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