Linked by lemur2 on Wed 22nd Jun 2011 22:30 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 478654
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[8]: holding things back
by Temcat on Sun 26th Jun 2011 10:32
in reply to "RE[7]: holding things back"
RE[8]: holding things back
by saynte on Sun 26th Jun 2011 13:26
in reply to "RE[7]: holding things back"
RE[9]: holding things back
by lemur2 on Sun 26th Jun 2011 23:52
in reply to "RE[8]: holding things back"
Fancy math, but what they provided was anecdotal... wait for it.. evidence. And it was actually on topic. You countered with anecdotal evidence from yourself and some others, but as has already been pointed out, the "external" evidence wasn't even about the same thing.
Anectdotal evidence, even if it is on topic, is what is known as "heresay" evidence. Completely unreliable.
There are countless references available online which would turn up after even the most superficial search which will tell you that LibrOffice forked from OpenOffice late last year, and that ever since then LibreOffice has a much larger group of programmers than OpenOffice has ever had, and they have been diligently going through the OpenOffice code and removing all of the legacy cruft from it.
LibreOffice has now produced a couple of new versions which beat the socks off OpenOffice for speed.
On Linux systems, the old OpenOffice was slower than MS Office under Wine, but only marginally so.
All of this is not even contentious, it is easily discoverable fact. Have a look for yourself.
Yet the posters to whom I responded were trying to pretend that MS Office under Wine was significantly faster than both OpenOffice and LibreOffice, which they lumped in the same box.
Utter rubbish, easily debunked. Try again, sport.





Member since:
2007-02-17
My evidence is one-thousand-fold better than anything you, or anyone else, has provided to support other contentions that have been made.
Actually, come to think about it, my evidence is far more than a thousand times better, it is infinitely better. After all, any evidence, divided by zero evidence, yields a ratio of of infinity, in favour of my claims, for evidence provided.
Edited 2011-06-26 10:26 UTC