Slashdot Mirror


Ubuntu vs. Windows In OpenOffice.org Benchmark

ahziem writes "Ubuntu's Intrepid Ibex and Redmond's Windows XP go head-to-head in an OpenOffice.org 3.0 performance smackdown measuring vanilla OpenOffice.org, StarOffice, Go-oo, and Portable OpenOffice.org 3.0. Each platform and edition does well in different tests. Go-oo is known for its proud slogan "Better, Faster, Freer," but last time with OpenOffice.org 2.4 on Fedora, Go-oo came in fourth place out of four. Slashdot has previously reported Ubuntu beating Vista and Windows 7 in benchmarks, so either XP is faster or this benchmark carries a different weight."

24 of 262 comments (clear)

  1. First! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Who cares? OOo is still slow no matter what platform it's run on.

    1. Re:First! by inhuman_4 · · Score: 5, Informative

      Try disabling java in the settings. Made my version run a whole lot faster.

    2. Re:First! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Is there anything Java can't slow?

    3. Re:First! by bami · · Score: 5, Funny
    4. Re:First! by MightyYar · · Score: 5, Informative

      Why-oh-why did the OpenOffice devs decide to create a whole new widget library?

      Portability. Remember that OpenOffice comes from StarOffice, which came from a company called Star Division (good band name, eh?). Star Division developed StarOffice back in the early nineties, before even Windows 95 was available... and they used their own C++ cross-platform library that was meant to make GUI development easier between Windows, OS2, Mac, and OSF/Motif.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    5. Re:First! by warrax_666 · · Score: 4, Informative

      That and the weird idea to put the entire office suite into one, big executable.

      Modern systems only load the memory pages of executables that are actually needed, so it doesn't matter how big the executable is -- what matters is how much of the executable actually needs to be loaded.

      --
      HAND.
  2. Big surprise by Bobnova · · Score: 5, Interesting

    XP faster then vista/7? I'm shocked. I've been doing some general testing between XP and ubuntu 8.10 as well as dellbuntu 8.04. Ubuntu gets 25% longer battery life on my netbook, but cannot play youtube videos (on either version) without lurching video. XP on the same netbook does youtube just fine, but has a 3 hour batter life to ubuntu's 4 hour. On an old p4 i have xp scrolls smoothly and instantly in firefox, where 8.10 has a delay before anything happens. My conclusion: On a slow system, XP is faster.

    1. Re:Big surprise by Vectronic · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Perhaps, however videocard drivers could also be the cause of all 3, especially video and graphical user interfaces.

      But, even the power usage, could be from improperly handling the videocard, or maybe even bypassing it and using the CPU. (fuck if I know, just an assumption)

    2. Re:Big surprise by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      XP on the same netbook does youtube just fine, but has a 3 hour batter life to ubuntu's 4

      Obviously you should just virtualize XP alongside ubuntu so you can take advantage of Ubuntu's extended battery life but still utilize XP's greater flash performance! It's a win/win!

    3. Re:Big surprise by master811 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Only on older hardware is XP better than Vista/7.

      ZDNet did a 'test' and found that with modern hardware 7/Vista (but more so with 7) easily beat XP comfortably.
       
      http://blogs.zdnet.com/hardware/?p=3789&page=3
       
      The better the hardware, the smaller the difference I suppose or the bigger the advantage Vista/7 has over XP.

    4. Re:Big surprise by Tubal-Cain · · Score: 5, Informative

      Ubuntu gets 25% longer battery life on my netbook...
      XP...has a 3 hour batter life to ubuntu's 4 hour.

      Isn't that 33% longer?

    5. Re:Big surprise by electrosoccertux · · Score: 4, Funny

      It's a win/win!

      Wouldn't that be a lin/win box?

  3. One phrase invalidates the whole shebang... by tjstork · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "Due to the efficiency of Visual Studio 9 over GCC"... I don't want to pick a compiler flamewar here, but I think it is fair to say that making blanket statements about one particular compiler producing faster code than another is pretty ignorant. There are some things VC does that GCC doesn't do, and vice versa, compiler switches can make a big difference, and you really would need to study the most commonly used code in OO under both compilers to see who is, in fact, generating better code, and, incidentally, for which processor.

    --
    This is my sig.
    1. Re:One phrase invalidates the whole shebang... by Vanders · · Score: 5, Informative

      With the notable exception that OOo is Java-based

      No it isn't. It's written in C++. Look, you even contradict yourself with this quote:

      The Java Runtime Environment (JRE) is required for the Base (database) component of OpenOffice.org as well as several other features.

      Note that it doesn't say "The JRE is required for OpenOffice.org". You can install and run OO.o without installing Java, provided you don't want to use OO.o Base

  4. OpenOffice benchmarks? Seriously? by The+Hooloovoo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Is speed really the issue here? My LAPTOP was a bargain-barrel purchase 3 years ago and it has no problem running OpenOffice + FireFox + other standard software on either Ubuntu or XP.

    What I care about is, "Which one is least likely to crash and make me lose my work?" That's always been my big complaint with the Windows versions of free software (GIMP comes to mind), not speed.

  5. Re:Like Windows users are gonna care by Pharmboy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Who runs OO on Windows?

    More people than who run it on Linux, that is for sure. We have it on all the computers here that didn't already have Office preinstalled (meaning most of them). I have both on my computer, although I use OO most of the time, as I like their spreadsheet app better than office.

    --
    Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
  6. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  7. Did I read the summary right? by lymond01 · · Score: 4, Funny

    Because...well, I didn't read the article, but are we benchmarking Word Processing applications now? How fast a spreadsheet can calculate the sum of a column? Whether there's a pause between fade-in transitions in a presentation?

    I'm trying to think of a good car analogy here...maybe how fast your passenger side door closes?

  8. wtf is go-oo? by Kozz · · Score: 5, Informative

    For others (like me) who are familiar with OOo but never heard of "Go-oo", Wikipedia says,

    Go-oo is a concentrated set of patches for the cross-platform OpenOffice.org office suite. Go-oo is also one of OpenOffice.org variants created from these patches. It has better support for Office Open XML file formats than the official OpenOffice.org releases produced by Sun Microsystems, and other enhancements that have either not yet been accepted into the upstream Sun version, or will not be because of business or political reasons. Some of these changes or enhancements will eventually be part of the Sun version, too; the process of assessing patches, "upstreaming", just takes time.

    It's a shame that even the Go-oo website does a poor job of explaining this on the front page (doesn't mention OpenOffice.org until nearly the very end) nor on the "about" page.

    --
    I only post comments when someone on the internet is wrong.
  9. Anyone who wants documents readable in 10 years? by Colin+Smith · · Score: 4, Informative

    Oh wait. It was a rhetorical question. Sorry.

    --
    Deleted
  10. Re:Who cares about CPU speed if it slows your work by DesertBlade · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I use xls on both Excel and Open Office and they are mostly compatable. If you are one of those accounting types with 100000 lines in an excel file then you you should stick with excel.

    Open Office is a replacement for M$ office for 95% of the use cases. Still the proprietary formats of M$ Office made it difficult to port. Since those standards are now published I think cross program support will improve.

    --
    Half of writing history is hiding the truth.
  11. Re:Like Windows users are gonna care by Ephemeriis · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Who runs OO on Windows?

    A lot of our home user and student clients use OO instead of Microsoft Office.

    Microsoft Office isn't cheap. It's several hundred dollars depending on what kind of discounts you get and what version you need. It used to come preloaded on a lot of systems, but these days they frequently give you some kind of 30-day trial of Microsoft Office, instead of the full version.

    Business folks don't generally care. Most of our business clients have some kind of volume license anyway, so they throw it on whatever new computer they get.

    A lot of our home users have a hard time justifying spending $100 or more just so their kid can type up a paper at home.

    So we point them at OO, and it generally does what they need it to. We've made a lot of people very happy by giving them a free alternative to Microsoft Office.

    --
    "Work is the curse of the drinking classes." -Oscar Wilde
  12. Re:Who cares about CPU speed if it slows your work by Ephemeriis · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Seriously. ... Who cares if OpenOffice opens a .xls document 4 seconds faster, since it takes me a good 25 minutes to reconfigure all the graphs formating that it lost from MS Office??

    Is that 25 minutes taken into factor? ... That's right, I didn't think so.

    That's just silly.

    If you need Excel, why would you be running OO? If you've got all kinds of graphs and formatting and whatever else that's going to take 25 minutes to fix in OO, why wouldn't you be running Excel? That time adds up pretty quickly and before long it becomes very easy to justify the cost of a license for Excel.

    That's like the folks who switch to Linux or OS X and then load up their machine with some kind of VM and run everything in Windows anyway. If you need Windows, why not just run Windows?

    Of course the best solution would be to get everyone working from some kind of open format, so it didn't matter what software you were using. So there was absolutely no vendor lock-in. But that won't be happening any time soon.

    --
    "Work is the curse of the drinking classes." -Oscar Wilde
  13. Re:Like Windows users are gonna care by jedidiah · · Score: 4, Insightful

    > It's slow, and it doesn't work for anything beyond a very trivial subset of Office functionality.

    SURPRISE! That's all most people actually need.

    You know.... "my requirements" versus "your requirements" beyond just the basic vendorlock thing.

    The rest of us shouldn't have to buy a certain product just because you have a Microsoft fixation.

    This includes the Mac users with their copies of iWork.

    --
    A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.