Wilson wrote:
What version of Open Office is FC2 running?
As Scott mentioned, OpenOffice in FC2 is rather perky because it is
version 1.1.0. Yum update moves it to 1.1.1. At the present time,
rawhide is the only option if you want to play with 1.1.2.
But again, version number is one
There is another issue that may affect the performance of OOo; it has
something to do with, from my own experience, the choice of Athlons vs
Pentiums.
Several years ago, when running the pre-1.0 versions of Mozilla, I
noticed a huge difference in performance between Athlon and PIII. The
Since OpenOffice/StarOffice is a critical element determining the pace
at which Linux will be accepted by the mainstream public, this issue
deserves a further elaboration.
At the outset, I am sure most of us are aware that, for many open source
projects, the name itself is quite irrelevant
Office vs Open Office?
Since OpenOffice/StarOffice is a critical element determining the pace
at which Linux will be accepted by the mainstream public, this issue
deserves a further elaboration.
At the outset, I am sure most of us are aware that, for many open source
projects, the name itself
Wilson wrote:
What version of Open Office is FC2 running?
Without an install in front of me, I cannot say. I will tell you that
with respect to the K12LTSP dimension of your question, version 4.1 is
FC2 based and Openoffice is rather perky. Wayne could better elaborate
why. I just know
Wilson wrote:
Which one is better? Also, in a LTSP situation would you see any benefits
running Star vs Open Office?
I have OOo 1.1.2 installed in an LTSP pilot. Because OOo can take a
long time to load (relative to Microsoft Office), running OOo in LTSP
actually makes you feel much better
Which one is better? Also, in a LTSP situation would you see any benefits
running Star vs Open Office?
Wilson
