Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 26th Sep 2005 13:28 UTC, submitted by Malahide
Novell and Ximian "We chat to Gnome and OpenOffice.org coder Michael Meeks about all things Linux. Here's a few of the questions we asked the Novell employee."
Thread beginning with comment 36628
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Re: OO startup time
by on Mon 26th Sep 2005 21:57 UTC

Member since:

The difference, from what I have gleaned from scouring the Web, is that OO is written as multi-platform, so it can't hook into the environment like O2K3 or KOffice can.

KOffice is built to leverage the K desktop environment. O2K3 is built to leverage the Windows desktop environment (or Wine, or CrossOverOffice, which give a pseudo-Windows environment for O2K3 to hook.)

Try making KOffice platform-agnostic, or O2K3 platform-agnostic, with a consistent user experience across all platforms. You'd have to write your own platform-agnostic presentation code as well, like OOo has had to do, to give a consistent look-and-feel.

If OOo had been written to leverage the graphical API set of each platform it's been ported to, it would look and behave radically different on Windoze, KDE, OS X and any other GUI it's been ported to. leveraging that, and overcoming the differences to keep the consistency, may be part of the speed improvements in 2.0, but in 1.x that wasn't the case, AFAIK.

That's not the kernel's fault, though - it's the way OOo was built, to be platform-agnostic. But if this guy can figure out how make the kernel precognitive, more power to him ;)

Reply Score: 0

RE: Re: OO startup time
by on Mon 26th Sep 2005 23:30 in reply to "Re: OO startup time"
Member since:

I use plenty of "platform-agnostic" software. The Seamonkey browser, for example, loads in about a second. KOffice, ported to OS X just last year, loads in about three. Yet OpenOffice.org takes 17 seconds to load. It's poorly designed.

Reply Parent Score: 0