_1946223_63</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589760
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_1946223_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589624
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590500
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_1946223_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589404
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589742
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31593386
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_1946223_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589404
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31594716
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_1946223_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589748
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_1946223_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589404
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590106
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_1946223_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589560
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589890
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_1946223_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589590
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589864
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_1946223_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590380
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_1946223_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590228
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31597834
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_1946223_71</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589404
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589742
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589948
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_1946223_85</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589614
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31591174
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_1946223_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590226
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_1946223_61</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589454
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589688
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31602282
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_1946223_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590892
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_1946223_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589454
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589658
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_1946223_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589594
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31591936
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_1946223_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589404
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589566
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31595122
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_1946223_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589560
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31591074
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_1946223_77</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589594
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31593250
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_1946223_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589404
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589566
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590586
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31593330
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_1946223_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590228
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31593376
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_1946223_67</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589404
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589460
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_1946223_83</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590306
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_1946223_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589404
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589456
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31593222
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_1946223_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589594
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31591574
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31596786
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_1946223_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589624
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31593986
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_1946223_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589614
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590206
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31609834
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_1946223_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589590
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590034
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_1946223_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589508
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590348
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_1946223_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589594
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31592718
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_1946223_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589450
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589654
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_1946223_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589594
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31593110
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_1946223_75</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589450
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31592422
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_1946223_66</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589454
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590520
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_1946223_89</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589404
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589830
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_1946223_80</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590148
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_1946223_65</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589450
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589774
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_1946223_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589404
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589566
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590586
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31593684
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_1946223_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589594
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31591412
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_1946223_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589404
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31591458
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31600594
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_1946223_70</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589594
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31593328
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_1946223_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589450
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589962
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_1946223_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589594
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31591890
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_1946223_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590138
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590796
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_1946223_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31591240
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_1946223_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589614
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590302
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_1946223_88</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589448
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589660
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31593184
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_1946223_59</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589450
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31592458
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_1946223_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589404
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589742
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590734
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_1946223_62</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589454
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590346
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31593658
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_1946223_64</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590228
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31603398
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_1946223_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589404
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589742
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31602374
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_1946223_87</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589614
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589824
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_1946223_78</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589594
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31591748
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31594296
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_1946223_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589598
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_1946223_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589450
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31592742
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_1946223_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589590
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31593232
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_1946223_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589404
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589566
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31594420
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_1946223_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589508
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590232
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_1946223_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589450
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31594872
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_1946223_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589590
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31591870
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_1946223_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589448
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589660
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31602370
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_1946223_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589404
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589714
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_1946223_79</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589594
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31593922
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_1946223_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31594902
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31601978
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_1946223_84</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589508
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590296
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_1946223_86</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590140
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31592834
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_23_1946223_69</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589590
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590176
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_23_1946223.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590228
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31593376
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31597834
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31603398
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31597562
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_23_1946223.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589454
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589688
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31602282
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590346
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31616794
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31593658
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589658
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590520
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_23_1946223.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590040
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_23_1946223.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31593234
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_23_1946223.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589624
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31593986
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590500
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589886
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_23_1946223.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589560
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31591074
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589890
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_23_1946223.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590140
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31592834
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_23_1946223.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589436
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589748
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589760
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590306
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31591240
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590892
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590138
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590796
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590380
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589594
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31591574
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31596786
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31591412
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31593328
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31593922
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590724
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31591890
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31591936
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590288
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31593110
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590472
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590112
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31591748
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31594720
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31603848
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31594296
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31593250
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31592718
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31594190
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589614
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590206
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31609834
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590302
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589824
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31591174
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590148
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590226
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589590
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31591952
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31591870
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590034
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590176
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31593232
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589864
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589598
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_23_1946223.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589450
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589774
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589962
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31591344
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31594872
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31592422
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589654
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31592458
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31592742
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589820
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590820
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589656
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_23_1946223.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589404
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590106
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589714
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589566
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31595122
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590586
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31593330
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31593684
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31593876
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31594420
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590178
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589548
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589856
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589742
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31602374
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590734
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31593386
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589948
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589830
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31594716
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589456
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31593222
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31597222
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589460
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31591458
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31600594
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590030
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31602724
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_23_1946223.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589508
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31591212
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589626
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590232
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590348
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31590296
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589682
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_23_1946223.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31594902
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31601978
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_23_1946223.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589644
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_23_1946223.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31592866
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_23_1946223.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589448
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31589660
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31593184
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_23_1946223.31602370
</commentlist>
</conversation>
