Re: [libreoffice-users] start up speed
Hi Tom Many times there are sneaky spamware, not necessarily malware, generally called PUP's (Potentially Unwanted Programs), that are bundled with a downloaded or disk based program, and we all just click next next next, instead of hesitating and checking to see if there is a minuscule tick box to uncheck the loading of a add-on PUP. And most times it's these PUP's that are robbing the resources of a system, mostly monitoring a users PC habits and emails, and then phoning home with their collected data. This is how spam gets to all of us. I regularly use the ctrl shift esc key sequence to bring up the Windows Task manager to see what processes are running, and then I edit my registry (two places, under the user account and the system account) to find and remove these self loading PUP's, and also tracing where they lie on my hard drive and either uninstalling them or my favourite part, simply delete them, and if Windows cannot do this, then my trusty Linux does (most times they are difficult to remove while Windows is running, or they self protect themselves, changing the permission and file attributes to beyond the administrator level). I will not post how to edit the registry on this open forum as I don't want to be held responsible for inexperienced people tinkering, tampering and then messing up their system, but I'll email it privately to anyone that wants to know with the risk on your own head, as to where you go in the registry and what keys to work with. So as I said a clean system, with correct AND TRUSTWORTHY software tools, along with correct defragging makes for a fast system at all times. I can also let people know, if they want via private mail, as to the tools I use and only trust for this. There is plenty payware (and freeware) GARBAGE out there that do keep their promises of really cleaning your system, i.e. wipe all of your O/S and data for you. Regards On 05/08/2013 11:03 PM, Tom Davies wrote: Hi :) That is weird. On this fairly crumby laptop, 2.2GHz (hmmm, not so crumby after all) it took about 0-1 seconds for the LO splash-screen to appear. Same on my really nice desktop, 1.86GHz (hmmm, not so nice after all!). Both running Ubuntu and fairly old versions of LO (i think). Meanwhile on Windows 2.93GHz it took about 1s to open Writer completely. Didn't even have time to see the splash screen. Now i guess i need to find the machines that are having the slow start-ups and maybe find out why. Dunno why i am getting unusually good results on these 3 machines except that i have just done tons of maintenance on the laptop for the first time in years and i tend to look after those 2 desktops more than any others in the office Regards from Tom :) From: Kracked_P_P---webmasterwebmas...@krackedpress.com To:users@global.libreoffice.org Sent: Monday, 5 August 2013, 17:39 Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] start up speed Yes, I get 3 seconds from clicking on the panel icon to the appearance of the splash screen. I sometimes see a progress bar if I am running a lot of packages and need to open a document within LO. Just now, the splash screen came on and in about a second or two the page view windows [or whatever it is officially called] replaced the splash screen and the progress bar did not have the time to show any progress. I run an AMD Phenom X4 9650 64-bit quad core running either 1.15 or 2.3 GHz depending on the system need at the time. It has an internal NVIDIA GeForce 7025 video on a ASRock N68-S motherboard. I could upgrade the processor since it is AM3 ready. The system was a custom build so it is not a name brand system. I have 4 GB of ram, most likely DDR2. All four of the SATA ports are used, and it stated they are SATA II @ 3.0 Gb/s. There are some internals that was designed for Windows, that are not accessible using Linux, but I do not notice any issues. I have a 600 watt power, just in case I decided to add a powerful GPU video. I have not so far. I was told that this system was somewhere shy of the top quarter of the AMD processors for power, when it came out. I just call it mid-range. I do not remember the drive companies, but in Feb. 2010 it had a 1-TB drive and an IDE optical DVD burner. The spring of 2012, I installed a 2-TB drive [big-drive] and by the fall I added another 2-TB drive [data-two]. A few weeks ago I added the SATA DVD burner. So now all 4 SATA II ports are in use. I want to replace the aging 1-TB OS and active data drive with a 2-TB one with it partitioned as 300-500 for the OS and data, then the rest being a data-only partition. That will give me a total of 6-TB in the desktop. The next drive purchase will be to replace the first 2-TB drive with a 3 or 4 TB one. The current drives have 78.8 GB, 113.8 GB, and 55.2 GB free space on them. So it is time to think about adding the extra TB or more to the desktop. I just have to either replace a drive
Re: [libreoffice-users] start up speed
Ha! Ha! there you go, LO just runs on whatever platform and O/S of your choice. And for the most part, what is a minute or less really from switch on to productive use of something. I can't make a cup of tea in that time, and I mean a real brewed cup of tea. Now at least the movies can show an actor sitting down in front of a PC and almost instantly start to work on it, I used to laugh at this in the past :-P Regards Andrew On 06/08/2013 04:12 AM, Virgil Arrington wrote: On 08/05/2013 05:03 PM, Tom Davies wrote: Hi :) That is weird. On this fairly crumby laptop, 2.2GHz (hmmm, not so crumby after all) it took about 0-1 seconds for the LO splash-screen to appear. Same on my really nice desktop, 1.86GHz (hmmm, not so nice after all!). Both running Ubuntu and fairly old versions of LO (i think). Meanwhile on Windows 2.93GHz it took about 1s to open Writer completely. Didn't even have time to see the splash screen. I have a Sony Vaio laptop. I'm running a dual boot Windows 7 and Linux Mint 15 (running in the Windows WUBI installer). I just started using LO 4 on the Linux Mint side and immediately noticed how much faster it runs on Mint rather than Win7. I'm sure there are a lot of variables, and I haven't tested them all, but so far, I'm really pleased with the performance of LO on Mint. Virgil -- 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
Re: [libreoffice-users] Libre Office on various operating systems
Hi Bruce Yep, nice feedback of what can be done, thanks for that. This should get you going then, if Mark Shuttleworth pulls it off with his upcoming device Ubuntu Edge and Ubuntu Touch. Both Ubuntu and Android running side by side, with no routing/jailbreaking (a risky thing to do if you don't know what you are doing and can void your warranty, just a warning for the inexperienced here). I posted this about a week back on this mailing list. Enjoy the read. http://www.indiegogo.com/projects/ubuntu-edge Regards On 06/08/2013 05:39 AM, Bruce Carlson wrote: Hi to all in the community, I've been reading emails from a number of users who have been having difficulties with Libre Office on a variety of operating systems. I'd like to report a success story. I have managed to set up Ubuntu in a virtual space on a rooted Samsung galaxy tab 2, 10.1 running android 4.0.2 and using android VNC to access the Ubuntu GUI. On the Ubuntu OS I'm running Libre Office 3.5.2.2. This is the first time I've been able to get a fully featured office suite running on any android tablet. The results are fantastic Beyond my wildest hopes. The speed on loading Libre Office is a little slow but once it is loaded, opening, creating and editing documents is almost as good as on my core I7 windows 64 machine I am now able to go to meetings in any of our company's offices and open, create and edit all types of office documents and all I have to take with me is a 10.1 tablet (I also have a Samsung purpose built keyboard - docking station that tends to make things easy but it's the performance of Libre Office that I'm most impressed with. While this method of running linux / Libre Office on tablets may not be the most perfect method, it does give pointers to how developers could upgrade existing systems to run on modern tablet devices without spending too much time and thought on creating new GUI's etc. when what we have is already working. I suspect that many developers are afraid of using methods for pointing and user input devices that have been developed over many years on new touch screens and think that completely new interfaces MUST be developed. Also there is no need to cut out functionality or change tool bars etc. These devices can handle the existing applications with all their features. With touch screens we should not try to over complicate things. Multi touch with zoom and tilt and scroll are fine and should not introduce too many new problems but with single touch actions just stick to the simple:- 1 touch = left click Double touch = double click Touch and hold = left click Touch and drag = Left click and drag. At least that's my experience and thoughts Food for thought -- perhaps, Kind Regards to everyone in the community, Bruce Carlson Business Systems Development Manager / IT Projects Manager [Description: Description: Description: Description: NepeanLogo_bw] Website: www.nepean.comhttp://www.nepean.com -- 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
[libreoffice-users] Base: In basic, how do you open a form to a particular record number?
This is some example code I'm using that opens a form. How do set set the current record number of the newly opened form from the basic script. Sub OpenDataEntry(oEvent As Object) Dim FrmName as string FrmName = Finalization - Data Entry ThisDatabaseDocument.FormDocuments.getByName(FrmName).open() End Sub I'm a programmer. Does anyone know where a useable API reference is for libreoffice basic? I have looked at the documentation and there is no apparent reference to ThisDatabaseDocument , FormDocuments , getByName , and etc. Surely there is a real API reference or some trick I'm missing out there Thanks Jason White -- 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
Re: [libreoffice-users] start up speed
Actually my 3 second test, as stated in a past post, was with 3 utilities open on the screen and 2 or 3 Firefox browser windows open. The utilities are always loaded at boot by my choice. I have several FF windows open with many tabs involved. That is part of my normal desktop use so I do not have to keep opening those pages every day or so, and sometimes 3 or 6 times a day. So with all that background packages, 3 seconds is not bad at all for a Ubuntu 12.04LTS system. Now on my Win7 laptops, well that is a different story, or similar maybe. I have a ton of security packages loaded up at boot time. Also there are some utilities and other options loaded, like printer management and other stuff like that. So there is much more packages running in the background with the Win7 laptops - both dual core but different power - so click to splash to ready for work will take longer. To be honest, I am one of those people that believes that Windows is a OS that can be easily infected with nasties so you must have a lot of security utilities running to keep that from happening. I know some fools that do not even run anti-virus packages. They say why bother, I am safe, I never go to sites that will infect me, or my favorite It will never happen to me. You are just paranoid. So, the key is that fact that LO is faster loading to a usable state, now, than it was last year. Also, it is not the speed to the splash screen, but the speed of how long it will take till you are able to use the package. So if you run all of the security package, like I do, on Windows it will take longer to load up completely than with less security. The same with Linux and how much is running in the background. The same system, down to the exact same CPU, RAM, drive, OS, etc., will take different times depending on what is installed and running. Even a fragmented drive will reduce the load and usage speeds. So let us just say LO is loading faster than before and if a person cannot wait for a few seconds for load time, then they will not be happy with most packages out there that does similar work. Tablets can be worse load times for their packages and I know of no one locally who has complained about that. On 08/06/2013 07:06 AM, Andrew Brown wrote: Ha! Ha! there you go, LO just runs on whatever platform and O/S of your choice. And for the most part, what is a minute or less really from switch on to productive use of something. I can't make a cup of tea in that time, and I mean a real brewed cup of tea. Now at least the movies can show an actor sitting down in front of a PC and almost instantly start to work on it, I used to laugh at this in the past :-P Regards Andrew On 06/08/2013 04:12 AM, Virgil Arrington wrote: On 08/05/2013 05:03 PM, Tom Davies wrote: Hi :) That is weird. On this fairly crumby laptop, 2.2GHz (hmmm, not so crumby after all) it took about 0-1 seconds for the LO splash-screen to appear. Same on my really nice desktop, 1.86GHz (hmmm, not so nice after all!). Both running Ubuntu and fairly old versions of LO (i think). Meanwhile on Windows 2.93GHz it took about 1s to open Writer completely. Didn't even have time to see the splash screen. I have a Sony Vaio laptop. I'm running a dual boot Windows 7 and Linux Mint 15 (running in the Windows WUBI installer). I just started using LO 4 on the Linux Mint side and immediately noticed how much faster it runs on Mint rather than Win7. I'm sure there are a lot of variables, and I haven't tested them all, but so far, I'm really pleased with the performance of LO on Mint. Virgil -- 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
RE: [libreoffice-users] What's needed for reading and writing an excel o spreedsheet file from Java
Good day. Thanks Tim for answering back. Well, to give some context, I'm working on a Java application. I was using Apache POI, which are a set of libraries to work with MS Office file formats as you kindly mention. I'm not using LibreOffice nor Apache Open Office at this time. As I wrote on the previous email, I was using apache poi for reading and writting to an Excel file, unfortunately, a .xlsx file with a size of 27M, ate 5G of my memory when opening it, throwing an OutOfMemoryError exception, so it didnt scale as required. I saw the examples of libre office for openning an Excel file, and was wondering what is required to create a java application that uses LibreOffice UNO runtime for such a task. That is, use LibreOffice for openning and manipulate Excel files from within a Java application (like in the examples: http://api.libreoffice.org/examples/java/ToDo/ToDo.java). To be clear, I'm not interested in using Apache POI, but LibreOffice for completing my task. I hope I'm clear enough now. Thanks again. Edwin F. López A. -- 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
Re: [libreoffice-users] Base: In basic, how do you open a form to a particular record number?
Jason , on the website from Roberto Benitez http://www.baseprogramming.com/ you wil find what you are looking for ! This is some example code I'm using that opens a form. How do set set the current record number of the newly opened form from the basic script. Sub OpenDataEntry(oEvent As Object) Dim FrmName as string FrmName = Finalization - Data Entry ThisDatabaseDocument.FormDocuments.getByName(FrmName).open() End Sub I'm a programmer. Does anyone know where a useable API reference is for libreoffice basic? I have looked at the documentation and there is no apparent reference to ThisDatabaseDocument , FormDocuments , getByName , and etc. Surely there is a real API reference or some trick I'm missing out there Thanks Jason White -- 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
Re: [libreoffice-users] Base: In basic, how do you open a form to a particular record number?
Ok, so he put up a blog over his old site. I found the old content and the is no reference to opening a form from a basic macro. Surely the is an object reference. Aka Real documentation for Basic programming out there somewhere ? On Tue, Aug 6, 2013 at 10:24 AM, Jason White whitewaterssoftwarei...@gmail.com wrote: As far as I can tell, this website only (and I mean only) has two blog posts about Java programming. No references, nor anything else that seems useful. Perhaps the website has changed owner recently? On Tue, Aug 6, 2013 at 10:05 AM, Fernand Vanrie s...@pmgroup.be wrote: Jason , on the website from Roberto Benitez http://www.baseprogramming.com/ you wil find what you are looking for ! This is some example code I'm using that opens a form. How do set set the current record number of the newly opened form from the basic script. Sub OpenDataEntry(oEvent As Object) Dim FrmName as string FrmName = Finalization - Data Entry ThisDatabaseDocument.FormDocuments.getByName(FrmName).open() End Sub I'm a programmer. Does anyone know where a useable API reference is for libreoffice basic? I have looked at the documentation and there is no apparent reference to ThisDatabaseDocument , FormDocuments , getByName , and etc. Surely there is a real API reference or some trick I'm missing out there Thanks Jason White -- 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 -- Jason White -- Jason White -- 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
Re: [libreoffice-users] Base: In basic, how do you open a form to a particular record number?
Hi :) Maybe one of the links in this link? https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Documentation/Other_Documentation_and_Resources#Programmers It would be nice if the link that has already been given could be added in there so feel free if you know how to edit a wiki (it easy to learn by just doing it) Regards from Tom :) From: Jason White whitewaterssoftwarei...@gmail.com To: Fernand Vanrie s...@pmgroup.be Cc: users@global.libreoffice.org Sent: Tuesday, 6 August 2013, 15:24 Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] Base: In basic, how do you open a form to a particular record number? As far as I can tell, this website only (and I mean only) has two blog posts about Java programming. No references, nor anything else that seems useful. Perhaps the website has changed owner recently? On Tue, Aug 6, 2013 at 10:05 AM, Fernand Vanrie s...@pmgroup.be wrote: Jason , on the website from Roberto Benitez http://www.baseprogramming.com/ you wil find what you are looking for ! This is some example code I'm using that opens a form. How do set set the current record number of the newly opened form from the basic script. Sub OpenDataEntry(oEvent As Object) Dim FrmName as string FrmName = Finalization - Data Entry ThisDatabaseDocument.FormDocuments.getByName(FrmName).open() End Sub I'm a programmer. Does anyone know where a useable API reference is for libreoffice basic? I have looked at the documentation and there is no apparent reference to ThisDatabaseDocument , FormDocuments , getByName , and etc. Surely there is a real API reference or some trick I'm missing out there Thanks Jason White -- 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 -- Jason White -- 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
Re: [libreoffice-users] start up speed
Well, I have had a number of system in where I could not install or run anti-virus the installed. I wonder about the portable versions of anti-virus would work? What I usually do it remove the drive and plus it into a USB adapter and use my most secured Windows PC and scan that drive. I use Comodo [like the dragon] since it is free and it has a full Internet Security suite available for the free download. I add a bunch of other security packages to that and scan the heck out of the drive to clean any nasties that might be lurking. So with all that security running on my Win7 laptops [dual boot with Ubuntu 12.04LTS] they tend to run slower than other Windows systems others may have, but slower and safer is better than getting it infected. So, between the Win7 and Ubuntu installs, Ubuntu 64-bit runs the fastest for using LO. Less need of all those security packages running in the background is one reason. I do do a anti-virus scan nightly on my Ubuntu desktop though, just to make sure my downloaded files are clean so I will not pass on infected files to others. I like the fact than AVG has a free Android version and it scans any files that are downloaded and/or installed on my NOOK tablet. The same goes with Comodo on my Win7 systems. So, LO is a fast loading package, even with security packages running in the background, no matter which ones you choose for your Windows systems. LO runs faster on Linux, since there are less a need for all of those security packages running in the background. PLUS, unlike Windows, Linux has both a 32-bit and a 64-bit install so it matched your system a bit better. Of course one day we may have other installs specific to ARM, AMD, Intel, and other CPU types so it is tweaked for the processors. Raspberry Pi has ported LO to their version of Debian to run more efficiently on that processor and OS that has been tweaked to run the RPi. I wonder how many ported tweaks have been made for specific systems out there world wide. So LO is fast loading to the point you are able to use it. The last MSO I used loaded up to the page view window but took several minutes till you were able to edit your document. I assume MS has sped that up a bit, but I have not bough any MSO since 2003 and have not tested MSO 2010 or 2013 [yet]. Did use the trial 2007 a few times, though, but do not remember it being much better than 2003. On 08/06/2013 10:30 AM, Tom Davies wrote: Hi :) Good point. I only had the anti-malware stuff running. None of the usual other windows open. On Windows machines i typically have 2 running. 1. Microsoft Security Essentials, the one that kinda forces it's way onto your system through automatic updates and stuff even if you don't want it 2. A free one. Usually AVG in the company where i kinda work. In a different place i might be using a different one but AVG seems reasonably ok to me. On machines that are desperately slow running like that i switch off one or the other. Usually the MS one because i still don't completely trust it yet. The number 1 job of any malware has to be to either knock-out the anti-malware stuff or find a way to permanently bypass it without raising any alarms. So anti-malware stuff needs to think in a very different way from whatever in-built security might be around. I don't have any confidence in MS being able to do that. I think a 3rd party program is more likely to have different structures. On the other hand MS might have more of an idea where all their most well-known flaws are and might be able to structure their one to deal with likely threats. So, who knows which is going to be best in the next years or so. Regards from Tom :) From: Kracked_P_P---webmaster webmas...@krackedpress.com To: users@global.libreoffice.org Sent: Tuesday, 6 August 2013, 14:56 Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] start up speed Actually my 3 second test, as stated in a past post, was with 3 utilities open on the screen and 2 or 3 Firefox browser windows open. The utilities are always loaded at boot by my choice. I have several FF windows open with many tabs involved. That is part of my normal desktop use so I do not have to keep opening those pages every day or so, and sometimes 3 or 6 times a day. So with all that background packages, 3 seconds is not bad at all for a Ubuntu 12.04LTS system. Now on my Win7 laptops, well that is a different story, or similar maybe. I have a ton of security packages loaded up at boot time. Also there are some utilities and other options loaded, like printer management and other stuff like that. So there is much more packages running in the background with the Win7 laptops - both dual core but different power - so click to splash to ready for work will take longer. To be honest, I am one of those people that believes that Windows is a OS that can be easily infected with nasties so you must have a lot of
Re: [libreoffice-users] Base: In basic, how do you open a form to a particular record number?
https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/images/5/50/BH40-BaseHandbook.odt http://www.baseprogramming.com/OOBasicDatabaseDev.pdf http://www.pitonyak.org/database/ http://www.pitonyak.org/database/AndrewBase.odt http://www.pitonyak.org/oo.php These links just provide some ideas of other places to look http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/DevGuide/Database/Using_DBMS_Features http://www.openoffice.org/api/docs/common/ref/com/sun/star/sdbc/TransactionIsolation.html On 08/06/2013 09:23 AM, Jason White wrote: This is some example code I'm using that opens a form. How do set set the current record number of the newly opened form from the basic script. Sub OpenDataEntry(oEvent As Object) Dim FrmName as string FrmName = Finalization - Data Entry ThisDatabaseDocument.FormDocuments.getByName(FrmName).open() End Sub I'm a programmer. Does anyone know where a useable API reference is for libreoffice basic? I have looked at the documentation and there is no apparent reference to ThisDatabaseDocument , FormDocuments , getByName , and etc. Surely there is a real API reference or some trick I'm missing out there Thanks Jason White -- Andrew Pitonyak My Macro Document: http://www.pitonyak.org/AndrewMacro.odt Info: http://www.pitonyak.org/oo.php -- 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
Re: [libreoffice-users] Base: In basic, how do you open a form to a particular record number?
Well, thank you everyone for all the references. I've figured out the I am doing things backwards, I have the tool Xray, and the 1500 page introductory developers guide. Clearly this is a question for one of the core developers (if its not documented in the developers guide) On Tue, Aug 6, 2013 at 11:21 AM, Andrew Douglas Pitonyak and...@pitonyak.org wrote: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/images/5/50/BH40-BaseHandbook.odt http://www.baseprogramming.com/OOBasicDatabaseDev.pdf http://www.pitonyak.org/database/ http://www.pitonyak.org/database/AndrewBase.odt http://www.pitonyak.org/oo.php These links just provide some ideas of other places to look http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/DevGuide/Database/Using_DBMS_Features http://www.openoffice.org/api/docs/common/ref/com/sun/star/sdbc/TransactionIsolation.html On 08/06/2013 09:23 AM, Jason White wrote: This is some example code I'm using that opens a form. How do set set the current record number of the newly opened form from the basic script. Sub OpenDataEntry(oEvent As Object) Dim FrmName as string FrmName = Finalization - Data Entry ThisDatabaseDocument.FormDocuments.getByName(FrmName).open() End Sub I'm a programmer. Does anyone know where a useable API reference is for libreoffice basic? I have looked at the documentation and there is no apparent reference to ThisDatabaseDocument , FormDocuments , getByName , and etc. Surely there is a real API reference or some trick I'm missing out there Thanks Jason White -- Andrew Pitonyak My Macro Document: http://www.pitonyak.org/AndrewMacro.odt Info: http://www.pitonyak.org/oo.php -- 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 -- Jason White -- 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
Re: [libreoffice-users] start up speed
Hi :) I tend to take the view that some users will always manage to infect Windows without even seeming to try. Others will find their system gets infected despite elaborate precautions that no other sane person would bother with. It's more a case of setting things up so that after it does get infected you have some way of dealing with it. Sometimes it's a simple little infection other times it might need a complete reinstall. Taking reasonable precautions makes sense but too much serious hampers productivity and becomes more of a problem than an actual infection would be. Just my 2 cents Regards from Tom :) From: Kracked_P_P---webmaster webmas...@krackedpress.com To: users@global.libreoffice.org Sent: Tuesday, 6 August 2013, 16:16 Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] start up speed Well, I have had a number of system in where I could not install or run anti-virus the installed. I wonder about the portable versions of anti-virus would work? What I usually do it remove the drive and plus it into a USB adapter and use my most secured Windows PC and scan that drive. I use Comodo [like the dragon] since it is free and it has a full Internet Security suite available for the free download. I add a bunch of other security packages to that and scan the heck out of the drive to clean any nasties that might be lurking. So with all that security running on my Win7 laptops [dual boot with Ubuntu 12.04LTS] they tend to run slower than other Windows systems others may have, but slower and safer is better than getting it infected. So, between the Win7 and Ubuntu installs, Ubuntu 64-bit runs the fastest for using LO. Less need of all those security packages running in the background is one reason. I do do a anti-virus scan nightly on my Ubuntu desktop though, just to make sure my downloaded files are clean so I will not pass on infected files to others. I like the fact than AVG has a free Android version and it scans any files that are downloaded and/or installed on my NOOK tablet. The same goes with Comodo on my Win7 systems. So, LO is a fast loading package, even with security packages running in the background, no matter which ones you choose for your Windows systems. LO runs faster on Linux, since there are less a need for all of those security packages running in the background. PLUS, unlike Windows, Linux has both a 32-bit and a 64-bit install so it matched your system a bit better. Of course one day we may have other installs specific to ARM, AMD, Intel, and other CPU types so it is tweaked for the processors. Raspberry Pi has ported LO to their version of Debian to run more efficiently on that processor and OS that has been tweaked to run the RPi. I wonder how many ported tweaks have been made for specific systems out there world wide. So LO is fast loading to the point you are able to use it. The last MSO I used loaded up to the page view window but took several minutes till you were able to edit your document. I assume MS has sped that up a bit, but I have not bough any MSO since 2003 and have not tested MSO 2010 or 2013 [yet]. Did use the trial 2007 a few times, though, but do not remember it being much better than 2003. On 08/06/2013 10:30 AM, Tom Davies wrote: Hi :) Good point. I only had the anti-malware stuff running. None of the usual other windows open. On Windows machines i typically have 2 running. 1. Microsoft Security Essentials, the one that kinda forces it's way onto your system through automatic updates and stuff even if you don't want it 2. A free one. Usually AVG in the company where i kinda work. In a different place i might be using a different one but AVG seems reasonably ok to me. On machines that are desperately slow running like that i switch off one or the other. Usually the MS one because i still don't completely trust it yet. The number 1 job of any malware has to be to either knock-out the anti-malware stuff or find a way to permanently bypass it without raising any alarms. So anti-malware stuff needs to think in a very different way from whatever in-built security might be around. I don't have any confidence in MS being able to do that. I think a 3rd party program is more likely to have different structures. On the other hand MS might have more of an idea where all their most well-known flaws are and might be able to structure their one to deal with likely threats. So, who knows which is going to be best in the next years or so. Regards from Tom :) From: Kracked_P_P---webmaster webmas...@krackedpress.com To: users@global.libreoffice.org Sent: Tuesday, 6 August 2013, 14:56 Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] start up speed Actually my 3 second test, as stated in a past post, was with 3 utilities open on the screen and 2 or 3 Firefox browser windows open. The utilities are always loaded
[libreoffice-users] North America QA Informational Session - Thanks!
Hi All, I just wanted to say thank you for the six people who attended the QA pub video/audio chat. I talked a bit more than I was planning but I hope that it was informative and that those who joined will become (or continue) a part of the great community which is LibreOffice. We hope to have a similar meeting (not so formal, less informational, more about specifics and what you've all had success/failures with) in a month. The tentative date is Friday, September 13th. If people are interested please let me know so I can get a head count - only worth it if we have enough people :) For others on user list and qa mailing list - please attend - it was really casual, I hope quite informative, and we really _*are always looking for new contributors. Remember: NO DEVELOPING SKILLS REQUIRED*_. Best, Joel -- 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
Re: [libreoffice-users] start up speed
Hi Tom You are on track, but one thing I will give in defence of freeware malware protection, is MS Security Essentials. It along with the MS firewall built in and Windows Defender built in and activated fully with MSSE installed, make for a not bad system. And you are correct, MS I am sure are fully aware of their exploitable code/bugs/weaknesses, not necessary found by themselves, but by very clever honest and dishonest malware practitioners out there. With personal experience, usage and fighting a good fight, my trust of AVG has waned big time, and MSSE is now top, as I said for freeware. One must remember freeware tools are not strong with active protection and scanning of your system, plugged in devices and email, this is where MSSE does excel. In this order, I mention a Linux scanner that is now ported to MS, as it's not bad and totally opensource. Freeware 1. MSSE 2. Avast 3. ClamAV for Windows For payware there is only two, by continuous test, both personal, business and enterprize, and without starting a flame war Kaspersky ESET Nod32 Regards Andrew Brown On 06/08/2013 04:30 PM, Tom Davies wrote: Hi :) Good point. I only had the anti-malware stuff running. None of the usual other windows open. On Windows machines i typically have 2 running. 1. Microsoft Security Essentials, the one that kinda forces it's way onto your system through automatic updates and stuff even if you don't want it 2. A free one. Usually AVG in the company where i kinda work. In a different place i might be using a different one but AVG seems reasonably ok to me. On machines that are desperately slow running like that i switch off one or the other. Usually the MS one because i still don't completely trust it yet. The number 1 job of any malware has to be to either knock-out the anti-malware stuff or find a way to permanently bypass it without raising any alarms. So anti-malware stuff needs to think in a very different way from whatever in-built security might be around. I don't have any confidence in MS being able to do that. I think a 3rd party program is more likely to have different structures. On the other hand MS might have more of an idea where all their most well-known flaws are and might be able to structure their one to deal with likely threats. So, who knows which is going to be best in the next years or so. Regards from Tom :) From: Kracked_P_P---webmaster webmas...@krackedpress.com To: users@global.libreoffice.org Sent: Tuesday, 6 August 2013, 14:56 Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] start up speed Actually my 3 second test, as stated in a past post, was with 3 utilities open on the screen and 2 or 3 Firefox browser windows open. The utilities are always loaded at boot by my choice. I have several FF windows open with many tabs involved. That is part of my normal desktop use so I do not have to keep opening those pages every day or so, and sometimes 3 or 6 times a day. So with all that background packages, 3 seconds is not bad at all for a Ubuntu 12.04LTS system. Now on my Win7 laptops, well that is a different story, or similar maybe. I have a ton of security packages loaded up at boot time. Also there are some utilities and other options loaded, like printer management and other stuff like that. So there is much more packages running in the background with the Win7 laptops - both dual core but different power - so click to splash to ready for work will take longer. To be honest, I am one of those people that believes that Windows is a OS that can be easily infected with nasties so you must have a lot of security utilities running to keep that from happening. I know some fools that do not even run anti-virus packages. They say why bother, I am safe, I never go to sites that will infect me, or my favorite It will never happen to me. You are just paranoid. So, the key is that fact that LO is faster loading to a usable state, now, than it was last year. Also, it is not the speed to the splash screen, but the speed of how long it will take till you are able to use the package. So if you run all of the security package, like I do, on Windows it will take longer to load up completely than with less security. The same with Linux and how much is running in the background. The same system, down to the exact same CPU, RAM, drive, OS, etc., will take different times depending on what is installed and running. Even a fragmented drive will reduce the load and usage speeds. So let us just say LO is loading faster than before and if a person cannot wait for a few seconds for load time, then they will not be happy with most packages out there that does similar work. Tablets can be worse load times for their packages and I know of no one locally who has complained about that. On 08/06/2013 07:06 AM, Andrew Brown wrote: Ha! Ha! there you go, LO just runs on whatever platform and O/S of your choice. And for the most
Re: Most stable version right now Fw: [libreoffice-users] stable vs new
I still abide by a statement attributed to Adam Osborne back in the 80s: He, who lives on the cutting edge of technology, gets sliced to bits. Since the 3.6 series works fine for me, I will wait until the knife edge dulls a bit before I make the leap to 4.1. Girvin Herr On 08/04/2013 02:08 PM, Tom Davies wrote: Hi :) I would only go with the 3.6.7 if you are currently on the 3.6.x branch and need to stay there or if you have need of staying with the accessibility java-bridge, older version for other programs. I think everyone else is better off with 4.0.4 and perhaps update in that branch as it steadily marches onwards. On the other hand i still have plenty of machines on 3.5.something and it's a free world so you can do as you please. Regards from Tom :) - Forwarded Message - From: Girvin R. Herr girvin.h...@sbcglobal.net To: Tom Davies tomdavie...@yahoo.co.uk Cc: V Stuart Foote vstuart.fo...@utsa.edu; users@global.libreoffice.org users@global.libreoffice.org Sent: Sunday, 4 August 2013, 21:23 Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] stable vs new Tom, To me: stability = productivity But I am just a lowly user. Nice description! I saved it for future reference. Now I know why I keep getting 3.x update notices when 4.x has been released some time ago. That surprised, but pleased, me. As a result of your description, I will have to repackage and install 3.6.7 after my monthly backup today. Girvin Herr On 08/04/2013 10:35 AM, Tom Davies wrote: Hi :) Yes, i was trying to keep it simple and practical by avoiding side issues or detail. Even so my post turned out to be a lot longer than planned! For some projects stability = stagnation ie that the 3.0.0 could be considered stable because pretty much all the bugs are known issues and mostly written-up somewhere. That has never been considered good enough in LO. The earlier releases in a branch are not considered more stable after the branch reaches .3 or .4. It's only the .3 or .4 and onwards that are considered more stable. Time-based releases vs release when ready. Whichever methodology is used it's only after initial proper release that the thing gets used on the mad set-ups out in the real world that most problems surface and get fixed. With MS products many corporates wouldn't consider installing before Service Pack 1 got released, which means it's only after SP 1 that many problems come to light! So, i agree with Stuart and most of the rest of the project on this issue. I'm sure the arguments about which is best will continue for another 7 years in most projects (and possibly longer). We all get to play ginea pig but we would with proprietary software too. The difference is that if a problem we reported does get fixed we get the fix for free along with all the updates that we didn't help with. There is no paying for upgrades or being pushed into buying a different bundle by some salesman. Regards from Tom :) From: V Stuart Foote vstuart.fo...@utsa.edu To: users@global.libreoffice.org users@global.libreoffice.org Sent: Sunday, 4 August 2013, 16:58 Subject: RE: [libreoffice-users] stable vs new Folks, In opening this thread ( Nabble http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/stable-vs-new-tp4068750.html ) Tom is correct in a practical sense. Stability is an inherent component of a mature product. And testing during the development cycles by more potential user willing to invest a little time in QA is essential to the health of the project. But a key aspect Tom omits is that LibreOffice development and release stages are tightly timed--and by proxy so is its support. Nor does he mention that the project has stayed on schedule since inception--synchronizing to a six month minor release cycle implemented in a broader ecosystem of Free and Open Source Software. The Release Plan for LibreOffice publishes the release schedule, current status and a historical record of the project, worth a read: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Release_Plan Keeping to the time based release plan means that the delay between initial release on a minor version and the next minor version release is just six months. And that the delay between the x.x.0 release and each bug fix release has been and will continue to be just one month. So, while I don't completely agree Toms' assessment of how far along each bug fix takes things--it is just not the way the user feedback, QA,and development work proceeds--but it is not unreasonable practical advise. Support has kept to the same cycle--for the most part--user documentation (static HTML or wiki based, and published) can always use more active contributors and lags a bit as a result. This is not just development churn, there is solid User eXperience, QA and development work at every tick of the release cycle. And as a minor release nears end of its development life it gets less and less development
Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: stable vs new
Stuart, Thanks for taking the time to explain this. You are correct, I tend to be in the late recommended to early conservative category. I also believe in if it ain't broke, don't fix it. and LO 3.6 is currently working fine for what I expect of it. I also have another rule that unless there is a really, really compelling reason to, I never install software with a version ending in zero, like 4.0 or 4.1.0. Therefore, I am holding out for the 4.1.3+ release. Thanks again. Girvin On 08/04/2013 02:03 PM, V Stuart Foote wrote: Girvin, Girvin R. Herr wrote Now I know why I keep getting 3.x update notices when 4.x has been released some time ago. That surprised, but pleased, me. As a result of your description, I will have to repackage and install 3.6.7 after my monthly backup today. Absolutely, there is nothing wrong with continuing to use the earlier releases. Just be aware that the 3.6.x minor release will be designated EOL development status the 15th of this month. Meaning, it is a final release (for the minor and 3.6 major branch) No further patches will be accepted for the release and no project effort to fix compatibility or security issues. Support will continue in the mail list forum and the Ask site as well as Bugzilla issue tracking---but quality of that support will slack off as fewer users maintain a 3.6.x branch install. LibOReleaseLifecycle.png https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/images/2/2c/LibOReleaseLifecycle.png This graphic from the release plan presents a concise view of the project. With work on the master branch extending into the future, each minor release branch is categorized as release canidate, for Early adopters, for Recommended use, for Conservative use. With its EOL eminent, using 3.6.7 you would be well in the Conservative category--meaning simply that it is not the Project recommended category, which has shifted to the 4.0 major release--a 4.0.4 build. Please note, that when released at the end of the month--the 4.0.5 build will also transition to a conservative category. But as you say, what ever works best for your productivity, we just want you and others to understand the project infrastructure and how best they can contribute. Stuart -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/stable-vs-new-tp4068750p4068822.html Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- 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
Re: [libreoffice-users] start up speed
On 08/06/2013 11:49 AM, Tom Davies wrote: Hi :) I tend to take the view that some users will always manage to infect Windows without even seeming to try. Others will find their system gets infected despite elaborate precautions that no other sane person would bother with. It's more a case of setting things up so that after it does get infected you have some way of dealing with it. Sometimes it's a simple little infection other times it might need a complete reinstall. Taking reasonable precautions makes sense but too much serious hampers productivity and becomes more of a problem than an actual infection would be. Just my 2 cents Regards from Tom :) When I signed up for my local Cable/Internet service, I was given a free subscription to McAfee AntiVirus. Whether or not it provides good protection, I'll never know as it slowed my computer down to a crawl, with frequent updating and automatic scanning. I got so frustrated that I uninstalled it and installed MS Security Essentials. I have found no reason to distrust SE, and it seems to behave and at least stays out of way when I'm working. Virgil -- 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
Re: Most stable version right now Fw: [libreoffice-users] stable vs new
On 08/06/2013 02:07 PM, Girvin R. Herr wrote: I still abide by a statement attributed to Adam Osborne back in the 80s: He, who lives on the cutting edge of technology, gets sliced to bits. Since the 3.6 series works fine for me, I will wait until the knife edge dulls a bit before I make the leap to 4.1. Girvin Herr I'm with you on this. 3.6.7 works just fine for me. Virgil -- 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
Re: [libreoffice-users] start up speed
Hi :) I've not had any problems with AVG so far. Afaik! But i definitely think anti-malware stuff is definitely one of those things that people have to make up their own minds about which is best for them. After-all if it works really well then you never know it's doing anything. if it does log lots of things happening then is that stuff that it's making up or would the attacks have happened anyway. It's a bit like the fella in Peckham sprinkling anti-elephant powder on his doorstep each morning. It 'obviously' works because there are no elephants in Peckham. Even better is the example from House MD where a lady said that her monthles had stopped but that was one of the possible side effects of her birth-control pills working. House pointed out it was also a possible side-effect of her pills NOT working. Regards from Tom :) From: Andrew Brown andre...@icon.co.za To: Tom Davies tomdavie...@yahoo.co.uk Cc: Kracked_P_P---webmaster webmas...@krackedpress.com; users@global.libreoffice.org Sent: Tuesday, 6 August 2013, 19:05 Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] start up speed Hi Tom You are on track, but one thing I will give in defence of freeware malware protection, is MS Security Essentials. It along with the MS firewall built in and Windows Defender built in and activated fully with MSSE installed, make for a not bad system. And you are correct, MS I am sure are fully aware of their exploitable code/bugs/weaknesses, not necessary found by themselves, but by very clever honest and dishonest malware practitioners out there. With personal experience, usage and fighting a good fight, my trust of AVG has waned big time, and MSSE is now top, as I said for freeware. One must remember freeware tools are not strong with active protection and scanning of your system, plugged in devices and email, this is where MSSE does excel. In this order, I mention a Linux scanner that is now ported to MS, as it's not bad and totally opensource. Freeware 1. MSSE 2. Avast 3. ClamAV for Windows For payware there is only two, by continuous test, both personal, business and enterprize, and without starting a flame war Kaspersky ESET Nod32 Regards Andrew Brown On 06/08/2013 04:30 PM, Tom Davies wrote: Hi :) Good point. I only had the anti-malware stuff running. None of the usual other windows open. On Windows machines i typically have 2 running. 1. Microsoft Security Essentials, the one that kinda forces it's way onto your system through automatic updates and stuff even if you don't want it 2. A free one. Usually AVG in the company where i kinda work. In a different place i might be using a different one but AVG seems reasonably ok to me. On machines that are desperately slow running like that i switch off one or the other. Usually the MS one because i still don't completely trust it yet. The number 1 job of any malware has to be to either knock-out the anti-malware stuff or find a way to permanently bypass it without raising any alarms. So anti-malware stuff needs to think in a very different way from whatever in-built security might be around. I don't have any confidence in MS being able to do that. I think a 3rd party program is more likely to have different structures. On the other hand MS might have more of an idea where all their most well-known flaws are and might be able to structure their one to deal with likely threats. So, who knows which is going to be best in the next years or so. Regards from Tom :) From: Kracked_P_P---webmaster webmas...@krackedpress.com To: users@global.libreoffice.org Sent: Tuesday, 6 August 2013, 14:56 Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] start up speed Actually my 3 second test, as stated in a past post, was with 3 utilities open on the screen and 2 or 3 Firefox browser windows open. The utilities are always loaded at boot by my choice. I have several FF windows open with many tabs involved. That is part of my normal desktop use so I do not have to keep opening those pages every day or so, and sometimes 3 or 6 times a day. So with all that background packages, 3 seconds is not bad at all for a Ubuntu 12.04LTS system. Now on my Win7 laptops, well that is a different story, or similar maybe. I have a ton of security packages loaded up at boot time. Also there are some utilities and other options loaded, like printer management and other stuff like that. So there is much more packages running in the background with the Win7 laptops - both dual core but different power - so click to splash to ready for work will take longer. To be honest, I am one of those people that believes that Windows is a OS that can be easily infected with nasties so you must have a lot of security utilities running to keep that from happening. I know some fools that do not even run anti-virus packages. They say why
Re: [libreoffice-users] start up speed
Hi :) Hmm, MS Security Essentials does seem to be quite fast and lets the system run reasonably well. I'm tempted to turn slow system over to just that one instead of the free one. Regards from Tom :) From: Virgil Arrington cuyfa...@hotmail.com To: users@global.libreoffice.org Sent: Tuesday, 6 August 2013, 19:59 Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] start up speed On 08/06/2013 11:49 AM, Tom Davies wrote: Hi :) I tend to take the view that some users will always manage to infect Windows without even seeming to try. Others will find their system gets infected despite elaborate precautions that no other sane person would bother with. It's more a case of setting things up so that after it does get infected you have some way of dealing with it. Sometimes it's a simple little infection other times it might need a complete reinstall. Taking reasonable precautions makes sense but too much serious hampers productivity and becomes more of a problem than an actual infection would be. Just my 2 cents Regards from Tom :) When I signed up for my local Cable/Internet service, I was given a free subscription to McAfee AntiVirus. Whether or not it provides good protection, I'll never know as it slowed my computer down to a crawl, with frequent updating and automatic scanning. I got so frustrated that I uninstalled it and installed MS Security Essentials. I have found no reason to distrust SE, and it seems to behave and at least stays out of way when I'm working. Virgil -- 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
Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: start up speed
Hi Ken Interesting, I'll need to do some more intense reading of the web page, a nice find. The chart is a bit congested, and they don't seem to cover the freeware versions of the payware versions on the chart, and the ones I mentioned below. It would be interesting to see where they fare against MS's free tools at 90%. Don't get me wrong I'm no fan of MS in any way, but at least their built-in and add-on security products cannot be thumb-nosed at. I personally use Kapsersky Pure 3.0 for all freestanding customer and personal / home PC's and Kaspersky ES (Endpoint Security) or TS (Total Security) for my bigger stuff and client servers. And as can be seen those that seems to score high faired only one test before it looks like they failed (all in red text), so this is not good, brands to avoid, even if they look good as no.1 on paper. Hype, as I say bull baffles brains. Thanks for this link. I like going over stuff like this. Andrew Brown On 06/08/2013 08:54 PM, Ken Springer wrote: Andrew, Just interested in your comments/thoughts on this site: http://www.virusbtn.com/vb100/rap-index.xml On 8/6/13 12:05 PM, Andrew Brown wrote: Hi Tom You are on track, but one thing I will give in defence of freeware malware protection, is MS Security Essentials. It along with the MS firewall built in and Windows Defender built in and activated fully with MSSE installed, make for a not bad system. And you are correct, MS I am sure are fully aware of their exploitable code/bugs/weaknesses, not necessary found by themselves, but by very clever honest and dishonest malware practitioners out there. With personal experience, usage and fighting a good fight, my trust of AVG has waned big time, and MSSE is now top, as I said for freeware. One must remember freeware tools are not strong with active protection and scanning of your system, plugged in devices and email, this is where MSSE does excel. In this order, I mention a Linux scanner that is now ported to MS, as it's not bad and totally opensource. Freeware 1. MSSE 2. Avast 3. ClamAV for Windows For payware there is only two, by continuous test, both personal, business and enterprize, and without starting a flame war Kaspersky ESET Nod32 Regards Andrew Brown On 06/08/2013 04:30 PM, Tom Davies wrote: Hi :) Good point. I only had the anti-malware stuff running. None of the usual other windows open. On Windows machines i typically have 2 running. 1. Microsoft Security Essentials, the one that kinda forces it's way onto your system through automatic updates and stuff even if you don't want it 2. A free one. Usually AVG in the company where i kinda work. In a different place i might be using a different one but AVG seems reasonably ok to me. On machines that are desperately slow running like that i switch off one or the other. Usually the MS one because i still don't completely trust it yet. The number 1 job of any malware has to be to either knock-out the anti-malware stuff or find a way to permanently bypass it without raising any alarms. So anti-malware stuff needs to think in a very different way from whatever in-built security might be around. I don't have any confidence in MS being able to do that. I think a 3rd party program is more likely to have different structures. On the other hand MS might have more of an idea where all their most well-known flaws are and might be able to structure their one to deal with likely threats. So, who knows which is going to be best in the next years or so. Regards from Tom :) snip -- 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
Re: Most stable version right now Fw: [libreoffice-users] stable vs new
Heh! Heh! nice one Girvin. I will have to sensor my saying my late military father used to drum into me. Similiar to Adam Osbourne and applied in a military vein, and I take no credit from it, or know who the original author is etc. The pain and frustration of living on the cutting edge, is like being an ant sliding down a 20 foot razor blade using your (part of the male anatomy, rhymes with many golf balls) as brakes Regards Andrew Brown On 06/08/2013 09:05 PM, Virgil Arrington wrote: On 08/06/2013 02:07 PM, Girvin R. Herr wrote: I still abide by a statement attributed to Adam Osborne back in the 80s: He, who lives on the cutting edge of technology, gets sliced to bits. Since the 3.6 series works fine for me, I will wait until the knife edge dulls a bit before I make the leap to 4.1. Girvin Herr I'm with you on this. 3.6.7 works just fine for me. Virgil -- 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
[libreoffice-users] Does LO Writer converts (internally) any format other than .odt to .odt when it wants to open such files?
Hello, As I've described my story before I've already written many parts of my thesis with LO Writer and now I'm finalizing it using LO Writer. However because the original format of my University template was in .doc format I've already saved my current work as a .doc file. I did this for the compatibility with MS Word in mind, but as my work expanded I found some incompatibilities between LO Writer and MS Word especially in their Numbering system and so I shifted to LO Writer system completely, but I still save my work in .doc format. However during my work with .doc format I found out that after closing and reopening the file, some very minor things don't save correctly and each time I have to fix them manually. Additionally, I noticed that when I save my work in a .doc file it shows Exporting document... in status-bar and when I open the same .doc file it shows Importing document... message. These import and export messages bring the idea in mind that LO Writer internally converts any format to .odt format when it wants to open them and vice versa during save. Now I want to know that whether this is true? I mean does LO Writer converts files to .odt when it tries to open them or it can directly work with formats other than .odt like .doc and .docx? -- 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
Re: [libreoffice-users] Base: In basic, how do you open a form to a particular record number?
Hi :) Yes, sorry for all the Rtfm answers! Prolly is best to ask on devs lists as they might have more idea of what you are doing. There are a few here that seemed to understand but it was all waaay beyond me. Regards from Tom :) From: Jason White whitewaterssoftwarei...@gmail.com To: and...@pitonyak.org Cc: users@global.libreoffice.org Sent: Tuesday, 6 August 2013, 16:43 Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] Base: In basic, how do you open a form to a particular record number? Well, thank you everyone for all the references. I've figured out the I am doing things backwards, I have the tool Xray, and the 1500 page introductory developers guide. Clearly this is a question for one of the core developers (if its not documented in the developers guide) On Tue, Aug 6, 2013 at 11:21 AM, Andrew Douglas Pitonyak and...@pitonyak.org wrote: https://wiki.documentfoundation.org/images/5/50/BH40-BaseHandbook.odt http://www.baseprogramming.com/OOBasicDatabaseDev.pdf http://www.pitonyak.org/database/ http://www.pitonyak.org/database/AndrewBase.odt http://www.pitonyak.org/oo.php These links just provide some ideas of other places to look http://wiki.openoffice.org/wiki/Documentation/DevGuide/Database/Using_DBMS_Features http://www.openoffice.org/api/docs/common/ref/com/sun/star/sdbc/TransactionIsolation.html On 08/06/2013 09:23 AM, Jason White wrote: This is some example code I'm using that opens a form. How do set set the current record number of the newly opened form from the basic script. Sub OpenDataEntry(oEvent As Object) Dim FrmName as string FrmName = Finalization - Data Entry ThisDatabaseDocument.FormDocuments.getByName(FrmName).open() End Sub I'm a programmer. Does anyone know where a useable API reference is for libreoffice basic? I have looked at the documentation and there is no apparent reference to ThisDatabaseDocument , FormDocuments , getByName , and etc. Surely there is a real API reference or some trick I'm missing out there Thanks Jason White -- Andrew Pitonyak My Macro Document: http://www.pitonyak.org/AndrewMacro.odt Info: http://www.pitonyak.org/oo.php -- 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 -- Jason White -- 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
Re: Most stable version right now Fw: [libreoffice-users] stable vs new
Andrew, Ouch! Just thinking about that one makes me wince! Take care. Girvin On 08/06/2013 12:36 PM, Andrew Brown wrote: Heh! Heh! nice one Girvin. I will have to sensor my saying my late military father used to drum into me. Similiar to Adam Osbourne and applied in a military vein, and I take no credit from it, or know who the original author is etc. The pain and frustration of living on the cutting edge, is like being an ant sliding down a 20 foot razor blade using your (part of the male anatomy, rhymes with many golf balls) as brakes Regards Andrew Brown On 06/08/2013 09:05 PM, Virgil Arrington wrote: On 08/06/2013 02:07 PM, Girvin R. Herr wrote: I still abide by a statement attributed to Adam Osborne back in the 80s: He, who lives on the cutting edge of technology, gets sliced to bits. Since the 3.6 series works fine for me, I will wait until the knife edge dulls a bit before I make the leap to 4.1. Girvin Herr I'm with you on this. 3.6.7 works just fine for me. Virgil -- 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
Re: [libreoffice-users] Does LO Writer converts (internally) any format other than .odt to .odt when it wants to open such files?
Hi :) Yes, when you are working on a document Writer treats it as a Odt. That is 1 reason why people recommend keeping an original in Odt and then only export to Doc or other formats when you need to share the document with other people on systems that don't have any of the non-MS Office Suites or programs. Other programs behave the same way. When you save in a non-native format it does a translation into that format. Regards from Tom :) From: Sina Momken digi...@gmail.com To: users@global.libreoffice.org Sent: Tuesday, 6 August 2013, 20:55 Subject: [libreoffice-users] Does LO Writer converts (internally) any format other than .odt to .odt when it wants to open such files? Hello, As I've described my story before I've already written many parts of my thesis with LO Writer and now I'm finalizing it using LO Writer. However because the original format of my University template was in .doc format I've already saved my current work as a .doc file. I did this for the compatibility with MS Word in mind, but as my work expanded I found some incompatibilities between LO Writer and MS Word especially in their Numbering system and so I shifted to LO Writer system completely, but I still save my work in .doc format. However during my work with .doc format I found out that after closing and reopening the file, some very minor things don't save correctly and each time I have to fix them manually. Additionally, I noticed that when I save my work in a .doc file it shows Exporting document... in status-bar and when I open the same .doc file it shows Importing document... message. These import and export messages bring the idea in mind that LO Writer internally converts any format to .odt format when it wants to open them and vice versa during save. Now I want to know that whether this is true? I mean does LO Writer converts files to .odt when it tries to open them or it can directly work with formats other than .odt like .doc and .docx? -- 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
Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: start up speed
Hi :) +1 Looks like they get a lot of snow Regards from Tom :) From: Andrew Brown andre...@icon.co.za To: Ken Springer snowsh...@q.com Cc: users@global.libreoffice.org Sent: Tuesday, 6 August 2013, 20:28 Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: start up speed Hi Ken Interesting, I'll need to do some more intense reading of the web page, a nice find. The chart is a bit congested, and they don't seem to cover the freeware versions of the payware versions on the chart, and the ones I mentioned below. It would be interesting to see where they fare against MS's free tools at 90%. Don't get me wrong I'm no fan of MS in any way, but at least their built-in and add-on security products cannot be thumb-nosed at. I personally use Kapsersky Pure 3.0 for all freestanding customer and personal / home PC's and Kaspersky ES (Endpoint Security) or TS (Total Security) for my bigger stuff and client servers. And as can be seen those that seems to score high faired only one test before it looks like they failed (all in red text), so this is not good, brands to avoid, even if they look good as no.1 on paper. Hype, as I say bull baffles brains. Thanks for this link. I like going over stuff like this. Andrew Brown On 06/08/2013 08:54 PM, Ken Springer wrote: Andrew, Just interested in your comments/thoughts on this site: http://www.virusbtn.com/vb100/rap-index.xml On 8/6/13 12:05 PM, Andrew Brown wrote: Hi Tom You are on track, but one thing I will give in defence of freeware malware protection, is MS Security Essentials. It along with the MS firewall built in and Windows Defender built in and activated fully with MSSE installed, make for a not bad system. And you are correct, MS I am sure are fully aware of their exploitable code/bugs/weaknesses, not necessary found by themselves, but by very clever honest and dishonest malware practitioners out there. With personal experience, usage and fighting a good fight, my trust of AVG has waned big time, and MSSE is now top, as I said for freeware. One must remember freeware tools are not strong with active protection and scanning of your system, plugged in devices and email, this is where MSSE does excel. In this order, I mention a Linux scanner that is now ported to MS, as it's not bad and totally opensource. Freeware 1. MSSE 2. Avast 3. ClamAV for Windows For payware there is only two, by continuous test, both personal, business and enterprize, and without starting a flame war Kaspersky ESET Nod32 Regards Andrew Brown On 06/08/2013 04:30 PM, Tom Davies wrote: Hi :) Good point. I only had the anti-malware stuff running. None of the usual other windows open. On Windows machines i typically have 2 running. 1. Microsoft Security Essentials, the one that kinda forces it's way onto your system through automatic updates and stuff even if you don't want it 2. A free one. Usually AVG in the company where i kinda work. In a different place i might be using a different one but AVG seems reasonably ok to me. On machines that are desperately slow running like that i switch off one or the other. Usually the MS one because i still don't completely trust it yet. The number 1 job of any malware has to be to either knock-out the anti-malware stuff or find a way to permanently bypass it without raising any alarms. So anti-malware stuff needs to think in a very different way from whatever in-built security might be around. I don't have any confidence in MS being able to do that. I think a 3rd party program is more likely to have different structures. On the other hand MS might have more of an idea where all their most well-known flaws are and might be able to structure their one to deal with likely threats. So, who knows which is going to be best in the next years or so. Regards from Tom :) snip -- 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
[libreoffice-users] Re: Does LO Writer converts (internally) any format other than .odt to .odt when it wants to open such files?
Am 06.08.2013 21:55, schrieb Sina Momken: ... does LO Writer converts files to .odt when it tries to open them or it can directly work with formats other than .odt like .doc and .docx? I think no software works directly with a file format. Files are frozen data streams, they are static. Any data bits from the file get imported into the software which stores them into its internal variables, arrays, objects, and more, then it works with them and after that stores the result again in the file. So there is always some kind of import translation of data when a software opens (i.e. reads) the file (resp. export translation when writing it). However, in the native format (as is odf for LibreOffice), this translation mostly goes 1:1 as the file format is chosen to support the software's needs best (or vice versa). In contrast, for other (i.e. non-native) formats, the software first has to convert the foreign data format into what it understands. This is done by import resp. export filters, which map the software's needs to file format givens and thus allows the software to understand foreign formats. Does this answer your question? Or did you mean something completely diffferent? Why did you ask this question? Nino -- 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
[libreoffice-users] help
-- 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
Re: [libreoffice-users] Highlighted text blinks
and then the page takes off to scroll up or down for no apparent reason ... I never had these problems before this newest computer; it's something to do with the speed of it ;-( as far as I know, there's nothing that can be done but either sit wait for the computer to finish whatever it thinks it's doing ;-) or click on some key which will cause it to stop - but be wary that nothing is highlighted or this section of your document will be gone; but ne'er to fear, it will return to you by 'undo'ing the previous action ;-) Everytime there's an 'improvement', seems to me the computer geeks have gotten ahead of the mere users once again ... t'is harder harder to maintain that middle ground ... ... ... ... ... ... ... slipping fast here ... maybe I should pull out the ol' skis ;-) From: Tim Deaton t...@timdeaton.org Date: Sun, Aug 4, 2013 at 6:14 AM Subject: [libreoffice-users] Highlighted text blinks To: LO users users@global.libreoffice.org I'm using LO 4.0.4.2 on Win7-64, but I first started noticing this at least with v3.6, maybe earlier. In Writer, when I highlight a selection of text, about once per second that highlighted area blinks (the highlighted coloring goes away for a split-second, then comes back). Is there any way to stop that blinking? -- Tim -- 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
[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
[libreoffice-users] Re: start up speed
Hi Sina You have supplied good info for LO, on your system, but I would like to point out a few issues I see why your system with LO could be slow. Your laptop was launched in May 2007 and discontinued a year later, so five to six year old technology, not completely fair to put the blame at a modern up to date LO's door for slow run times. You don't mention whether your Linux Mint with XFCE is 32bit or 64bit. If 32bit, then you are already hindered by only having 3.2GB of actual RAM available for everything you indicate you have running/open. This is a physical limit and only upgrading to a 64bit version of O/S, will it help you better to utilise your full 4 GB at least, and to upgrade to 6 or 8GB even better. And this RAM is old DDR 2 667MHZ type, quite slow compared to laptops with 1333MHZ and 1600MHZ DDR3. In the case of your laptop, when I last worked on that model of some of my clients, it was installed with a 4500RPM hard drive, the slowest spin speeds of any hard drive for battery endurance, but poorly for performance, are you sure of your speed. But even at 5400RPM it does not lend itself well to performance. Notebook drives have always lagged similiar capacity and spin speed desktop drives, due to the manufacturer focussing on battery endurance as a priority in most cases of general population consumption. Not all of us can afford the Alienware and like monsters, or VoodooPC ones either. But things are getting better hence in the last year maybe two, mechanical laptop drives have increased to 7200RPM, or gone solid state, to relieve the bottleneck, and in the case of SSD, total performance with very good battery life. I have a Toshiba midrange laptop i3, running Ubuntu 64bit and LO, about a year old now with an original 5400RPM 500GB mechanical HDD and only 2GB of RAM originally. A couple of months ago I upgraded it to a 256GB SSD, with 8GB of RAM (max of laptop), and found an incredible performance boost, in everything running on it. And as I mentioned I used heavy documents to the size of around 5MB, for my tests on my desktop, likewise not a solid scientific benchmark, but supplied as a performance indicator that LO is nut a slug as is perceived. Regards Andrew Brown On 06/08/2013 11:41 PM, Sina Momken wrote: 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
Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: start up speed
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
[libreoffice-users] How to change direction of Outline Numbering to RTL in LO Writer?
Hello I've recently found another incompatibility between LO Writer and MS Word again. As you may know I'm working on my thesis and I have to obey rules of my university template which is also provided as a .doc or .tex file. The template is originally in Farsi as an RTL language. When you open the template in MS Word, Outline Numberings are shown in Right to Left order. For example sub-chapter (section) 1 of chapter 3 is represented as ۳-۱- (with right to left order) in MS Office and LaTeX templates. But when I import that template in LO Writer, regardless of direction of the paragraph, sub-chapter 1 of chapter 3 is always shown as ۳.۱- which is still in left to right format. You can practically see this wrong numbering direction in Chapter 3 of file below which is a partially translated version of my university template: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/file/n4067241/iust_translated_english_template_for_thesis_final_%28nazanin%29_writable.doc The chapter 3 is not translated and you can see that by changing direction of paragraph of ۳.۱- to LTR, it only changes to 3.1-, both of them in left to right direction Generally speaking numbers (like ۱.۹۹ = 1.99) in Farsi are from left to right and characters are from right to left, but for Outline Numberings (i.e. Numbering of Headings) most books and publications use the right to left direction as in characters and not as in simple numbers. But it seems that LO Writer represents Outline Numberings like simpler numbers from left to right. I want to know is there any method to show numbering of headings (Tools-Outline_Numbering) in right to left direction? (e.g. sub-chapter 1 of chapter 3 as ۳-۱- instead of ۳.۱-) -- 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
[libreoffice-users] Re: start up speed
On 08/07/2013 03:00 AM, Andrew Brown wrote: Hi Sina You have supplied good info for LO, on your system, but I would like to point out a few issues I see why your system with LO could be slow. Your laptop was launched in May 2007 and discontinued a year later, so five to six year old technology, not completely fair to put the blame at a modern up to date LO's door for slow run times. I don't think it's the fault of my laptop (at least not its CPU, but maybe its RAM speed). Because I have a single core Pentium 4 @2.8GHz desktop PC with 2*1GB RAM (lower or equal frequency than 677MHz) and open and save operations on LO Writer is faster on that! I guess the problem is because of LO Writer being single-threaded which doesn't uses all power of my CPU and RAM. You don't mention whether your Linux Mint with XFCE is 32bit or 64bit. When I have 4GB RAM (2*2GB @677MHz) I know I must have a 64bit linux. So yes, I have a LMDEx64 (64bit). All my installed software are 64bit too. If 32bit, then you are already hindered by only having 3.2GB of actual RAM available for everything you indicate you have running/open. This is a physical limit and only upgrading to a 64bit version of O/S, will it help you better to utilise your full 4 GB at least, and to upgrade to 6 or 8GB even better. I'm sure that 4GB RAM is even more than enough for my work. Because I monitored the system using XFCE System Monitor (or htop) and only 30-40% of my RAM was used. Unfortunately LO Writer only used less than 400MB of my Physical Memory, while I had more than 2GB available and unused, despite the fact that LO Settings for Memory were set to their maximum (Graphics Cache-Use for LibreOffice=256MB, Memory per object=20MB, Remove from memory after=00:30, Cache for inserted objects-Number of objects=100, LibreOffice QuickStarter=Disable). And this RAM is old DDR 2 667MHZ type, quite slow compared to laptops with 1333MHZ and 1600MHZ DDR3. I can't do for that now, 667MHz is the max FBS of the laptop's motherboard and I don't have enough money to buy a new laptop. In the case of your laptop, when I last worked on that model of some of my clients, it was installed with a 4500RPM hard drive, the slowest spin speeds of any hard drive for battery endurance, but poorly for performance, are you sure of your speed. But even at 5400RPM it does not lend itself well to performance. Notebook drives have always lagged similiar capacity and spin speed desktop drives, due to the manufacturer focussing on battery endurance as a priority in most cases of general population consumption. Not all of us can afford the Alienware and like monsters, or VoodooPC ones either. But things are getting better hence in the last year maybe two, mechanical laptop drives have increased to 7200RPM, or gone solid state, to relieve the bottleneck, and in the case of SSD, total performance with very good battery life. I have replaced HDD of my laptop myself. So I'm sure that it's a Western Digital 500GB @5400rpm. However I don't think that it's a HDD problem because first the final file is less that 7MB and its write will not take so much time. Second I noticed the HDD busy LED of my laptop and either during save or open it was not busy very much. I have a Toshiba midrange laptop i3, running Ubuntu 64bit and LO, about a year old now with an original 5400RPM 500GB mechanical HDD and only 2GB of RAM originally. A couple of months ago I upgraded it to a 256GB SSD, with 8GB of RAM (max of laptop), and found an incredible performance boost, in everything running on it. The SSD may increase performance of OS but in the case of LO open and save, why should it increase performance? Why LO open and save may need heavy I/O operations while the final written file is only ~7MB and there are more than 2GB of free ram which can eliminate its need to disk cache? And as I mentioned I used heavy documents to the size of around 5MB, for my tests on my desktop, likewise not a solid scientific benchmark, but supplied as a performance indicator that LO is nut a slug as is perceived. Dunno! Surely a hardware upgrade will improve the performance but in this case I guess power of a single core of CPU and RAM speed are more effective than other factors, mainly because of wrong LO architecture. Best Regards Andrew Brown On 06/08/2013 11:41 PM, Sina Momken wrote: 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
Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: start up speed
Hi :) Even so that is not really all that low spec. It's actually qite respectable compared to a lot of systems at my work or other places. 3.2 Gb is higher than most machines in my office. Most are 1Gb or 2Gb at most. We just got a batch of new ones but i haven't really checked out the specs on them much yet. If you look at how much ram is actually being used and then at how much swap you'll probably find about 0 swap is used and only 1 or maybe 2Gb ram at the most. There's not much reason to get more ram if you're running GnuLinux. Plus LO is supposed to run quite well on lower spec anyway. The thing i found really interesting was the comparisons between different things rather than the actual figures themselves. There might be a few odd things that could be done to significantly improve the performance of the machine. Having /home on it's own partition might be nice and would make it easier to do a reintall of the OS without risk to any of the data (although backing up is always wise jic). I'm not sure if it's worth putting the time in to get that increased performance though. This guide is pretty much copypaste without really having to understand it too much but rsyncing the data to the other partition can take quite a few hours. https://help.ubuntu.com/community/Partitioning/Home/Moving During most of the process you can keep using the existing /home and then at the end use rsync again to sync-up the last bit that you changed while all that was going on. Just make sure you have a back-up of the crucial file jic you accidentally sync the wrong way around! Then the actual switch over to the new /home is very quick and if it doesn't work you can go back to the one that did work. Regards from Tom :) From: Andrew Brown andre...@icon.co.za To: Sina Momken digi...@gmail.com Cc: Tom Davies tomdavie...@yahoo.co.uk; Kracked_P_P---webmaster webmas...@krackedpress.com; users@global.libreoffice.org Sent: Tuesday, 6 August 2013, 23:30 Subject: [libreoffice-users] Re: start up speed Hi Sina You have supplied good info for LO, on your system, but I would like to point out a few issues I see why your system with LO could be slow. Your laptop was launched in May 2007 and discontinued a year later, so five to six year old technology, not completely fair to put the blame at a modern up to date LO's door for slow run times. You don't mention whether your Linux Mint with XFCE is 32bit or 64bit. If 32bit, then you are already hindered by only having 3.2GB of actual RAM available for everything you indicate you have running/open. This is a physical limit and only upgrading to a 64bit version of O/S, will it help you better to utilise your full 4 GB at least, and to upgrade to 6 or 8GB even better. And this RAM is old DDR 2 667MHZ type, quite slow compared to laptops with 1333MHZ and 1600MHZ DDR3. In the case of your laptop, when I last worked on that model of some of my clients, it was installed with a 4500RPM hard drive, the slowest spin speeds of any hard drive for battery endurance, but poorly for performance, are you sure of your speed. But even at 5400RPM it does not lend itself well to performance. Notebook drives have always lagged similiar capacity and spin speed desktop drives, due to the manufacturer focussing on battery endurance as a priority in most cases of general population consumption. Not all of us can afford the Alienware and like monsters, or VoodooPC ones either. But things are getting better hence in the last year maybe two, mechanical laptop drives have increased to 7200RPM, or gone solid state, to relieve the bottleneck, and in the case of SSD, total performance with very good battery life. I have a Toshiba midrange laptop i3, running Ubuntu 64bit and LO, about a year old now with an original 5400RPM 500GB mechanical HDD and only 2GB of RAM originally. A couple of months ago I upgraded it to a 256GB SSD, with 8GB of RAM (max of laptop), and found an incredible performance boost, in everything running on it. And as I mentioned I used heavy documents to the size of around 5MB, for my tests on my desktop, likewise not a solid scientific benchmark, but supplied as a performance indicator that LO is nut a slug as is perceived. Regards Andrew Brown On 06/08/2013 11:41 PM, Sina Momken wrote: 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
[libreoffice-users] Feature request: MATH - Include Greek letters and other symbols
Hi. It would be a good enhacement include into MATH's docking window a section for greek letters and other mathematicals symbols. Just to simplify the edition's time on academics jobs. Regards. -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Feature-request-MATH-Include-Greek-letters-and-other-symbols-tp4069117.html Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- 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
Re: [libreoffice-users] start up speed
Cable modem - i.e. always on connection - needs a Firewall and a better one than what I heard MS's built in one is. I prefer to use Comodo Internet Security suite that included anti-virus and firewall. And yes, they have a free version. They have a host of free security packages. If you use AVG, the pair it with a free firewall like Zonealarm, since the last time I knew AVG with firewall was not free. Also you should use a variety of different types of blockers and scanner/cleaners. The more you use the less likely that something might slip through all of your packages. Of course you should never have 2 firewalls and two anti-virus packages running at the same time. Then to the anti-elephant power, well just because you do not see elephant foot prints does not mean that they did not get inside your house and searched the place before leaving. The same is true with all those nasties. If you do not keep everything up-to-date, then these elephants could come in and shut down the monitors letting you know that they were ever there. I know of several cases where people never kept their security databases up-to-date and they let the elephants into the house and were never the wiser since the had the protection and never felt the need to keep it fed with the needed data bread crumbs to keep their protection happy and healthy. I know of one system that had an owner add the security and someone else removing it since it slowed down his file transfers and stopped him for accessing certain sites, one that the security would stop you from going to. On 08/06/2013 03:37 PM, Andrew Brown wrote: Well said Andrew Brown On 06/08/2013 09:10 PM, Tom Davies wrote: Hi :) I've not had any problems with AVG so far. Afaik! But i definitely think anti-malware stuff is definitely one of those things that people have to make up their own minds about which is best for them. After-all if it works really well then you never know it's doing anything. if it does log lots of things happening then is that stuff that it's making up or would the attacks have happened anyway. It's a bit like the fella in Peckham sprinkling anti-elephant powder on his doorstep each morning. It 'obviously' works because there are no elephants in Peckham. Even better is the example from House MD where a lady said that her monthles had stopped but that was one of the possible side effects of her birth-control pills working. House pointed out it was also a possible side-effect of her pills NOT working. Regards from Tom :) *From:* Andrew Brown andre...@icon.co.za *To:* Tom Davies tomdavie...@yahoo.co.uk *Cc:* Kracked_P_P---webmaster webmas...@krackedpress.com; users@global.libreoffice.org *Sent:* Tuesday, 6 August 2013, 19:05 *Subject:* Re: [libreoffice-users] start up speed Hi Tom You are on track, but one thing I will give in defence of freeware malware protection, is MS Security Essentials. It along with the MS firewall built in and Windows Defender built in and activated fully with MSSE installed, make for a not bad system. And you are correct, MS I am sure are fully aware of their exploitable code/bugs/weaknesses, not necessary found by themselves, but by very clever honest and dishonest malware practitioners out there. With personal experience, usage and fighting a good fight, my trust of AVG has waned big time, and MSSE is now top, as I said for freeware. One must remember freeware tools are not strong with active protection and scanning of your system, plugged in devices and email, this is where MSSE does excel. In this order, I mention a Linux scanner that is now ported to MS, as it's not bad and totally opensource. Freeware 1. MSSE 2. Avast 3. ClamAV for Windows For payware there is only two, by continuous test, both personal, business and enterprize, and without starting a flame war Kaspersky ESET Nod32 Regards Andrew Brown snip -- 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
Re: [libreoffice-users] Does LO Writer converts (internally) any format other than .odt to .odt when it wants to open such files?
I would save the .doc file as .odt first and then edit that .odt file. If I needed to save it back to a .doc file then I would save it as the following: document.doc ---save as document.odt ---edit and save as document-edited-v1.odt ---and then save as document-edited-v1.doc That way I save the original file[s] and keep track of the major edited versions. I do this with documents, with graphic files, and many other files that need editing and may need to back track to a previous version to redo something, specially .png and .jpg files. It may take a little more effort, and drive space, to keep original version and edits saved at various points, but if you need to go back to a version 3 days ago, for whatever reason, it would be easier to just open that file than recreate the file to that point in the edit cycle. Also, keeps a backup just in case the worse thing happens and the file you are working on crashes so bad it cannot be recovered. I have had many of those over the past 30+ years as a programmer and later in my own graphics and writing works. On 08/06/2013 04:06 PM, Tom Davies wrote: Hi :) Yes, when you are working on a document Writer treats it as a Odt. That is 1 reason why people recommend keeping an original in Odt and then only export to Doc or other formats when you need to share the document with other people on systems that don't have any of the non-MS Office Suites or programs. Other programs behave the same way. When you save in a non-native format it does a translation into that format. Regards from Tom :) From: Sina Momken digi...@gmail.com To: users@global.libreoffice.org Sent: Tuesday, 6 August 2013, 20:55 Subject: [libreoffice-users] Does LO Writer converts (internally) any format other than .odt to .odt when it wants to open such files? Hello, As I've described my story before I've already written many parts of my thesis with LO Writer and now I'm finalizing it using LO Writer. However because the original format of my University template was in .doc format I've already saved my current work as a .doc file. I did this for the compatibility with MS Word in mind, but as my work expanded I found some incompatibilities between LO Writer and MS Word especially in their Numbering system and so I shifted to LO Writer system completely, but I still save my work in .doc format. However during my work with .doc format I found out that after closing and reopening the file, some very minor things don't save correctly and each time I have to fix them manually. Additionally, I noticed that when I save my work in a .doc file it shows Exporting document... in status-bar and when I open the same .doc file it shows Importing document... message. These import and export messages bring the idea in mind that LO Writer internally converts any format to .odt format when it wants to open them and vice versa during save. Now I want to know that whether this is true? I mean does LO Writer converts files to .odt when it tries to open them or it can directly work with formats other than .odt like .doc and .docx? -- 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
[libreoffice-users] Re: start up speed
On 08/07/2013 03:14 AM, 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 :) Hi Tom, Hmmm! Very interesting idea. I don't know why the idea of writing each chapter separately was not brought to my mind. Maybe because I didn't know how Master documents work. Or maybe because the original .doc template had not used Master document. But I had seen different chapters combining together in .tex template of my university, and I was aware of that capability in LaTeX but not in LO Writer. Anyway I have currently written many parts of my work in a huge document and I must cope with it. I really don't expect LO Writer to do magic for me, especially that I've seen that MS Office is slow too in loading heavy files. But I think that MS Office is still much faster in loading and saving huge files partly because it fully uses multiple cores of a CPU, partly because it doesn't load whole of a file at once (e.g. you can read and edit first parts of a doc while it's loading further parts if needed) and partly because it can save the file while you can scroll. Anyhow, it's very important for LO to support multi-threading because number of cores in upcoming CPUs is continually increasing and without using multi-threading LO won't be able to use the vast performance power of future CPUs. I also believe that shifting LO source code from Java to C++ could be a good idea, because Java and its virtual machine have considerable overhead which could slow down the performance specifically during the work with large files. Best, Sina Momken 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
Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: start up speed
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. 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. So, maybe someone should collect some data and let us know how it worked out. Maybe we could be surprised on what we find. I sure was running DeVeDe on 2 different laptops, both as XP/Vista and Ubuntu 10.04/ U. 10.04 systems. 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
[libreoffice-users] Re: start up speed
On 8/6/13 1:28 PM, Andrew Brown wrote: Hi Ken Interesting, I'll need to do some more intense reading of the web page, a nice find. The chart is a bit congested, and they don't seem to cover the freeware versions of the payware versions on the chart, and the ones I mentioned below. It would be interesting to see where they fare against MS's free tools at 90%. Don't get me wrong I'm no fan of MS in any way, but at least their built-in and add-on security products cannot be thumb-nosed at. I personally use Kapsersky Pure 3.0 for all freestanding customer and personal / home PC's and Kaspersky ES (Endpoint Security) or TS (Total Security) for my bigger stuff and client servers. Hi, Andrew, I found out about that site a long time ago in another newsgroup, probably. But I hadn't visited in a long time, and was surprised to see some names missing, and some new ones. So the programs being tested is not stagnant. MS Essentials used to be listed, but it was in the bottom half of the pack. There's been a recent upgrade, so the old results would now be invalid. I didn't reread the site, but IIRC the programs tested are the ones submitted by others. snip -- Ken Mac OS X 10.8.4 Firefox 22.0 Thunderbird 17.0.7 LibreOffice 4.0.4.2 -- 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
[libreoffice-users] Re: Does LO Writer converts (internally) any format other than .odt to .odt when it wants to open such files?
On 08/07/2013 01:22 AM, Nino Novak wrote: Am 06.08.2013 21:55, schrieb Sina Momken: ... does LO Writer converts files to .odt when it tries to open them or it can directly work with formats other than .odt like .doc and .docx? I think no software works directly with a file format. Files are frozen data streams, they are static. Any data bits from the file get imported into the software which stores them into its internal variables, arrays, objects, and more, then it works with them and after that stores the result again in the file. So there is always some kind of import translation of data when a software opens (i.e. reads) the file (resp. export translation when writing it). However, in the native format (as is odf for LibreOffice), this translation mostly goes 1:1 as the file format is chosen to support the software's needs best (or vice versa). In contrast, for other (i.e. non-native) formats, the software first has to convert the foreign data format into what it understands. This is done by import resp. export filters, which map the software's needs to file format givens and thus allows the software to understand foreign formats. I exactly meant what you said above in my question. Of course a file is not understandable by a software and it imports its info into its data structures. A software has a 1:1 relationship between its internal set of data structures and its native file format. But is it necessary that an alien file format be converted (filtered) to the current set of data structures in the software? Maybe or maybe not. If the software has only one set of data structures and only one system to process them then the external format must be converted. But if the software has 2 different systems for storing data in memory (RAM) and analyzing them then there can be no need for conversion, because the second system has a 1:1 relation with stored data in the file. I wanted to know which of these 2 possibilities is true for LO and found out that LO has only one set of data structures which goes 1:1 with .odt format but not with .doc format. Does this answer your question? Or did you mean something completely diffferent? Why did you ask this question? Yeah you realized my question right. I asked this question because I wanted to know whether the process of doc - odt - odt' - doc' is running under LO. Because in this case it's faster, more efficient and much more stable to work directly on .odt files, which reduces the redundant processes of conversion (filtering). 1.odt - edit - 2.odt is faster and much more stable than 1.doc - internal DS of 1.odt - edit - internal DS of 2.odt - 2.doc Regards, Sina Momken Nino -- 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
[libreoffice-users] Re: start up speed
On 08/07/2013 04:00 AM, Tom Davies wrote: Hi :) Even so that is not really all that low spec. It's actually qite respectable compared to a lot of systems at my work or other places. 3.2 Gb is higher than most machines in my office. Most are 1Gb or 2Gb at most. We just got a batch of new ones but i haven't really checked out the specs on them much yet. If you look at how much ram is actually being used and then at how much swap you'll probably find about 0 swap is used and only 1 or maybe 2Gb ram at the most. There's not much reason to get more ram if you're running GnuLinux. Plus LO is supposed to run quite well on lower spec anyway. The thing i found really interesting was the comparisons between different things rather than the actual figures themselves. There might be a few odd things that could be done to significantly improve the performance of the machine. Having /home on it's own partition might be nice and would make it easier to do a reintall of the OS without risk to any of the data (although backing up is always wise jic). I'm not sure if it's worth putting the time in to get that increased performance though. This guide is pretty much copypaste without really having to understand it too much but rsyncing the data to the other partition can take quite a few hours. https://help.ubuntu.com/community/Partitioning/Home/Moving During most of the process you can keep using the existing /home and then at the end use rsync again to sync-up the last bit that you changed while all that was going on. Just make sure you have a back-up of the crucial file jic you accidentally sync the wrong way around! Then the actual switch over to the new /home is very quick and if it doesn't work you can go back to the one that did work. Regards from Tom :) Hello Davis, Thank you for your suggestion. I also have my /home placed on a separate partition than / partition. However it's not related to this issue :D Best, Sina ;) From: Andrew Brown andre...@icon.co.za To: Sina Momken digi...@gmail.com Cc: Tom Davies tomdavie...@yahoo.co.uk; Kracked_P_P---webmaster webmas...@krackedpress.com; users@global.libreoffice.org Sent: Tuesday, 6 August 2013, 23:30 Subject: [libreoffice-users] Re: start up speed Hi Sina You have supplied good info for LO, on your system, but I would like to point out a few issues I see why your system with LO could be slow. Your laptop was launched in May 2007 and discontinued a year later, so five to six year old technology, not completely fair to put the blame at a modern up to date LO's door for slow run times. You don't mention whether your Linux Mint with XFCE is 32bit or 64bit. If 32bit, then you are already hindered by only having 3.2GB of actual RAM available for everything you indicate you have running/open. This is a physical limit and only upgrading to a 64bit version of O/S, will it help you better to utilise your full 4 GB at least, and to upgrade to 6 or 8GB even better. And this RAM is old DDR 2 667MHZ type, quite slow compared to laptops with 1333MHZ and 1600MHZ DDR3. In the case of your laptop, when I last worked on that model of some of my clients, it was installed with a 4500RPM hard drive, the slowest spin speeds of any hard drive for battery endurance, but poorly for performance, are you sure of your speed. But even at 5400RPM it does not lend itself well to performance. Notebook drives have always lagged similiar capacity and spin speed desktop drives, due to the manufacturer focussing on battery endurance as a priority in most cases of general population consumption. Not all of us can afford the Alienware and like monsters, or VoodooPC ones either. But things are getting better hence in the last year maybe two, mechanical laptop drives have increased to 7200RPM, or gone solid state, to relieve the bottleneck, and in the case of SSD, total performance with very good battery life. I have a Toshiba midrange laptop i3, running Ubuntu 64bit and LO, about a year old now with an original 5400RPM 500GB mechanical HDD and only 2GB of RAM originally. A couple of months ago I upgraded it to a 256GB SSD, with 8GB of RAM (max of laptop), and found an incredible performance boost, in everything running on it. And as I mentioned I used heavy documents to the size of around 5MB, for my tests on my desktop, likewise not a solid scientific benchmark, but supplied as a performance indicator that LO is nut a slug as is perceived. Regards Andrew Brown On 06/08/2013 11:41 PM, Sina Momken wrote: 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
[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
[libreoffice-users] How to change separator of numberings in Tools-Outline_Numbering something other than '.'?
Hello, As I said before I'm working on my thesis and I have to obey format of my university template. As defined in .doc file of that template numbers in heading numberings (i.e. outline numberings) must be separated from each other by '-' character. For example sub-chapter 1 of chapter 3 must be displayed as ۳-۱- in which 3 and 1 are separated with '-' from each other. But I could not find any field for setting separator in Tools-Outline_Numbering, though there's a label named Separator without any field in front of it. You can specify the separator character after the numbering but not the separator character between numbers of a numbering. Therefor in the example above sub-chapter 1 of chapter 3 can be shown as ۳.۱. or ۳.۱- but not as ۳-۱-. You can practically see this yourself in chapter 3 of the file below: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/file/n4067241/iust_translated_english_template_for_thesis_final_%28nazanin%29_writable.doc I want to know is there a way to change the middle separator character to '.'? Regards, Sina Momken -- 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
Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: start up speed
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;
Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: start up speed
Hi :) If you have your /home on a separate partition then it might be possible to install the 64bit version of Ubuntu without disturbing your 32 it version. I tend to use a 10-15Gb partition for / for Ubuntu. It doesn't really need all that much space but Ubuntu is about the most bloated distro at the moment. Having plenty of space makes it easier when installing programs. Regards from Tom :) From: Sina Momken digi...@gmail.com To: users@global.libreoffice.org Cc: Andrew Brown andre...@icon.co.za; users@global.libreoffice.org users@global.libreoffice.org Sent: Wednesday, 7 August 2013, 2:44 Subject: [libreoffice-users] Re: start up speed On 08/07/2013 04:00 AM, Tom Davies wrote: Hi :) Even so that is not really all that low spec. It's actually qite respectable compared to a lot of systems at my work or other places. 3.2 Gb is higher than most machines in my office. Most are 1Gb or 2Gb at most. We just got a batch of new ones but i haven't really checked out the specs on them much yet. If you look at how much ram is actually being used and then at how much swap you'll probably find about 0 swap is used and only 1 or maybe 2Gb ram at the most. There's not much reason to get more ram if you're running GnuLinux. Plus LO is supposed to run quite well on lower spec anyway. The thing i found really interesting was the comparisons between different things rather than the actual figures themselves. There might be a few odd things that could be done to significantly improve the performance of the machine. Having /home on it's own partition might be nice and would make it easier to do a reintall of the OS without risk to any of the data (although backing up is always wise jic). I'm not sure if it's worth putting the time in to get that increased performance though. This guide is pretty much copypaste without really having to understand it too much but rsyncing the data to the other partition can take quite a few hours. https://help.ubuntu.com/community/Partitioning/Home/Moving During most of the process you can keep using the existing /home and then at the end use rsync again to sync-up the last bit that you changed while all that was going on. Just make sure you have a back-up of the crucial file jic you accidentally sync the wrong way around! Then the actual switch over to the new /home is very quick and if it doesn't work you can go back to the one that did work. Regards from Tom :) Hello Davis, Thank you for your suggestion. I also have my /home placed on a separate partition than / partition. However it's not related to this issue :D Best, Sina ;) From: Andrew Brown andre...@icon.co.za To: Sina Momken digi...@gmail.com Cc: Tom Davies tomdavie...@yahoo.co.uk; Kracked_P_P---webmaster webmas...@krackedpress.com; users@global.libreoffice.org Sent: Tuesday, 6 August 2013, 23:30 Subject: [libreoffice-users] Re: start up speed Hi Sina You have supplied good info for LO, on your system, but I would like to point out a few issues I see why your system with LO could be slow. Your laptop was launched in May 2007 and discontinued a year later, so five to six year old technology, not completely fair to put the blame at a modern up to date LO's door for slow run times. You don't mention whether your Linux Mint with XFCE is 32bit or 64bit. If 32bit, then you are already hindered by only having 3.2GB of actual RAM available for everything you indicate you have running/open. This is a physical limit and only upgrading to a 64bit version of O/S, will it help you better to utilise your full 4 GB at least, and to upgrade to 6 or 8GB even better. And this RAM is old DDR 2 667MHZ type, quite slow compared to laptops with 1333MHZ and 1600MHZ DDR3. In the case of your laptop, when I last worked on that model of some of my clients, it was installed with a 4500RPM hard drive, the slowest spin speeds of any hard drive for battery endurance, but poorly for performance, are you sure of your speed. But even at 5400RPM it does not lend itself well to performance. Notebook drives have always lagged similiar capacity and spin speed desktop drives, due to the manufacturer focussing on battery endurance as a priority in most cases of general population consumption. Not all of us can afford the Alienware and like monsters, or VoodooPC ones either. But things are getting better hence in the last year maybe two, mechanical laptop drives have increased to 7200RPM, or gone solid state, to relieve the bottleneck, and in the case of SSD, total performance with very good battery life. I have a Toshiba midrange laptop i3, running Ubuntu 64bit and LO, about a year old now with an original 5400RPM 500GB mechanical HDD and only 2GB of RAM originally. A couple of months ago I upgraded it to a 256GB
Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: start up speed
On 08/07/2013 01:05 AM, Tom Davies wrote: Hi :) If you have your /home on a separate partition then it might be possible to install the 64bit version of Ubuntu without disturbing your 32 it version. I tend to use a 10-15Gb partition for / for Ubuntu. It doesn't really need all that much space but Ubuntu is about the most bloated distro at the moment. Having plenty of space makes it easier when installing programs. Regards from Tom :) I did that on PCLOS. It works well, altho a few apps that are strictly 32-bit will not run on the 64-bit installation.I lost Adobe Reader on the 64-bit os, because there is no 64-bit version of that s/w. I had to go find a 64-bit version of one or two other programs. But basically, it's a lot simpler than having to back up all your files to an external storage medium and then having to copy everything back to a completely new install. You will have to make a new blank partition on the drive, using gparted or something similar, and format it to ext4 and call it / Then when you install the 64-bit version, DO NOT format /home, only / (Your distro may or may not make it mandatory to reformat / during the install, even tho you formatted it already.) Be careful when you install the 64-bit os, so as to NOT make a new /home. Note that you probably already have a swap partition, so don't make another one. Any and all Linux os's on the disk can use the one swap. It has been quite a while since I did an Ubuntu install, so I can't be more specific. And I don't think I would try this with Korora-- its installation would drive a saint crazy! (Just to get it onto two partitions is maddening!) Good luck--doug -- Blessed are the peacemakers..for they shall be shot at from both sides. --A.M.Greeley -- 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
