[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: [K12OSN] OpenOffice.org



Exactly. This is why, the few times I've had the opportunity to demo K12LTSP, I always start up both an OO.o session and a Mozilla session on the server itself. Right after I start that up, I take the folks over to a thin client and start my short explanation of thin clients (Xterms) and netbooting. That short explanation, and the booting of the thin client, all take less than a minute. By the time the thin client boots, and I log in from it, OO.o and Moz have long since finished loading on the server, and thus are cached! Sneaky, eh? ;-) Thus, OO.o and Moz start up very quickly on the thin client. Heh heh...

If you think this is silly, I've spoken in another thread (SCSI vs. IDE) about my own server. This semi-sneakiness actually was a significant factor in getting said server deployed...in a Microsoft shop.

--TP

Jim Kronebusch wrote:

On another note, I have noticed that once you load it the first time in
each session, the load speeds thereafter are exceptionally quick.  I
don't know if this is a result of the program still being cached or in
RAM or something, but at least a user only sits through a painful load
once per session (At least in my testing).

-----Original Message-----
From: k12osn-admin redhat com [mailto:k12osn-admin redhat com] On Behalf
Of Terrell Prude', Jr.
Sent: Thursday, March 11, 2004 5:28 PM
To: k12osn redhat com
Subject: Re: [K12OSN] OpenOffice.org


Two reasons.


1.) Unlike MS Word, which performs one function, OO.o is one big monolithic application that does word processing, spreadsheets, presentations, and database access. So, when you fire it up, from the perspective of a Microsoft Office user, you're essentially firing up four applications, or all of MS Office except for Outlook. That's why OO.o Writer can directly open spreadsheets and presentations; it's all one big app. Note that OO.o 1.1.0 is considerably better about this than 1.0.x or 1.1Beta, and the 1.1.1rc1 is yet faster to load.

2.) Remember when Windows 98 came out, and the boot times were more than double that for Windows 95? On a test machine several years ago, I

clocked Windows 95 booting in just over 40 sec. Win 98 on the same box took over two minutes. However, Internet Exploder launched more quickly

on Windows 98 than on '95. Reason: Win 98 included IE and pre-cached it non-pageable at boot time, thus giving the illusion to the user of faster browser startup times than Netscape, whom they were battling at the time. Essentially, MS robbed Peter to pay Paul. Turns out that recent versions of MS Office on, say, Windows 2000 and XP do the same thing. The MS Office apps come up faster because Microsoft included code to pre-cache them at boot time, as you're logging in. Yes, it is sneaky, but that's what happens when you own the OS and the office suite; you can do that. The price is that it takes longer to boot and log in.

--TP

Kevin Boone wrote:



does anyone know why OpenOffice.org writer takes forever to laod????






_______________________________________________ K12OSN mailing list K12OSN redhat com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn For more info see <http://www.k12os.org>

---
Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.618 / Virus Database: 397 - Release Date: 3/9/2004


--- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.618 / Virus Database: 397 - Release Date: 3/9/2004



_______________________________________________
K12OSN mailing list
K12OSN redhat com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/k12osn
For more info see <http://www.k12os.org>







[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]