Linux: process number 2 is the logging subsystem

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Serious Hardware/Software Crap > YOSPOS > Linux: process number 2 is the logging subsystem

«‹›1165 »

Notorious b.s.d.: Jan 25, 2003; by Reene

celeron 300a posted:

But yeah, if any of them are actually Itanium running HP-UX, it would be a small number. HP execs are saying that it's mission critical stuff like telecoms, with contracts to 2025. Nothing like vendor lock-in to guarantee those sweet profits.

re: mission-critical, there are probably a few people running nonstop-os on itanium, from the tandem/himalaya purchase back in the day

that's not enough market to make a dent in sales

celeron 300a posted:

EDIT: Maybe a lot of it is HP themselves when they are providing services in general.

consultants make their money on labor, not vendor purchases. it doesn't make sense for hp/eds to buy hp-ux or itanium, because it weakens their competitive position vis a vis dell/perot and ibm global services

once upon a time ibm gs was rumored to be sun's single largest customer, buying hardware for their own customers. consultants aren't paid to make the mothership look good, they're paid to accomplish customer goals

# ? Oct 25, 2015 02:47

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Jan 15, 2025 06:05

pram: Jun 10, 2001

they dont really do that last part either

# ? Oct 25, 2015 02:51

celeron 300a: Jan 23, 2005; by exmarx; Yam Slacker

celeron 300a posted:

But yeah, if any of them are actually Itanium running HP-UX, it would be a small number. HP execs are saying that it's mission critical stuff like telecoms, with contracts to 2025. Nothing like vendor lock-in to guarantee those sweet profits.

Notorious b.s.d. posted:

consultants make their money on labor, not vendor purchases. it doesn't make sense for hp/eds to buy hp-ux or itanium, because it weakens their competitive position vis a vis dell/perot and ibm global services

once upon a time ibm gs was rumored to be sun's single largest customer, buying hardware for their own customers. consultants aren't paid to make the mothership look good, they're paid to accomplish customer goals

That's true. I wasn't trying to imply that they're pushing for itanium/hpux, but it wouldn't be hard to imagine that they would be able to get a good price for x86 racks from home base anyway.

Their servers aren't bad, and they're priced well. Their consumer desktops, on the other hand, are a nightmare, almost as bad as packard bell back in the day.

# ? Oct 25, 2015 02:57

Suspicious Dish: Sep 24, 2011; 2020 is the year of linux on the desktop, bro; Fun Shoe

huh

i thought dell was the market leader by far for servers but i guess not?

# ? Oct 25, 2015 03:04

carry on then: Jul 10, 2010; by VideoGames
(and can't post for 9 years!)

Notorious b.s.d. posted:

re: mission-critical, there are probably a few people running nonstop-os on itanium, from the tandem/himalaya purchase back in the day

that's not enough market to make a dent in sales

consultants make their money on labor, not vendor purchases. it doesn't make sense for hp/eds to buy hp-ux or itanium, because it weakens their competitive position vis a vis dell/perot and ibm global services

once upon a time ibm gs was rumored to be sun's single largest customer, buying hardware for their own customers. consultants aren't paid to make the mothership look good, they're paid to accomplish customer goals

gbs lmao

# ? Oct 25, 2015 04:23

eschaton: Mar 7, 2007; Don't you just hate when you wind up in a store with people who are in a socioeconomic class that is pretty obviously about two levels lower than your own?

Notorious b.s.d. posted:

for the last seven years hp has been talking about doing superdome boxes that support both xeon and itanium, so they can run linux, windows, and hp-ux workloads on the same system architecture, just changing the line items as necessary for a given order

this year they announced their new superdome X. it's 288 cores in 1/4 of a rack, instead of 256 cores in two racks. and it's x86 only. and linux only. because lol @ enterprise anything on windows.

itanium is dead.
hpux is dead.
windows is one foot in the grave.

linux/x86 supremacy.

do they have an itanium emulator?

because at that point they should just do itanium emulation for the few systems they need to support

# ? Oct 25, 2015 07:42

eschaton: Mar 7, 2007; Don't you just hate when you wind up in a store with people who are in a socioeconomic class that is pretty obviously about two levels lower than your own?

Notorious b.s.d. posted:

dec sold some insanely fast RISC boxes with one* of the worst unix systems ever, "digital unix." it was a derivative of osf/1, so it was mach-based, with all the ugly problems that implies

I think you mean all the awesome that implies, which Linux and BSD are busily trying to reinvent

also, I think Digital UNIX was the successor name for Ultrix, and OSF/1 was the Mach-based system

quote:

linux on dec alpha had 1/10th the overhead of the vendor unix.

dude your "Mach sucks" gimmick is showing

if Linux on Alpha was faster it was because it didn't do as much

quote:

dec didn't really care about this since their core market was their proprietary operating system, vms. and vms on alpha was demonstrably faster than vms on vax.

I've seen approximately zero uses of VMS on Alpha

quote:

*the absolute worst-ever unix was also a dec product: ultrix. but that's another story for another day

nbsd shows he actually hates BSD

Ultrix never felt substantially different than either SunOS or NEXTSTEP to me, it was all 4.2BSD

our lab full of DECstation 5100 systems running Ultrix was replaced with SPARCstation 5 systems running SunOS 4.1.3 and it was pretty goddamn transparent

the lab full of DECstatipm 3100 systems running Ultrix that was replaced with HP 700 systems running HP-UX was a much more jarring transition, as was the lab full of SGI Indigo systems running Irix down the hall

# ? Oct 25, 2015 07:51

eschaton: Mar 7, 2007; Don't you just hate when you wind up in a store with people who are in a socioeconomic class that is pretty obviously about two levels lower than your own?

celeron 300a posted:

But yeah, if any of them are actually Itanium running HP-UX, it would be a small number.

does the stack at least grow the right direction when you use HP-UX on Itanium? or is it compatible with the brokenness of HP-PA?

# ? Oct 25, 2015 07:54

Sapozhnik: Jan 2, 2005; Nap Ghost

eschaton posted:

I think you mean all the awesome that implies, which Linux and BSD are busily trying to reinvent

also, I think Digital UNIX was the successor name for Ultrix, and OSF/1 was the Mach-based system

dude your "Mach sucks" gimmick is showing

if Linux on Alpha was faster it was because it didn't do as much

rolf

"ffs our filesystem and tcp/ip code is just TOO FAST, we need to slow it down somehow. hmm. if only there was some sort of masturbatory evolutionary dead end of kernel design we could transition to" - linux torbolds

# ? Oct 25, 2015 14:18

pram: Jun 10, 2001

gentlemen you dont need to wait. you can switch to Apple Operating System X 10.11 El Capitan and immediately reap the benefits of the mach architecture

# ? Oct 25, 2015 15:23

Soricidus: Oct 20, 2010; freedom-hating statist shill

pram posted:

gentlemen you dont need to wait. you can switch to Apple Operating System X 10.11 El Capitan and immediately reap the benefits of the mach architecture

and all this, absolutely free*

* with purchase of overpriced hardware, and also hopefully you don't want it on a server because we don't do servers any more

# ? Oct 25, 2015 16:22

carry on then: Jul 10, 2010; by VideoGames
(and can't post for 9 years!)

Soricidus posted:

and all this, absolutely free*

* with purchase of overpriced hardware, and also hopefully you don't want it on a server because we don't do servers any more

overpriced compared to what lmao

# ? Oct 25, 2015 18:25

Forums Terrorist: Dec 8, 2011

like most linux users he hasn't moved past 1998 yet

# ? Oct 25, 2015 18:35

Soricidus: Oct 20, 2010; freedom-hating statist shill

carry on then posted:

overpriced compared to what lmao

compared to cheap PC hardware that's just fine for anything normal people want to do

infinitely overpriced compared to the hardware I already have that I can use to run any Linux or even Windows if that's what I want

# ? Oct 25, 2015 19:41

BobHoward: Feb 13, 2012; The only thing white people deserve is a bullet to their empty skull

Notorious b.s.d. posted:

cpu would be a much smaller gap than you might imagine. especially if you use an SS20 instead of an SS5 (same chips, different memory architecture). it's strong in all the places a cellphone ARM is weak: instructions per clock, memory latency, memory bandwidth.

lol if you actually believe an early 90s system is strong on any of these metrics compared to the rpi, whether in relative or absolute terms

the system bus on those sparcs was mbus. mbus was 64-bit (beefy in early 90s), but it was also multiplexed address data, supported only one outstanding transaction (because early 90s), and guaranteed every transaction had wait states inserted because early 90s async dram tech. 50 MHz, effective throughput probably more like 10-20 MHz.

the rpi's arm1176 talks to main memory through axi. that's a 32/64/128/256+ (designer option) split transaction bus with independently pipelined unidirectional channels. even though i'm sure the implementation in arm1176 skews towards the low end of the performance scale, you can actually queue up a bunch of transactions with this bus while you're waiting for the memory controller to deliver the first word. this is a huge advantage. also it's talking to ddr2 sdram

# ? Oct 25, 2015 20:00

MrMoo: Sep 14, 2000

Soricidus posted:

compared to cheap PC hardware that's just fine for anything normal people want to do

infinitely overpriced compared to the hardware I already have that I can use to run any Linux or even Windows if that's what I want

10 cheapest cars: Why (almost) nobody buys them

So are you going to complain about Microsoft not making cheap PC hardware also?

# ? Oct 25, 2015 20:07

ahmeni: May 1, 2005; It's one continuous form where hardware and software function in perfect unison, creating a new generation of iPhone that's better by any measure.; Grimey Drawer

THE APPLE TAX I yell over the hinges of my groaning laptop, a slight brush of my palm on the trackpad sending a flurry of clicks and scroll events as I clatter a reply onto stack exchange. today my S key doesn't work but it saved $0.07 off the cost of my laptop and I am glad some middle manager will receive enough bonus to get the proper Thai escort this weekend

# ? Oct 25, 2015 21:02

Cocoa Crispies: Jul 20, 2001; Vehicular Manslaughter!; Pillbug

Forums Terrorist posted:

like most linux users he hasn't moved past 1998 yet

well yeah he hasn't heard the good news about computing in the 21st century

because sound on linux

# ? Oct 25, 2015 21:32

Smythe: Oct 12, 2003

MrMoo posted:

10 cheapest cars: Why (almost) nobody buys them

So are you going to complain about Microsoft not making cheap PC hardware also?

I like these cars

# ? Oct 25, 2015 21:33

mike12345: Jul 14, 2008; "Whether the Earth was created in 7 days, or 7 actual eras, I'm not sure we'll ever be able to answer that. It's one of the great mysteries."

MrMoo posted:

10 cheapest cars: Why (almost) nobody buys them

almost nobody except Europe. And probably the rest of the world that isn't US

# ? Oct 25, 2015 21:38

Smythe: Oct 12, 2003

drat, just looked up my car and its held its value like a bawzZ

# ? Oct 25, 2015 21:44

Notorious b.s.d.: Jan 25, 2003; by Reene

eschaton posted:

I think you mean all the awesome that implies, which Linux and BSD are busily trying to reinvent

also, I think Digital UNIX was the successor name for Ultrix, and OSF/1 was the Mach-based system

osf/1 predates digital unix.

they did release un-branded osf/1 to a few ultrix/mips customers to test on dec's mips workstations, but this was never a product. not enough dec mips customers to be worth "saving"

eschaton posted:

dude your "Mach sucks" gimmick is showing

if Linux on Alpha was faster it was because it didn't do as much

digital unix was just really bad.

remember this is circa-1988 mach on a platform with single-digit market share

eschaton posted:

I've seen approximately zero uses of VMS on Alpha

alpha was a non-starter in the unix world, because there were other, better software vendors with hardware that was at least vaguely comparable to dec

in the vms world they rapidly approached 100% market share, because there was no one else to buy from.

eschaton posted:

Ultrix never felt substantially different than either SunOS or NEXTSTEP to me, it was all 4.2BSD

no shared libraries.

hope you enjoy swapping

# ? Oct 25, 2015 22:40

Cocoa Crispies: Jul 20, 2001; Vehicular Manslaughter!; Pillbug

eschaton posted:

dude your "Mach sucks" gimmick is showing

eschaton posted:

dude your "Mach sucks" gimmick is showing

eschaton posted:

dude your "Mach sucks" gimmick is showing

eschaton posted:

dude your "Mach sucks" gimmick is showing

eschaton posted:

dude your "Mach sucks" gimmick is showing

eschaton posted:

dude your "Mach sucks" gimmick is showing

eschaton posted:

dude your "Mach sucks" gimmick is showing

eschaton posted:

dude your "Mach sucks" gimmick is showing

eschaton posted:

dude your "Mach sucks" gimmick is showing

eschaton posted:

dude your "Mach sucks" gimmick is showing

eschaton posted:

dude your "Mach sucks" gimmick is showing

eschaton posted:

dude your "Mach sucks" gimmick is showing

lol

# ? Oct 25, 2015 22:45

eschaton: Mar 7, 2007; Don't you just hate when you wind up in a store with people who are in a socioeconomic class that is pretty obviously about two levels lower than your own?

BobHoward posted:

lol if you actually believe an early 90s system is strong on any of these metrics compared to the rpi, whether in relative or absolute terms

the system bus on those sparcs was mbus. mbus was 64-bit (beefy in early 90s), but it was also multiplexed address data, supported only one outstanding transaction (because early 90s), and guaranteed every transaction had wait states inserted because early 90s async dram tech. 50 MHz, effective throughput probably more like 10-20 MHz.

the rpi's arm1176 talks to main memory through axi. that's a 32/64/128/256+ (designer option) split transaction bus with independently pipelined unidirectional channels. even though i'm sure the implementation in arm1176 skews towards the low end of the performance scale, you can actually queue up a bunch of transactions with this bus while you're waiting for the memory controller to deliver the first word. this is a huge advantage. also it's talking to ddr2 sdram

turns out that BYTE UNIX benchmark results are scaled such that some dude�s SPARCstation 20-61 is at 10.0 for everything

a Raspberry Pi only benchmarks 7⨉ faster, but a Raspberry Pi 2 benchmarks 16-40⨉ faster

here are the results for a Raspberry Pi B+:

code:

Benchmark Run: Sun Oct 25 2015 21:01:12 - 21:29:41
1 CPU in system; running 1 parallel copy of tests

Dhrystone 2 using register variables        1647374.0 lps   (10.0 s, 7 samples)
Double-Precision Whetstone                      239.6 MWIPS (9.9 s, 7 samples)
Execl Throughput                                167.7 lps   (29.8 s, 2 samples)
File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks         30363.8 KBps  (30.0 s, 2 samples)
File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks            9473.6 KBps  (30.0 s, 2 samples)
File Copy 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks         76219.4 KBps  (30.0 s, 2 samples)
Pipe Throughput                              118393.6 lps   (10.0 s, 7 samples)
Pipe-based Context Switching                  14539.1 lps   (10.0 s, 7 samples)
Process Creation                                434.6 lps   (30.0 s, 2 samples)
Shell Scripts (1 concurrent)                    354.5 lpm   (60.1 s, 2 samples)
Shell Scripts (8 concurrent)                     44.9 lpm   (60.8 s, 2 samples)
System Call Overhead                         276169.1 lps   (10.0 s, 7 samples)

System Benchmarks Index Values               BASELINE       RESULT    INDEX
Dhrystone 2 using register variables         116700.0    1647374.0    141.2
Double-Precision Whetstone                       55.0        239.6     43.6
Execl Throughput                                 43.0        167.7     39.0
File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks          3960.0      30363.8     76.7
File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks            1655.0       9473.6     57.2
File Copy 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks          5800.0      76219.4    131.4
Pipe Throughput                               12440.0     118393.6     95.2
Pipe-based Context Switching                   4000.0      14539.1     36.3
Process Creation                                126.0        434.6     34.5
Shell Scripts (1 concurrent)                     42.4        354.5     83.6
Shell Scripts (8 concurrent)                      6.0         44.9     74.8
System Call Overhead                          15000.0     276169.1    184.1
                                                                   ========
System Benchmarks Index Score                                          71.9

and here are the results for a Raspberry Pi 2:

code:

Benchmark Run: Sun Oct 25 2015 14:01:09 - 14:29:16
4 CPUs in system; running 1 parallel copy of tests

Dhrystone 2 using register variables        3000237.2 lps   (10.0 s, 7 samples)
Double-Precision Whetstone                      435.3 MWIPS (9.9 s, 7 samples)
Execl Throughput                                321.5 lps   (29.7 s, 2 samples)
File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks         70026.8 KBps  (30.0 s, 2 samples)
File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks           20353.5 KBps  (30.0 s, 2 samples)
File Copy 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks        186926.9 KBps  (30.0 s, 2 samples)
Pipe Throughput                              181562.5 lps   (10.0 s, 7 samples)
Pipe-based Context Switching                  33809.8 lps   (10.0 s, 7 samples)
Process Creation                               1190.8 lps   (30.0 s, 2 samples)
Shell Scripts (1 concurrent)                   1087.0 lpm   (60.0 s, 2 samples)
Shell Scripts (8 concurrent)                    301.0 lpm   (60.2 s, 2 samples)
System Call Overhead                         399939.7 lps   (10.0 s, 7 samples)

System Benchmarks Index Values               BASELINE       RESULT    INDEX
Dhrystone 2 using register variables         116700.0    3000237.2    257.1
Double-Precision Whetstone                       55.0        435.3     79.1
Execl Throughput                                 43.0        321.5     74.8
File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks          3960.0      70026.8    176.8
File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks            1655.0      20353.5    123.0
File Copy 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks          5800.0     186926.9    322.3
Pipe Throughput                               12440.0     181562.5    146.0
Pipe-based Context Switching                   4000.0      33809.8     84.5
Process Creation                                126.0       1190.8     94.5
Shell Scripts (1 concurrent)                     42.4       1087.0    256.4
Shell Scripts (8 concurrent)                      6.0        301.0    501.7
System Call Overhead                          15000.0     399939.7    266.6
                                                                   ========
System Benchmarks Index Score                                         165.6

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Benchmark Run: Sun Oct 25 2015 14:29:16 - 14:57:30
4 CPUs in system; running 4 parallel copies of tests

Dhrystone 2 using register variables       11948737.7 lps   (10.0 s, 7 samples)
Double-Precision Whetstone                     1729.8 MWIPS (9.9 s, 7 samples)
Execl Throughput                               1210.6 lps   (29.9 s, 2 samples)
File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks        110940.6 KBps  (30.0 s, 2 samples)
File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks           31384.0 KBps  (30.0 s, 2 samples)
File Copy 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks        296346.9 KBps  (30.0 s, 2 samples)
Pipe Throughput                              713070.2 lps   (10.0 s, 7 samples)
Pipe-based Context Switching                 126241.1 lps   (10.0 s, 7 samples)
Process Creation                               2572.9 lps   (30.0 s, 2 samples)
Shell Scripts (1 concurrent)                   2395.0 lpm   (60.1 s, 2 samples)
Shell Scripts (8 concurrent)                    317.0 lpm   (60.3 s, 2 samples)
System Call Overhead                        1545514.4 lps   (10.0 s, 7 samples)

System Benchmarks Index Values               BASELINE       RESULT    INDEX
Dhrystone 2 using register variables         116700.0   11948737.7   1023.9
Double-Precision Whetstone                       55.0       1729.8    314.5
Execl Throughput                                 43.0       1210.6    281.5
File Copy 1024 bufsize 2000 maxblocks          3960.0     110940.6    280.2
File Copy 256 bufsize 500 maxblocks            1655.0      31384.0    189.6
File Copy 4096 bufsize 8000 maxblocks          5800.0     296346.9    510.9
Pipe Throughput                               12440.0     713070.2    573.2
Pipe-based Context Switching                   4000.0     126241.1    315.6
Process Creation                                126.0       2572.9    204.2
Shell Scripts (1 concurrent)                     42.4       2395.0    564.9
Shell Scripts (8 concurrent)                      6.0        317.0    528.3
System Call Overhead                          15000.0    1545514.4   1030.3
                                                                   ========
System Benchmarks Index Score                                         417.4

by way of comparison, my 4GHz i7-4790K Linux box gets 2674.5 & 7230.6 running 1 and 8 copies of the tests, respectively

the benchmark fails on my 2015 MacBook Pro with Retina Display, I�ll see if I can debug it

# ? Oct 26, 2015 00:46

Notorious b.s.d.: Jan 25, 2003; by Reene

eschaton posted:

turns out that BYTE UNIX benchmark results are scaled such that some dude�s SPARCstation 20-61 is at 10.0 for everything

a Raspberry Pi only benchmarks 7⨉ faster, but a Raspberry Pi 2 benchmarks 16-40⨉ faster

i was expecting a rasbpi to be more like 2-5x faster. i guess i underestimated lovely cellphone chips. (but not by much)

# ? Oct 26, 2015 00:47

Dolomite: Jul 26, 2000; Cars & Legs

MrMoo posted:

10 cheapest cars: Why (almost) nobody buys them

So are you going to complain about Microsoft not making cheap PC hardware also?

because the american cars in that list punish you for buying an economy car. we bought a fiesta s because my wife works for ford and ~support your workplace~ and its terrible.

# ? Oct 26, 2015 02:54

Mondrian: Jan 8, 2011

eschaton posted:

turns out that BYTE UNIX benchmark results are scaled such that some dude�s SPARCstation 20-61 is at 10.0 for everything

a Raspberry Pi only benchmarks 7⨉ faster, but a Raspberry Pi 2 benchmarks 16-40⨉ faster

here are the results for a Raspberry Pi B+:

by way of comparison, my 4GHz i7-4790K Linux box gets 2674.5 & 7230.6 running 1 and 8 copies of the tests, respectively

the benchmark fails on my 2015 MacBook Pro with Retina Display, I�ll see if I can debug it

hey wow thanks for all this dumb nerd poo poo

oh gently caress you even used a unicode multiplication sign what the poo poo

# ? Oct 26, 2015 11:11

Symbolic Butt: Mar 22, 2009; (_!_); Buglord

Mondrian posted:

oh gently caress you even used a unicode multiplication sign what the poo poo

this is killing me because it looks like poo poo here:

# ? Oct 26, 2015 14:31

b0red: Apr 3, 2013

lol transmission daemon can't handle 3k torrent files. might be time to wipe and start a new

edit:
seems transmission wasn't deleting files that I said to delete. This should be a fun cleanup....

b0red fucked around with this message at 16:48 on Oct 26, 2015

# ? Oct 26, 2015 15:27

Smythe: Oct 12, 2003

Dolomite posted:

because the american cars in that list punish you for buying an economy car. we bought a fiesta s because my wife works for ford and ~support your workplace~ and its terrible.

i thot ppl liked the new fiesta. i thot it was sposed to be good or smth despite being a ford? is this not the case?

# ? Oct 26, 2015 17:58

Notorious b.s.d.: Jan 25, 2003; by Reene

Dolomite posted:

because the american cars in that list punish you for buying an economy car. we bought a fiesta s because my wife works for ford and ~support your workplace~ and its terrible.

all economy cars are terrible

# ? Oct 26, 2015 18:08

Smythe: Oct 12, 2003

Notorious b.s.d. posted:

all economy cars are terrible

no way dude. Subcompacts ftw

# ? Oct 26, 2015 18:29

Cocoa Crispies: Jul 20, 2001; Vehicular Manslaughter!; Pillbug

Smythe posted:

i thot ppl liked the new fiesta. i thot it was sposed to be good or smth despite being a ford? is this not the case?

i drove one from arlington to dulles once and the dual-clutch gearbox trolled me, i'm sure i'd have enjoyed one with a Standard Transmission more

- a ford owner

# ? Oct 26, 2015 18:36

Cocoa Crispies: Jul 20, 2001; Vehicular Manslaughter!; Pillbug

i liked the dual-clutch transmission in the GTI, and it less in the diesel jetta wagon (an ex had one)

# ? Oct 26, 2015 18:38

carry on then: Jul 10, 2010; by VideoGames
(and can't post for 9 years!)

Cocoa Crispies posted:

Standard Transmission

and there goes the thread

# ? Oct 26, 2015 18:40

Dolomite: Jul 26, 2000; Cars & Legs

Smythe posted:

i thot ppl liked the new fiesta. i thot it was sposed to be good or smth despite being a ford? is this not the case?

everytime i drive it, i hear a disembodied voice say "gently caress you for not wanting to spend $20,000, i am going to punish you". it has a foot tall shifter and no armrests. the engine is lethargic. when you press the dome light button, the whole ceiling assembly flexes, also the dome lights are in the front and don't shine over the seat, so the backseat is pitch black. the door lock button is in the center of the dash, because that is where you reach when you're getting out of the car. also the floor cover in the trunk doesn't reach all the way, so it collapses and stuff migrates on top of the spare tire. the radio is a cut down version of sync, and requires a five step process to listen to something on a usb drive/ipod. you have to repeat the steps everytime you start the car, it will not go back to what it was doing.

its a whole bunch of little things that add up. really ford doesn't know how to build small cars, i don't think any american manufacturer does. i understand, i mean there is no money in it for them. my wife works for ford motor credit, and they don't even bother that much with repossessing non-suvs, they don't get anything for cars at auction.

Notorious b.s.d. posted:

all economy cars are terrible

the mazda2 is the same platform, yet light years better. ford made a mistake getting rid of their stake in mazda. although they didn't learn a thing from them.

Cocoa Crispies posted:

i drove one from arlington to dulles once and the dual-clutch gearbox trolled me, i'm sure i'd have enjoyed one with a Standard Transmission more

- a ford owner

no you wouldn't. we have a manual, the shifter is a foot tall, its like the gearbox in a old pickup. you throw the lever, and the engine is near idle once you complete the gear change. only in a pickup you'd have torque.

Dolomite fucked around with this message at 18:55 on Oct 26, 2015

# ? Oct 26, 2015 18:52

DONT THREAD ON ME: Oct 1, 2002; by Nyc_Tattoo; Floss Finder

Smythe posted:

no way dude. Subcompacts ftw

leave your ball smashing fantasies out of this

# ? Oct 26, 2015 20:03

ZShakespeare: Jul 20, 2003

I am increasingly inclined to buy a truck and drive it out into the middle of the woods where there is no internet.

# ? Oct 26, 2015 20:12

The_Franz: Aug 8, 2003

Smythe posted:

no way dude. Subcompacts ftw

he said economy cars. there are lots of nice subcompacts like the mini and fiat 500 that are economical, well designed and fun to drive. actual dirt-cheap economy "tin-can on wheels" cars like those korean-built chevrolets are awful in every way: the build-quality, the styling, the anemic engine and an interior where every surface has the same feel as a plastic mop bucket from the discount store. these are cars for people who don't care and just want something to get them to their chain restaurant so they can smother their well-done steak with ketchup and pick up some lite beer and a box of wine on the way home.

The_Franz fucked around with this message at 20:32 on Oct 26, 2015

# ? Oct 26, 2015 20:17

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Jan 15, 2025 06:05

Notorious b.s.d.: Jan 25, 2003; by Reene

The_Franz posted:

he said economy cars. there are lots of nice subcompacts like the mini and fiat 500 that are economical, well designed and fun to drive. actual dirt-cheap economy "tin-can on wheels" cars like those korean-built chevrolets are awful in every way: the build-quality, the styling, the anemic engine and an interior where every surface has the same feel as a plastic mop bucket from the discount store. these are cars for people who don't care and just want something to get them to their chain restaurant so they can smother their well-done steak with ketchup and pick up some lite beer and a box of wine on the way home.

# ? Oct 26, 2015 20:39

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Serious Hardware/Software Crap > YOSPOS > Linux: process number 2 is the logging subsystem

«‹›1165 »