970
votes
|
|
994
29
24
|
|
|
|
|
89
votes
|
|
274
100
185
|
|
|
|
|
|
-149
votes
|
|
90
37
239
|
|
|
|
|
|
55
votes
|
|
76
24
21
|
|
|
|
|
|
34
votes
|
|
43
8
9
|
|
|
|
|
|
-4
votes
|
|
6
4
10
|
|
|
|
|
|
6
votes
|
|
6
1
0
|
|
|
|
|
|
Propose your solution
Attachments
No attachments.
Duplicates
Comments
|
yzarc
wrote on the 19 Feb 09 at 19:32
|
|
|
|
in my computer, it's the same time of the firefox. not especially slow. maybe the loading windows that gives this impression.
|
|
|
|
I hope that once KOffice gets as powerful as Open Office Kubuntu will change to it. And I think that KOffice will be there soon. But I do feel that OO is a bit sluggish. So1, 1, and 0 how can I time it to see if that's true?
|
|
viraptor
wrote on the 20 Feb 09 at 17:25
|
|
|
$ cat /proc/cpuinfo
vendor_id : GenuineIntel
model name : Intel(R) Celeron(R) M CPU 430 @ 1.73GHz
cpu MHz : 1733.374
cache size : 1024 KB
And it takes 6 seconds for a complete cold start. I think this is quite fast. Faster than I would expect anyway.
|
|
r0g
wrote on the 21 Feb 09 at 00:03
|
|
|
Really people need to quit whining about this. OO3 is a heavy lifter so of course it takes a while to get going, it's always been this way. I remember back on Windows Adobe Photoshop always took an age to start up but that's coz it's a very serious slab of software, if you wanted to quickly view and edit files you'd use something lite like irfanview, same difference here. No-one should expect the 800 pound gorilla software to be as snappy as the 1 trick ponies.
Horses for course people!
|
|
Pasto
wrote on the 23 Feb 09 at 17:39
|
|
|
|
java=slow ? jeypeyy please don't troll.
|
|
Cé
wrote on the 23 Feb 09 at 17:50
|
|
|
I think no matter how fast or slow it currently is, faster = better :-)
I like the idea of not loading the complete application at once, the rest of the application can load after I can begin to edit (after I type the first sentence, the computer has loads of tyme to load the rest in the background).
Best regards,
Cedric
|
saivann
(Brainstorm moderator)
wrote on the 25 Feb 09 at 01:56
|
|
|
|
Deleted solution #3 as it was a comment and not a solution.
|
|
young
wrote on the 26 Feb 09 at 20:38
|
|
|
|
Disable "Use a Java runtime environment" in Options and you'll get a shorter startup time.
|
|
|
First time load: 10 seconds
Second time load: 3 seconds.
All this on a Celeron 1.6MHz with 512MB RAM.
That's not slow people!
We have to concentrate on the important things! It's not like 90% of the users open their Open Office 20-30 times in one session.
|
|
grofaty
wrote on the 27 Feb 09 at 08:21
|
|
|
OpenOffice Word processor 3.0 starts-up in 20 seconds on my Ubuntu computer. It is way too much.
I have dual boot (Ubuntu/Windows) and on Windows OpenOffice starts up first time in 30 seconds. But on the same hardware Microsoft Word 2003 starts up in 5 seconds. Second time OpenOffice starts up in 4 seconds, MS-Word in 2 seconds.
|
|
sayakb
(Brainstorm admin)
wrote on the 28 Feb 09 at 09:24
|
|
|
Deleted solution #4 "IBM Lotus Symphony" as of 4 irrelevance reports.
|
|
jeypeyy
wrote on the 1 Mar 09 at 11:51
|
|
|
young:
You're right, but I'm sure there are a lot of disadvantages with this. Java doesn't only makes it slower, it makes it look bad in gnome (also in kde).
|
|
|
The problem is that rewritting OpenOffice to C, C++, or C# will require alot of time, programmers and a busy schedule, I would like it to be ported, but sun would like it to be Java, especially since it uses it code base for StarOffice.
I would suggest a transition from Java to C++ or C, how ever we will compile a years worth of code to C.
Hey OpenOffice Load 4 seconds on my PC which has 2 GB of RAM and a 1.060 GHZ processor. The second load time is the same 4 secounds, Java is good only for applications that need to port across dozens of architectures, OpenOffice runs on dozens of architectures.
|
|
jeypeyy
wrote on the 2 Mar 09 at 17:29
|
|
|
|
nextstep: I didn't say anything about a total rewrite. I meant working on abiWorld or something. AbiWord is a lot more integrated to gnome than OOo writer.
|
|
Shane Fagan
(Idea reviewer)
wrote on the 4 Mar 09 at 11:24
|
|
|
|
Open office is made by sun and they support java. If you want a alternative there are a few good ones in c.. etc like abiword just without the feature set of open office.
|
|
ubby
wrote on the 4 Mar 09 at 11:56
|
|
|
|
Openoffice.org needs improvement but this can only be accomplished if they have enough developers and at the moment I don't think they have.
|
|
jeypeyy
wrote on the 4 Mar 09 at 15:27
|
|
|
|
Shane Fagan: Yes! And that's why I want developers to focus on creating more features for abiWord.
|
|
|
Focusing on abiword isn't a solution to make OOO faster, is a workaround, an alternative, but not a solution.
On Windows there is an application that quick-starts OOO by preloading somewhat on system startup... I think that would be useful on ubuntu too.
|
|
|
@OpenNingia
The real issue here is not "OOO is slow" but "Ubuntu office package is slow", and using Abiword/Gnumeric is a solution for that. The problem is that people will still miss a presentation program (except Kubuntu users, as Koffice has one).
|
|
adelie
wrote on the 7 Mar 09 at 18:33
|
|
|
A few things here:
Open Office is massive. It has way more tools than most people need, but it is fast for all it does.
"Suggestion" 1 is not a solution, it is a complaint.
Sun does not take suggestions so much as feedback. Their source is open for review, but they don't allow outside contributions
Open Office is just as fast on OSX and Windows. It is also fast once it is running, just takes a little time to open.
Google Documents is superior in many ways, but not much more feature rich than Abiword. For a full word processor, ThinkFree.com, imo, has the best to offer. OpenOffice should still be default, but there should be some kind of link to these options.
|
|
|
|
Won't increasing the amount of memory in the options make it run wayyy faster?
|
|
ubby
wrote on the 8 Mar 09 at 09:37
|
|
|
[quote]Sun does not take suggestions so much as feedback. Their source is open for review, but they don't allow outside contributions[/quote]
This will not stimulate the project and will not attract developers to help.
|
|
|
Why don't we use some of OpenOffice source and put in Abiword and Gnumeric, and create a new presentation program, all of this can be done by using OOo's existing code and take off some of Java, and compile as C or C++.
We can use OOo's code to make a more "native approach to Ubuntu, we just have to modify to C!
|
|
yzarc
wrote on the 13 Mar 09 at 18:54
|
|
|
I get about 7 seconds at cold start (once). and 0.5 seconds after (thousand times). my computer is 2 year-old. I will not vote against make things faster but it isn't a real issue and the way what the problem was written are wrong.
We are being headed for wrong conclusions guided by wrong premises.
|
|
Chuq
wrote on the 16 Mar 09 at 03:03
|
|
|
|
AFAIK this is a general OO.org issue, not a Ubuntu issue?
|
|
|
|
In response to Solution #7, OpenOffice is already supported by several commercial distributions. I think its a great application, all we have to do is improve compatibility with other apps like M$ Office.
|
|
|
Also in response to AndrewLuecke's comment, its easy to remind Ubuntu or Canonical of its responsibility. I think they're doing great. Improving apps is the responsibility of the community, people like us. And we anyways don't pay Canonical for giving us Ubuntu, so all we can do is suggest.
IMO Canonical should start a paid version of Ubuntu desktop, which should have more stable and tested software. Only then can they actually work on individual apps better, its not possible without funds.
|
|
|
What's with all the unsubstantiated allegations against Java ?
"There are ways to use C and C++ functions from interpreted languages like Java. The parts of OpenOffice that are the major bottlenecks could be transitioned to C/C++, or other compiled languages."
Java isn't an interpreted language, look in the Wikipedia if you don't believe me: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interpreted_language . Java (with the SUN JRE and OpenJDK) is compiled to machine code.
"java (=slow"
Thats just ranting, do you have anything concrete to back that up ? Or did you just run an applet in the 90's before the JIT compiler was implemented and it was slow ?
If you guys want to compile all the Java in OO to machine code that badly you can look at GCJ, but I highly doubt that will make a positive difference in performance. Maybe it will decrease the startup time slighty, but you will lose performance when the application is running.
|
|
jeypeyy
wrote on the 22 Dec 09 at 21:15
|
|
|
Ok, sorry, I made many false assumptions when I wrote that. Anyhow I think OOo could be more efficient, since ms office is faster as far as I know.
I don't know what is slowing down OOo that much. Maybe it is NWF (http://people.redhat.com/dcbw/ooo-nwf.html ) or maybe it's the rest of the code that is written in a way that is not efficient on Linux.
|
|
|
Why have so many people voted against solution #5 when it is _optional_?
Surely an option that defaults to off isn't going to hurt?
Personally I wouldn't use that option but I know some people who would and I'd like them to have that choice.
|
|
|
If this is still an issue, please file a bug report against OpenOffice/LibreOffice or direct your suggestion(s) to the OpenOffice/LibreOffice team.
Closing in Brainstorm.
|
Post your comment
|
