PowerPoint Viewer 2003 is SLOW on downlevel system

[Mitch Gallant]

Had an interesting result today:

I helped an elderly person install a licensed version of PPT 2000 Pro. on
his Win98 computer. It works perfectly and runs fairly advanced ppt
presentations nicely (I think it is a PII ~ 500 MHz with 128 M ram).
Now for the shock:
I edited a presentation using PowerPoint 2003, saved it as a "Package for CD
..."
including the PowerPoint Viewer 2003 etc. Even though he doesn't need the
viewer, he wishes to deploy via CD to targets who would probably not have
PPT installed so that is the right approach.
Now, when I ran the presentation on his Win98 computer using the PPT Viewer
2003, the full-screen presentation was HORRIBLY slow .. huge delays between
slides (when transition time was typically 5 seconds .. they were delayed to
about 30 - 40 seconds)! Essentially unusable.
I then ran the SAME ppt presentation, on that same Win98 computer, using his
PowerPoint 2000 and it was very speedy and transitions and timing were as
designed.

What gives here? Is this horrible performance of PPT 2003 Viewer because it
IS a 2003 viewer .. being used on Win98 ?? Since the ppt presentation
doesn't use any really advanced animation effects should a downlevel version
of PPT Viewer be used? Are they available??

or has the PPT Viewer always had that level of performance?

- Mitch Gallant
MVP Security

 

[Echo S]

Were you running the file from the CD? If so, I'd be inclined to blame the CD
speed or just reading from the CD in general.

Maybe try copying the files to the harddrive, opening the Viewer, and
navigating to the file to play it.

 

[Mitch Gallant]

No, I copied the entire folder onto the Win98 HD. Then executed from the HD.
I executed the SAME ppt file from the same folder directly (which invoked
PPT 2000) so the identical ppt file, from exactly same HD was opened.

- Mitch

Were you running the file from the CD? If so, I'd be inclined to blame the
CD
speed or just reading from the CD in general.

Maybe try copying the files to the harddrive, opening the Viewer, and
navigating to the file to play it.

--
Echo [MS PPT MVP]
http://www.echosvoice.com
Fixing PowerPoint Annoyances
http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/powerpointannoy/

Had an interesting result today:

I helped an elderly person install a licensed version of PPT 2000 Pro.
on
his Win98 computer. It works perfectly and runs fairly advanced ppt
presentations nicely (I think it is a PII ~ 500 MHz with 128 M ram).
Now for the shock:
I edited a presentation using PowerPoint 2003, saved it as a "Package for
CD
..."
including the PowerPoint Viewer 2003 etc. Even though he doesn't need
the
viewer, he wishes to deploy via CD to targets who would probably not have
PPT installed so that is the right approach.
Now, when I ran the presentation on his Win98 computer using the PPT
Viewer
2003, the full-screen presentation was HORRIBLY slow .. huge delays
between
slides (when transition time was typically 5 seconds .. they were delayed
to
about 30 - 40 seconds)! Essentially unusable.
I then ran the SAME ppt presentation, on that same Win98 computer, using
his
PowerPoint 2000 and it was very speedy and transitions and timing were as
designed.

What gives here? Is this horrible performance of PPT 2003 Viewer because
it
IS a 2003 viewer .. being used on Win98 ?? Since the ppt presentation
doesn't use any really advanced animation effects should a downlevel
version
of PPT Viewer be used? Are they available??

or has the PPT Viewer always had that level of performance?

- Mitch Gallant
MVP Security

 

[Mitch Gallant]

OK I just checked this on XP Pro sp2 and there seems to be a serious problem
with slowness in using the pptview.exe (PowerPoint Viewer 2003). The
transitions between slides are much slower, and right-clicking Next Slide
doesn't work. I again tried launching directly with PowerPoint 2003 and
things are fast and timing is as expected by design.
Can anyone explain this? The same thing applies if the file is saved as a
pps (still slow using pptview.exe).
- Mitch

 

[Echo S]

I haven't experienced this at all -- although I fully admit I don't use the
Viewer nearly as much as many here.

I can't remember -- was this presentation created in PPT 2000 or 2003?

 

[Mitch Gallant]

I'm not sure. I received it 3rd hand. But I have edited it and added things
in PPT 2003 Pro. The presentation is fairly large (~ 45 Mb with 25 slides
and lots of audio clips .. most which are linked in mp3 files).
I assume that opening with PPT Viewer is isolated from PP 2003 and there
isn't any conflict issue.
It is hard to believe that it could be something in the presentation, since
it runs exactly as expected using PPT 2003.

To summarize:
Create/Modify presentation in PPT 2003. Runs nicely in usual show mode
with all animations working and timed properly.
Package for CD ... (with default include PPT Viewer and linked in
dependent audio clips etc..)
(save the Package for CD to a local folder on desktop).
Execute the pptview.exe in this folder and open the ppt file.
This runs very slowly .... long delays ... even Esc key takes quite a
while to quit the slideshow.
Execute the same ppt file directly (opens directly in PPT 2003); runs
slideshow properly.

- Mitch

I haven't experienced this at all -- although I fully admit I don't use the
Viewer nearly as much as many here.

I can't remember -- was this presentation created in PPT 2000 or 2003?

--
Echo [MS PPT MVP] http://www.echosvoice.com
Fixing PowerPoint Annoyances
http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/powerpointannoy/
PPTLive! Sept 17-20, 2006 http://www.pptlive.com

OK I just checked this on XP Pro sp2 and there seems to be a serious
problem with slowness in using the pptview.exe (PowerPoint Viewer 2003).
The transitions between slides are much slower, and right-clicking Next
Slide doesn't work. I again tried launching directly with PowerPoint 2003
and things are fast and timing is as expected by design.
Can anyone explain this? The same thing applies if the file is saved as a
pps (still slow using pptview.exe).
- Mitch

 

[Austin Myers]

Mitch,

I would bet even money there is a corruption in the file. I would start
with the original 2000 file and begin again. Instead of burning to a CD
simply save it to your HD for testing.


Austin Myers
MS PowerPoint MVP Team

Provider of PFCMedia http://www.pfcmedia.com

 

[Mitch Gallant]

I haven't actually burnt anything to CD yet. Only HD file testing.
Why would PP Viewer behave differently than PPT 2003? if the file was
corrupted and it affected timing stuff, I would have thought both Viewer and
PPT would have the same problem with a corruption.

I'm going to have a look at some other ppt presentations with PP Viewer2003
to see what happens.
- Mitch

 

[Echo S]

Wow. This is just way weird.

I wonder how it would act if you deleted all the audio.

Or, what is making the file so large? I guess I'm thinking about PPT 2003
and GDI and how the Viewer doesn't use that (does it?) and how maybe that
makes it harder for certain things to display....

--
Echo [MS PPT MVP] http://www.echosvoice.com
Fixing PowerPoint Annoyances http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/powerpointannoy/
PPTLive! Sept 17-20, 2006 http://www.pptlive.com

I'm not sure. I received it 3rd hand. But I have edited it and added
things in PPT 2003 Pro. The presentation is fairly large (~ 45 Mb with 25
slides and lots of audio clips .. most which are linked in mp3 files).
I assume that opening with PPT Viewer is isolated from PP 2003 and there
isn't any conflict issue.
It is hard to believe that it could be something in the presentation,
since it runs exactly as expected using PPT 2003.

To summarize:
Create/Modify presentation in PPT 2003. Runs nicely in usual show mode
with all animations working and timed properly.
Package for CD ... (with default include PPT Viewer and linked in
dependent audio clips etc..)
(save the Package for CD to a local folder on desktop).
Execute the pptview.exe in this folder and open the ppt file.
This runs very slowly .... long delays ... even Esc key takes quite a
while to quit the slideshow.
Execute the same ppt file directly (opens directly in PPT 2003); runs
slideshow properly.

- Mitch

I haven't experienced this at all -- although I fully admit I don't use
the Viewer nearly as much as many here.

I can't remember -- was this presentation created in PPT 2000 or 2003?

--
Echo [MS PPT MVP] http://www.echosvoice.com
Fixing PowerPoint Annoyances
http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/powerpointannoy/
PPTLive! Sept 17-20, 2006 http://www.pptlive.com

OK I just checked this on XP Pro sp2 and there seems to be a serious
problem with slowness in using the pptview.exe (PowerPoint Viewer 2003).
The transitions between slides are much slower, and right-clicking Next
Slide doesn't work. I again tried launching directly with PowerPoint
2003 and things are fast and timing is as expected by design.
Can anyone explain this? The same thing applies if the file is saved as
a pps (still slow using pptview.exe).
- Mitch

No, I copied the entire folder onto the Win98 HD. Then executed from
the HD.
I executed the SAME ppt file from the same folder directly (which
invoked
PPT 2000) so the identical ppt file, from exactly same HD was opened.

Is this Win98 or Win98SE?

The viewer isn't supported on, and won't install itself on, Win 98
nonSE.

But on a CD from Package for CD, the installer isn't involved so
doesn't get a
chance to head 'em off at the pass if it's a non-SE Win98.



-----------------------------------------
Steve Rindsberg, PPT MVP
PPT FAQ: www.pptfaq.com
PPTools: www.pptools.com
================================================

 

[Mitch Gallant]

I tried a smallist ppt (a few images .. nothing fancy .. no sound) using
PPViewer 2003 and it seems to be fine (about 1.5 Mb).
The ppt I was given has a lot of larger high-resolution images and several
MP3s (each about 300 kb or so) .. adding up to about 40 Mb or so (haven't
compressed all images yet .. ).
The question really is WHY for this large presentation is PPViewer 2003 so
different than PPT 2003 ?
I'll post more info here as I discover more.

- Mitch

Wow. This is just way weird.

I wonder how it would act if you deleted all the audio.

Or, what is making the file so large? I guess I'm thinking about PPT 2003
and GDI and how the Viewer doesn't use that (does it?) and how maybe that
makes it harder for certain things to display....

--
Echo [MS PPT MVP] http://www.echosvoice.com
Fixing PowerPoint Annoyances
http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/powerpointannoy/
PPTLive! Sept 17-20, 2006 http://www.pptlive.com

I'm not sure. I received it 3rd hand. But I have edited it and added
things in PPT 2003 Pro. The presentation is fairly large (~ 45 Mb with 25
slides and lots of audio clips .. most which are linked in mp3 files).
I assume that opening with PPT Viewer is isolated from PP 2003 and there
isn't any conflict issue.
It is hard to believe that it could be something in the presentation,
since it runs exactly as expected using PPT 2003.

To summarize:
Create/Modify presentation in PPT 2003. Runs nicely in usual show mode
with all animations working and timed properly.
Package for CD ... (with default include PPT Viewer and linked in
dependent audio clips etc..)
(save the Package for CD to a local folder on desktop).
Execute the pptview.exe in this folder and open the ppt file.
This runs very slowly .... long delays ... even Esc key takes quite a
while to quit the slideshow.
Execute the same ppt file directly (opens directly in PPT 2003); runs
slideshow properly.

- Mitch

I haven't experienced this at all -- although I fully admit I don't use
the Viewer nearly as much as many here.

I can't remember -- was this presentation created in PPT 2000 or 2003?

--
Echo [MS PPT MVP] http://www.echosvoice.com
Fixing PowerPoint Annoyances
http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/powerpointannoy/
PPTLive! Sept 17-20, 2006 http://www.pptlive.com


OK I just checked this on XP Pro sp2 and there seems to be a serious
problem with slowness in using the pptview.exe (PowerPoint Viewer
2003). The transitions between slides are much slower, and
right-clicking Next Slide doesn't work. I again tried launching
directly with PowerPoint 2003 and things are fast and timing is as
expected by design.
Can anyone explain this? The same thing applies if the file is saved as
a pps (still slow using pptview.exe).
- Mitch

No, I copied the entire folder onto the Win98 HD. Then executed from
the HD.
I executed the SAME ppt file from the same folder directly (which
invoked
PPT 2000) so the identical ppt file, from exactly same HD was opened.

Is this Win98 or Win98SE?

The viewer isn't supported on, and won't install itself on, Win 98
nonSE.

But on a CD from Package for CD, the installer isn't involved so
doesn't get a
chance to head 'em off at the pass if it's a non-SE Win98.



-----------------------------------------
Steve Rindsberg, PPT MVP
PPT FAQ: www.pptfaq.com
PPTools: www.pptools.com
================================================

 

[Echo S]

Well, that's a good sign. I'm glad the smaller file runs well, at least!

I suspect the high-res images have something to do with it. PPT itself takes
advantage of system hardware and GDI and all kinds of stuff, but the Viewer
(I think) doesn't do that. The goal was for the PPT 2003 Viewer to be able
to run without having anything actually installed to the system. I think
that probably affects how it handles certain things. I used to know more
about this, but I swear, my brain has holes.

If it is indeed the high-res images causing the issues, that would be yet
another reason to make sure to use images optimized-for-screen (generally
speaking, of course).

You know, I know I've run some presentations with high-res images in the
Viewer, and they seem to do fine -- but it's also always on a pretty beefy
system. I wonder if this particular problem is a combination of the high-res
images and the Viewer on a lower-end machine. (Not to dis the machine --
just meaning not pimped out with RAM and fast CPU.)

Then again, Austin's inclination that something's corrupt in the file sounds
pretty reasonable, too. It may just be one odd object causing all kinds of
grief. It seems weird, but if the Viewer is expending energy (It's alive!
<g>) to display this object, that's less energy it can use to run the whole
show....

Just kind of thinking out loud here.