Microsoft is definitely on speed.
__/ [ High Plains Thumper ] on Sunday 28 May 2006 00:20 \__
> Sinister Midget wrote:
>> Jim Richardson posted:
>>
>>> I read with some interest, Erik's post on the unverified
>>> claims made by George Ou, still haven't seen any evidence
>>> from Erik that Sun's engineers agreed with Ou's claims,
>>> but that's not too surprising I suppose.
>>> Anyway, I thought, if I'd see if the odt format was slow
>>> for me. I don't have MS-Office, so can't make a comparison
>>> with that, I just wanted to see if I had problems with the
>>> format, if it was slow for me or something.
I use it over here. Pretty fast in general and almost equally fast. For
OpenOffice formats and Office formats in OO2, there is little noticeable
difference. PDF's make the exceptions, as one would expect. Many file saves
are incremental anyway, so who gives a f*ck?
>>> So I took a document, plain text, 30,000 wds, about 130
>>> dbl space pages, and saved it in odt, took less than 2
>>> seconds. Then closed OOorg2 writer, reopened it, and
>>> opened the saved file, Took less than 3 seconds to open
>>> the file. Not really feeling slow yet. Inserted a rather
>>> large graphic, saved as, close OOorg, reopened OOorg, then
>>> opened the new file, same times for saving, and opening as
>>> the first file, at least as close as I could determine.
>>>
>>> Is OOorg+odt slower than MS-Office whatever and MS-xml ?
>>> dunno, but OOorg certainly didn't seem slow opening or
>>> saving some rather large documents to me. Sounds like Ou
>>> may be, at best, making a mountain, out of a molehill, and
>>> that, if we are going to be charitable.
That was pure FUD. I don't even need George to say such bullshit. Only a day
later, the same words came out from Microsoft spokesmen (i.e. FUDmeisters).
This experiment(s) was all along intended to put OpenOffice at a position of
disadvantage. I discussed it with Rex this morning. It's easy to manipulate
using memory constraints.
>> I may try to duplicate your experiment at work tonight, but
>> I /will/ have Word available to compare. I'm not sure it
>> won't crash at 130 pages, but I'll make one as long as I
>> can and use it for both.
That's anotherfactor. In the experiments, things will /not/ scale linearly.
Perhaps as you increase the volume, the time gap is narrowed or equalled.
>> The only hindrances to pulling a side-by-side will be a
>> dependency on how busy we are. And whether I think
>> Erik/George are worth bothering with their fraud.
>
> Open Office works. Shoot, it works acceptably on my 600 MHz
> Dell laptop with Win2k, which has a considerably slower
> processor than the more recent offerings.
>
> Places like Singapore have already incorporated it on their
> Government desktops, rather than purchase upgrade licenses
> for Microsoft Office.
>
> Campaign to discredit it is aimed at those who have never
> tried and rely on word from others. It is like the negative
> ad campaign by competitors that killed the Tucker Automotive
> Company and perhaps the best car of the time, with many
> advancements. News was spread like the car has no reverse
> gear and other FUD, etc.
Yes, indeed.
> FUD is nothing new. There is a deliberate campaign afoot to
> kill Linux and the Open Source movement. Worst has been the
> alleged unsuitability of the desktop, which was quite usable
> even in 1998.
>
> Fortunately, that campaign is losing ground as we see already
> occurring. One sign is the nature of the attacks in this
> newsgroup. They now occur in the form of attacking the
> character of the Linux advocate. The FUD artists are groping
> for straws.
Will people /please/ refrain from replying to trolls? This would drive them
away rather quickly.
Best wishes,
Roy
--
Roy S. Schestowitz | Open Source Othello: http://othellomaster.com
http://Schestowitz.com | GNU/Linux ¦ PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
1:25am up 30 days 7:57, 8 users, load average: 0.02, 0.11, 0.23
http://iuron.com - next generation of search paradigms
|
|
