For me, I do not use the Quickstart option. Their are some hassles with
upgrading some extensions if that is "on" all the time. I find that
without using that option, I have the package load up and usable for
editing quickly enough for my needs. It is faster than many other
packages I use.
The "boot" time for LO is much faster now that in the past. Also,
compared to MS Office, it is still faster.
There is one other "time" that needs to be measured. The time it takes
for you to be able to start editing. Sure you can have a package start
up fast and show its "page view", but it does no good if you cannot
start working with the package if it take another minute or so to allow
you to start working with it.
Take Writer or Word. You start the package by double-clicking the icon
in the menu or on the screen. Then you get a splash screen. After that
the document or a new one is seen in the "page view" window. Now, how
long does it take from there to be able to click on a menu or start
typing editing the document? That is where I had a problem with MSO
2003. Sure that is ten years out of date, but it was the last version
of MSO I actually work with on a regular basis. Since 2010 I have been
a "Linux" person with Ubuntu as my default desktop OS. So I have not
tried the newest version of MSO. But, with Writer, the time ti takes
from opening of the page view window to being able to edit or click on
the menus has been reduced by a large percentage since I started using
LO in its early days.
That is the real question. How much wait time do you have between
clicking on the icon to the print of being able to work with the
package. No package is as fast as people would like, i.e. click and
edit in a matter of a 2 or 3 seconds. Right now, with 2 browser windows
open, this email package and 3 utilities on the screen, my Ubuntu
install on a mid-range quad core desktop from Feb. 2010 , takes about 7
seconds from click to editing. That is fast enough for me. I have run
packages that take 15 to 30 seconds to open up to the point of using
it. In this day of wanting things as quick as possible, 15 to 30
seconds may be too long for some people.
Yet, for those of you who have been using PCs since its early days of
DOS or even Windows 95, these start up times are super fast compared to
those older systems, even with the less powerful packages that we used,
like PC-Write for word processing.
On 08/04/2013 07:21 PM, Tom Davies wrote:
Hi :)
You could have either of them use their Quickstarter but it's a pain and kinda
blocks having the other one on your machine at the same time.
Regards from
Tom :)
________________________________
From: Tim Lloyd <[email protected]>
To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, 5 August 2013, 0:15
Subject: [libreoffice-users] start up speed
Hi All,
I saw a question on the Fedora Forum regarding the "boot" speed of LO
which is impressive especially compared to old versions of OOo.
I think this has been discussed here in the past but I can't find any
specific posts. Is there anything running in the background which makes
LO start up faster?
Cheers
--
To unsubscribe e-mail to: [email protected]
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: [email protected]
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
