Jean asks:

> I'd like to know what to write in the "Starting OOo" chapter of the
Getting
> Started guide. What the heck is the Quickstarter *for*? Why bother with
it?

About the only thing I wanted to read before trying
OO.o follows:

The quick starter loads library (.dll) files required by OO.o
components in advance, shortening the startup for OO.o
components by about half.

The times change from slightly more than 1 minute without
quickstart to about 30 seconds with for 1.9.69 on my
Athlon 750 Mhz 200 MHz frontside bus 130 MHz 7200
RPM disks using XP.)

You might want to give different numbers, as any $500
machine bought today  is likely to be a lot faster.

As you and others point out, on earlier versions right clicking
produced a menu of links for starting the several OO.o
components.

I liked this feature. As you read, this follows  Microsoft
application guidelines closely, I think too closely.

Warm Regards,
David Teague,
Advocating Free Software and
Double Bass tuned in fifths
www.dennismasuzzo.com
www.silviodallatorre.com
www.joelquarrington.com/
For information on Red  Mitchell, see
http://home.teleport.com/~mimuma/
www.larryholloway.com
http://cs.wcu.edu/~dbt



----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Jean Hollis Weber" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, March 04, 2005 9:26 PM
Subject: Re: [authors] OOo2.0 Quickstarter on Windows?


> I now understand that the components don't pop up at all any more. I've
> read the issue on the subject; thanks for the pointer to it.
>
> What I don't understand is what the Quickstarter does, if anything, when
it
> is loaded into the system tray. Clicking (or double clicking) on it has no
> effect; OOo does not start.
>
> Is it supposed to speed up the opening of OOo when you start OOo some
other
> way? I haven't seen any evidence of that, though I haven't done a
carefully
> timed test.
>
> I'd like to know what to write in the "Starting OOo" chapter of the
Getting
> Started guide. What the heck is the Quickstarter *for*? Why bother with
it?
>
> Thanks, Jean
>
>


Reply via email to