[nycbug-talk] BSD on a desktop

[G.Rosamond]

On Jul 31, 2004, at 10:31 AM, Scott Robbins wrote:

>> Unless you're using FBSD 4.10. . . which is still 1.0.
>
> www.openoffice.org has its own binaries, including 1.1.2 for FreeBSD
> 4.x.
>

You are correct. . .I was referring to the comments is the 1.1 port. . .

>> I do notice a general speed difference with the newer versions. . .
>
> Yes, I didn't benchmark it, but it is noticeable--I found it more
> noticeable in Linux, but it's still noticeable in FreeBSD.
>
>
>>
>> I know there are hacks to increase speed of OOo startup, but haven't
>> googled yet, so I'll keep my mouth shut <g>
>
>
> <rant>
>
> This is one of the things, (imho) that shouldn't require google. It's a
> freakin' desktop app, and should, if one is into advocacy, just work.
> </rant>
> Of course, this is easy for me to say, I'm not a coder.  :)
>

I agree. . .but tweaking is a reality of the world.  If it wasn't the 
case, Dru wouldn't be a billionaire off her BSD Hacks book.<g>

> Still it does seem that, especially if advocacy is an issue, that one
> shouldn't have to do extra work.  Those speed up tips might be on their
> page somewhere--as I really seldom need it, I've never bothered to look
> hard either--seems to me (but with my memory, I could easily be wrong)
> that one had to do something that seemed to be too much trouble.  :)
>

I haven't bothered either, obviously.  But it's a reality of all os's, 
and while OOo is in its 1.x releases, there are still maturity issues 
that are being dealt with. . .It wasn't that long ago that you couldn't 
perform a decent zoom in "page preview" mode. . .

> The other thing that joe user doesn't realize is that one reason MS
> Office opens so much faster is that it's preloaded into memory.  (Or
> something like that, that's what I seem to remember.)  With
> hardware these days, that isn't often noticeable, but when setting up
> users' MS boxen, one of the first things I do is remove it from
> startup--no one has complained about slow opening yet.
>

That's one reason. . .and having it preloaded (from Win32 experiences) 
does make it substantially faster.

>
> However, if we're comparing to Linux, vs. MS or Mac, then, this becomes
> a non-issue.
>

Yes, but no.  It's relevant insofar as most users don't do basic 
comparisons when using new operating systems. . .  they become super 
critical when they are using something new.  This can arise with every 
desktop application. . . It's what people are used to.  But my target 
audience is quite narrow. . .

> Ohhhh--I forgot realplayer--haven't gotten that working properly with
> Linux-opera either.  Mezz, the developer has a post on forums about
> getting things to work with it and mentioned that he hadn't been able 
> to
> get it working, so at least I'm in good company.  Realplayer ~does~ 
> work
> if I want to open something with it, but if one clicks on a vid link on
> the web, it doesn't open.  I think I did get it to do that in Linux 
> with
> opera, but I've forgotten what I did.  :)  (Again, it's not something I
> do often or really need.
>

Haven't even tried Real Player. . .that little evil spyware that 
masquerades as a desktop necessity.

> So, there's one more disadvantage to FreeBSD as desktop.  However,
> (again, to me, with my needs) it's too minor to merit me not using
> FreeBSD as my main workstation.

Understood.  I use W2K, primarily due to QuickBooks which is a 
necessity since I'm an independent consultant, but I live on my iBook 
now. . .when it's not in the repair shop <g>.

Let me again reiterate my goal: a comprehensive how-to for all those 
people at non-BSD events who approach the Daemon News/BSD Mall table 
and say they want to try out a BSD on their desktop.

This would be a handy reference, aimed at providing what they need to 
know, instead of rattling off responses piecemeal.  It would be a tool 
for today's context: a real growth in interest in the BSDs, something 
that's noticeable even among the trolls of Slashdot.

Maybe I should stop these long rambling responses. . .sorry.

g