Hi :) +1 It's beyond the scope of this list and certainly beyond the scope of individuals here to do rigorous bench-marking. The amount of data we did get was impressive. Regards from Tom :)
>________________________________ > From: Sina Momken <digi...@gmail.com> >To: users@global.libreoffice.org >Cc: users@global.libreoffice.org >Sent: Wednesday, 7 August 2013, 3:09 >Subject: [libreoffice-users] Re: start up speed > > >On 08/07/2013 05:43 AM, Kracked_P_P---webmaster wrote: >> >> I would expect that .doc would load slower in Writer and .odt would load >> slower in Word. >> >> The question really is how well does Writer load both. How well it load >> the 10 page documents vs. the 50 page ones. Both with the same average >> number of graphics per page. >> >> Then look at the simple 20 or 50 page documents vs. the very complex ones. >> >> Get an over all load times for the same documents on Writer and Word on >> various Windows systems and various version of Windows [Win7 - Home/H. >> Premium/Professional - 64-bit and 32-bit. Vista versions in both 32 and >> 64 bit.] Then look into the same documents with Writer run on some of >> the different version of Linux [32-bit and 64-bit OS] such as Ubuntu, >> Fedora, Mint, Mageia, Arch, etc., etc.. >> >> Then with all that data make a chart and add to it every time someone >> tries the "standard" documents on different systems and specifications. >> >> Then we would have a chart that will tell us how much different systems >> and specifications effect the load and run speeds of LO, Writer >> specifically, and Word specifically. >> >> Does more RAM or more CPU power influence it most. How does 4.0.4 vs >> 4.1.0 compare on the same system/specs. How much faster a 64-bit >> install is over the same distro's 32-bit version. >What you're requesting here is an exact benchmark with will take so much >time and effort. Besides different file formats, size and heaviness of >the file, different OSes and different HW Architectures, the exact >conditions of the system during experiment (like the software and >processes running in the background, etc.) and the number of repetitions >for each experiment must also be specified. Ideally no other excessive >processes must be run and each experiment must run more than 10 times. >It's accurate to write a test program to automatically test these >factors with any repetition desired. > >But doing all these is a major job and takes much time and effort. If >I'd done this before, I've published this on my website or other major >website, not on this mailing list which doesn't have many visitors. > >I only wanted to show you a rule of thumb about LO Writer dealing with >heavy files. > >> >> Without these types of data charted, we could just say what we "think" >> is true or want works better for you. >> >> To be honest, when I was using it and it worked well, my AMD64 CPU >> laptop worked better than my Intel dual core laptop. When I asked why >> my older slower AMD laptop worked faster creating the .iso file using >> DeVeDe .avi/.mp4 file to DVD-movie disc conversion tool, I was told that >> the faster dual core laptop was not powerful enough to do the work even >> though my older slower AMD64 laptop could do it just fine. >> >> So, no matter how I think it should not be true, sometimes newer faster >> systems that we think is more powerful and faster might now be a good as >> we think and the older slower less powerful systems might actually work >> better at some job or package. Slower single core laptop working better >> than a faster speed dual core laptop, does not make sense, but in >> practice it works that way. >I doesn't say that. Actually I exactly said opposite of that. I have a >single core pentium4 @2.8GHz desktop which runs LO Writer faster than my >dual core core2due @2.2GHz laptop. Maybe power of both cores of my >laptop be more than power of cpu of my desktop, but power of a single >core of my laptop is surely less than power of a single core of my >desktop and because LO only uses 1 core, my older desktop PC wins. > >> >> So, maybe someone should collect some data and let us know how it worked >> out. Maybe we could be surprised on what we find. >Making a precise benchmark is always a valuable and highly regarded >work, can practically assess a software and help to make it better. > >> >> I sure was running DeVeDe on 2 different laptops, both as XP/Vista and >> Ubuntu 10.04/ U. 10.04 systems. > > >Regards, > Sina Momken >> >> >> On 08/06/2013 06:44 PM, Tom Davies wrote: >>> Hi :) >>> Brilliant. Larger file-size is a better test and some of those >>> comparisons were really interesting. So.doc loads and saves much more >>> slowly. >>> >>> I dont know how they do it but the docs team write each chapter of the >>> guides separately and then combine them into 1 book at the end. >>> Master documents perhaps? >>> Regards from >>> Tom :) >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> ________________________________ >>>> From: Sina Momken <digi...@gmail.com> >>>> To: users@global.libreoffice.org >>>> Cc: Tom Davies <tomdavie...@yahoo.co.uk>; Kracked_P_P---webmaster >>>> <webmas...@krackedpress.com>; users@global.libreoffice.org >>>> Sent: Tuesday, 6 August 2013, 22:41 >>>> Subject: [libreoffice-users] Re: start up speed >>>> >>>> >>>> I also think that start up time for LO Writer and MS Office and many >>>> other programs is small enough. But opening an empty document in under 3 >>>> secs is not a huge win too! >>>> I believe that LO Writer is catastrophically slow in opening heavy >>>> documents. For proving my claim, I've done some experiments. Also these >>>> manual experiments are not accurate enough to be a precise benchmark but >>>> can show you some approximate slowness of LO Writer. Let see how long LO >>>> Writer takes to open or save a heavy (~185 pages thesis) document: >>>> >>>> >From clicking document to being able to edit @ .odt: 2'17" >>>> Completing "Opening document..." bar @ .odt: 1'25" >>>> >>>> >From Ctrl+S to being able to edit again @ .odt: 3'00" >>>> Completing "Saving document..." bar @ .odt: (another try): 1'40" >>>> >>>> >From clicking document to being able to edit @ .doc: 5'26" >>>> Completing "Opening document..." bar @ .doc: 3'14" >>>> >>>> >From Ctrl+S to being able to edit again @ .doc: 3'20" >>>> Completing "Saving document..." bar @ .doc: 3'17" >>>> >>>> >>>> Other minimized software: >>>> - Another heavy (~186 pages) document open in LO Writer >>>> - Thunderbird 17.0 with 5 accounts minimized >>>> - XChat with many channels open minimized >>>> - GoldenDict with many dictionaries minimized >>>> - FreeU proxy software minimized >>>> - No browser open >>>> >>>> File size: >>>> - A ~185 pages thesis in either .doc and .odt formats >>>> - .doc file size: 6.8 MBytes >>>> - .odt file size: 5.6 MBytes >>>> >>>> Software spec: >>>> - Linux Mint Debian Edition Update Pack 6 (latest version and repo) >>>> - XFCE 4.8 Desktop Environment >>>> - LibreOffice 3.5.4.2 >>>> - Thunderbird 17 (minimized) >>>> - XChat 2.8.8 (minimized) >>>> >>>> Hardware Spec: >>>> - Laptop: Dell Latitude D830 >>>> - CPU: Intel Core2Due T7500 Dual Core @2.2GHZ >>>> - RAM: 4GB @677MHz >>>> - GPU: NVidia quadro NVS 140m >>>> - HDD: 500GB @5400 RPM >>>> >>>> >>>> This experiment shows that LO Writer is very very slow (at least 1'30") >>>> when it deals with heavy documents. It's specially not acceptable when I >>>> realized that LO Writer always use ONLY 1 core of my CPU and it's why LO >>>> Writer works better on my Pentium4 @2.8GHz single core computer than my >>>> dual core @2.2GHz laptop. Being single-threaded for such a heavy >>>> software is not acceptable in a world of multi-core CPUs. >>>> >>>> Another limitation of LO Writer is that when it saves a document it >>>> blocks the whole software and you have to wait until completion of >>>> saving. This issue is solved in MS Word because MSO is a multi-threading >>>> software. Because I must save my document at least each 30min therefor I >>>> have to rest each 30min for at least 2min because LO Writer takes this >>>> amount of time when it saves my huge document. >>>> I'm not pleased with save and open operations of LO Writer at all. >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> Sina Momken >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On 08/05/2013 05:47 PM, Andrew Brown wrote: >>>>> Gents >>>>> >>>>> Kracked, a good reply. If I may add my two cents worth to >>>>> performance of >>>>> start-ups here. >>>>> >>>>> This is my system hardware top of the range in December 2007, and still >>>>> hops today. The only things updated since 2008 was the video card and >>>>> the SATA III hard drives, and the O/S's. >>>>> >>>>> Windows 7 Ult. x64 / Ubuntu 13.04 Raring Ringtail Dual boot, Intel >>>>> Core2 >>>>> Duo 6850 3GHZ, MSI X-38 Diamond mobo, Asus ATI EAH5770 CUcore 1GB >>>>> Video, >>>>> SuperTalent 6GB DDR3 1333MHZ, Seagate 7500RPM SATAIII 500GB (Windows >>>>> Boot), Seagate 7500RPM SATAIII 2TB (Data), Seagate 7500RPM SATAIII >>>>> 500GB >>>>> (Linux), Thermaltake Toughpower 750W PSU >>>>> >>>>> Also my analogy of a well tuned and clean system, will run top gun for >>>>> many years compared to cutting edge modern hardware today getting >>>>> bogged >>>>> down with willy nilly installed and unmaintained software (but again if >>>>> this is maintained it will remain a top gun from it's day of purchase >>>>> and clobber my hardware performance). I see and read too many who throw >>>>> good money at high end systems only to have them slow a few months >>>>> later, and many who poer poer the idea of cleaning a system (registry >>>>> and boot processes), and defragging it. So here's my tested speeds of >>>>> this system above. >>>>> >>>>> PC switch on to ready state to use (Windows 7 64bit, with a dual boot >>>>> menu selection and the login screen) = 40 seconds >>>>> PC switch on to ready state to use (Ubuntu 13.04 64bit, with a dual >>>>> boot >>>>> menu selection and the login screen) = 20 seconds >>>>> >>>>> LO Writer from click on icon to ready to type / menu clicks (Windows 7 >>>>> 64bit) etc. - 3 seconds >>>>> LO Writer from click on icon to ready to type / menu clicks (Ubuntu >>>>> 13.04 64bit) etc. - 3 seconds >>>>> LO Calc from click on icon to ready to type / menu clicks (Windows 7 >>>>> 64bit) etc. - 3 seconds >>>>> LO Calc from click on icon to ready to type / menu clicks (Ubuntu 13.04 >>>>> 64bit) etc. - 3 seconds >>>>> LO Impress from click on icon to ready to type / menu clicks (Windows 7 >>>>> 64bit) etc. - 3 seconds >>>>> LO Impress from click on icon to ready to type / menu clicks (Ubuntu >>>>> 13.04 64bit) etc. - 3 seconds >>>>> >>>>> All the above to load a file directly i.e click on the data file which >>>>> loads the appropriate app (and I chose files of around 5MB - 4 seconds >>>>> for Writer, 5 seconds for Calc and 5 seconds for Impress in both O/S's. >>>>> >>>>> PC shutdown, from time to click on shutdown options to cold and dark >>>>> (Windows 7 64bit) = 15 seconds >>>>> PC shutdown, from time to click on shutdown options to cold and dark >>>>> (Ubuntu 13.04 64bit) = 5 seconds >>>>> >>>>> My LO splash logo on both O/S's is displayed in under 1 second and the >>>>> scroll bar in the splash logo takes under 1 second to show it's loading >>>>> state, the balance of the time in the 3 seconds is loading the app, and >>>>> I don't use the quickstarter option and have never done. I have >>>>> supplied >>>>> the times for clicking on the data file to load the app. >>>>> >>>>> Regards >>>>> >>>>> On 05/08/2013 02:10 PM, Tom Davies wrote: >>>>>> Hi :) >>>>>> With MSO the splash screen appears immediately and keeps doing things >>>>>> to make it clear it is doing something. >>>>>> >>>>>> With LO it is ages before the splash screen appears so it looks like >>>>>> it hasn't reacted at all. >>>>>> >>>>>> So people don't trust it and they think that more time passes. It >>>>>> might be good to video the same system starting each up in turn. Also >>>>>> i think the Windows version is a lot slower to start up than the >>>>>> Ubuntu one. >>>>>> >>>>>> LO is getting better but it just doesn't look like it is. Perception >>>>>> is often more important than reality with things like this. >>>>>> Regards from >>>>>> Tom :) >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> ________________________________ >>>>>>> From: Kracked_P_P---webmaster <webmas...@krackedpress.com> >>>>>>> To: users@global.libreoffice.org >>>>>>> Sent: Monday, 5 August 2013, 12:49 >>>>>>> Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] start up speed >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> For me, I do not use the Quickstart option. Their are some >>>>>>> hassles with >>>>>>> upgrading some extensions if that is "on" all the time. I find that >>>>>>> without using that option, I have the package load up and usable for >>>>>>> editing quickly enough for my needs. It is faster than many other >>>>>>> packages I use. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The "boot" time for LO is much faster now that in the past. Also, >>>>>>> compared to MS Office, it is still faster. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> There is one other "time" that needs to be measured. The time it >>>>>>> takes >>>>>>> for you to be able to start editing. Sure you can have a package >>>>>>> start >>>>>>> up fast and show its "page view", but it does no good if you cannot >>>>>>> start working with the package if it take another minute or so to >>>>>>> allow >>>>>>> you to start working with it. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Take Writer or Word. You start the package by double-clicking the >>>>>>> icon >>>>>>> in the menu or on the screen. Then you get a splash screen. After >>>>>>> that >>>>>>> the document or a new one is seen in the "page view" window. Now, >>>>>>> how >>>>>>> long does it take from there to be able to click on a menu or start >>>>>>> typing editing the document? That is where I had a problem with MSO >>>>>>> 2003. Sure that is ten years out of date, but it was the last >>>>>>> version >>>>>>> of MSO I actually work with on a regular basis. Since 2010 I have >>>>>>> been >>>>>>> a "Linux" person with Ubuntu as my default desktop OS. So I have not >>>>>>> tried the newest version of MSO. But, with Writer, the time ti takes >>>>>> >from opening of the page view window to being able to edit or >>>>>> click on >>>>>>> the menus has been reduced by a large percentage since I started >>>>>>> using >>>>>>> LO in its early days. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> That is the real question. How much wait time do you have between >>>>>>> clicking on the icon to the print of being able to work with the >>>>>>> package. No package is as fast as people would like, i.e. click and >>>>>>> edit in a matter of a 2 or 3 seconds. Right now, with 2 browser >>>>>>> windows >>>>>>> open, this email package and 3 utilities on the screen, my Ubuntu >>>>>>> install on a mid-range quad core desktop from Feb. 2010 , takes >>>>>>> about 7 >>>>>>> seconds from click to editing. That is fast enough for me. I >>>>>>> have run >>>>>>> packages that take 15 to 30 seconds to open up to the point of using >>>>>>> it. In this day of wanting things as quick as possible, 15 to 30 >>>>>>> seconds may be too long for some people. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Yet, for those of you who have been using PCs since its early days of >>>>>>> DOS or even Windows 95, these start up times are super fast >>>>>>> compared to >>>>>>> those older systems, even with the less powerful packages that we >>>>>>> used, >>>>>>> like PC-Write for word processing. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 08/04/2013 07:21 PM, Tom Davies wrote: >>>>>>>> Hi :) >>>>>>>> You could have either of them use their Quickstarter but it's a pain >>>>>>>> and kinda blocks having the other one on your machine at the same >>>>>>>> time. >>>>>>>> Regards from >>>>>>>> Tom :) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> ________________________________ >>>>>>>>> From: Tim Lloyd <tim.ll...@gmx.com> >>>>>>>>> To: "users@global.libreoffice.org" <users@global.libreoffice.org> >>>>>>>>> Sent: Monday, 5 August 2013, 0:15 >>>>>>>>> Subject: [libreoffice-users] start up speed >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Hi All, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I saw a question on the Fedora Forum regarding the "boot" speed >>>>>>>>> of LO >>>>>>>>> which is impressive especially compared to old versions of OOo. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I think this has been discussed here in the past but I can't >>>>>>>>> find any >>>>>>>>> specific posts. Is there anything running in the background which >>>>>>>>> makes >>>>>>>>> LO start up faster? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Cheers >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org >>>>>>>>> Problems? >>>>>>>>> http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Posting guidelines + more: >>>>>>>>> http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette >>>>>>>>> List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ >>>>>>>>> All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot >>>>>>>>> be deleted >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org >>>>>>> Problems? >>>>>>> http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ >>>>>>> Posting guidelines + more: >>>>>>> http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette >>>>>>> List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ >>>>>>> All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot >>>>>>> be deleted >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org >>>> Problems? >>>> http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ >>>> Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette >>>> List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ >>>> All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot >>>> be deleted >>>> >>>> >>>> >> >> > > > >-- >To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org >Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ >Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette >List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ >All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted > > > -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
