Re: [ros-dev] Microsoft Office files in the trunk

[Richard Campbell]

The rule not the exception?  Several open source projects out there have 
a problem with bloat....Firefox (opera is 5.15 mb on disk, Firefox is 
15.7 MB)  I'm not against open source (I wouldn't be on this list if i 
were.) but bloat is something open source developers really need to pay 
more attention to.

Nate DeSimone wrote:

>   Time to Load (sec)
>  ------------------
>  OpenOffice.org 2-----5.5
>  Office 2003----------1.2
>
>  Memory Usage after Loading
>  --------------------------
>  OpenOffice.org 2------41.7 MB
>  Office 2003-----------15.9 MB
>
>     Also the argument that office "hides" its memory usage since it 
>  uses Windows code doesn't seem to have much bearing, if you look at 
>  the memory use of it running under crossover in Linux its ~20MB used 
>  by all the wine processes, I personally could see wine using 5MB for 
>  itself.  I'm sorry to say it but OpenOffice is an absolute hog, it 
>  makes Office look lean!  Now I really do like open source software, 
>  don't get me wrong.
>     Thankfully the OpenOffice project is not the rule for the open 
>  source community, it is the exception.  The problem with OpenOffice is 
>  they inherited a horrible codebase from Sun (which was developed in a 
>  closed source fashion btw), and unlike the Mozilla project they did 
>  not attempt to fix the underlying codebase before jumping right in.  
>  If you look at old versions of StarOffice you may notice that it loads 
>  up a unified suite, where one app does word processing, spreadsheet... 
>  everything.  While OpenOffice has separated the apps from each other, 
>  it doesn't appear all of the tightly integrated code has been unwound 
>  yet.  When you add all that old code with Java it becomes big.  Then 
>  when you consider that the OpenOffice "community" is made up of mostly 
>  Sun employees I'm not suprised about the memory requirements *cough* 
>  Java *cough*.  At least google is getting involved with the intention 
>  of leaning it down a bit.
>
>     Anyway my point is I personally still see good reason to stick with 
>  Office, and I hope that the open product becomes up to par in the future.
>
>
>
>  Michael B. Trausch wrote:
>
> >   Murphy, Ged (Bolton) wrote:
> >   
> >
> > >   I disagree with this. I don't know how to use
> > > oo.o or variants, and 
> > >  I don't
> > >  intend on learning something I have no interest in. I'm currently 
> > >  putting together a presentation for the speeches I have coming
> > >  up on ReactOS. If a rule was put in place where we could only commit
> > >  OpenDocument files, I would simply not put it into the repository 
> > >  and would
> > >  instead share it with anyone who wanted it via email.
> > >
> > >  This isn't because I'm being awkward, it's because I have no time or
> > >  interest to learn a new office suite .... and I certainly don't want to
> > >  install oo.o on my machine.
> > >
> > >  I suppose it's this attitude which keeps MS Office up as a monopoly, 
> > >  which
> > >  now make me realise why they don't want to support OpenDocument.
> > >
> > >     
> >
> >  I don't know what "learning" there is.  You may have to find something
> >  lurking a few items up or down in a menu; however, the things that it
> >  can do over that of what Office can do, is pretty amazing.  It's
> >  intuitive, and unless you're a heavy VBScript programmer, you wouldn't
> >  be disappointed.
> >
> >      - Mike
> >
> >   
> >
> >  ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >  _______________________________________________
> >  Ros-dev mailing list
> >  Ros-dev(a)reactos.org
> >  http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
> >  
>
>  _______________________________________________
>  Ros-dev mailing list
>  Ros-dev(a)reactos.org
>  http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
>