Posted by: Anonymous Coward
on May 16, 2005 04:32 AM
The article was reviewing OOo pre version 2.0. Your comments are true about OOo versions 1.0.x and 1.1.x.
OOo version 2 should provide you with a very pleasant surprise. It has good ODBC functionality(provided you include a java runtime environment), and capacity for twice as many rows of data as Excel instead of the half as many rows that you are used to.
The user interface is much closer to Excel than the current version. I don't know if that means easier to learn, or just less hard to change if you already use Excel.
Performance is another area where the OOo team has worked diligently. In my opinion, there is still room for improvement, but the performance compared against OOo 1.x is very significant, with the start up times being a good example. With 1.x you could get reasonable startup times by pro-loading a runtime environment. With Version 2, you can still load a runtime environment to improve startup times, but the startup times with V2 and no runtime loaded seem to be about half as long as the startup times for V1.x when they had a runtime environment pre-loaded.
There is still an issue with comprehensible/consistent error messages, but there has been a great improvement over what was.
Learn about Linux
Download Linux
Get Linux help
Apples, Oranges and Potatos
Posted by: Anonymous Coward on May 16, 2005 04:32 AMOOo version 2 should provide you with a very pleasant surprise. It has good ODBC functionality(provided you include a java runtime environment), and capacity for twice as many rows of data as Excel instead of the half as many rows that you are used to.
The user interface is much closer to Excel than the current version. I don't know if that means easier to learn, or just less hard to change if you already use Excel.
Performance is another area where the OOo team has worked diligently. In my opinion, there is still room for improvement, but the performance compared against OOo 1.x is very significant, with the start up times being a good example. With 1.x you could get reasonable startup times by pro-loading a runtime environment. With Version 2, you can still load a runtime environment to improve startup times, but the startup times with V2 and no runtime loaded seem to be about half as long as the startup times for V1.x when they had a runtime environment pre-loaded.
There is still an issue with comprehensible/consistent error messages, but there has been a great improvement over what was.
#