On Apr 7, 4:24 pm, smr <[email protected]> wrote: Ah, I think I see how your mind is working now. You fixated on the following:
> > You said earlier: > "I need to be able to address 8Gig of RAM because OpenOffice and other > applications don't work when parts of them are in the swap file...at > least on Ubuntu. " > > But, when the gargantuan figure of 8GB for text editing was questioned > you admitted, which is big of you and kudos for doing it: > "Have I physically used 8Gig of RAM? No." > and completely ignored the rest of the paragraph because it didn't fit your theory. --------------- Have I physically used 8Gig of RAM? No. I've never seen a "free" report using much over 6Gig, but I had a lot of interruptions that day, so more documents and terminal sessions open than normal. --------------- I have popped over 6Gig on more than one occasion. Anything over 4Gig rules out 32-bit. If I have to work on anything larger I will definitely be bumping into the 8Gig wall. If you wait until the second you hit a wall to attempt avoiding it, things don't work out well for you. 2Gig modules are sold in pairs for under $50 for this machine. You have to put in matching pairs. You think I should hamstring it with 6Gig just so I can experience the occasional wall. You also overlooked the original problem behind all of this. Cannonical released a kernel update which allowed OO to take down __ALL__ of Ubuntu, not just itself. Check the support forums and you will see it impacted thousands of machines...yet they didn't back it out. The "March or Die" philosophy was too much for myself and many others to deal with. It will definitely stop them from ever becoming a corporate desktop standard. You simply can't DO that! > If you don't mind > me saying so I think that picking up on my "that completely escaped > me, that's very interesting" comment to another person on the group > comes across as sort of petty and I don't know if you want that > associated with your "professional" persona, if you understand what I > mean by that, and your books. It wasn't petty, nor was it meant to be. The statement pointed to someone that didn't work in IT and tended to miss things when they read. I was trying to fill in an obvious gap, not be petty. See above about 6Gig vs. 8Gig and memory modules having to be installed in matching pairs. > Your criticism of OO.o has some merit, but I do think you're selling > the marathon effort that's gone into OO.o short, it may not be good > for you but it is extremely useful for millions of people who cannot > easily afford modern commercial word processing/spreadsheet/ > presentation software. As you say yourself, it ably handles a 20 page > term paper and it's crucial, particularly for authors selling their > work I suppose, to remember that not everybody is writing a technical, > illustrated book. If you need to type a 20 page term paper you've got > a bigger concern right there than the structural design decisions > which shaped your word processor. "Good enough is", to quote a joke > from Reader's Digest. It performs a really crucial job of attracting > people to free and open source software, concerns about its > (potentially) monolithic structure aside. It is a huge program now, > though, and receives a lot of criticism for being sluggish on some > systems and that's a worry because it's one of the poster child > projects for open source. > There are lots of other free word processors out there. OpenOffice came very close to being discontinued this week. Sure, the non-paid community developers might still have worked on it some, but the SUN developers wouldn't have been working on it any more. If you really like OO, you should thank whatever powers you praise that IBM walked away from the deal table this week. Symphony is a much better designed product. It may not have all of the features, but it has a much more solid design. It is also free. I've never known IBM to pay to keep two competing free products going. You need to check out Lotus Symphony. If you are running a crippled 32-bit OS, there will be a direct install package on their site for you. Thankfully, OpenSuSE got the 32-bit to 64-bit bridge libraries done correctly...a feat Ubuntu hasn't even come close to achieving...the 32-bit RPM installed just fine on OpenSuSE 11.1. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ubuntu Linux" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/ubuntulinux?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
