PDA

View Full Version : LibreOffice 3.5.4: 100% faster?



vasa1
May 31st, 2012, 03:49 AM
As a result, LibreOffice 3.5.4 is the fastest version of the best free office suite ever, with up to 100% performance gains when opening large files (depending on operating system, hardware configuration and file contents).

The Document Foundation suggests all users to upgrade from previous versions to LibreOffice 3.5.4.
http://blog.documentfoundation.org/2012/05/30/the-document-foundation-announces-libreoffice-3-5-4/

It's not clear where exactly these 100% performance gains are to be seen but I use Calc a lot and would hope that improvements are visible there.

Since I'm currently on 3.5.3, I'm thinking of measuring the "performance" of a large file now and after the upgrade. It's a pity LibO doesn't provide a large file as a standard for anyone interested to verify or demonstrate 100% performance gains. That would get one variable, file content, out of the way.

MadmanRB
May 31st, 2012, 05:43 AM
well I noticed libreoffice is already speedier in loading as of 3.5.3, it used to take ages to load.

neu5eeCh
May 31st, 2012, 07:29 PM
Just installed 3.5.4 from the PPA and noticed 0% difference. It might even be a little slower. Not sure what all the hype is about. :???:

MisterGaribaldi
May 31st, 2012, 07:41 PM
*grumbles*

Ok, ok, fine. Fine.

I'll go install it on my Mac and see what the shouting is all about.

[Back in a few minutes.]

Guitar John
May 31st, 2012, 07:50 PM
*grumbles*

Ok, ok, fine. Fine.

I'll go install it on my Mac and see what the shouting is all about.

[Back in a few minutes.]

You forgot to add some more grumbling (trailing off) as you were traipsing off to your Mac. :mrgreen:

viperdvman
May 31st, 2012, 08:03 PM
I just updated using the LibreOffice PPA. The PPA still has the Release Candidate for 3.5.4, but it works. I just ran it in Unity and the lo-menubar package for Unity's global menu works just fine with the newer version.

Haven't tested it in KDE yet, but I'm sure the KDE-specific stuff still works.

neu5eeCh
May 31st, 2012, 08:16 PM
I just updated using the LibreOffice PPA. The PPA still has the Release Candidate for 3.5.4, but it works. I just ran it in Unity and the lo-menubar package for Unity's global menu works just fine with the newer version.

Haven't tested it in KDE yet, but I'm sure the KDE-specific stuff still works.

Yeah... everything works just fine; but, at least on my system, there's no perceptible increase in speed. None whatsoever.

And I still can't vertically center text without more keystrokes than ants in an anthill. I get the sense that the majority of Libre devs are obsessed with CALC. The number of stupid, annoying little bugs in Writer is embarrassing -- bugs that they've known about for years but just kinda' don't care about. Maybe I'm imagining things...

viperdvman
May 31st, 2012, 08:22 PM
Yeah... everything works just fine; but, at least on my system, there's no perceptible increase in speed. None whatsoever.

And I still can't vertically center text without more keystrokes than ants in an anthill. I get the sense that the majority of Libre devs are obsessed with CALC. The number of stupid, annoying little bugs in Writer is embarrassing -- bugs that they've known about for years but just kinda' don't care about. Maybe I'm imagining things...

I just tested it in KDE, and everything seems to look and act fine there too. Then again, I don't run a global menu in KDE like I do in Unity.

weasel fierce
May 31st, 2012, 08:26 PM
Maybe it's a tiny bit snappier? I don't really use calc though.

MisterGaribaldi
June 1st, 2012, 03:33 AM
Ok, admittedly it took me more than a few minutes to get back to this, but here are my results:

System: MBP Core i7, 4GB RAM, running Lion 10.7.4

LibreOffice 3.5.4
Initial (fresh boot) launch: ~10.5 sec.
Subsequent relaunches: ~2 seconds

MS Office 2011
Initial (fresh boot) launch: ~3.5 sec.
Subsequent relaunches: <1 seconds

Well, looks like LO has a ways to go.

alphacrucis2
June 1st, 2012, 05:01 AM
For windows 7 core I7 machine

Word 2007. First run 6 seconds to load empty doc. Susequent less than 2 sec

LO writer (3.5.4). First run 6 sec to load empty doc. Subsequent about two seconds.

Word was a little faster than writer for starting up subsequently.


I guess startup time for the latest word is much better than for the older version I have or could be due to OSX being more efficient I/O than windows.

sffvba[e0rt
June 1st, 2012, 08:36 AM
100% improvement over PRIOR versions of LIBREOFFICE when OPENING certain LARGE FILES...

Again:

100% improvement over PRIOR versions of LIBREOFFICE when OPENING certain LARGE FILES...

Again:

100% improvement over prior versions of LibreOffice when opening certain large files...

Again:

...


404

Paqman
June 1st, 2012, 12:44 PM
It is indeed a lot faster to open. Now if they could just turn their attention to how it performs when it is open...

JDShu
June 1st, 2012, 04:44 PM
100% improvement over PRIOR versions of LIBREOFFICE when OPENING certain LARGE FILES...

Again:

100% improvement over PRIOR versions of LIBREOFFICE when OPENING certain LARGE FILES...

Again:

100% improvement over prior versions of LibreOffice when opening certain large files...

Again:

...


404

:lolflag:

You're right, of course... I was wondering if it was me that was going crazy since everybody appeared to be measuring something different from the claim. That said, "up to 100% improvement" is a bit ambiguous and sounds like marketing speak. The LibreOffice guys could have worded it better I suppose.

jimbo99
June 2nd, 2012, 11:56 PM
Ok, admittedly it took me more than a few minutes to get back to this, but here are my results:

System: MBP Core i7, 4GB RAM, running Lion 10.7.4

LibreOffice 3.5.4
Initial (fresh boot) launch: ~10.5 sec.
Subsequent relaunches: ~2 seconds

MS Office 2011
Initial (fresh boot) launch: ~3.5 sec.
Subsequent relaunches: <1 seconds

Well, looks like LO has a ways to go.

That's just ridiculous. LO is fine. The difference in a couple seconds here or there fine. To claim that a few seconds launching a productivity app matters is just plain <snip>.

My numbers show 2 seconds first time launch for Calc, and under a second for subsequent launches.

inashdeen
June 2nd, 2012, 11:59 PM
Yerp MisterGaribaldi. You can't deny that somehow, MS-office is still faster than LO. shame , puppy shame.

MadmanRB
June 3rd, 2012, 12:19 AM
Well libreoffice is java based, it comes with the territory

weasel fierce
June 3rd, 2012, 12:23 AM
On the off-chance that this is a linux user site, I'm not 100% sure why MS vs Libre start up times are very relevant. Unless you measured how long it takes to start MS Office under wine?

Bachstelze
June 3rd, 2012, 12:34 AM
LO is painfully slow, end of the story. I don' treally care since I use LaTeX for most of my stuff, but if I had to use a word processor on a regular basis, I would definitely use MS Office under Wine.

MisterGaribaldi
June 3rd, 2012, 12:46 AM
That's just ridiculous. LO is fine. The difference in a couple seconds here or there fine. To claim that a few seconds launching a productivity app matters is just plain retarded.

Where in my post did I ever say that? Thanks for the optimistic appraisal of what I said too, btw. However, unlike others on this board I don't need to resort to calling you out to mods.

azangru
June 3rd, 2012, 01:07 AM
Has anyone tried Softmaker Office (their free version for Linux or their more recent paid version)? From what I've heard, it's pretty fast, but I haven't tested it myself.

neu5eeCh
June 3rd, 2012, 02:55 AM
Has anyone tried Softmaker Office (their free version for Linux or their more recent paid version)? From what I've heard, it's pretty fast, but I haven't tested it myself.

I have the paid version, 2010. The compatibility with MS Office is much better than Libre Office. However, there are a number of refinements missing from Textmaker that always drive me back to Libre and Abiword. For instance, Textmaker doesn't allow one to adjust the vertical ruler directly as with Abiword or Libre. You have to set those preferences via the menu. Unlike Libre, one has to adjust zoom via the menu. Softmaker has focused on compatibility rather than the refinement or polish of the user interface. It's lacking. Edit: There's also no auto-correct or grammar checker. It's all about compatibility. Other than that, the user experience is very primitive - like something from the 1990's.

Most importantly, font rendition in Textmaker is very bad. For that reason alone, I won't recommend it. Fonts are blurry, about as bad as Windows 2000 when I run Virtual Box.

Lastly, I just sent Softmaker an E-Mail asking them where Linux 2012 was? They've been harping on their Windows version for months and are now parading their Android version. Where's Linux? Here, copied and pasted, is what they wrote:



There is no release date yet. We will inform you as soon as there are any news.

Best regards
SoftMaker TeamUh-huh.

Sure. Doesn't take a genius to read between the lines. Stick with Libre or Abiword. That's my advice.

vasa1
June 3rd, 2012, 02:57 AM
Well libreoffice is java based, it comes with the territory
I'm not sure that that is correct at all. Certain aspects may need Java. But an "average" user can get by without Java.

weasel fierce
June 3rd, 2012, 03:19 AM
Now, since we're discussing word processors, any verdict on Calligra (if I remember the name right) for KDE?

MadmanRB
June 3rd, 2012, 04:44 AM
Now, since we're discussing word processors, any verdict on Calligra (if I remember the name right) for KDE?

It still lacks decent compatibility, libreoffice and abiword are still better

vasa1
June 3rd, 2012, 08:56 AM
Well libreoffice is java based, it comes with the territory
Here is a nice link: http://ask.libreoffice.org/question/696/what-features-absolutely-require-java

MadmanRB
June 3rd, 2012, 11:35 AM
Here is a nice link: http://ask.libreoffice.org/question/696/what-features-absolutely-require-java

Yes but I said its java based, you dont need java to actually run it though it does help

Kodeine
June 3rd, 2012, 01:25 PM
I moved away from libre to Google documents long ago due to it's incredible compatibly with M$ office documents, which we have to use at college, and having the ability to store all my work in the cloud and subsequently access it anywhere. I also like the interface of documents over libre so much so that I've actually now removed libre from my computer.

It is a tad of a pain say if your quickly wanting to view a presentation or word document as you have to upload it to drive, wait for it to convert to Google format and finally wait for it to open but I consider that a minor inconvenience.

neu5eeCh
June 3rd, 2012, 02:07 PM
I moved away from libre to Google documents long ago due to it's incredible compatibly with M$ office documents...

I personally haven't found it any better than Libre. Neither one of them are compatible with something as simple and basic as Word (or Wordperfect's) ability to vertically center text. I use this feature in nearly all my correspondence and both Libre and Google Docs royally mess it up. So much for compatibility...

Other than that, I don't live in a region of the world with lots of free public networks or cell phone connectivity. Most of Google's stuff is dead-in-the-water in Vermont - pretty useless.

neu5eeCh
June 3rd, 2012, 02:18 PM
O:) After a recent round of updates (in conjunction with the latest Libre update), I'm seeing some real speed improvements.

whatthefunk
June 3rd, 2012, 02:32 PM
100% performance gains means that it takes 0 sec to perform tasks and that further improvement is physically not possible. I guess we wont be seeing any future releases of LO. Weird wording indeed....

nll
June 3rd, 2012, 02:45 PM
It's very easy to disable Java: Tools > Options > Java > uncheck Use JRE. It gets really fast after that.

JDShu
June 3rd, 2012, 05:33 PM
100% performance gains means that it takes 0 sec to perform tasks and that further improvement is physically not possible. I guess we wont be seeing any future releases of LO. Weird wording indeed....

Not quite. You're thinking in terms of latency, when they're probably talking about throughput, ie. 100% faster at performing a task or twice as fast as before.

This is why I said it's ambiguous.

pt123
June 3rd, 2012, 10:53 PM
You can speed up Libreoffice like how it was possible in Open Office using - Tools - > Options -> Memory

MisterGaribaldi
June 4th, 2012, 03:05 AM
The performance of StarOffice and early versions of OpenOffice was definitely a factor in deciding to use the thing or not. At this point, how long it takes a program to open, as long as it's not obnoxious, is irrelevant. How long it takes it to open a document is important, on the other hand, definitely a significant factor.

However, how powerful and capable a program is, relative to your needs, is the most important factor of any program, followed by interoperability. To me, LO is an interesting curiosity, but nothing I would seriously use to get by with.

ssam
June 4th, 2012, 01:19 PM
Ok, admittedly it took me more than a few minutes to get back to this, but here are my results:

System: MBP Core i7, 4GB RAM, running Lion 10.7.4

LibreOffice 3.5.4
Initial (fresh boot) launch: ~10.5 sec.
Subsequent relaunches: ~2 seconds

MS Office 2011
Initial (fresh boot) launch: ~3.5 sec.
Subsequent relaunches: <1 seconds

Well, looks like LO has a ways to go.

on linux you can improve the cold start times by installing preload. it loads programs files into RAM while the computer is idle, so that they are alread there when you need them. it probably wont help if you have less that 1GB of RAM.

Helkaluin
June 4th, 2012, 02:58 PM
on linux you can improve the cold start times by installing preload. it loads programs files into RAM while the computer is idle, so that they are alread there when you need them. it probably wont help if you have less that 1GB of RAM.
I find it that prelinking actually speeds up program starting a hell lot more than using the preload daemon.

Unfortunately, prelink is currently broken due to some libc magic. The upstream dev at Redhat seems to be AWOL as well.

thatguruguy
June 4th, 2012, 03:03 PM
100% performance gains means that it takes 0 sec to perform tasks and that further improvement is physically not possible. I guess we wont be seeing any future releases of LO. Weird wording indeed....

If a car is driving 50 km/h suddenly surges to 100 km/h, there has been a 100% increase in speed. The car doesn't need to start driving at light speed in order to achieve a 100% increase.

whatthefunk
June 4th, 2012, 03:37 PM
If a car is driving 50 km/h suddenly surges to 100 km/h, there has been a 100% increase in speed. The car doesn't need to start driving at light speed in order to achieve a 100% increase.

I was thinking about it differently. If it normally takes you 15 minutes to drive to work, and then one day you drive 100% faster, you arrive at work the same instant you leave for work. Confusing.

MisterGaribaldi
June 4th, 2012, 04:08 PM
I was thinking about it differently. If it normally takes you 15 minutes to drive to work, and then one day you drive 100% faster, you arrive at work the same instant you leave for work. Confusing.

Sounds like an Einstein-Rosen link to me...

whatthefunk
June 4th, 2012, 04:27 PM
I was thinking more modified Delorean, but I guess a wormhole works too.

thatguruguy
June 4th, 2012, 06:20 PM
I was thinking about it differently. If it normally takes you 15 minutes to drive to work, and then one day you drive 100% faster, you arrive at work the same instant you leave for work. Confusing.

Not really. If it normally takes you 15 minutes to drive to work, and you drive 100%, you arrive at work in 7.5 minutes. You are confusing "time" and "speed".

To arrive at work instantaneously, you'd have to move at infinite speed.

EDIT: Maybe you could do it through quantum tunnelling.

MisterGaribaldi
June 5th, 2012, 02:44 AM
Not really. If it normally takes you 15 minutes to drive to work, and you drive 100%, you arrive at work in 7.5 minutes. You are confusing "time" and "speed".

To arrive at work instantaneously, you'd have to move at infinite speed.

EDIT: Maybe you could do it through quantum tunnelling.

whatthefunk and I are already exploring those possibilities. I far prefer the "gateway" or "portal" approach to anything involving acceleration and deceleration of mass.

thatguruguy
June 5th, 2012, 03:05 AM
whatthefunk and I are already exploring those possibilities. I far prefer the "gateway" or "portal" approach to anything involving acceleration and deceleration of mass.

Quantum tunnelling it is, then.

Make sure your transporter has a Heisenberg compensator, or you're just asking for trouble.

MisterGaribaldi
June 5th, 2012, 05:39 AM
Also, Sun Microsystems has been doing some fascinating development work (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HVPlqPPPRS4) on Heisenberg Compensators lately. Too bad this isn't the same group that worked on StarOffice.

neu5eeCh
June 5th, 2012, 01:04 PM
Be careful, I was reading at Groklaw that Larry Ellison is claiming the patents on the Heisenberg APIs.