Posted Oct 16, 2008 13:40 UTC (Thu) by anselm (subscriber, #2796)
[Link]
Jake's comment does not actually imply that startup times
have, in fact, become shorter. Maybe enough people have complained that
OO.o starts too quickly for them to go to the kitchen downstairs, put the
kettle on, make coffee, and carry the coffee back to their computer and
still see the splash screen when they return. This would indicate that
OO.o start times need to be increased in order to enhance user
satisfaction, an issue that was subsequently »addressed in 3.0«.
This explanation would also neatly answer Michael Meeks's question.
OpenOffice.org releases 3.0, faces new challenges
Posted Oct 16, 2008 14:04 UTC (Thu) by jake (editor, #205)
[Link]
heh. I certainly didn't time it, but 3.0 definitely seemed snappier to start up than my usual 2.4 start-up time (which isn't horrible by any means). It is one of the "features" that has been advertised for 3.0 as well.
YMMV ...
jake
OpenOffice.org releases 3.0, faces new challenges
Posted Oct 16, 2008 15:27 UTC (Thu) by wingo (subscriber, #26929)
[Link]
In conclusion, OpenOffice.org is generally getting slower with each release. However, startup performance has made great improvements, the performance losses are relatively small, advances in new computer hardware are more than making up the loses, and OpenOffice.org continues to mature with new features. OpenOffice.org doesn't compel users to upgrade, so you are welcome to continue using older versions.
OpenOffice.org releases 3.0, faces new challenges
Posted Oct 16, 2008 19:03 UTC (Thu) by dale77 (guest, #1490)
[Link]
Very clever. I'll have to get all scientific and time it before and after the upgrade to find out for sure.
OpenOffice.org releases 3.0, faces new challenges
Posted Oct 18, 2008 3:38 UTC (Sat) by dale77 (guest, #1490)
[Link]
ArchLinux OOO 2.4 Writer, cold start 17 sec, 4 sec next open
ArchLinux OOO 3.0 Writer, cold start 12 sec, 3 sec next open
So 3.0 starts 30% faster! Meeks needs to check his facts?