Home Messages Index
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index

Re: [News] OpenOffice.org Gets a Lot Faster in Next Version

Hash: SHA1

____/ Chris Ahlstrom on Saturday 14 March 2009 00:30 : \____

> After takin' a swig o' grog, Erik Funkenbusch belched out
>   this bit o' wisdom:
>> On Wed, 11 Mar 2009 09:44:55 +0000, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>>> Hash: SHA1
>>> Start up performance - something that always matters
>>> ,----[ Quote ]
>>>| Today I want to show you what we have done so far for start up
>>>| performance. We made a thoroughly analysis about the start up performance
>>>| under Windows and Linux. Using powerful tools (e.g. Process Monitor from
>>>| Sysinternals), which provide data from the system level, made it easy to
>>>| collect data to quantify the different aspects during start up. Based on
>>>| this data we want to see where we can influence the start up performance.
>>> `----
>>> http://blogs.sun.com/GullFOSS/entry/start_up_performance_something_that
>> Wait... wait.. wait..
>> But I thought OpenOffice.org was already blazingly fast?
>> According to Sun's own benchmarks, it takes 24.8 seconds to start up.
>> almost half a minute.
>> So Terry, what was that bout OOo being so fast again?
> Well, Erik, could it be <cough> <cough> the fault of the /operating system/?
>    The following table summarises the measured values on OpenOffice.org
>    Writer cold start up. Cold start means that OpenOffice.org was started
>    after a reboot and removing the prefetch file which created by Windows
>    XP. For more details about the prefetch feature of Windows XP you can
>    links at the end of this blog.
>    Aspect         Time     Percentage
>    Writer startup 24800ms  100,00%
>    . . .
>    It's obvious that file I/O plays the most important role on start up.
>    More than 80% of the time needed for start up is lost due to reading
>    libraries or data. Reading data files is about half the time
>    OpenOffice.org needs to read all necessary libraries. It's also clear
>    that raw CPU power doesn't help for a quicker start up.
> Gotta love that good ol' XP I/O.

If you want to see why it may be slow on Windows, then look no further than
Microsoft's own criminal behaviour (as shown by its very own words):



    * Unpublished Office '96 internal shell extensions (Exhibit PLEX0_5673)
    * Office gets a shell optimized for its use (Exhibit PX07377)
    * A unique competitive advantage by controlling API, apps and systems
(Exhibit PX00952)
    * Undocumenting the shell integration API (Exhibit PX07738)
    * Making IShellBrowser internal; "intentionally break those apps" (Exhibit
    * Optimize load times for Office (Exhibit PX07949)
    * Visio file format policy (Exhibit px03104)
    * Excel strawman redacted (Exhibit PX04449) "

More here:


- -- 
                ~~ Best of wishes

Roy S. Schestowitz      |    "ASCII stupid question, get a stupid ANSI"
http://Schestowitz.com  |  GNU is Not UNIX  |     PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
      http://iuron.com - proposing a non-profit search engine
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)


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