🚀 go-pugleaf

[Posted and mailed]

In article <5ruj1k$eu4@nntp02.primenet.com>,
	Stephen Anspach <spach@nospam.primenet.com> writes:
> Michael Funk <mwfunk@uncc.campus.mci.net> wrote:
> 
>:  I'm wondering (a) just how much memory is enough for StarOffice
> 
> 	It doesn't swap w/64MBs.

StarOffice (or, more precisely, StarWriter, the only component I've even
tried to use for anything more than just taking a quick look) doesn't
cause noticeable swap activity on my system with 32MB, either, if it's
the only thing running (I've got SWiM Motif, and so use the dynamic
version).  StarOffice's speed problems seem to be more closely related to
software bloat and/or inefficient coding.  (I'm inferring this; I've not
actually laid eyes on the source code, of course.)  When starting it,
there's a HUGE pause while there's neither disk activity nor any visible
indication on screen that the program is doing anything.  During the
beta-test period, there was some discussion of this, and the conclusion
was that this was a bug in (IIRC) the GNU linker or Linux's handling of
libraries or some such, which resulted in exponentially increasing delays
when loading larger and larger executables, and the StarOffice executables
are all quite large.  There was a hacked library floating around to fix
this problem, but I never bothered to try it, and have since lost the
reference.  Perhaps an appropriate Deja News search would turn it up. 
Other than the loading problem, StarWriter does seem a bit sluggish, but
not unuseably so -- for the most part, I don't really need a whole lot of
speed in a word processor.

Oh, I've got a Cyrix 6x86 P166+, FWIW, in addition to my 32MB of RAM.

> 	Anybody have comments on the speed comparison between Applix &
> StarOffice before I run out and buy the former?

For the most part, Applix is much faster than StarOffice -- Applix
certainly starts a lot faster, and most operations are noticeably faster
with Applix.  Applix also seems less bloated, and IMHO the user interface
is much clearer (but some of this is, I'm sure, simply what one's used to;
the word processor I've used most, and the one I still like best, is
DeScribe on OS/2, whereas I've no experience with the recent versions of
MS Word after which I'm told StarWriter is modelled).

There is one area, however, where StarWriter blows Applix Words out of
the water:  Text update speed.  I've got a Matrox Millennium (4MB RAM,
usually run at 16 bpp in 1024x768), and with XFree86 (any version from 3.2
to 3.3), if I set the word processor to fully justify text, the screen
updates become painfully slow.  Slow enough, in fact, that it's quite
obvious that Applix is re-drawing the entire window contents (the text,
that is, not the menu bar) every time I press a single key, even when that
only affects the line on which the cursor rests.  I'm a fairly fast
typist, and since my first computer (an Atari 400 with ~1.8MHz 6502 CPU),
one criterion I've used to judge a word processor is whether it can keep
the display updated with my fastest typing.  With the Atari 400 (or the
800, with a better keyboard and thus faster typing), some word processors
could and some couldn't.  You'd sort of expect that a 133MHz Cyrix 6x86
would have no problems, given that some programs running on a ~1.8MHz 6502
don't.  Sadly, this isn't true of Applix Words with full justification
enabled, a Matrox Millennium, and XFree86.

That said, this problem lies only partly at Applix's feet; if I switch to
Metro-X 3.1.5, the program can then keep up, though there's a bit much in
the way of quick blanks and re-appearances of text as the server updates
the entire window contents.  This happens quickly enough that I'm not
waiting for my text to appear, though.  I'm told, but can't confirm, that
most other XFree86 servers don't have this problem.  Matrox Millennium and
various ATI owners are the ones who've complained about it; S3 and other
owners don't complain.  It's also only obtrusive when text is
fully-justified; when text is left-justified, the system can keep up. 
Still, StarWriter does *NOT* have this problem, even with XFree86 3.2,
which implements virtually no acceleration.  So it's obvious that, despite
bloat and possible inefficiencies elsewhere, the StarDivision programmers
at least got this aspect right, where the Applix programmers seem to have
stumbled.

Overall, I prefer Applix.  Although Metro-X is supposedly slower than
XFree86 (according to xbench), the only program where I notice a speed
difference is in Applix Words, and that favors Metro-X, and since I've got
a legal Metro-X license (two, actually), I'm using it.  Even if I weren't,
I seldom need to fully justify text, and when I do I can type it in with
left justification and then change the style prior to printing and saving
the document.  So this particular speed issue can be worked around, but
I've had a much harder time working around the overall bloatiness, screen
hoggishness, and general non-intuitive design of StarOffice.

While I'm rambling, I'll mention that if you want freeware, LyX is
definitely worth checking out.  It's a front-end to LaTeX, and as such
it's not the usual sort of WYSIWYG word processor; but if you read even a
little about LaTeX, as well as the LyX manual, you'll be able to do a lot
with LyX without too much trouble.  It's got a fairly clean design, though
it doesn't yet directly interface with most of LaTeX's features, just many
of the more important ones.  I've written a scientific paper with LyX, and
after a bit of struggle learning the basics, it went pretty smoothly.

-- 
Rod Smith                                 Author of:
rodsmith@indiana.edu.uceprotect           "Should I Buy OS/2" FAQ
http://php.indiana.edu/~rodsmith          "OS/2 Soundcard Summary"
NOTE: Remove "uceprotect" from address to e-mail me