I use OOo 3 beta and like it, except for starup speed. I was reading about Red Office recently (Chinese thing supposed to be based on OOo) and came across a link to Go-oo. It seems to address a few comments mentioned, including faster startup and supposedly tighter code. Anybody use it? I'm downloading it right now to give it a try...
http://go-oo.org/
Update: Seems like a customized version of OO. It won't install unless I first uninstall the OO3 beta, which won't be happening today. It states it has support for those crappy new MS formats built in, as well as Works and WordPerfect graphics.(so if that's important to you, you might want to give it a try.)

OpenOffice WILL survive and get better. It does what microsoft doesn't. It listens directly to it's users.

Don't its users say "make it faster?" but I fear this is impossible. If it was, they would have made it by now "if" they listened to the users.

"Faster computer hardware over the years makes up for the difference, the team says."

Anyway, I trully doubt they can make it faster...

They have made significant improvements to it's startup speed, and general speed of use.

I've been using it since it was owned by StarOffice gmbh, and I've seen major improvements.

Some regressions, sure but lots of maturity. I don't think it's "slow", sure it's slower than previous versions but typically most software is.

If software didn't progress and in it's progression become slower there would be no hardware market. Without a hardware market there would be no need for forward looking architects, only sustaining engineering.

Long story short: I'm ok with software getting slower as it progresses.

:-D

I'm ok with software getting slower as it progresses.

Now scrap your high-end system and go back to a 1Ghz Athlon with 512MB.

:)

Slowness is OK if you have the hardware to compensate. What we've got here is the same issue Vista is having. Lack of hardware support in the general market.

We need a drop in *good* HW prices. We need the market to stop selling hamster-powered systems.

Long story short: We need the hardware market to catch up to the software market.

The computer to my left is a single core AMD64 running at 2.2GHz (3500+).

It's plenty fast (Ubuntu 8.04), and it's 3 years old. :-D

The low end hardware market needs to catch up to the software market, I can agree with that.

2.2GHz 64-bit is a far cry from a 1Ghz Athlon, fewt.

Sheesh. :P

Meh, it scales back to 1GHz when it's not busy.

I guess that makes it a part time 1GHz Athlon, PC_Tool.

heh

;-)

Novaguy..

Openoffice simply doesn't listen to it's users... look how long it's taken for multi-language documents as an example(version 3!) and mostly the main gripe I hear time and again are twofold - it's damn slow and it looks like a dog's dinner.

They have their own agenda and don't listen to the users, otherwise it would be speedy and look like a modern application.

OO is a great idea, but a great idea but only that, an idea.

OpenOffice is awesome, mainly because it's a worthy free alternative to MS Office. It's adding more features and getting more bloated/slow in the process. Hardly surprising news. The product of the life cycle of software. Look at Vista - such an easy target but it's true.

as code gets bigger, so does the need for the engine,

when the code becomes to big and bloated, that's when a whole new engine is needed, and a virtual rewrite of the main codebase, the one good thing that does come from starting scratch, is one can code using all the good parts, and leave out the messy code, also one can then restructure the code in a more simpler (which usually means faster execution) and also take advantage of new programming methods and advances in hard ware which was not around when the original code base was designed,

designing a new engine is the hardest and painstaking part of programming there is, but without a good optimal engine, the code just bogs down with all the additions of new lines of code being constantly added to the old engine, and the engine just can't keep up, and better hardware isn't the answer, as it's the code engine which is at fault, not processor speed, all big applications at some point has to be ripped apart and rebuilt from the ground up, this way all the good code gets put in, and all the old crap gets taken out, or rewritten with better more efficient programming,

for example, 7 lines of code could write a message on the screen, but the same thing could be done with only 1 line of code, just a simple example,

good luck, i hope they can do it, it's hard when there is no real big incentives to help you along,

Open Office is the biggest, slowest pile of bloat ever created, and it's getting worse with every """"update"""""

yep, global warming again.

Open Office needs to get off JAVA in my opinion to gain in speed with all of the recent additions and features we've been seeing. I guess I still prefer a slower then before software package in open source before anything (working or not working) from M$.

Tools and then options management sections. In the memory dialogue box, increase graphics cache to 64MB and memory per object to 8MB. It will take Open Office a few openings before this helps.

Yeah, first thing I'm thinking is #Cough# Java.

I used OpenOffice also. One thing I'm thankful for is the direction that MS is going with their interface in Office 2007. I absolutely hate it.

I think Java and speed are mutually exclusive. I was hoping Sun would eventually open up Java so someone else could work on it and speed it up a little.

Could it be possible that the OO's slowness comes from the fact that it is Java-based?

That's the first thing I was thinking!

Just want to say one thing - all the people saying they dont wanna waste 3-400$ on office 2007 - you can get the Office Home and Student 2007 Licensed for 3 PCs - Retail for 97$ at Newegg.com

The ONLY difference is that this version does not include Outlook. But if you have Vista, you already have a mail client built in. All you need to do is use it for home or student use - no need to have any special status, other than not being a business.

So stop saying that you need to pay 400$ to buy Office 2007. Do your research - then post.

I use OOo at work.

So, where's my $97 version of Office?

Oh, right.

Thanks.

Now, for home use: If there were features in Office 2007 so advanced that OOo couldn't compete, that would justify $97 for Office home, and I'd buy it.

There aren't though.

'nuff said

http://www.newegg.com/Pr...px?Item=N82E16832116135

There's your copy.

DEE DEE DEE

I use OOo at work.

Next time, read my comment. Don't be a DEE DEE DEE.

Thanks.

hey, just saying "there's your copy" but you have to be the one to get it!

Wasn't sure if you were serious but glad you have a sense of humor.

duuuuuuurr!!

heh

I refuse to run Office not because of the price but because the damn thing insinuates itself completely into your machine like a virus and has a million features that 90% of humanity never uses. Never mind the predatory corporate licenses and the blatant attempt to monopolize XML standards...

I use OpenOffice because it does what I want it to do and stays the hell out of my machine for the most part.

Now, what needs to be done is to get rid of that Java garbage. It's bloated, slow, prone to memory issues and generally a poor excuse for a programming language.

Actually, that ONLY difference is quite wrong. The Home & Student version basically contains just Word, Excel and Powerpoint. So that's the Access database missing, too - to name just one big item that you seem to have forgotten.

I refuse to run Office not because of the price but because the damn thing insinuates itself completely into your machine like a virus and has a million features that 90% of humanity never uses.

*laughs*

Methinks thou doth exaggerate.

Now, what needs to be done is to get rid of that Java garbage.

Agreed 100%.

Most complex systems get slower over time. Performance is one of the trickier issues to get right whereas it typically gets de-prioritized vs. new features. Hence you add code requiring additional resources while not getting the time allocated to address existing bottle necks (I suspect that happened for Vista too...).

Then again hardware is a commodity and one has to balance effort to optimize (instead of using more maintainable high level abstractions) vs cost of resources...

its free...

Tis pants, unless u have like an hour to spare

OpenOffice.org is a joke. People can praise it all they want but *if* I can afford better, I will get better regardless if I have to pay for it - if I can afford it. Otherwise I will stick with OpenOffice.org or something cheaper (in comparison with MS Office) but better than OOo.

Seriously, taking 20 (and if not more) seconds to start an office suite on a DualCore E6600 with 3GB of memory is simply *unacceptable*. There is *no* excuse.

OH MEH GAWD THE SKY IS FALLING! MEH OFFICE IT TAKE 20 SECOND TO LOAD! I IZ SPENDIN $400 ON TEH MS OFFICE SO I CEN START TEH DOCUMENTS 10 SECONDS FASTER!

OH MEH GAWD!

click

WON WON-THOWZEND
TOO WON-THOWZEND
THREE WON-THOWZEND
FORE WON-THOWZEND
FIVE WON-THOWZEND

Hmm, what's this? Can it be?

OH MEH GAWD MEH OOo OPENID IN TEH FIVE WON-THOWZEND!!

AMD Athlon(tm) 64 X2 Dual Core Processor 4200+
4GB RAM
2 Seagate ST3250310AS
ASRock ALiveNF6P-VSTA
Ubuntu 8.04 - AMD64 Edition

I expected this but I am not going to lower my self to your level of stupidity and arrogance. My advice to you is to either go back to grade one and learn how to spell or if you can't take criticism, do not reply. Fortunately you do not represent the open source community as most people out there are a lot smarter and intelligent than you. Until you learn how to behave civilized and accept authentic criticism, I will not waste my time replying again to you. kaPcIsh??!!111!2!1

WOW, do you really honestly believe that you've provided one shred of authentic criticism?

That's funny stuff.

"OpenOffice.org is a joke."

Screw you and your make believe "authentic criticism".

Your post was no different than mine, and you know it.

Thanks for the decision to stop replying, you are saving 10s of thousands of readers from your pointless FUD and lies.

:-D

Yes I do and I can prove my point. I can prove OpenOffice.org is slow when compared to MS Office. That is a fact and it is authentic criticism. They need to get their act together and do something! And what are YOU trying to say fewt? I dare you to prove me wrong. It might be good and packed with features but it is slow! There is no denial about it.

I guess you missed the comment right below this one where OOo opened in under 6 seconds. I can do it again on a 32bit Ubuntu, or a 32bit Windows host and time them too for you if you'd like.

All your comment proves is that you don't know how to configure, or defrag or do some form of maintenance activity on your own computer.

Wait, I thought you weren't replying.

Hmm.

Thanks.

You changed your language :) Look at my comment above. Anyway, this is pointless. We will never agree.

If you weren't wrong, it would be easier to agree with you.

Blast OOo for things it's not good at like workgroup collaboration, but don't make claims that it sucks because it opens a little slower than MSOffice. That's just whining.

;-)

Ha...I love the guys that complain about MS software getting slower over time as features get added (and saying how much better and faster open source software is), while at the same time brushing off complaints about open source software getting slower over time...it's great. :)

With your second part of the comment, I sort of agree :) but not entirely as personally I am used to the speed of MS Office.

OpenOffice.org is a good set of programs, the only thing I complained was the slow start up. Everything else is almost perfect. I should have mentioned the positives too.

So, I challenge you to find a post in the last 5 years anywhere on the net where I've complained about MS Office getting slower.

:-)

LOL i WAZ ROFL N LMAO!!11!!1

Yea...I'm gonna go through 5 years of betanews posts to prove you wrong...you really think I care THAT much?:)

Oh no no no, I said anywhere on the internet.

It's not that you won't, it's that you can't.

;-)

"So, I challenge you to find a post in the last 5 years anywhere on the net where I've complained about MS Office getting slower." TECHNICALLY, you said "MS Office getting slower" in your above post... DO I get a cookie for finding it?.. actually, you weren't complaining... guess I don't get a cookie :( **slaps self in the face and leaves betanews for being dumb**

Heh...

He got ya, fewt. ;p

I tried OO 2.4. Speed-wise its only slightly slower than Office 2003 (the final version worth using). Unfortunately the word processor was so buggy I couldn't so much as update my resume. I'm talking ridiculous "how did they miss THAT" interface issues, freezing...just a bunch of flakiness I never saw with Word. The spreadsheet seemed to load any Excel file I threw at it flawlessly, but even if I never touched a key before exiting it would tell me I'd made changes and ask if I wanted to save. I didn't bother with the other apps..after that I gave up.

Open Office is free, and seems far less bloated than Office 2007.

I still own Office 97, Office 2000 and Office XP. I personally use Office 2000, but have no problem at all putting Open Office on the other machines.

Ive got about 5-6 years old computer and starting OO 2.4 Writer takes about 7-8 seconds, 2 seconds if it has been already started once. I can only imagine how much faster it is with latest hardware.

The quality of open source and their commitment to defeating the problems they advertise as prevalent on the windows software side of the house is finally showing through. I guess F/OSS software doesnt mean that it is faster or lighter than anything windows commercial programmers can offer. This just continues to emphasize that point.

The Firefox team did a great job in responding to user feedback and focusing on speed, performance, and memory usage in Firefox 3.

The OOo team might want to try something similar... after one release, they put all "to-dos" on the back burner and focus just on bug fixes, memory usage, and speed/performance for the next release.

For the $300-400 the OEM MS Office costs - you can sure buy a fair bit of RAM or processing power to make up for the slightly slower OO.

It's also worth noting that MS Office isn't that quick if you disable it's pre-loader. By default, Office launches when you boot, not when you click the icon. It's just like the Adobe Reader - load during boot so it doesn't seem so slow later.

1. Office Home and Student (3 licences) RETAIL = less than $150. This is not academic nor OEM pricing.

2. My Office 2007 does not have any preloader. And the start-up time is good. To be fair, though, I don't think OO's start-up time is that bad either.

3. The benchmark isn't about start-up time alone. Many other operations were measured as well. (Did you even read the benchmarks?)

4. Let's face it: OO IS inferior to MS Office in terms of features and performance. But it's free. So there is still market for it. Also, some people don't think these shortcomings of OO are a big deal.

The features in OpenOffice.org are equal to their Microsoft Office equivalents. As for performance, OpenOffice.org has always been faster than Microsoft Office even without using that quickstart application that OpenOffice.org uses by default. If OpenOffice.org is getting slower it's not visible to the human eye.

Student and Home = No More Outlook.

$99 separate purchase. :(

you have got to be kidding me.. no and no.

i like openoffice.org a lot, using it right now actually.. but it does not have equal features and speed of msoffice 2007. and yes i use both pretty regularly. anyone that has used both can tell a noticeable difference between the two products.

The difference is significant.

When I'm working on documents that require workgroup collaboration for example, that's a job for MS Office.

Updating a resume? That's something that OOo can handle without breaking a sweat.

Windows Mail = $0.

Hopefully you don't break a sweat often when you're typing on a computer anyway. I guess that depends on where you're at and if your AC works :)

I type at 4 million notes per second. Breaking a sweat is nothink, I break many keysboards with meh speeds. 24,000 keyboards per minute is broken with meh greatness.

:-D

*Laughing My a** Off*

...and OOo's alternative for Outlook?

Right.

Your point?

/facepalm

Read the article.

Despite what these benchmarks say, OpenOffice.org 2.4.0 starts up just as fast as Windows Notepad does on my computer and no I'm not using the quickstart feature of OpenOffice.org at all. My computer is using Vista SP 1, has 2GB of RAM and an Intel Core 2 E6420 processor. MS Office 2007's equivalent programs performs a lot slower on my computer than OpenOffice.org 2.4.0 does and the slower performance isn't limited to starting MS Office 2007 programs.

Not as good as Office, no, Not as bad as Works, Thank god. and best of all still free...

so that trumps a lot IMHO. However we should note that as they add more UNNESSESARY fluff just as MS office did from office xp and up.. its bound to get slower and resource heavy. Just as Office did as it bloated up... The Perfect MS office IMHO was Office XP... Maybe not security wise but it should have been fixed up IMO with SPs. and addons. Office 2003, was fine, it was up to date, but it was not the MUST HAVE thing either. Office 2007 is a joke. Complete with corporate retraining of every employee on how to use the dumb thing. and the Classic interface is NOT included in the package, its an addon you pay for yet again on top of the bloated Office price. Not even from MS and officially MS says it should NOT be used when applying SPs to 2007.

Why would this not be in the package or at least a part of a corprate resource kit? Seriously... the only reason I can see is MS wanted to sell recertifications for it, and sell more redundant classes to do things we have known how to do for years on the classic interface, but now have to hunt and peck around for basic functionality...

ANYWAYS. Openoffice is still the best alternative for those low end machines that need somethign better then the OEM Works or wordperfect that often comes with the system, Yuck!!!

I do kinda wish Lotus would make a push again into the office market however, with an better alternative that is fast and cheap... Anyone else remember lotus 123 being the industry standard for spreadsheets? and Lotus notes being the king of the IPX exchange systems?

God I miss Lotus and IBM collaborations!!

I mean yea they are still out there, but so far off the radar its so rare to see it in the field anymore... Oh well.. we live in a MS world anymore it seems. Soon I'm sure MS will find a way to buy out Openoffice and make them vanish from the competition pool too... Whatever...

The GUI change in Office 2007 is a great move. When I need to use some feature I alway know where are they even I never ever use them before. Gui is designed very logic.

In Office 2003 I usually press F1, search and see how to do it and click throw alot of menu.

i happen to love the changed interface with office 2007.. if anything it makes using it easier since everything is laid out more usefully. just my opinion tho.

Seems ok to me. Plus its free. What else can you complain about.

Its definitely not as good as MS Office but its a great alternative for people who can't or arnt willing to pay for MS Office.

Too bad Windoze users. NeoOffice, based on OpenOffice, is definitely faster and has more features. But the cream of the crop is iWork. This puts over priced and slow M$ Office and bloated OpenOffice to shame. Oh the joys of owning a Mac...

http://www.apple.com/iwork/

Last I checked, Microsoft Office wasn't slow unless your computer is, say 10 years old.

I guess you just enjoy being a troll.

Gotta agree with dvferret. I have the latest Office version and it is very quick. Of course I have Vista Operating system with the recommended RAM and processor, too.

that or maybe his G4 can't handle MS Office

thats why most mac users use microsoft office right?

hell two of the big selling points for macs are
-you can windows in parallels
-you can use MS Office for Macs

silly apple fans

Actually I think the biggest selling points for Macs include no viruses and a quick, easy UI. The fact you can run Windows on it is way, WAAAY down the list. I think most people switch to Mac do so because they're fed up with Windows boxes - they're hardly going to want to spend another $600-800 to buy OEM versions of Windows and Office to install on it.

Silly Windoze fanboys. Nice try though. But if you really want to impress me with how "smart" you are, get a Mac.

I've got the latest OO3 beta, and it runs quickly. (on a 3 year old P4.) A little slow to start up, but that's only once a day.

When you keep trying to remain compatible with a bloated program that keeps changing document formats and the like, you're bound to be bloated too.

no thanks, I prefer to upgrade not downgrade.

Windows UI too much for you?

do you need everything to be in a bouncing ball format to follow along?

Office Mac is only $80 OEM CAN
Windows XP Pro x64 OEM is $150 CAN

you must be thinking of apple products with the 300-400% markup ;)

and yes, being able to use windows/office on mac is quite a big selling point for apple.

so much so they spend time with the switch adds to promote it.

The only real apple users I've seen were the yearbook staff at my college. They used Adobe products in Mac. They did use MS Word 2002 though. There was no attempt to emulate Windows using parallels or anything though.

At least until some idiot left the office unlocked and the back door of the building open and someone stole the Mac G4 (this was three years ago so it wasn't TOO old), complete with the entire yearbook source files which had no backups.

Fortunately for me I had stopped working for them the previous year. (I couldn't believe I had been working for $100/semester once I started getting even just minimum wage at about $8/hr from the library. Easily made $100 every two weeks working a couple hours a day three days a week).

I understand they had to rush to redo all that work but I don't understand how they managed to completely leave me out of my class listing. :(

I bet if MacOSX had native Windows apps support (I think I heard they were going for that) plenty of Windows users would switch. They already have the "I'm a Mac, I'm a PC" commercials that are telling everyone Macs are superior (I don't use 'em enough to comment, but they seem to be more stable overall, being UNIX/BSD based can't possibly hurt that either). I bet the #1 reason people don't switch is because they don't want to lose their personal files and especially programs.

Gamers especially. All of my favorite games are Windows only but thanks to Wine I can play some of them in Linux which could help me free myself from Windows totally eventually.

There it is again, that word - Troll. I can't stand that word anymore. Every post on Betanews has the word "troll". Guys, please be a little more creative!

Upgraded to Windows some time during the XP era. It's like having been trapped in a jail made out of Lego and suddenly stepping out into the world.

I believe the Parallels virtualization software has support for running Windows applications in seamless mode meaning they look just like native Mac OS X programs.

When you keep trying to remain compatible with a bloated program that keeps changing document formats and the like, you're bound to be bloated too.

How clever, to portray that Microsoft Office users are fat.

No offense, but none of us here give a sh!t about impressing you. We're here to read about the latest software news (other than the trollers, anyway).

Stop being a little guy that lives under a bridge.

Thanks, I'll be here all night.

heh

Yes, because it's so smart to spend more for less.

I see the light now.

So funny, but why can I open most ODF docs in Word *and* support all of MSFT's formats....faster than I can in OOo, Go-oo, Oxygen, or even the latest 3.0 betas?

There's a reason I run Office in Wine.

Compatibility. I just wish OLE worked better.

I know, I love it.

They whine about MSFT and incompatibilities, but when one needs compatibility, where do we turn?

Office.

*shrug*

I just wish Office itself ran better in WINE. Haven't tried it on the new version, but I remember 2003 was a real piece of work to get running under WINE.

Easier now, perhaps?

We're just big-boned. ;)

Much easier actually, I had a how-to posted on my blog, but my site is down now. The computer used as web server wanted to become a "media portal" (ZOMFGLOL DID HE SAID HE NOW RUN A M$?! hah) and who am I to argue with computer?

Actually, Wife said netflix online -> theater, now!

Which was followed with "hmm, 30K hits last month? Sorry Suckas! ~# dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/sd[a,b] && reboot"

I'll have the how-to reposted whenever I get around to setting up blogger or wordpress and move the data over.

heh.

Use the tick-tock mechanism.
One year (or version) you make the code more streamlined,
the other you add more features.

Really easy to control with a bunch of open source developers who all want to work on the next coolest thing.

That there is your problem.

If we can stop flaming each other for a few moments and focus on the article: I would like to see a head-to-head comparison between OOo3 and MS Ofc2007 to see how much speed difference there is; has anyone seen such a comparison that i might look at?