Slashdot Mirror
Has the Command Line Outstayed Its Welcome?
dgharmon writes "The Command Line Interface has its uses, acknowledged Mobile Raptor blogger Roberto Lim, but no piece of technology targeted at the consumer market should ever require that something be done via CLI, he says. Keep it as an option or you can take it out all together. 'If it is there, it should just be there for the IT people or tech support to use when you encounter a problem.'"
Guy is a fucking moron. Thats all.
Mod headline -1, flamebait.
(and the summary is silly, as well—how many popular software products today actually require the end user to run terminal commands?)
How can I believe you when you tell me what I don't want to hear?
No. Fucking. Way.
A squid eating dough in a polyethylene bag is fast and bulbous, got me?
Sometimes you have to have a user ping something, telnet to something. I know it sucks and it is hard, but basic connectivity tests are what you need. /Love using AppNeta's PathView so I don't have to do this much anymore. //Just need the company to get more testing equipment.
Just a dude. Stuck in IT.
That is all.
Article = flamebait.
No sig today...
The GUI - Making easy things easier, and hard things impossible. (Seriously, there are still a lot of command line tools like sed and awk which are absolutely invaluable, with no real non-commandline alternatives)
You can have my command line when you pry it out of my cold dead fingers!
There are some things that are easier and more intuitive in a command line terminal than through layers of menus or clusters of icons.
I think that is the key word... a rather hazy that doesn't really mean anything.
CLI isn't just for 'tech support and IT', but most users don't have much use for it. Though some people are just going to like it even if they are 'consumers', there are times where it can be a real time saver for common 'consumer' tasks. Though I do have to agree that no 'consumer' app should actually require its usage at this point.
Having worked with itnsince 1998 i am 100% behind not using cmd line for users, You see people are stupid and even if you think while doing things a majority of people do not.
The light-switch is one of the end-user interfaces for electricity in the house. The wiring behind it is better left to the experts. It's dangerous for the non-initiated to fiddle with it.
Same for the command line. Graphical user interfaces have become the de-facto end-user interface to modern computing devices, to information, to the Internet, etc. The CLI exposes some of the wiring behind it. No need for end users to mess with it or to have to understand it. It can be confusing for them or even dangerous.
The sooner software developers realize this, the better it is for everyone involved.
It may be sad that today's users are not introduced at the same level to the technology that many of us were decades ago, but that's the way things go. We don't expect to wire up our house ourselves, or build our own generators or electric engines. We shouldn't expect that a product for the masses should require in-depth knowledge or even expose an interface that is not really useful for every day users.
Why did this even make it to the home page? That door is so open you can't kick it in anymore.
-- Cheers!
*gets ready for mindless hate replies*
Look, I'm not against the command line. It's fine. And I actually would say that every program should have a command line. That said, every program should also have a GUI interface.
A serious problem in linux is that frequently you have to go to the command line to do a lot of things. You should NEVER have to go to command line.
The command line is great for people that have memorized all the commands, know exactly what they want to do, and can run the operations in their sleep. But for everyone else it's a hinderence. They have to do queries and check forums to figure out what the program is called. Then they need to look up the syntax.
It's the opposite of user friendly.
Command line is great for certain things. I Scripting especially is much easier if everything can take a command line. I wish more programs in windows for example could take a command line.
But linux especially needs to offer the GUI as the primary interface for EVERYTHING.
I know the old linux hands disagree. This is why you have adoption problems. And because you have adoption problems many companies don't write software for your OS requiring the open source community to write everything themselves. And of course hardware venders frequently don't release drivers for your OS. Fix the GUI issue and all that will change.
Quid pro quo. We're not asking for the universe here. Just the GUI as the primary interface. Keep the command line for those that prefer it. But you'll never get the adoption up so long as its the secondary interface.
I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
Taking away my CLI? That's cause for war. GUI's are for the weak/simple minded. I do not want graphs, charts, and pictures to tell me a problem may exist, I need just one line or 100's of them!
Excuse me... I'm a consumer. I use the command line all the time, because I recognize that it is far more powerful than any GUI tool that purports to serve the same purpose that I've ever seen.
The GUI is great if you only ever do what someone else happened to write a feature to allow you to do. If you ever think on your own, want to step outside those bounds, the command line is far superior. With a few simple tools piped together, you can do things easily that are highly painful and tedious with a UI.
But then, we seem to be fast becoming a species that no longer thinks for themselves, wanting everything dumbed down as far as possible.
Many times I've seen people laboriously doing something with a GUI that I can script in 15 seconds with Bash. When I show them, they are amazed.
But hey, let's take all the power user features out of our computers and make sure they are suitable ONLY for casual users and novices. That sounds like a good plan.
I can think of many reasons why the command line is still a very important part of any operating system. If, as a developer, you are worried that Joe User needs access to your tool, then make it easy for them. Rather then have the whole system cater to the computer illiterate.
I invoke Betteridge's Law of Headlines here.
No.
Those of us who use the CLI on a regular basis find ourselves feeling confined on those odd occasions when we have to use Windows. With a GUI, everything is visual, but nothing can be automated or repeated. This greatly aids someone who doesn't know what they are doing, but since when did business want someone who didn't know what they were doing sitting behind a terminal?
In Windows, everything is point-and-click easy, but nothing can be automated. In UNIX, the important things have a GUI shortcut, and everything can be automated.
The society for a thought-free internet welcomes you.
>but no piece of technology targeted at the consumer market should ever require that something be done via CLI, he says.
To my knowledge, no piece of consumer tech, in the last 15 years, has required the command line. I think Telix was the last one, and that was after ProComm went totally GUI after 95. One of my favorite editors, Aurora, was never moved over to the GUI, and remained moribund after Windows 95 - no updates, nothing.
Does *anyone* know of any consumer tech over the past 15 years that has ever required the command line to even start? I can't think of one.
That being said, there is something to like about the character based terminal for character based protocols. I find IRC to be a pain with anything other than something like irssi and screen. I also don't see any GUI based OS automation worth a damn. It's just simpler to write a bash or PowerShell script to do automated tasks than to fudge around with a GUI.
--
BMO
When we get rid of the command line AND the start button? Ahh I see where this is going. NO, it's MY computer. Piss off, monopolistic OS vendor.
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
And if it wasn't available we would find a way to install it.
Next topic.
CLI is for writing code...?
What happens in your GUI when you have a folder with 10,000 files in it? What if you want to do something with all those files? Are you going to do it one click at a time?
No sig today...
"... but no piece of technology targeted at the consumer market should ever require that something be done via CLI, he says."
"... but no piece of technology targeted at the consumer market should ever require that something be done via soldiering iron, he says."
"... but no piece of technology targeted at the consumer market should ever require that something be done via distillation, he says."
"... but no piece of technology targeted at the consumer market should ever require that something be done via (fill in the blank), he says."
Now ask yourself what percentage of home users have ever used the command line on their phones. Or have opened up a device to re-soldier parts of it. And when was the LAST time something like that needed to be done.
Troll article is trolling. Nothing to see here.
Have you ever had automated something? This happens even in the consumer world and where the command-line comes in ;-).
Probably reacting to a flamebait i shouldn't reply to....
It should 'just work'.
For tech staff, it needs to stick around.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
"Mobile Raptor blogger Roberto Lim"
Well I'd assume raptors would be mobile, but I still have no idea why a dinosaur would be blogging, let alone why anyone would care what they thought about CLI vs anything else?
...when you pry it from my cold, dead fingers.
Dipshit...
"Just the simple task of separating two kinds of files from a single directory, 'mkdir GIF;mkdir JPG;mv *.gif ./GIF;mv *.jpg ./JPG' and I'm done -- five seconds to accomplish that. How long would it take in a pretty looking GUI?"
Create two directories; sort by file type; drag & drop * 2... done. And it'll deal with mixed case extensions. Don't get me started about Mr. "You can't do that FTP transfer in less than 8 mouse clicks". vs 32 keystrokes. I'm not sure where his maths comes from.
They also don't go into how far you are away from destroying the world with a CLI:
sudo rm -Rf ~/bin
is one keystroke from
sudo rm -Rf ~ /bin
Or just the simple case of "cp a b c/", only you eagerly hit enter before "c/" so you blow away b with no checks.
And who knows what you get when your super awesome smart shell loop isn't escaped properly on a filename with a space, quotes or apostrophe in the name.
GUI or CLI -- do whatever you like -- but don't base your choice on the "quality" of information from the types of people in this article.
Or more specifically, a GUI whose interactions can be modeled completely by a finite state machine. Need context sensitivity? Sorry, too much computer for you.
Agreed. Just yesterday I had to change extensions for a bunch of files in a directory, and each of those files was in its own sub directory. Using a little for loop and the handy '*', everything was changed and I could continue on with my life.
The CLI is a tool like any other. Would I want to work with it as my sole means for using my computer? Most definitely not. But I couldn't image working without it, either.
"It's a trick. Get an axe."
CLI is the defacto interface for Google searches. People use it everyday and all day long. Nobody complains that it isn't intuitive.
Typing in a few keywords is not CLI. That's just data input in response to a prompt.
Using the more complex search modifiers does make it more like CLI use as you are driving behavior - but most people do not do that.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
The *menu* has mainly outstayed its welcome. For helping a lot of non-geeks with computers, I'm amazed at how they get lost in menus, and are fearful of trying stuff out. I think most apps should just propose templates to be filled, use very loud and simple screen for configuration (à la Palm), and maybe just one menu for "More..." like Android currently does.
I know there are experts out there, who like menus, keyboard shortcuts, and CLIs (I do). But most people just can't handle them.
The Cloud - because you don't care if your apps and data are up in the air.
The command line is not better or worse than a beautiful GUI. It is a whole different paradigm with a whole different purpose. I love that I can go to my mac and type nearly the exact same commands as my linux box to do the same things; xvfz is nearly one keystroke. But these are not things I would ever impose on my family.
The key (hee hee) to the command line is constancy of knowledge. Things I do now, I have done for over a decade, and hopefully will do for another decade using the same keystrokes. These tend to be dark arcane things like ssh tunnels that again I would never impose upon my family. I don't need to learn a new interface from year to year, I don't need to learn a new interface from OS to OS. Much of my Solaris knowledge is still good. One of the reasons that I fled Windows was that its command line was not consistent with my other more Unix'y knowledge. If I had to noodle a Windows box I would start poking around looking for applications and menus that conceal the things I want almost as well as a command line ever could.
To eliminate the command line from an OS that I use would be to eliminate an OS from my use.
I would have agreed with all the flamebait posts, except that the Plex Media Center team, which makes an otherwise super-user-friendly front end and back end for managing their media center, requires the use of a CLI for even basic operations like updating the library.
I will give up the command line when you pry the keyboard from my cold, dead fingers. Still, I would prefer that consumer software not require its use for common, or even uncommon but simple, tasks.
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
That's the whole point. What percentage of the light switches currently in use are NOT operated by some kind of switch?
He's advocating for something that has been solved and implemented years ago.
Yep. So he's advocating that what has already happened ... happen? How many people have used the command line on their smart phones? Already solved. Already implemented. No need to claim that it SHOULD be done.
They have realized it. They have implemented it. It is already done.
Again, already realized, designed, implemented, shipped and sold.
Been there. Done that. Ten years ago.
With a GUI, everything is visual, but nothing can be automated or repeated.
While somewhat true in Windows, OS X has the Automator, which is basically a GUI for building scripts using the OS X environment. It's quite powerful, and I often find myself using it to accomplish tasks that I normally would have written a shell script for in Linux. Given the complexity of the tasks it can accomplish, it's fairly user friendly.
On the other hand, my impression is that Automator is also vastly underused by OS X users. I think the fundamental difference between "computer people" and computer users is that if a computer person has to do the same thing more than twice, they see if they can't find a more efficient and automated way to do it... whereas computer users just sigh and resign themselves to a redundant and mindless task.
"Anyone who [rips a CD] is probably engaging in copyright infringement." - David O. Carson
'era of the gui' - false premise, too. You can have both, as it should be.
It would be great, however, if all GUI apps were designed with a client shell component and the gui just manipulated the command line part for you.
mov ah, 4ch
int 21h
I'll be happy when I get a CLI version of Photoshop!
Seriously, the more I get under the hood with Linux, the more I appreciate the utility of a good CLI. Then again, I date back to the days of DOS and WordPerfect....
Three Squirrels
duh
There used to be a word processor I think Borland Sprint that was sold as having every popular word processor UI so no retraining would be required for a large office.
Why not allow every UI that someone wants to use, CL unix or DOS, Win 95, OS/2, OS9, OSX, X11, whatever?
Why ever disable, ignore or exclude anything? It ADDS effort to do so.
According to Betteridge's Law of Headlines: No.
The command line is still the preferred way to do things in some environments. Period. This is especially true in servers. In fact the next release of Windows Server supposedly has a non-GUI aka command line oriented interface by default. Linux is becoming more like Windows and vice versa. As someone else said, some command line tools offer features that just aren't available from a GUI... and again... vice versa. I say use the best tool for the job... even if it is a command line tool. I still prefer to run package managers from the command line even when there are reasonable GUI front-ends for them. The command line isn't always a failure, it's a feature.
Scott Dowdle
www.MontanaLinux.Org
I've got hundreds of reinvented one-liner (or other quick script) wheels stashed away on my computer, so was quite pleased by this quote:
having to use a whole bulldozer when you just want to reinvent the wheel slightly doesn't make any sense
I didn't think that was quite punchy enough, so thought up the following alternative phrasing:
There's no need for a bulldozer when all you need is another wheel
Ask me about repetitive DNA
sudo rm -Rf ~/bin
is one keystroke from
sudo rm -Rf ~ /bin
From the rm manpages: -i Request confirmation before attempting to remove each file, regardless of the file's permissions, or whether or not the standard input device is a terminal. The -i option overrides any previous -f options.
Or just the simple case of "cp a b c/", only you eagerly hit enter before "c/" so you blow away b with no checks.
from the mv manpages: -i Cause mv to write a prompt to standard error before moving a file that would overwrite an existing file. If the response from the standard input begins with the character `y' or `Y', the move is attempted. (The -i option overrides any previous -f or -n options.)
alias rm='rm -i'
alias mv='mv -i'
Problem Solved
GP
Well that depends on what's drawing the window (a smart GUI would keep the 10,000 files in memory and only bother displaying / retrieving any metadata about those actually on-screen), and what you want to do with it.
For example, P:
While I would use the CLI for this task as well*, I could just as easily use e.g. Total Commander.
1. Select the files + sub directories you want to filter in, if you just want all, skip this step.
2. Search for the extension you want to replace**
3. Feed to listbox**
4. File - Multi Rename Tool
5. In Search & Replace, fill in the Search / Replace fields.
6. Hit Start (or press enter)
* Of course, Total Commander has a CLI built-in and running console rename commands in that works just fine.
** Steps needed because multi-rename tool doesn't search in subdirs itself. If the files are in a single directory then these steps also become unnecessary.
The reason I use the CLI for this is pretty obvious - it's much faster. But it can be done in a GUI fairly well, and a more dedicated 'batch rename' utility would probably do it in less steps still.
Additionally, let's say you have all those subfolders, but there's a few that you want to exclude. Within the Total Commander GUI, all I'd need to do is de-select them. On the command line... well I'm not sure what the exclusion flags would be, actually.
So like you basically said - there's a right tool for every task and every user. GP would do well to look beyond the stock tools, though :)
If some bright idiot "somehow" takes away my headless BSD servers we are going to have a problem.
Python: 'And then suddenly you have a language which says "we're all stuck with whatever the whiniest coder wants".'
I understand that the CLI is not useful to the average user aside from the fact that it is the best way for IT people to fix their computers. So I don't really see why there is any reason to remove the CLI. Plus, I don't know of any server admins who'd like to waste resources by having a GUI on a headless server or any other kind of server set for that matter. The CLI has not over stayed its welcome because it remains the most efficient and thorough way to interact with a Computer. GUIs are great and all, but they still do not provide all that is necessary for full computer operation. The day that changes, then we might be able to have a conversation about their demise. Up until that point the CLI will remain, because it is needed. Its not like we are on the cusp of a massive change in the fundamentals of OS design. They are all, at their core a CLI running a GUI on top. Bidding farewell to the CLI would require a massive change in how we build our operating systems. A change that, with current technology, would be both inefficient and unnecessary.
So yes, in a nutshell I may see where his sentiment is coming from, but the proposal is currently ridiculous.
~theCzar
What is this? The attack of the iZombies?
When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
Because nobody goes barefoot.
Damn it, this really bothers me. I'm usually very careful to check my theories and hunches before I post a comment, but I really messed that one up. Now instead of modding me down, like I asked, people are modding it up. Apologies to Roberto Lim and Robin Miller, and anybody who read what I wrote but missed the AC's correction.
I want to blame the Euro soccer finals and copious amounts of alcohol, but I should know better than to drink and post.
Ah, arrogance and stupidity, all in the same package. How efficient of you. -- Londo Mollari
Gnome has a registry. Fucking idiots.
I can click on a file and hit delete in a GUI :P
You didn't look at Gnome recently, did you?
Rethinking email
Possibly.
But you do realize that you are talking about a small segment of the Linux-using population, right? Smart phones, DVR's, etc. Those all seem to be just fine for the end-user without a command line.
And even that small segment that you described, if using Ubuntu or some other end-user-friendly distribution, would not NEED to use the command line.
The people who use the command line on Linux use it because they want the increased flexibility that it offers. With the command line they can expand the system to do more than the basic operations covered by the GUI.
Not because it is required for basic operation.
Come on, Gnome is written by a guy with a hard on for Bill Gates, what do you expect? Which part of Windows did they not try to implement? .Net, mono, .asp and other weirdass shit.
He did say he would love to work for Microsoft.
Since they wouldn't hire him, he is doing his best to turn Linux into Windows.
Yay. More minimalist UI experts telling us to remove everything not used by the lowest common denominator.
Back in my Amiga days, people ranted endlessly about the machines custom chips, the games, the graphics, the multimedia, and some forward-thinking people actually even mentioned the multitasking. But to me, the greatest feature of the Amiga was the seamless coexistence of the GUI and CLI in one environment, without forcing one or the other upon people. At least once OS 2.0 came out, you never needed to use the CLI unless you were messing around with public domain software. A huge number of GUI-driven applications had tons of command-line options without needing a separate executable. Granted, the Amiga's shell wasn't anywhere near as powerful as a typical UN*X terminal, but it was powerful enough for everyday use. With some exceptions, there never was a war between CLI and GUI fanatics.
I was always wondering when Windows and UN*X would get their stuff together and finally learn that the GUI and CLI don't have to be separate environments designed for totally different people. Ironically, the Mac, which always treated the CLI as evil, comes the closest today.
Computers are horribly complex devices accounting for both hardware and software and the majority of people are, unfortunately, lazy and don't want to put any effort into learning how to use them. Blame the manufacturers, both of hardware and software, who know this and market them as consumer appliances, just like a TV or washing machine. This is why the constant push to hide the complexity from the users and restrict their ability to break anything thus denying them the ability to ever learn how to operate the machine properly.
"You can lead a horse to water but a pencil must be lead!" - Stan Laurel
Are you kidding, the command prompt / terminal is REQUIRED on any system. Even if your a user that has no computer ability and no skill it is still a requirement when you ask for help. There are some problems that have no way to be fixed via GUI, any IT "professional" that claims they don't need a prompt should stay 100 meters away from all computers. The command prompt / terminal is the single most powerful computer tool there is, with out it your using a childs toy mean't for kids 0 - 3.
You don't write code in a CLI. You just happen to use the same terminal emulator that hosts your CLI to host a text editor and IDE, and that's only in the worst-case scenario where you are too much a troglodyte to even use gvim (let alone a modern IDE.)
A command line is great for lots of things. Writing code isn't one of those things.
But I must give to them that they try to look Unlike Windows really hard. Breaking ages old GUI behaviors and leaving the users bewildered and frustrated just for the reason of "because we're not Windows".
45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
When I upgraded from an old Mac iBook to a MacBook Pro, I mistyped the username in the Migration Assistant application. Without really thinking it through, I deleted that new user account in my new MacBook, which left thousands of orphaned files on my new machine. A few minutes of Google searching provided a single command which changed the ownership of every file owned by the deleted user over to the correct owner. Problem solved in 15 minutes. I wouldn't even want to think about how to fix a problem like that through a GUI.
"I'll die before I surrender, Tim"
Why would you require sudo to delete your personal bin directory under your $HOME ?
Don't tell try lump everyone into a group like "consumers." Figure out what the market is actually interested in then make available an array of options that makes sense.
It might be true that most consumers don't want a product that needs a command line. They don't need the flexibility and the usability gains are a good trade for it. Others have more complex needs and are willing to invest some time in learning more capable (not automatically better) tools.
This is like saying we should only market circular saws to consumers because only a professional carpenter would ever want to deal with something that gives them more options. A hammer and circular is all you need tackle some small projects around the house, and is great for many perhaps most people but some want something more.
I don't know where this idea that the consumer should *never* need to know anything about a tool to use it came from. Simple options that require nearly knowledge are good. They don't typically handle unusual use cases well however. As developer, don't assume the only thing anyone will ever want to use your product for is something you can imagine.
Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
Or just the simple case of "cp a b c/", only you eagerly hit enter before "c/" so you blow away b with no checks.
Put this in your ~/.bashrc so that an overwrite will prompt you:
alias cp='cp -i'
Works for 'mv' too. Most distros default to prompting.
To be fair, Microsoft is doing the same shit these days. Consistent Windows User Experience Guidelines? No, fuck you, you get ribbons and no start menu you douche, so pay me already.
What are you talking about? Unless you use ksplice(most don't) you still have to reboot your machine to get the latest and greatest kernel. Now you can *INSTALL* kernel updates without rebooting, but you will continue to run the old kernel until you do so.
Monstar L
Command-line-only OSs will use less memory than GUI OSs. GUI OSs are more prone to memory leaks than CLI OSs because GUI OSs continually allocate and deallocate memory, CLI OSs can use the same input buffer over and over. I think MS is finally realizing the inherent vulnerabilities of GUI OSs for server applications in their introduction of a headless version of Windows 8 Server: http://tech.slashdot.org/story/12/01/13/1455242/windows-admins-need-to-prepare-for-gui-less-server
For server applications, CLI OSs will always be my preference. http://ttylinux.com/
Funny how yesterday's bloated crap becomes today's lean and fast. I still can't stomach Enlightenment, though.
Lets not forget who dominates the computer scene; computer nerds.
No. Really 1000 times no. The nerds make up a very tiny minority of the computer users. The dominating force in the computer scene are people who spend all day playing on Facebook, the people who actually welcome the Ribbon Bar because it's more "user friendly".
You've made one key mistake, .... or you're just seeking job security, I don't know.... The goal of software should be that WE DON'T NEED to set up a CLI script to run grandma through a list of options. If grandma can't use her computer the way she wants without my help then the designer of the software has failed.
In another reply to me someone compared the use of awk and sed to entering functions in Excel. My reply then makes a good example here too. awk and sed will be ready for the consumer when a window pops up giving the user a searchable list of software functions, guides the user through entering the arguments with extensive help, and when you balls it up fixes the function for you.
A consumer should NEVER need to access a CLI. If they do then the software developer has failed, or they are a power user like most of the Slashdot posters here who like yourself are getting very defensive at the prospect that computers should be usable by untrained monkeys.
It's a matter of economics. If a very small percent of users/customers is going to need to change something, then it does not make economic sense to create a GUI for those few.
Further, one cannot anticipate all customer needs or future tweak needs, such as an OS version that doesn't exist at the time of app writing. You cannot predict what a future OS will do different.
And you don't want to make a GUI up-front for everything, because there are some things you don't want the customer fiddling with under normal circumstances.
Table-ized A.I.
Just the other day a Linux distro decided that they want to do away with "Upgrade Kernel Without Reboot" feature of Linux
Which distro is that?
"The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
please remind us where the word 'prompt' comes from... the 'bash prompt' or 'shell prompt'.
you type 'key words' into it and get responses.
why does it work? because its an anlogue of verbal communication. .. which humans have been doing for 10,000+ years.
as opposed to 'poking square things that look like candy' which humans have been doing for 20 years.
Considering one of the focus areas of recent MS endeavours is to provide a richer baked-in shell (powershell), OSX has the same CLI credentials as the rest of the *nix world, it's silly at this point to say CLI is dead or dying.
I understand the sentiment that nothing should 'require' a GUI, but that's actually a pretty poor sentiment that can lead to an atrocious GUI experience. What you want is a clean GUI that enables what most of your users have to cope with. The CLI in a sense is freeing for the GUI developers. If you have advanced capability that is rarely going to be used by a small portion of the population, you can make it CLI only and keep the GUI clean. Similarly, there are some things the CLI just inherently does better, and any attempts to cater to some of those use cases in GUI is similarly going to ruin the GUI for the things that it currently does well.
I have dealt with software that held the philosophy of 'must provide all function and do it via GUI because CLI is dead'. The GUI had a labyrinth of menus and UI elements. Any attempt to do the most simple tasks prompted a 'wizard', to cover the 'well, 99% of the time, what you wanted to do was obvious, but to cover the corner cases, we are going to force you down a wizard that wants to make sure you want to do it now instead of later, when later you might want to do it, do you want to repeatedly do this same thing, while you are here, are there other things you want me to do this for, occasionally it might make sense for this to be combined with another usually unrelated task, do you want to do that this time? The data that will be processed, would you like the data exported for consumption elsewhere or thrown away?'. While it may be argued this particular piece of software was poorly designed and maybe it could've been done better, if you are trying to cater to all those scenarios trying to be *competitive* with a CLI strategy there aren't a lot of ways really to do that...
XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
since 99.9% of users will not have the permissions to start up an access database, and the "IT crew" will be too busy / underfunded to help them, they will revert to sharing Excel files on sharepoint.
furthermore, since the vast majority of people in these corporations have never been trained in database stuff, and the company will not pay to train them, excel is something that is essentially something 'anyone can use' the basic features of and still kind of understand whats happening without much training.
Without the CLI, how are you going to script anything in proprietary apps? Surely this is trollbait, otherwise this guy is a complete idiot.
"These days"? Get real, Microsoft has NEVER had a consistent user interface across their applications.
There's no -1 for "I don't get it."
If you really insist:
sudo cp /dev/sda1 /dev/sda
When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
What? You mean, what? Uh, well... yeah... what?
This signature intentionally left blank.
GSettings doesn't come close to the Windows registry in terms of ease of use, documentation, or features. And unlike the registry, GSettings requires special install steps that either need root access or use of undocumented features.
There's no -1 for "I don't get it."
Ironically, Captcha is a purely GUI phenomenon.
People used DOS forever. Was it intuitive? Sure, after you learned a few things. No one needed to know the ins and outs of DOS to be productive, but before the Mac and Windows, mainstream computing (used by businesses, sold to kids from Atari/Commodore, etc.) was a command line interface. I forget who said it, but it is still appropriate: "The only intuitive interface is the nipple. All other interfaces are learned." We can teach command line to new users just as easy as we can a mouse/touchscreen. It isn't about what's more difficult. It's about what we bother to teach the up-and-coming future users...
It's nice that there is a Graphical interface to computing, but it should never be at the expense of the command line. In other words, there should never be an arbitrary "One True Way" to do something with a computer. If someone wants to ignore the command line, that is their choice. Removing it altogether or making it just an afterthought is what the DOS prompt is for Windows XP (and yet, the Powershell is Microsoft's answer to "not everything can be done graphically.")
This reminds me of the desire to eliminate writing since we do lots of communication via computers. That's dumb to a fault, and I think the mentality of a command line being some sort of anachronism is just as dumb.
It's not about being a relic, nor is it about being stuck in the past. It's about being a useful device for everyone. I think we're moving the wrong way by creating the "One True Way" in Tablets and other devices. Just like Oracle (and others) tried to kill the PC a while ago (Ellison's famous "No PC will be below $500")... the industry wants to take the power out of the hands of the user. They're like pushers. They gave the ordinary user power, but now that is cramping their plans. Removing the command line isn't about progress. It is about removing power from the user.
It's the Stay-Puft Marshmallow Man.
No, not no, but MF'ing hell no. I hope that clears this up. The CLI is VERY powerful. If you want GUIs, fine, I have no problem with GUIs. But CLIs give power to those who want it, and it should never be taken way. Full stop.
Hello,
One thing I haven't seen mentioned about this particular mole hill is that it was uttered by someone who runs a blog dedicated to small form-factor devices like smart phones and tablets.
Given that typing anything of length on such devices is painful, it is unsurprising that he is denigrating the command line interface. It simply doesn't fit in his worldview.
Regards,
Aryeh Goretsky
Dexter is a good dog.
LOL, obviously no. I'm also reminded of all the graphical programming languages. Sooner or later you end up with textboxes in those languages. It's text that got blown to smithereens, scattered all over, and surrounded by pretty colors. It's actually harder to look at than a line of text. Saying that CLI should go away is like saying that English should be replaced with something based on Ikea furniture assembly instructions. No more simple English for pilots. They'll transmit a picture of an airplane angled towards an iconic cloud with lightning coming out of it, and maybe a number underneath. You'll figure out that you're supposed to come to a new heading to avoid weather. Or descend? Or that the cloud server is out again and you're on your own. Or that you're supposed to put a drop of glue on that little dowel and stick it into the console. Something. Oh crap... it's off the RADAR, what happened?
For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
"Microsoft has NEVER had a consistent user interface across their applications."
You're forgetting the days of the "Blue Screen of Death." That was pretty consistent.
"National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
I teach college students, and almost all of them are hopeless at programming. This is at least partly because they have never seen a CLI. I'd like to see more CLI used (yes, required!) not less.
When you sudo it from from my cold, dead hands.
That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
I really do not see where any changes are required.
Look 90% of the consumer markets time on a pc is spent fucking around with facebook, twitter, click ville, pinterest shit like that. Guess what there is your point and click interface for linux. Linux owns the frigging desktop, a consumer os is nothing more than a launch platform for a web browser. Linux flat out powers the internet thus it already owns the desktop.
Got Code?
"While they are at it, why don't they import the "Windows registry feature" into Linux, and/or turn Linux into a proprietary closed-sourced OS??"
Just saying - package managers. Sure, when their database explodes, the system still works... for a while. Just about as impossible to fix, though. Sadly fixing this tendency does not seem like a priority for most distros. Arch and Gentoo are the only I have used that did not have serious, repeated package database implosions.
Great Intellect...
They have a red one now.
Help stamp out iliturcy.
The reason that the command line survives is that it is a model of the way that humans communicate abstract concepts - primarily using language, not using pictures. Yes, there are plenty of examples where a picture is worth a thousand words. For many applications (such as one-off editing of a photograph) a GUI makes a lot of sense. But there's no need to rip out the language facility from the user interface!
If you were going to criticize the command line interface, it would be to criticize the poor "grammatical constructions" (the inconsistent syntax and quoting methods), and the poor "semantics" (difficult to remember option codes, hard to access manuals). But these are arguments for improving the command line interface, not for discarding it. The prime reason that puts people off using the command line interface is that there are no hints as to what to type next, no feedback. It is a problem we should address.
A graphical interface is quite poor for some things, for example "do this a thousand times". The problem isn't the "thousand times"; easy enough to have a GUI element that handles it. The problem is the denotation "this", an abstraction that is hard to visualize. At best, you represent "this" as a macro sequence of GUI actions, but that is only a single level of abstraction with no parameterization. A command line interface can handle such abstractions with ease.
I would say from the release of Windows 95 to the release of Office 2007, they were pretty much within their own standard style guidelines for GUI more or less across the board. That would be 12 years, which is a fairly significant amount of time in the computing world.
Actually the GUI-fication of Windows Server was one of the many reasons Windows based networks are so insecure and poorly configured. It creates this notion that any "kid" can configure a Windows Active Directory Domain, and small to medium sized (and sometimes larger) companies hired amateurs to save a buck. I met some pretty bad sysadmins in the last 20 years of my life, who left a horrible mess wherever they lay their hands.
Not to mention that the GUI kept changing every year, because that's just how Microsoft does stuff; anything you learn becomes obsolete a year later. They are very volatile like that. This is not so in the Unix world, where API's and tools are kept minimalistic, are cleverly crafted, slowly improved upon, with stable releases coming out every few years instead of betas coming out every month. Indeed, history shows that a Unix person retains his knowledge for decades. Show me one Windows person who can say that what he learned about Windows 2000 Server is still useful?
Enough with the Microsoft Bashing, here's one product I actually liked that took the CLI forward: Splunk. They took the CLI and put it in a Web browser! Splunk is basically a data collection tool that pipes everything through whatever you type into the web based "CLI" prompt, with the basic function being a combination of "grep", sed, awk, with powerful regular expressions, etc.
The beauty of it is that you can take your piped processes, and save them as a "View", and you can even create charts based on the resulting data. The result is a Unix admin's dream dashboard into the depths of his IT environment. I seriously recommend any Unix head look into that technology, especially considering the product has a free version (the free edition removes some "enterprise" features, but for many applications you won't miss those features at all).
I also like the combined approach: UI tools that produce either scripts or configuration files that you can read and understand and modify manually if you wish. Make a change in the configuration file? It will register in the UI. Made a change through the UI? It will register in the files and scripts. You get the best of both worlds this way.
All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain... time... to... die...
Ubuntu was supposed to be really user friendly and hand-holdy compared to other versions of Linux but I tried it anyway. I attempted to install Java to turn it into a Runescape machine (it was a while ago lol) and it took over a dozen hand-typed, 50+ character commands in the command line to run it properly. A single right click and run as root function would have made all the files execute properly, all the libraries register, etc.
I do find ipconfig and chkdsk commands and their resulting output the fastest and most helpful compared to a UI but that's because they're short commands. So I vote no to endless pointless typing of impossible to remember file paths and stuff and yes to short and quick text commands that do simple things. They're just faster.
Sorry to burst your bubble but Linux already dominates the desktop. The general public sits down to a computer and launches a browser (gui to a linux server).
They spend the better part of 90% of their time logged into some application powered by thousands of linux servers. Google, Gmail, Facebook, Pinterest, Twitter, ClickVille games etc etc all powered by a linux server.
The CLI is not there to assist the general public it is there to allow us professionals to manage things efficiently.
A desktop os is only a vehicle in which to launch a browser.
Got Code?
Subject: Fucking moron journalist. And guy is a she.
Try to start your comment in the comment section. The subject line is for subjects. You're badly, sadly wrong, because the GP was referring to Roberto Lim, the blogger who is quoted by Katherine Noyes in this particular episode of her Linux Blog Safari. Hilariously, pretty much every point raised in this slashdot discussion has already been raised in the fine article, which suggests that it's not very fluffy at all. Perhaps you're just jealous that she built a bullpen of bloggers she can query and get publicity as a result before you did. I also note that you didn't cherry pick a little bit, you cherry picked a hell of a lot. The majority of Linux Blog Safari articles are on current events. I know, because I usually contribute to them.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
That's not exactly accurate. While GConf looks similar when you're setting things, under the hood it works in an entirely different way, and is much more resilient than Windows registry. A bad keypair won't hose your whole setup, for example.
Personally, I think the use of xml markup all over the place is a case of buzzword infatuation, and GConf would actually be cool if it was just an interface to ascii "KEY = SETTING" texts, but it's still not as bad a the Windows registry.
All that Chrome does is move the problem somewhere else.
Exactly like a VT102, an X Term or a Windows RDP Client.
If all a user needs is a preconfigured system administered by someone else, a remote desktop is a good solution to support. But they are not without their own problems either.
At work my users are on fat clients with network homes though because it outperforms any remote display tech I have ever seen. They rarely need a command line though. However I wouldn't dream of creating that environment for them without one though.
That said, there are a few places where I haven't bothered to totally automate away the CLI. Have yet to encounter a user who can't click the icon in the GNOME menu to open a terminal and type a simple command. Yea if there are options beyond a filename or wierd punctuation all bets are off for most of them so they will probably never become bash jockeys. That is why I automate just about anything. On the other hand we have some stalwarts who learned vi on SCO Xenix before I came and they still turn to vim for some things, something I of course encourage and ensure works.
Democrat delenda est
I have never ever had my package database implode on an apt-based system. Indeed, I haven't had my package database explode since Redhat 6. WTF are you doing to your poor systems?
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
I always wanted to see a good graphical MUD. If we obsolete the CLI, sometime after the chaos and riots in the IT industry someone will make a non-CLI MUD, which, I can play when I'm drunk!
But unfortunately for drunk me, the CLI isn't going anywhere, when "Scripting" turns into "Automated Systems Function Management App" that I create with a point and click interface, I will say I'm too old for computers.
OP has a fundamental lack of understanding on how technology works I guess
I'm not signing anything
I still can't stomach Enlightenment, though.
Can you please kindly elucidate the reason you _still_ can't stomach Enlightenment?
Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
I'd KILL for an official Control Panel option in Windows to allow me to customize the BSOD screen. Power Ranger Pink anyone?
Most people on Slashdot are fucking idiots.
How are the package manager databases a crippling problem with most distros? ./configure, make, make install. The old ways are still there!
With Debian;
A. If one repository goes down I can switch to another, quite easily in fact.
B. If all repos go down for some reason I can still install via
with a commandline - one needs a root-kit
with a GUI - one needs an App
Yes, but words are something that we are very good at.
If a GUI were made complex enough to be as flexible as the commandline, then people would have to remember just as many GUI options as commandline options.
But there's a difference. Humans are pre-wired to remember tens to hundreds of thousands of words trivially, without thinking. In contrast, we're not wired at all to remember many spatial locations, which is why complex GUIs are an utter nightmare to us.
CLIs match our brain and memory capabilities perfectly, at least when readable words are used as option names. Those who want to do away with the commandline don't realize that they're asking for it to be replaced by something that would be far, far worse.
"The question of whether machines can think is no more interesting than [] whether submarines can swim" - Dijkstra
Come on, Gnome is written by a guy with a hard on for Bill Gates, what do you expect? Which part of Windows did they not try to implement? .Net, mono, .asp and other weirdass shit.
He did say he would love to work for Microsoft.
Since they wouldn't hire him, he is doing his best to turn Linux into Windows.
It would appear that KDE is as well. Perhaps without the Bill Gates gloryhole type comments, but look at what they've done to KDE...
LK
"Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
Now we have a black screen of death.
Any sufficiently advanced influence is indistinguishable from control.
I use KDE when I can get get at least Version 4.5, and I have to say: Even at only version 0.17, Enlightenment is still much better than Gnome 3.x, IMNSHO.
Who is John Cabal?
Why is it that we spend years teaching people how to read and write, and suddenly when it comes to computers, they are unable to express their wishes in writing? Every educated person is expected to understand pen and paper, but a simple CLI is too difficult? We spend years and years teaching them math, but a CLI is too difficult? This is really pathetic!
The best statement of this sad state of affairs is by Eben Moglen:
"What I saw in the Xerox PARC technology was the caveman interface, you point
and you grunt. A massive winding down, regressing away from language, in
order to address the technological nervousness of the user. Users wanted to
be infantilized, to return to a pre-linguistic condition in the using of
computers, and the Xerox PARC technology's primary advantage was that it
allowed users to address computers in a pre-linguistic way. This was to my
mind a terribly socially retrograde thing to do, and I have not changed my
mind about that."
I completely agree with that sentiment. Educated, mature people need to be able to use and understand a command line. And they are. Denying them that empowerment is just unethical.
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
1. A command line interface for everything the program is supposed to do.
2. A GUI interface that scripts and engages the command line for every button you press
Thus the program is forced to adapt to both requirements, and is scriptable as well as having an easy interface. Also helps in debugging.
Starbucks, Harbuckle of Breath.
Really? So, which part of "Establish a high quality and consistency baseline for all Windows-based applications" translates into each new MS Office iteration overriding the File Dialog and generally doing a make over that Windows itself tended to follow? Further what part of each new IE iteration from IE 3 to IE 6 meaning yet a new interface mechanism (with IE3, hideable toolbars; with IE 4, moveable toolbars; with IE 5, collapsable/expanding toolbars/menus; with IE 6, lockable toolbars)? Is this iteration more of a move from 3D to flat or from flat to 3D when it comes to buttons, toolbars, etc? Should the background be a clear, plain color or some sort of marbled/swirly texture? Should toolbars/buttons meld together or be distinctly separate?
Seriously, though, as much as I can certainly see some consistent in the design (titlebar, menubar, toolbar, client area) for quite some time, there always seemed to be some need by MS to fidget about the border/design of those components, even going as far as merging or unmerging them. Certainly, there didn't seem to be a consistent rhyme or reason to it; it seemed all a matter of newness. That isn't to say some changes weren't good; but, it seemed more trial and error with plenty of reversions.
Eurohacker European paranoia, gun rights, and h
Believing that any linguistically rich environment for interaction between people and computers will be commercially unpopular, the designers of operating systems want u s to live in an infant's world. They show you pretty pictures, and in order to communicate you point at the appropriate picture and grunt.
The most important accomplishment of humanity is language, it is the single most important invention. Without language we would not have culture or technology. But here we are, trying to eliminate language from computer and replacing it with hieroglyphs and symbols.
The only problem with the CLI is the illiteracy fostered by Windows and the still prevailing inconvenience of the DOS like command prompt. Some people think that if there is no GUI for a problem, there is no solution at all. Most people do not even know that you can actually tell a computer what to do instead of clicking on abstract symbols. We humans tell other humans all the time what to do. We left runes and hieroglyphs and symbols millenia ego, but if you tell people you can actually tell a computer what to do they will not known what you mean.
What is so difficult to tell the computer to "find . MyFile" or "whereis firefox" or to "reboot", or to print the current "date"? Or to "sleep 5m && reboot"? or to "wget http://some.server/some.file && poweroff"?
If you tell me, you have to remember the commands, then I have news for you: humans are very good in remember commands (aka words). We remember at least 10,000 words for everyday usage and if you speak multiple languages, that number can go pretty high. So why do you think the CLI is only for "geeks" and a regular user should not use the CLI at all? Is it because you think of "regular" users are stupid and can't learn anything? I watched flight travel agents and McDonalds workers use the CLI all the time. Or is it more that the dominant operating system on desktops have a horrible command line interface?
http://www.mueller-public.de - My site http://www.anr-institute.com/ - Advanced Natural Research Institute
When the question is so stupid? We'll have a command line on glass for fsm's sake.
"It's a doughnut stuffed with M&M's. That way when you finish the doughnut, you don't have to eat any M&M's."
Fedora wants to introduce offline updates. You need to reboot to apply updates. http://linux.slashdot.org/story/12/06/21/2218226/fedora-introduces-offline-updates
Fedora
Exactly, Apple managed to create a fairly useful environment without any CLI. (not counting the script-like MPW for developers). This went on for decades and really there was not much to complain about. When NeXTStep was recycled into OSX we saw a return to command-line stronger than ever. Now you might argue that most users don't use Terminal.app, but given the search hits on doing various tricks and fixes on OSX I suspect a lot of folks are doing cut-and-paste CLI.
iOS doesn't offer a CLI, maybe this CLI madness at Apple will start and end at OSX.
A Linux environment that offes no CLI is theoertically possible, but the influence of power users is just too strong for such an effort to gain much support.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
there are things CLI is much more efficient at, and others that a GUI is better for. For the moment, an operating system isn't complete without competent implementations of both. both have binds to the physical realities of user input.. until those change, we'll need both.
another M$-Windows-like kludge?
Last I checked MS is pushing Server Core (aka GUI-less server install) and powershell everything.
You were saying?
PS: the registry isnt a bad idea, it just has a lot of cruft. Most anti-registry sentiment is based on ignorance.
One of the main indignities of old age is that young people regard all old people as the same, we don't see them as protagonists in their own right. It's tragic, because not all grandmothers are created equal, and don't wish to be regarded as such.
Seriously, you're making the disciples of Roland Barthes look good, and that isn't easy. I suppose what grandma wants is a technological experience devoid of human interaction.
Grandma goes to the store to buy a lb of hamburger. Let's not tell her about genetic engineering or bovine growth hormone, or heaven forbid, pink slime at the drive through. She doesn't want to know.
Grandma logs onto Facebook to check out her grandchild. Let's not tell her about privacy settings, or phishing, or heaven forbid, sexting. She doesn't want to know.
This magically disappearing technological shim you're so fond of doesn't exist. There are many magic rings in this world, Grandma Baggins, and none of them should be used lightly.
Maybe thats because the Windows desktop environment tends to be far superior for the end user than the Linux one. Does linux have better updates backend, better patching philosophy, better boot options? Sure, but thats all irrelevant, and if you doubt that the Windows desktop experience is superior you simply dont work with enough normal human beings.
Queue about 50 responses about how X distro with Y desktop environment and Z window manager is superior, but all with curiously absent explainations for how your average joe is going to set that up, much less get support for it when something inevitably doesnt work that they need. Good luck going to the ubuntuforums and starting with "I ripped out Gnome for lxde, and replaced grub with extlinux....."
I spent several years with Ubuntu as a primary distro, and it was both a lot of fun and a great learning experience, but most of that experience came from things like upgrading to 7.04 and spending several days trying to iron out why sound no longer works, or figuring out why Ventrilo wont cooperate with Wine and push-to-talk. The thing is, Im not really your average user and most people arent gonna want to spend days futzing with kernel driver blacklists or compatibility layers. The honest to goodness truth is that with just about ANY problem you could find on a Windows desktop, I could google it and find a technet article, a MS KB, and a ton of forum and experts-exchange answers on it. The same simply isnt true for Linux, and thats partly because of its fragmentation and marketshare.
Linux is great for systems that will be managed by folks who do Linux, and its great when those folks can set up a locked down system for someone else. But as an every day replacement for Windows, to be managed and run by average Joe? Yea, not quite yet.
PS None of the above applies to Win8, which I think is going to be an unmitigated disaster for any poor user who gets stuck with it.
There are somethings like scripts which work best on the command line. it allows power users and experts to navigate a system quicker, and execute any command at any time. a real command line also doubles as a scripting platform, like bash or ksh. While a modern GUI based operating system should have all features available via point and click, it should also feature a command line with scripting capability for the experts and power users.
Then we have remote access, with servers, not haivng a GUI saves CPU time, and makes managing multiple connections to multiple servers easier and far more effecient.
"iOS doesn't offer a CLI"
but there is a xterm + bash + gnu utils ports and people DO use it once they've jailbroken their phones. Apple doesn't exactly cater to the type who'd care about a CLI anyway. I don't think android comes with CLIs stock.
The only embedded OS that came with a CLI I can think of is maemo on the nokia n900. But that wasn't an "everybody" phone, but a niche phone for geeks and hackers(you know the experts and power users who like the CLI). The geeks and hackers are numerically few, but they are by far the most productive users, writing apps, submitting buxfixes, testing the limits of the OS, etc...
The same retards have been saying the command line is obsolete for the last 20 years and they've all been wrong, then and now. It will be obsolete only once keybords are. It will be obsolete when computers are programmed without typed code.
My hypothesis is that those people previously worked inside the Windows ecosystem. There complexity is a treasured asset. The more complex a system is the better it seems to be. That's the Windows philosophy.
The Unix philosophy is different. Everything should be as simple and elegant as possible. Data should be stored in text format, whenever possible.
If you want to see a typical Windows way of solving a problem. Look at OPC. The OLE for Process Control. Essentially that's a way to communicate with an object storage system. Networking is done via DCOM. Even trivial things become complex.
Just the other day a Linux distro decided that they want to do away with "Upgrade Kernel Without Reboot" feature of Linux
Now this guy wants to do away with CLI
Just what do they want to turn Linux into - another M$-Windows-like kludge?
While they are at it, why don't they import the "Windows registry feature" into Linux, and/or turn Linux into a proprietary closed-sourced OS??
Why can't they just leave Linux alone?
Well... given that I reboot about as often as I get laid, this should increase the number of times I get laid in a year. Where do I sign up?
With a decent command line you can simply do all the things people do on Excel databases in simple text files and shell scripts. And since that's all open source and uses open formats, changing to something better is trivial. Or you can simply add a different frontend.
If you have less than 100k datasets in your database, linear search is still acceptable.
You didn't look at Gnome recently, did you?
I'd rather one good common way of doing the same thing rather then 4000 different ways of doing the same thing.
The Windows binary registry is actually kind of awesome if you debug and understand how it is used. Each configuration parameter can have permissions. Each read and write to the registry can be easily audited/logged. You can use group policy to enforce permissions on registry keys or set them to certain values. Almost every app uses it, allowing you to enforce policy/set configurations across all your devices centrally. To do the same in *nix, you need to know the configuration paths of all your apps, their compile options, and some method of deploying coniguration changes to them (easier to release your own custom packages for your entire environment)
Wouldn't a proc-fs interface to similar system be awesome?!
120 characters ought to be enough for anyone
The only reason I was able to switch from Linux to OS/X on my desktop is exactly because it has a decent command-line.
From a customer support perspective I can tell you it's significantly easier to support an OS/X user than a Windows user as well. Why? Because I can send someone a string of commands and the can copy&paste the result back to. On Windows you have to enter each command one, often can't find a suitable command and, probably the worst, it's non-trivial for a regular use to copy&paste the output.
Probably the best troubleshooting technique ever, aside from this classic:
...yeah, you need to turn it on... uh, the button turns it on... yeah, you do know how a button works don't you? No, not on clothes."
"Hello, IT. Have you tried turning it off and on again? Uh... okay, well, the button on the side, is it glowing?
I've used both rpm and dpkg-based systems since the late 90s, and I've never ever had a package database impode, or really even heard of it happening.
The last 3 week of my current job were made up *exclusively* of writing scripts to automate image generation for Windows Deployment. Using cmd.exe batch scripts, yes. There is still no proper way to automate those processes without a CLI, not even in Windows. One of the best tools i've seen churned out by Microsoft (DISM) is a CLI-only tool. So yeah.
Violence is the last refuge of the incompetent.
Linux is great for systems that will be managed by folks who do Linux, and its great when those folks can set up a locked down system for someone else. But as an every day replacement for Windows, to be managed and run by average Joe? Yea, not quite yet.
Not even Windows can be adequately managed by Joe and Jane Average. You need a minimal level of understanding in order to keep any system running - not even talking about keeping it safe. I even get silly questions from the Mac users...
Actually you can type editor on most unixoid systems, and get to your pre-set editor.
If you mistype something, you'll get a prompt "command not found, did you mean perhaps x?".
If you press tab twice you'll get a list of all options, etc.
Wouldn't it be awesome to have the ability to display images in the console? For example, I could type "look niceboobs.jpeg" and it would display a thumbnail of the image right below the prompt.
Nah, the real problem with Linux is the same thing it's been for years - lack of critical applications. Sure, these days, any web-based applications will work like a charm... but it's things crucial to your business - in my case AutoCAD, MasterCAM and our Infor ERP system - that prevent Linux on anything but the most basic of machines.
Once those apps get ported to Linux, I think we'd be running it within a couple of years, simply due to the lack of cost and stability(and excellent support for out-of-date hardware).
Users, well, they'll learn whatever it takes to get the job done. CLI is great for some things, horrible for others. GUI is great for some, horrible for others. It shouldn't be one or the other - blend the two. Have a good gui with common options, and a CLI box that can be pulled up for access to the complex and arcane extra features(which perhaps only 100 people in the world use, but for them it's critical).
What most of you have no clue about, is that your habbits with your less than 1% market share of an OS, are in the less than 5% share of computers users. There is no desire at all from the 95% to have a command line, 0, none, nadda. got it? The reasons you think it should be there, are totally unwelcomed by the 95%. Companies that are in business to make money care about these things. ANY application written today, for a command line, is worthless crap to 95% of the market. Any time spent developing a command line application is wasted unless you are specifically targeting IT admins or developers, and to be real, many of us don't want your command line crap either.. Your grandmother now uses a computer - go explain a Java command line to start a program to her. See that funny stare you got?
Step one to making linux more popular and accepted; get a clue.
slashdot troll = you make a compelling argument I do not like the implications of.
Check the tags on the story, when I visited they were: xtroll xlinux xidiocracy xflamebait xcli xfool xidiot
And I agree. Who is this fool to be tossing around such bold and totalitarian claims?
Sure real clis (as in terminal apps) should be tucked away behind a solid layer of usability and discoverability
BUT they still are paramount for the tinkerer, the admin and the dev so no, doing away with the CLI is not a
solution or even an option. Creating great usability and discoverability for the app front ends is the solution.
Story's op is a fool and an uneducated one at that.
-- no sig today
Really? Is that the best anti-CLI example you can come up with? This is not even an edge case; in the days of dynamically generated /dev nodes, it is completely unnecessary to copy device nodes.
Mart
"I know I will be modded down for this": where's the option '-1, Asking for it'?
You mean Windows' mess of deeply nested and illogical configuration options and wizards? Its haphazard collection of inconsistent user interface elements? The way it randomly and inconsistently remaps the file system hierarchy in the user interface? The way plugging in any new piece of hardware starts a hardware installation wizard that hardly ever seems to work and then causes people to go hunting for some CD or driver on the net? The way you need to reinstall Windows every now and then because it mysteriously slows down or bits and pieces of it stop working?
No, I don't think the Windows desktop environment is "superior" for anybody, not experienced users and not novices.
Look, I agree with your assessment but I feel you're inviting trouble by posting such a comment on Slashdot. You run the risk of people posting retorts, using Ubuntu as an example of a workable alternative, mentioning "grandma" every so often, etc. I don't bother trying to debate the merits of operating systems on Slashdot anymore - as far as most people are concerned Linux rules all, despite the fact most people disagree (but hey, apparently it's because they don't' know any better. Well it didn't stop Firefox and Chrome from gaining market share with the unwashed masses, so maybe it's more than just that...")
Most people on Slashdot are fucking idiots.
Seems that's what this blogger is saying. I am a consumer, we all are, and I happen to love the CLI.
assignment != equality != identity
The Gnome "registry" feature is edited with a GUI that is similar to Windows registry editor. And, as in Windows, the system API prevents race conditions: if two processes each update a setting, neither one can clobber the other; both settings get changed and everything works.
Unlike Windows, the Gnome guys didn't use a fragile binary database; the Gnome system is backed by simple text files containing XML. Personally I'd rather see JSON than XML for this, but what the heck, XML works too.
So, in an emergency you can still boot into an emergency repair BASH session, fire up your favorite text editor and directly tweak a settings file, and unbork your system. Unlike Windows.
IMHO the GConf system takes everything that is good about the Windows Registry and leaves everything that is bad. It is The Right Thing.
If only the Gnome guys didn't go insane while writing GNOME Shell. I hate that thing.
I use it every day! Why build a GUI when all that I want is to see the first few lines of a file, or find all of the lines containing specific text. It's what I do more then I want. when I just need to automate a simple task, my Bash shell is there for me.
There was an unknown error in the submission.
Almost as good as a Control Panel option: add this to your system.ini
MessageBackColor=D
MessageTextColor=C
That should give you bright red on bright magenta, which is as close as you get to Power Ranger status.
I'd KILL for an official Control Panel option in Windows to allow me to customize the BSOD screen. Power Ranger Pink anyone?
http://blogs.technet.com/b/markrussinovich/archive/2011/01/11/3379158.aspx
The "Notmyfault" link.
Why can't they just leave Linux alone?
Because they *gasp* want to improve it.
An SQL query goes to a bar, walks up to a table and asks, "Mind if I join you?"
Get a clue, person. That does not copy a device node. I would suggest you avoid doing anything sudo because you're a hazard.
When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
Love the broken link in the 'Keep It as an Option' section.
Seems that whether the author's using a GUI or a CLI he's not very good at it.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Hey, if only it was so easy on linux, just download an installer, run it and viola! It works!
In my dreams. I'm a Linux fanboy but I do feel sad when my sound goes numb and I have to navigate a minefield of my-special-sound-daemon (un)interacting with other-guys-magical-sound-server using TLA ridden bits and bobs everywhere and my only help being totally incomprehensible forum posts here and there, all of which assume I have a Phd in sound server internals.
"Oh! Of course, what a noob I am! All I had to do was compile a custom kernel module, find the tla.conf file, enable undocumented feature Y, blacklist all the other drivers, and I'm good to go! What a noob, if _only_ windows was this easy!"
Hey, you wanna talk about inconsistency, go look at the plethora of different ways there are to get something as basic as SOUND working on linux. Funnily enough, on the same hardware, dual-boot a windows PC and stand in awe of how it just works. At worst, all I need do is download those evil drivers you speak of and run the installer.
This doesn't make me angry, or long for windows, but be realistic.
> no, yes, maybe (tagging beta)
Awww. I point out the idiocy of your example, and all you can do is complain about a minor semantic issue. Want some cheese with that whine?
Your example is idiotic regardless whether or not cp copies the device node itself or the contents of it. Period. And your over the top histrionics when this is pointed out paint you as the moron.
Mart
"I know I will be modded down for this": where's the option '-1, Asking for it'?
All you did is point out that you're an idiot. Care to continue?
When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
... when you take it from my cold dead hands.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
What?? That "crusty old relic" is the backbone of almost every GUI ever. The "command line" is just a convenient wrapper around the system() and exec() calls that programs use no matter what kind of interface they have. This is stupid. I can't believe I'm reading this stupid stupid. How can stupid so stupidly stupid the stupid stupid??
Slow story day, /.? This flamebait is a lot like saying "right, we've got street signs, now let's get rid of speech - noone needs to ask directions!"
It's in a similar category to the regular "let's stop using X" arguments, and tends to come from an ignorance of what is being dissed. For a basic understanding of what a CLI is, I suggest The Command Line - The Best Newbie Interface?.
Its the old pointy click interface that is endangered. The command line is coming back because language is a fundamentally more powerful paradigm. Its just that the input device is switching from keyboard to voice.
http://rareformnewmedia.com/
You can easily find out which files are being opened on any Unix variant by watching for an open system call. All other file descriptors are irrelevant, and this is akin of trapping registry access; permissions are granted by the filesystem, so no problem here either.
There is absolutely no advantage to the registry, but there are several disadvantages: it's harder to access and repair than a filesystem, you can't fix broken configurations with a text editor, and the process of backing up or deleting settings can be complex.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Yeah, but the only problem with that was that the BSOD was still just inconsistent enough that Microsoft has lasted this long.
You can't be ahead of the curve, if you're stuck in a loop.
The fact that businesses have stuck with MS over the past twenty some odd years indicates that your opinion does not represent the majority. Your points indicate that Windows is not the IDEAL desktop environment for any users but compared to the other offerings on the market it is, that is it is the dominate OS used in the world. You can argue all you want about how this that or the other thing is more "superior" but that is subjective. We have pretty much only one measure of what most people think is superior and that is market share and MS wins on that front.
All that being said I left windows for Linux, then was forced back to Windows, then went to OS X. I spend far less time trying to fix problems that randomly appear on OS X than I have on any other OS. That may very well be because I don't try the offerings every few years. But at the end of the day if you can't be bothered to change your OS because of the annoyances it comes with then it works for you and what one knows is almost always "superior" to a steep learning curve.
Just to add to your pointless anecdotal evidence, I dual-booted my old laptop (long since dead). Ubuntu too about 20 minutes to get installed, configured and FULL running (including my network printer). It took me a WEEK to get all the drivers for Windows. It turns out Windows didn't like my sound card, network card.
The REASON I reinstall windows was because I had to enable AHCI in my BIOS to be able to hot-swap my e-sata port. Do you want to hear the REALLY stupid part? It turns out that Windows XP will not boot off of sata if it doesn't have the sata driver (understandable), but that it also will not let you install the sata drivers unless you have sata (which Windows believes is true when AHCI is disabled). The only way to get it to work was to reinstall with an SP3 slipstream version.
I think the reason Firefox (and later Chrome) were able to get market share but not Linux is because of Apple. Microsoft used to enforce their browser by having IE incompatible with the w3c standards, but IE for mac was absolutely loathed (until it was discontinued that is) and ALL the other browsers for the mac were reasonably standards compliant. This meant that as soon as people made their websites able to work in standards compliant browsers, Firefox (also being standards compliant) was able to get a foothold.
Unfortunately, there is not such connection between the Mac and Linux. They may both be *nix at the core, but the sound, video and display interfaces are completly different. My hope is that people will start using cross-platform application frameworks such as qt, gtk, opengl, etc to target both Windows and the Mac and that hopefully we will start seeing popular software "just work" in Linux.
Imagine if AutoDesk or Dassault Systems switched to QT with OpenGL. You'd suddenly (or fairly easily) be able to use Linux for architectural and mechanical work, all because the company wanted to target the Mac (or what-ever other reason).
I think he was refering to gconf.
The CLI isn't dead on MS Windows 7 either, and in fact it's far more annoying there with the worst of both worlds. I've just had to open a command line, run "secpol.msc" then hunt through an enourmous registry style tree structure (not many banches but a huge number of leaves with very long names), just to map a fucking network drive from another MS Windows machine after the unasked for install of some HP "security" shit broke things for the user. There is no way to get to that point from the START menu or even a search. The CLI is still a part of the system that it cannot do without because in some cases it's just built that way and we have to take it if we like it or not.
It's quite trivial to export and import registry trees... rarely do people do this... but it is pretty easy.
120 characters ought to be enough for anyone
So the guy that calls us all ignorant is telling us that commands in a shell are doing things on an OS level instead of an application level?
Sorry, the GP example of google stands instead of your embarrassing revalation of using examples where you are out of your depth above.
Ya know, when I hear Linux guys bitch about the reg i just have to LMAO, because frankly you have NOTHING that comes close to the ease of use of the reg. I have a customer with a problem? I can just email them a .reg file and tell them "clicky clicky and reboot" and voila! Problem solved. And I can do that with 1 machine or a thousand just as easily.
In the end all the bitching and whining about how much worse Windows is, yet your free OS couldn't even beat Vista, the most hated OS MSFT put out since WinME, what does that tell you? Hell more people pirate Windows than take your OS for free, doesn't that tell you that you are doing something wrong?
CLI is a server tech that deserves to stay in the server room and NOT on the desktop. the world has spoken, since Win 3.x CLI based OSes have gone exactly nowhere and after 20 years that is where Linux is, why? Because at the heart of the matter CLI has become a crutch, that's why. Have a problem? Bash. Can't make a GUI to save your life? Bash. Problem with sound, video, networking? Bash.
If you think your OS is so superior step right up and take the hairyfeet challenge. Simply remove CLI from your OS for 1 YEAR, that's all. Personally I doubt you'll even get it to boot, much less make even the 6 month mark, simply because CLI has become the all purpose crutch in Linux. Don't believe me, go ask for help with a common problem like say WiFi issues in ANY Linux forum and tell them you need a non CLI solution, I dare you. You'll will get cursed and insulted because in reality THEY CAN'T DO IT WITHOUT CLI.
So when you get to even 15% then you can jump on that high horse, but right now acting elitist about an OS that has barely beaten JavaME after being given away free for 20 years? that's just sad dude, and not something to be acting all elitist over.
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
poke at the "download" item in the "file" menu
I personally type much faster than I mouse, so I also prefer command lines for productivity reasons.
Same here, I first bought a PC as a Wordprocessor
"There is such a desire by the elites to make personal computers just a shopping interface." - brilliantly put.
Yes.
According to Wikipedia, the equivalent to rm -fr in PowerShell is this:
Get-PSDrive -p "FileSystem" | % { ls -Recurse $_.Root | rm –Force }
And you want to tell me that Microsoft is finally "getting" the CLI? This example is as retarded and unintuitive as the registry.
You're forgetting the days of the "Blue Screen of Death." That was pretty consistent.
Hey, you speak like that was in the past. This weekend I installed a (legal, purchased, licensed) copy of Windows 7 Home Premium onto my new machine so I could run games. I installed six games. None of them would run, and of those three failed with blue screens of death: Oblivion, Settlers IV, and Alpha Centauri. What makes that a particularly sour experience is that Oblivion, at least (haven't tried the other two), runs pretty well under WINE (some minor graphics problems, but it's playable).
Apart from that, Windows 7 cannot access the Internet, although Linux running on the same machine can, and although in Windows it can access the rest of my local network and the rest of my local network can access it. Because it can't access the Internet, my newer games won't run. Microsoft's support pages say the most likely reason is that my router is too old to support the modern wizz-bang networking of Windows 7, and they provide an online tool to test your router... but guess what, it only works with Internet Explorer, so if you need it you definitely can't use it, and if you can use it you definitely don't need it.
That's the level of thoughtfulness and quality I've come to expect from Microsoft.
I'm old enough to remember when discussions on Slashdot were well informed.
Really? You cannot do better than "I know what you are..."?
Here's a cookie kid. Now go play, it's a nice day outside, and leave the adults to their conversation.
"I know I will be modded down for this": where's the option '-1, Asking for it'?
"Microsoft has NEVER had a consistent user interface across their applications."
You're forgetting the days of the "Blue Screen of Death." That was pretty consistent.
That was less an interface and more of an inyaface.
CLI is for doing one thing...
screen and tmux come to mind.
Lim is using a fallacious argument known as argumentum ex silentio, or appeal to ignorance: Lim is unaware or ignorant of the reasons for a command line to exist, therefore, command line has no reason to exist. Here's another example of the appeal to ignorance fallacy:
Using a lawyer evokes a sense of pride, so I expect to get flamed by the members of your bar, but I have to admit, I usually wind up following instructions from an attorney without fully understanding their import. Lawyers don't make any sense to me, so lawyers are unnecessary.
Here hairyfeet is employing half truths or suppressed evidence --a statement intended to deceive that conveniently omits the facts necessary for an accurate description.
Here hairyfeet cleverly combines half truths with observational selection, which is similar to confirmation bias, as he points out unfavorable circumstances while ignoring the favorable.
Spectacularly, hairyfeet ends his nonsensical rant with a blatant non sequitur, as his wildly inaccurate conclusion does not follow from any legitimate established premises, nor even his own prejudicial opinion. Hairyfeet's reasoning is flawed beginning to end. Apparently, in hairyfeet's world, computer servers are not what they are because they serve the requests of client computers or programs, but they are servers because the type of their human interface is not used for anything often. Let me see if I can construct a similar example of hairyfeet's flawed argument:
There are only TWO reasons to write a blog -- boredom and conceit -- and how many readers or editors require writing blogs or repeating the same editorial constantly? That would be pretty much none, which is why I say as long as a blog is the dominant way to do anything on a webpage, it is a bad habit indicative of narcissistic compulsion and neither a legitimate profession nor a constructive use of free time.
The Admin and the Engineer
You *wear* cars?
Let me guess, you're American.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
CL will always be needed for the really technical stuff, but if nothing goes wrong, a normal user would never have to use the CL (in windows/Mac, on LInux you can't do much without it (at least I've had to use it for a lot of stuff just to do some simple things)..
We need more illiterate, incompetent morons on the Teh Intarwebs -- so let's make everything sparkly and shiny and full of large friendly buttons. Let's hide the inner workings, let's seal them up, let's replace simple and elegant command line interfaces with hideous and opaque singing dancing graphical ones that make it impossible to see what's going on. Let's make EVERY web page an exercise in Flash (the technology of choice for inferior primates who think that every time they press a button the screen, a banana-flavored pellet will drop into their laps) and let's bloat all the applications to the point of bursting. Let's cater to the stupid, the careless, the ignorant, the mouth-breathing knuckle-dragging assholes who click on every shiny thing they see just to find out what it does. Let's give up any pretense that one should actually LEARN something and (gasp!) THINK about what one is doing with a computer. Let's just join in an orgy of stupidity, led by Roberto Lim, imbecile-in-chief.
What could possibly go wrong?
GConf really should've just been modeled on /proc and /sys where the file is the keyname and the value is the contents.
Of course, I don't really understand why any of this stuff was decoupled like this in the first place - Gnome is a collection of applications that work together, but they're not so closely tied that they shouldn't just have had their own config files stored logically.
..fedora
Yeah, I'm not surprised. I have several issues with Fedora, and stopped using it years ago. I don't think many would be using it if it weren't for the backing and implications of RedHat.
"The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
Assuming you have a good idea of WHAT to export. That is really the issue.
Most apps are not even remotely well behaved and shove junk into all sorts of places in the registry. If they stayed in one place it would be easy to export and import, but that is rarely the case :(
The CLI is the only thing that either stays the same (99,9% of the time) or very gradually improves. The Unix CLI is the only thing that doesn't become outdated. The majority of commands I used in 1995 are still the exact same today, 17 years later and in 20 years they will still be the same. I will use the very same commands and still be able to utilize the very most up-to-date computing power with those very same commands.
With grafical UIs we can't even count on the CUAS being upheld throughout desktop enviroments. And just now touch UIs of various sizes and usage patterns have entered the fray. Some of them even riddled with patents.
The *nix CLI will stay the same for a very long time, just as the bizar QWERTZ KB Layout will probably stay the same. Allthough I'd say with the CLI there are way more practical reasons for this. Take away a powerfull *nix CLI from a system and experts will abandon it. It's that simple.
We suffer more in our imagination than in reality. - Seneca
I've set up quite a few average lusers with Ubuntu machines who don't know what a CLI is or how to open a terminal window. It took a good bit of CLI work up front for most of them but now I don't need to touch those computers.
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
Have you never aliased mroe? The shell can be made slightly fuzzy too.
Also FatPhil on SoylentNews, id 863
Oh look, another "my computer is broken, it must be Windoze's fault!" post.
I installed six games. None of them would run, and of those three failed with blue screens of death: Oblivion, Settlers IV, and Alpha Centauri. What makes that a particularly sour experience is that Oblivion, at least (haven't tried the other two), runs pretty well under WINE (some minor graphics problems, but it's playable).
So what you are saying is that when you stress test your PC with some games it crashes. When you reduce the stress a bit by introducing some overhead and reducing support for high end DX11 features they work. That sounds like your PC is unstable under heavy graphical load.
Microsoft's support pages say the most likely reason is that my router is too old to support the modern wizz-bang networking of Windows 7
Your router doesn't support DHCP? It must be old...
DHCP is all you need to get the default install of Windows 7 online. Clearly your NIC is working if you can access the local network. It doesn't matter what options you click during installation, you can't break simple DHCP based internet access. Maybe you are using static IPs for everything and the DHCP config is wrong?
Windows isn't broken, your assumption that all faults must be due to Micro$oft bugs is.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
IT, tech, and developers are not consumers.
When we go home we enter statis until the next morning.
not sure where Arch keeps theirs (despite using it for 3 years)
/var/lib/pacman/local - each package is a directory containing two files, "desc" (metadata and dependencies of the package) and "files" (unsurprisingly, the files the package contains). HTH
Bonus points if the driver is for a USB Human Interface Device or an SMB network share... and fails to install properly. (Windows 7 did that to me recently. At least it was able to access the network share despite complaining that "the device doesn't function" for lack of a driver.)
USE HOT GRITS WITH STATUE OF NATALIE PORTMAN (NAKED AND PETRIFIED)
IME typically if the dpkg database gets corrupted dpkg will forget some packages are installed. This usually results in a prompt to run "apt-get -f install" which reinstalls many of the packages that were forgotten about and things keep on working though possiblly with some leaf packages in an "installed but the package manager doesn't know they are installed" state (which could cause issues if libraries those packages depend on are removed during a later update, probablly nothing that can't easilly be fixed though).
note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
There's actually am unofficial tool in UBCD for Windows these days that allows you to switch an existing Windows XP installation to AHCI. It's kind of hairy though - even creating the boot CD is messy and requires a non-OEM Windows XP installation CD, and then it does a crude partial installation of the AHCI drivers that's just enough to get Windows booting again, and you're meant to manually reinstall the drivers afterwards except that Windows didn't want to upgrade to the driver version off the AMD website for some reason, and so on...
(As an example), I am still cursing mozilla and other new web browsers for the way they are keeping their UIs in a constant state of flux. Things like moving the home icon, making the status bar something that only appears if you hover over a link for 2 seconds, and just making everything look different from what it was 2 years ago. That sucks when you have to provide tech support for idiots who don't know if they're using netscape navigator or Internet Explorer 9.
And in Linux, I have found that there are plenty of GUI tools that I never bothered to learn, specifically because the Redhat version is different from the Debian version, and possibly the newer Redhat version is different from the older Redhat version.
So, yes, keep the G-d damned command-line in every version of every operating system, because I want to spend my study time learning new things, not just learning how to do the same old things in different versions of Windows/Linux.
And, no, I'm not going to make the argument for CLI reliability (that it never mangles your settings in such a way that you have to try again), or flexibility (that it's the only decent way to do scripting). Others have done a much better job than I could, in that area.
I use the command line to save time.
Example, to transfer FSMO roles there are three places in the GUI that you have to go to vs via the command line I can easily execute the command to transfer roles and after every command I get the response to verify it successfully completed.
Another example, I have a PowerShell script and a batch script to install windows hotfixes on standalone non-internet connected machines in the field. I can install 100+ hotfixes onto a new station in 20 mins or so. Also the script queries the system for installed hotfixes and skips them if they are already installed which equates into a major time savings. Try doing that via the GUI and see how far you would get w/o accidently rebooting or just giving up cause it takes so long.
WTF do you care if there is a CLI? Why are you even wasting breath talking about it? It is not a problem and is there for those who want or need it. Talk about solution looking for a problem. Honestly go regulate something else, ok?
And if you design hardware, keep DIP-switches and optional 0-Ohm resistors only for the technicians, not for the general public.
I don't mind if they cut out the CLI, as long as they don't take away my terminal!
YankDownUnder Veni, Vidi, volo in domum redire
I really love how reinstalling Windows destroys all of my apps and a backup doesn't help because the damn registry won't be right, requiring me to reinstall all of my apps and reconfiguring all of them by hand. Love that.
- For the complete works of Shakespeare: cat
Man, how does The Onion continue to deliver such great comedy after all these years?
"...specifically, whether [the command line has] outlived its usefulness in this era of the GUI"
Great stuff! I am still laughing.
The number of developers I'm meeting who are not comfortable on the CLI and opt for more obtuse ( not esoteric and hard to get into, but obtuse when it's time to understand what just broke ) IDE's, I'm obliged to pour fire on anything short of mind-machine interfaces to replace the CLI.
"There are some people that if they don't know, you can't tell them." ~ Louis Armstrong
As far as I know, no one is disputing that the command line is a useful interface for many administrative and scripting functions. But these are not things that most users are going to be doing.
The important part is this: "no piece of technology targeted at the consumer market should ever require that something be done via CLI". If you require a command line, then you must accept that a majority of regular users aren't going to put up with it. Fundamentally, this is aimed at Linux: as long as a substantial number of operations require dropping down to the command line (and Linux fans defend this state of affairs), then Linux on the desktop will never be a mainstream reality.
You can do important stuff from the command line on Windows - IIS log queries with LogParser and batch image editing with ImageMagick are some of the reasons I've used this in just the past couple of days. But the average Windows user never needs to see or touch it. This is why Windows is a mainstream desktop OS and Linux is not.
I just use:
Remove-Item -Recurse -Force dir
Have you checked out Bodhi Linux? It runs a recent E17, and includes a minimal set of programs (with a bunch of programs in repo if you want them).
In 9x you could set registry keys to change background and text colors for the bsod
Snowden and Manning are heroes.
The real benefit of cli over other tools for me is in the troubleshooting of issues.
Think of it this way, to have an interface means to put several processes between you and the system or service performing the function you need. Using CLI gives you that extra edge of not having a filter on your product. The filter is great for day to day use and for people who do not find comfort in remembering 49,000 text based options. When you hit enter on a CLI it does something, when you hit enter on an interface other than CLI, you have to wait for two to three (or more) other services to function properly and do something. These days, nothing requires CLI on the consumer side. If your work load is greatly reduced by the use of CLI in setting up, support, monitor, or any other and you don't want to be hampered by the behind the scene actions of a GUI then stick with CLI. It all comes down to CLI in the end.
Hesperant
Um... It really isn't that hard these days. Hasn't been for a few years. I don't use the CLI on my Linux systems (all using whatever is the current version of KDE) any more than I do on my Windows installs or my old Macs. Basically, I only use it when it's faster/more convenient. The *only* reason it (Linux) doesn't work for most average folks is because a metric shit-ton of apps that your average Joe needs to use every day aren't ported. And I really can't blame someone for not wanting to spend hours googling how to get something working under WINE. I tend to fire up Windows rather than fuck with that, myself. As much as I hate Gnome 3 and Unity, they're still fine enough environments (well, now that the bugs are worked out). Just like how OS X and Win7 have great desktops.
Most apps are not even remotely well behaved and shove junk into all sorts of places in the registry.
I'd disagree.
Well, I've repackaged maybe 1500 applications for various windows environments. Almost all software write to HKLM\Software\Vendor. Problems are usually that the vendor and application names have changed so many times that you can't find it based upon what it happens to be called today. Another issue is apps writing machine config to the current user hive and vice versa. I think most developers are admin, so hey, if they can write it anywhere, then everyone can right?
Ok, so it does seem to validate what you said, but I'll just say that registry config is easier to manage than ini files, a lot easier than xml and the worst of course is some undocumented binary blob.
There are windowing systems for the CLI as well; they tend to have menus, pointer/cursor control, etc. They work fine, and are strikingly appropriate for interfaces that manage significant amounts of text. For instance, midnight commander uses a windowed interface to manage your files, and it is LOADS more powerful, faster, and cleaner than Windows explorer, and the the Mac Finder.
CLI's are also a great deal faster over a network link, and will remain so until all networks can transparently move one heck of a lot more data than they can today.
I have run into many applications that use windowed text interfaces quite successfully. I've also seen it done poorly, but that applies to bitmapped windows as well.
Then there are all the CLI based info displays -- top, various website monitoring tools... CLI obsolete? I think the word I'd pick would be "critical."
As far as I'm concerned, this blogger is out of his mind.
Windows did away with CLI? When did this happen? I just used it this morning.
Oh, I see. This is just a bash fest to try (poorly) to make it sound like Linux will become Windows even though nothing about removing the CLI has happened in Windows... Wow. Just wow.
I agree that the CLI has a place and shouldn't be removed from these OSs but what you did really doesn't support this point of view in any fashion. But I guess a hater is going to hate.
Come on, Gnome is written by a guy with a hard on for Bill Gates, what do you expect? Which part of Windows did they not try to implement?
It would appear that KDE is as well.
Well, what would you expect after all these years of people asking when various unix/POSIX/linux systems will take over the "desktop"? This is and always has been code for out-competing Microsoft, and most people interpret it as requiring that we mimic Windows exactly. This has always been infeasible, of course, because MS (and their sponsor IBM) has always had a marketing budget greater than all their competitors combined. And to MS customers, why would you buy a cheap knock-off of MS Windows, when for a few bucks more, you can get the Real Thing? If they are indistinguishable to the customers, this is really all you need to know. And you can't mimic them successfully anyway, because MS Windows changes significantly with every major release. To succeed, you'd have to write a system that mimics whatever Windows system the user came from. This would be a major AI project, and simply isn't feasible.
There have always been two "computer" markets that have relatively little overlap. There's the IBM/MS axis, which has always sold to people with no knowledge of computers, and no interest in the geeky internal stuff. Managers, business people, and eventually the masses who just want "a computer" and have no interest in distinguishing them. And there's the tech community, which wants to understand their tools, and has always supported a flock of smaller companies, each of which provides computers that are especially good at some things, and which are fairly "open" to customers who want to know about the internals, write their own software, etc.
You'd think the linux crowd would have learned by now that they can't win by mimicing the Big Guys. If you get too good at mimicing MS, they squash you by buying you out or (if you won't sell) bankrupting you in court. But there's a lot of money to be made by building technically good stuff and selling it to the people who understand the difference.
This topic is a clear example of this lack of understanding. It doesn't take any deep study to know that there are some things that a GUI does well, and other things that a CLI does well. In the tech market, you'd better have both of them, else your stuff will lose out to your competitors that have better tools. This isn't changing. I'm actually typing this on a Macbook Pro, and of the 10 windows visible on the (1920x1200) screen, only two have any images at all. This FF window has icons in the nav toolbar, and the adjacent Safari window has a google result page with a few similar icons. All the rest is text (some of which is in French, Italian or Chinese ;-). What I'm doing in those windows can't be done (reasonably or at all) with GUI tools. My wife has an iPad, but I don't, because a few tests showed that most of the things I want to do can't be done easily there.
So, yes, the CLI may be going away -- on "computers" that really are just appliances for email, browsing, facebook, etc. If that's where you want to do business (and will lose out to MS and Apple), sure, build a system with only GUI tools. But as someone who wants a real "computer" that I can use as a general info-processing tool, the absence of good CLI tools is a useful way of excluding systems from my list of prospective purchases. In the "tech" part of the computer market, the Command Line isn't going away, because there are too many useful tasks for which it's the best tool.
What would be really useful is a design that makes it easier to combine the CLI and GUI approaches. Currently, combining them is difficult and clumsy. Rather than saying that one should go away, the real win would be coming up with good bridges across the chasms between them.
Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
OMG! PONIES!
CLI makes sense in a server context, not a desktop context.
MS is adding PowerShell to appeal to people who like or need to script. Win7 comes with a PowerShell IDE so one doesn't need the CLI to use PowerShell. PowerShell is really geared towards scripting and being a CLI.
There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
4000 ways? Using configuration files is the only alternate way I can think of. The XDG-BaseDir spec defines pretty clear where you should store these too. They're really easy to backup, copy, human-readable, and can be easier to comment/document inline.
Permission/etc is already handled by the OS.
Which are the other 3999 ways?
'I've had more kernel panics, lock ups, *nix FAIL in the past 10 years than BSODs.' - Then you're doing it wrong.
âoeIn theory, theory and practice are the same. In practice, they are not." â Albert Einstein
The issue in most cases, is that you need to keep kernel modules in disk in case you need to load anything new.
Every time I upgrade my kernel, and then plug-in some new device, I need to reboot since my modules and kernel versions don't match.
Maybe you just need a more Linux friendly sound card? Lot's of noobs complain about Linux when they are actually trying to run on hardware that is not fully supported. Did you pick your hardware from the HCL? No. You probably had an old Windoze machine and decided to run Linux on it. Those types of problems were more common 7 years ago. Try a modern distro on equipment that is compatible and you won't have any of this.
âoeIn theory, theory and practice are the same. In practice, they are not." â Albert Einstein
When you don't understand something, it's easy to say it has no purpose. It sounds just like kids in high school whining about algebra when they don't see how they will use it in "real" life.
Master Foo Discourses on the Graphical User Interface One evening, Master Foo and Nubi attended a gathering of programmers who had met to learn from each other. One of the programmers asked Nubi to what school he and his master belonged. Upon being told they were followers of the Great Way of Unix, the programmer grew scornful. “The command-line tools of Unix are crude and backward,” he scoffed. “Modern, properly designed operating systems do everything through a graphical user interface.” Master Foo said nothing, but pointed at the moon. A nearby dog began to bark at the master's hand. “I don't understand you!” said the programmer. Master Foo remained silent, and pointed at an image of the Buddha. Then he pointed at a window. “What are you trying to tell me?” asked the programmer. Master Foo pointed at the programmer's head. Then he pointed at a rock. “Why can't you make yourself clear?” demanded the programmer. Master Foo frowned thoughtfully, tapped the programmer twice on the nose, and dropped him in a nearby trashcan. As the programmer was attempting to extricate himself from the garbage, the dog wandered over and piddled on him. At that moment, the programmer achieved enlightenment.
The point raised by master Foo is clear, text is the only way you REALLY understand what is being said, in this case, to your computer. The GUI guy could not understand what was going on. For more Master Foo wisdom, see http://catb.org/~esr/writings/unix-koans/gui-programmer.html
Nah, the real problem with Linux is the same thing it's been for years - lack of critical applications. Sure, these days, any web-based applications will work like a charm... but it's things crucial to your business - in my case AutoCAD, MasterCAM and our Infor ERP system - that prevent Linux on anything but the most basic of machines.
You dont think the fact that upgrades will randomly strand large percentages of userbase without sound, or without working wireless, or will bork Intel NICs.,...etc has anything to do with it?
The problem is that without the huge resources that MS has to do QA on a massive level, Linux will NEVER have the release-day polish that MS has (at least if you forget that ME and Vista existed...)
You mean Windows' mess of deeply nested and illogical configuration options and wizards?
Having had to mess with both at times, i would MUCH rather deal with the incredibly well documented registry than deal with gconf + .app folders + /etc options and try to figure out which one wins out at the end of the day.
As for "wizards", who have you ever met that uses a wizard to config something in windows? And what alternative does Linux offer that would be better in such a scenario? Have the user just fire up a terminal and paste some random commands in that he found on the web? Yea, THATS user friendly. As of 2-3 years ago, if your mouse wasnt working properly or you had the wrong resolutions for X, the standard fix involved editing xorg.conf, which if done improperly strands you at a console with no help available.
Incidentally, the first time that happened was probably the best learning experience I had on Linux, but it wasnt exactly pleasant to try to figure out how to survive now that IRC and web browsing were out (until I discovered irssi and links)
SMB network shares dont use drivers at all. HID devices 99.99% of the time arent "installing a driver", theyre setting up the config for that device. HID drivers come with Windows.
Its a well known fact that you cant easily switch from IDE mode to AHCI mode after windows is installed. Luckily, that isnt exactly something your average user does (and doesnt impact the "desktop experience"), and those who ARE interested generally can figure out how to do it.
Let's put this to a slashdot vote. I vote that MORE end-user applications should have a CLI. If you don't understand it, don't use it. Nothing essential should require it.
Firefox and Chrome succeeded for the same reason Linux desktop fails
Can I run Outlook, Can I run (MS) Office ? If the answer to these questions is no, or even No But ... The business user has already stopped listening
Firefox and Chrome can be run without stopping you running these ...
Puteulanus fenestra mortis
I do both NOC work, networking, and helpdesk. Consulting is what I do, and if it involves computers or computer communication, I will fix it.
Helpdesk issues have gotten pretty easy, because I have got a pretty good handle on what users struggle with, and how to fix their issues. Windows isnt perfect, but it works, and its pretty consistent. Linux, from my own experience, is not, and while you can set someone up with an Ubuntu install and train them on it, for the most part its a risky proposition. Will they opt to run dist-upgrade? Will that break everything? You dont know, its like playing russian roulette.
Ive used OSX, Windows XP-7, Gnome 2, Gnome 3/unity, and KDE 3/4. I like the feel of KDE4, but feel like it has WAY too much futzing required. I think OSX is confusing and limiting (the window management I havent gotten the hang of, and it seems like it wants to hobble you).
Of them all, yes, I prefer the windows 7 style that reveals how many windows an app has open without using up scads of space, and auto-organizes them. It is far more useable when you have 50 windows open than any of the alternatives.
a) My employer's hardware, and not old at all, but I don't get to pick it, and is supported under linux, because I could get it working. But I've played this game a number of times over the years, I can't say I've noticed much of an improvement, just a proliferation of more layers that make it ever more difficult to solve.
b) I've never met a 'novice' (as mentioned in gp's post) that had ever heard of a HCL.
*I* can get this to work (as I did), but I'm under no illusion that installing a driver on linux "after the fact" is nearly as easy as it is on windows.
I'm not saying Windows always works out the box (even though that's where I've had the most success "out the box"). I'm OK with that, especially if the hardware is a bit "out there". What I'm saying is: in that situation the fix for windows is vastly easier than it is for Linux.
Blame vendors, blame my hardware, call me a noob, blame closed hardware specs, whatever.... That is the reality.
> no, yes, maybe (tagging beta)
I've found that people with more classical training in information technology (i.e. programming), tend to prefer CLI for server management, not to mention people who were in the industry back in the days of 8" floppy disks and accoustic couplers. That's not to say that there aren't industry professionals that don't prefer a GUI, and programmers who like managing their servers the old-school way, etc, but that's how it seems to skew.
The one exception being that there a few things you can't do in the GUI that you can only do in the CLI. Personally, I find that irritating. Also, unless your server is very badly in need of a refresh or underpowered for its job, the 'too much overhead on the GUI' excuse really doesn't hold much water.
Finally, I would like to say that I personally am for neither the CLI or the modern GUI; I want that waving around virtual reality stuff that Tom Cruise had in 'Minority Report'. Oh, and as an added caveat, apologies in advance if I duplicated the same response as someone else. I've been reading the comments while trying to troubleshoot an HP printer that suddenly decided to switch all the print menus to German, so I might have missed a comment or two.
It isn't in the Control Panel but it is customisable:
http://www.petri.co.il/change_bsod_color.htm
*Users* of Linux don't need a CLI ... (can be helpful in some cases but they don't need to ever use it) same as in windows
Patching the registry with .REG files is the same as sending a BAT file (which is simply a scripted command line)
There are three reasons why Windows rules the desktop - not quality but availability
1) Business Applications - most do not run on anything but windows
2) Games - most do not run on anything but Windows/Consoles
3) Preinstallation - Most machines come preinstalled with Windows
Note this is a circle, business applications are written for windows because people have windows, people have windows because business apps are written for windows ...
Puteulanus fenestra mortis
I love the CLI for some things. But would anyone who actually read the quote argue with its point? I can't imagine. Isn't it -obvious- that nothing targeted at the consumer market should have functionality that can't be accessed through any other means than command-line, unless it's functionality that's only meant for debugging problems? I think so, and I love CLIs for the sort of things they're meant for. But I love programs that have GUI and CLI modes even more, especially when you can do everything in either mode, depending entirely on which is more convenient at the time.
Most users probably won't and shouldn't use the command line on a day-to-day basis. But, the real power of the CLI is scriptability - it's hard to script GUI apps.
This means that, if I need to, in a support/consulting role for a user, I can create a .bat or .sh file which I can send to the user, to do something really useful, just by recombining stuff that's already built-in to the operating system (so I don't have to write it). This means I can do something useful, but it only takes me 5 or 10 minutes to write and test the script, then send it to the user and tell them to put it somewhere, and double click the icon for the "program".
Myself, as a power-user, I like the ability to do pretty complex things with text files from the command line - piping stuff through grep, redirecting output, etc. For example, if I create a batch file to do some task for the user, as outlined above, I can redirect all the output to a log file, and have them send me the log if something goes wrong.
The CLI definitely has a useful role in computing. No, users shouldn't *have* to go to the command line to do anything common (and mostly they DON'T have to), but it's nice to have for those occasions when it is "the right tool for the job".
At work, I develop server-side applications in a Windows 7 environment and I'm still required to use the CL and batch file scripts occasionally. Why should it be any different for Linux, which has better, more flexible CLIs?
Seriously, is there no sensible Linux distro left? Debian?
Arch and Gentoo seems to be the only ones left that believe in leaving the choices with the sysadmin, not the developer.
(Well, Gentoo has deteriorated a bit that way after Dan Robbins left, with way too many use/mask restrictions and overrides. Perhaps Funtoo is better, apart from the name?)
Actually since WinVista made running as user instead of admin the default the user really doesn't NEED to manage much of anything. My 71 year old dad got impatient because I hadn't had the time to come by and install Win 7 on his new desktop so he decided to DIY, man I had my gut in a knot figuring he screwed it up BIG time, what did I find? A perfectly running Win 7 machine. Not only did it take care of all the drivers but it told him on first run "Hey you don't have an antivirus. Would you like to be taken to a page with antivirus choices?" and he picked out MSE from the free options. The ONLY thing I had to do was show him where to get his Firefox from.
So while there are plenty of reasons to bitch about Windows management really isn't one of them, not if my 71 year old dad could install it himself and end up with a perfectly running and updated machine.
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
The windows binary registry is a poorly thought out single point of failure with not nearly enough consideration given to basic disaster recovery. It's a database implemented by people with no clue about databases.
"if you debug and understand how it is used"
In other words: It's great if you drink the kool-aid.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
People like Roberto, and Steve Jobs as well, assume there are no consumers doing software development, or any type of real work. They assume consumers are idiots, incapable of doing complex operations or needing real control.
The way plugging in any new piece of hardware starts a hardware installation wizard that hardly ever seems to work and then causes people to go hunting for some CD or driver on the net?
I've never had it fail. What are you doing wrong?
The way you need to reinstall Windows every now and then because it mysteriously slows down or bits and pieces of it stop working?
I've never had to reinstall. What are you doing wrong?
Did you use a 10-year-old Ubuntu? Err, wait there was no Ubuntu yet.
Damn Microsoft for not supporting non-existent hardware with their installer! Windows XP RTM: August 24, 2001 SATA created: 2003 (Wikipedia).
So I had to do another car analogy. Most users of cars these days have little idea what exactly is under the hood of their engine. Sadly many don't even know how to check their oil anymore. These are GUI users. They get into their car, put the key in the ignition, start it up and then everything they want to do is controlled by a pedal, lever, wheel, button, or dial. If something is wrong a light on the dashboard tells them and they take the car into a mechanic or to a friend who knows how to fix it. Other users actually know how to change the fluids in the car, replace the battery, oil/air filter, break pads, tires, etc... And, mechanics learn to pretty much take the car apart and put it back together again. These are the CLI users. While many of us who know and appreciate the CLI wish that others did too it's just not reasonable to expect everyone to use the CLI. For most people the computer is simply a box that connects them to things. They want it simple, and they don't want to see things that confuse them. So these are the people who say the GUI rules all. Honestly there are times I appreciate the GUI to no end. It's often times easier to find a function I'm unfamiliar with through the GUI than through the CLI. But, once I know how to do something via the CLI it is far more efficient to use the CLI to do repetitive tasks. Now, unfortunately many of the developers that I have to work with who are fresh out of school have to clue how to make a CLI work. Which makes my life heck because they make the most convoluted choices sometimes... "Here's a PowerShell script that will check that for you." "A what?" "A PowerShell Script, just type ./dothis and it will get the data for you." "Type what? Where?"
A GUI is a metaphor. Metaphors are fine when you don't need to be specific, or need to perform physical input like gestures (i.e. pointing with a mouse.) However, when I want to give specific instructions to, and expect perfect execution by, an electronic idiot savant then I give instructions in chronological order using a limited vocabulary. In other words, I find it easer to use a CLI to instruct both stupid people and computers.
I use metaphors to convey complex ideas which are subject to interpretation, or to convey relative spacial coordinates. (e.g. data visualization, or pointing on a map)
Gentoo stores its package database as a series of text files, so the risk of the whole database getting corrupted is much lower unless you have a total disk failure (and then the package database is the last of your concerns)... If one or two package entries get corrupted its no big deal to reinstall them.
That said, even with a binary package database i've not had problems like you describe for a long long time.
http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
I'm not even going to dignify this story by posting in it.
..oops
Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
It's not just cruft, its:
1, there are no comments like you'd have in a text based config file, making manual editing more painful than it needs to be.
2, you need specialised tools to edit or view it, not just a standard text editor
3, backing up and revision control is much more difficult (i store my text based config files in git)
4, because its large binary files rather than individual text files, disk corruption is more damaging and harder to recover from
most of the cruft is not the registry itself at fault, rather applications which create the cruft and then don't uninstall cleanly, which is mainly because there is no proper package manager.
http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
Which is precisely why I find it amusing that Windows declares that it tries to install a "driver" for something that doesn't need driver installation. And how it can "fail" at "installing" a "driver", which might have no consequences whatsoever.
I get the feeling that someone at Microsoft decided that every time anything is connected to a Windows computer the OS needs to inform the user that some kind of driver is being installed. Perhaps they think it's too confusing if some things need drivers and some don't... or Windows just has really bad reporting and just classifies anything remotely related to system configuration as "installing a driver".
USE HOT GRITS WITH STATUE OF NATALIE PORTMAN (NAKED AND PETRIFIED)
The consumer chooses what he's going to buy.
So yes. If you actually want to sell what you're selling, give the consumer what he thinks he wants, not what you think the consumer should want.
The most important difference is that:
Most windows boxes are installed by people who understand windows (ie the OEMs), with the full support of the hardware manufacturer(s)...
Most linux installs are done by end users.
Give a user a random machine, a retail windows cd and a stable ubuntu cd and they're likely to have more problems with windows than linux.
When you don't get an OEM install of windows there is all manner of futzing around to be done, trying to work out exactly what hardware you have based on the pci ids (since windows has no pci.ids database), trying to manually download the drivers from a website which offers thousands of different drivers, trying to install generic drivers only to find they don't work and you need the oem specific drivers (this is also where the codec problems occur with things like sound on linux, some manufacturer implements an intel hd audio compatible soundcard, but doesnt configure it in a standard way, so on windows you need the oem specific drivers and on linux the drivers are generally configurable enough to handle it but you need to fuck around with settings)..
Windows is absolutely not suitable as a system to be managed and run by average joe, sure you may be able to keep a preinstalled version limping along with limited knowledge but you will soon succumb to malware and become a ddos or spam drone, or break the system in some other way and then need someone else to fix it. Linux may not be suitable either, but it's at least not as bad. On the surface windows may look simple, but it is actually orders of magnitude more complicated than linux especially when something goes wrong.
Something like an ipad, a games console or some other appliance is actually far more suitable for average joe.
If you buy hardware which is preinstalled, you have every reasonable expectation that everything will work out of the box. The only problem is that such preinstalls are less widely available for linux at the moment.
http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
To exclude, I usually use something like: `find . -name '.svn' -prune -o -name '*.c' -print` (searches for all .c files, ignoring the ones in the .svn directories)
I don't have much experience with Total Commander, so forgive my ignorance here. But from my experience, most GUI tools recognize a need but can only provide a partial solution for very specific cases ("Oh, you want to rename a lot of files? Well, here's a batch rename utility! Oh, you want to append the current time into the file name? Well, here's a variable that will expand to the date! Oh, you want the time to be in WHAT format? A different Timezone? Well, let me provide a special menu for that..."). Anticipating every need and providing a GUI interface for each is impossible.
The beauty of a command line with a modern shell is that it makes very odd, one-off situations possible. I have yet to see a GUI utility that can do that without providing a textual interface.
On Linux, hardware is easy: you plug it in and if it's supported it will work. Linux will never prompt you to install a driver. There is some unsupported hardware you may get to work with a lot of work, but that's not worth it.
It seems to me there is an awful lot of presumption in that statement about the needs, wants, and capabilities of the "end user". In the end, the arguments over GUI versus CLI boil down to "what they *think* you want to do" versus "what you yourself wants to do." GUI interfaces restrict ultimately restrict the user to allow only those actions for which a button/box/slider/etc... has been created to manipulate. CLI with pipes and redirects and loops and a thousand small utilities (ps, sed, wc, et al) allow near infinite permutations of operations and power.
The reason that there is a choice is because *both* have their place and they need not be mutually exclusive. It is my personal conviction, moreso, that when computing devices lose the CLI they will cease to be computing devices in the utilitarian sense of the word and be little more than fancy appliances, like a toaster that can tell you the weather. CLI is control. Control is power. Power is utility.
If you really insist..
Right-click on c:\windows\ and select delete
Idiots can screw up any system using a CLI or GUI.
Enlightenment has never been bloated or crap. If you "can't stomach" it, fine, don't use it. But stop lying and say it was ever bloated.
A right-click&delete 1 pixel to high can delete your whole windows-installation so the problem is? Seen this a few times when users never really read when stuf pop's up on the screen.. "Just hit 'Ok' to get rid of the irritating warning"
Another fun thing... click a bit too fast and start dragging, like most touch-pads do from time to time, can move your whole windows folder into c:\temp or similar..
Idiots screw up systems every day...
And who knows what you get when your super awesome smart shell loop isn't escaped properly on a filename with a space, quotes or apostrophe in the name.
I usually check the output from the script before actually doing anything dangerous... With a GUI you cannot even do that..
That reminds me of an old Microsoft joke:
A helicopter was flying around above Seattle when an electrical malfunction disabled all of the aircraft's electronic navigation and communications qquipment. Due to the clouds and haze, the pilot could not determine the helicopter's position and course to fly to the airport. The pilot saw a tall building, flew toward it, circled, drew a handwritten sign, and held it in the helicopter's window. The pilot's sign said "WHERE AM I?" in large letters. People in the tall building quickly responded to the aircraft, drew a large sign and held it in a building window. Their sign read: "YOU ARE IN A HELICOPTER." The pilot smiled, waved, looked at her map, determined the course to steer to SEATAC airport, and landed safely. After they were on the ground, the co-pilot asked the pilot how the "YOU ARE IN A HELICOPTER" sign helped determine their position. The pilot responded "I knew that had to be the Microsoft building because, like their technical support, online help and product documentation, the response they gave me was technically correct, but completely useless."
God is imaginary
By the market share argument, McDonald's is the superior hamburger restaurant. Market share is often a poor indicator of quality.
God is imaginary
Because putting the word "find" or "locate" in front of a few keywords just makes the whole transaction -impossilbe- for all us dummies... ?
Point of fact: offering -only- a CLI is dead and gone for most applications.
Point of fact: offering -no- CLI is dead and gone for those same applicaitons.
Pretending that CLI is an either-or transaction is just wee-tarded.
Innocent people shouldn't be forced to pay for inferior software development.
--"Code Complete" Microsoft Press
Linux is a fragmented construct of programs, so great suggestion to get everyone to use linux.
Is it... Linux is a quite stable kernel, that might come in some smaller variations but still...
Distributions are a fragmented construct of programs, but so is Windows or OSX.. A computer is not much worth without 3'rd party developers..
OSX, that so many people shout about that it's the easiest OS to use, is a unix system that uses lots of the same things are the linux-distributions are using... Like CUPS for printing, GCC for compiling, Samba for browsing windows-shares.. They have a total of 30-40 GPL'ed software packages in there...
It's not where the software comes from that can be confusing, it's how it's packages.. And i agree that there are some distributions that are crap, but there are some that are really nice...
There are many things that are easier to understand with the GUI but the CLI in linux is here to stay, sorry.
And there are many things that are easier to do with a CLI..
A GUI is good in some instances... in some instances a CLI is easier...
Example #1
Describe to a person how to move say 50 files around in a specific way and between each move of a file it should be renamed and permissions changed..
In a GUI you would have to list each file and the new name of the file and what permissions to set. Also you would have to explain how the permission settings worked etc.
If using a CLI you could just write down the commands for him to execute and he would just paste them into his terminal.
Example #2
A user needs support and the engineer on the other side of the line needs some more information from the system.
Expert writes down a few commands that will gather the needed information from the system in a easy way for the user.
User sends in the archive generated from the executed commands.
These tasks are usually not the same all the time so to be able to modify the commands from instance to instance is really powerful here instead of having some generic way of collecting stuff... And in most instances it's not only files that are needed but the output from the programs... Sending screenshots of 10+ windows manually can be quite tedious.
Example #3
A user goes to a forum to find a solution to problem X. The task is checking 30 views in a GUI. Viewing each screenshot is tedious enough, actually posting each screenshot will be hell..
Using a shell the user can execute prewritten commands and verifying the output in a simple way.
It's good for both novices and experts.. But novices lacks the knowledge to get the full power of the CLI, but that does not remove the usefulness for them, like the ones i wrote above.
I would love to have all registry-stuff and advanced system-settings in windows to only be accessible from the CLI... Then most idiots would stop screwing it up all the time...
I'm not lying. You impeach your own character when you throw that word around. Your opinion apparently differs, so I can assume you had quite a fast computer in 1997.
Plenty of people felt E was too bloated to run back then. Certainly my computer was fast enough to handle FVWM, but ran dog slow with E. If you search for opinions from the 90s (since your memory is apparently failing you), you'll find other people had similar experiences and opinions. Being bloated was rather the point of E--adding unnecessary eye candy because they valued prettiness over speed.
Personally, I used DR-0.11, which was buggy and crashy, contained a bunch of amusingly tiled nudes, and was all-around pretty ugly. By DR-0.14, it was still pretty slow and buggy. Clearly it's come a long way since then, and obviously computers are much faster now, but I'm sticking to my assessment of what it was :-P
I still prefer minimalism.
There's nothing forcing you to use it but any OS without a CLI is an OS not worth owning. Nothing everything to cater only to the lowest common denominator.
Business continue to use Windows because of compatibility, training, and third party software. On its own merits, Windows would never make it in the market.
I disagree. CentOS leaves power relatively in the hands of root and doesn't prevent a user from logging in as root. It is probably able to do this because of SELinux.
-- Betting on the survival of the media industry is a serious risk. I advise investing elsewhere.
Google search uses cli.
We have pretty much only one measure of what most people think is superior and that is market share and MS wins on that front.
By your standard, Toyota's are far superior to Ferrari's.
Change your video drivers. :)
I had several games start acting badly. it turned out that Windows Update had been gracious enough to upgrade the video drivers for me, and under load the new driver would overheat the card. Sometimes it was BSOD, sometimes it would just get hung mid-action, including the sound buzzing the last sound made. Looking around, there was lots of discussion on all kinds of video cards, and precisely what versions actually worked while gaming, and what didn't. Once you find the one that works right, the system will stop crashing.
And ya.. Windows 7.
But to stay with the conversation, ping, tracert, ipconfig /all... Those are basics that don't have an integrated equivalent, if you want to see everything.
On Linux, I do just about everything from the cli. On the servers, it *is* everything, as I don't want the unnecessary overhead of a graphic environment that no one looks at. On workstations, I'll admit, the web browser, mail client, and IDE are GUI. Browsing from lynx is nice and all, but sometimes you need to see a picture. :) I'm notorious for having dozens of terminals open, with top, ping, or something else going. It's called "doing my job".
Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
GConf was at least a half decent system, but it's gone for good.
There's no -1 for "I don't get it."
Linux is great for systems that will be managed by folks who do Linux, and its great when those folks can set up a locked down system for someone else. But as an every day replacement for Windows, to be managed and run by average Joe? Yea, not quite yet.
Not even Windows can be adequately managed by Joe and Jane Average. You need a minimal level of understanding in order to keep any system running - not even talking about keeping it safe. I even get silly questions from the Mac users...
AMEN!!! I work with Windows (and to a proportionate degree, Mac) end users daily, and can safely say that the lack of understanding/knowledge/willingness to learn is the same, would be the same, regardless of OS. Silly things like networked printers and wireless...? That combo alone probably puts $200+ in my pocket every month per client, because when there is a burp in the network, or someones print queue gets jammed, or the on-printer shared folder for scans/faxes doesn't get reconnected at boot, etc etc... the first thing they do is call me.
That the tagline from The IT Crowd of "Have you tried turning it off and then on again..." is so funny to us all is indicative of how widespread this ignorance and lack of concern about it is. If I could get the clients on Linux, at least then they would save the money of me having to sweep and repair machines on a regular basis because of the inability of the end users to steer clear of every free clicky flashy thing online that promises "Free! FREE!!!" and winds up infecting their system with "Anti-Virus Total Solution WIndows 7 AND 8 - With Registry Cleaner!!!.
"...there are some things that can beat smartness and foresight. Awkwardness and stupidity can." ~ Mark Twain
Yes, RHEL, CentOS and ScientificLinux (which is rapidly taking over for CentOS as the free EL) are good, but since they're based off Fedora, and with the turn Fedora has taken lately, I'm worried. Really worried. RHEL 6 will still be supported for almost a decade, but I'm not waiting with bated breath for RHEL 7.
Any Fedora past version 14 seems made both for and by a new generation of user, who doesn't believe details and understanding why anything is important, but want a "push big button, magic happens" and "works for 80%, screw the 20%" experience.
PulseAudio, systemd, gvfs, Gnome 3 - it's just one steaming pile of unwanted technology after the other.
The GUI is the equivalent of the automatic gear box for computers. Like the automatic gear box, it has been created to assist people that cannot do things correctly. the initial reason for developing automatic gear boxes was to help disabled people to drive. Something similar could be said about the GUI. The CLI is invaluable for anyone that whishes to use the real power of a computer, without it users lack power and control. It could be said that the GUI is a tool for "intellectually incompetent" people. There are a range of activities that I perform daily that would require much more time if i had to navigate through countless drop-menus and click on buttons. Scripting alone (Bash is such a wonderful thing) would be near impossible. By all means, keep your weak ineffective GUI for those less capable, but if you want power, well, you know what to do with this article.
Umm ... As long as we are talking about U ser I nterface, BSOD had absolutely nothing for the U ser to I nterface with
Are you kidding me?
BSOD is the penultimate Modal Diolog Box!!
CTRL-ALT-DEL to dismiss it.
And how it can "fail" at "installing" a "driver", which might have no consequences whatsoever.
Then there are 3 possibilities:
1) the device really does need a driver, and it hasnt been supplied
2) the device has malfunctioned, and is not responding properly
3) youve done something to your base windows install (like screwing with the inf folder) that prevents windows from properly configuring the device
As I understand it, "installing a driver" in the context of USB has something to do with associating that particular device with that particular USB port. It is, in fact, doing something, because subsequent connections from the same device to the same USB port will not initiate an "installation" (which incidentally disproves your theory... if you dont believe me, remove and reconnect a USB mouse to the same USB port: first time will cause an instalation, second will not).
And no, "things related to system configuration" arent reported as installing a driver. Things related to the OS talking to hardware are, because thats what a driver is.
Look, obviously a GUI cannot do everything as it will never be able to scale in such a way as to exactly match the functionality from a custom script or carefully parametrized command. But this is only the case for examples like you provide, where you're basically reaching for cases which are NOT COMMON for most people. Even in your case it might still be possible via a GUI (in Windows 7 you can sort in Explorer via images dimensions, though depending on what your requirements are I'm not sure what to rename them as).
Point is, go far enough and you'll come across a case where the CLI can do something the GUI cannot. But either it's because you aren't aware of a GUI which can do it (even though it might exist), or it's a case which is very left-field and unlikely to ever been required in the first place.
Most people on Slashdot are fucking idiots.
Yes, back to what I said... with the windows registry, there are ways to remotely change the permissions and it is simple to change single settings instead of having dozens of config file formats wherein the applications use dozens of dependant libraries to parse the config files and dozens of solutions to push the configs. How do you push or override multiple users settings on a network of machines when the config files of the app are stored in their home directories?
At least with the registry, the vendors are more or less encouraged to put the configurations in a specific spot... but in *nix it's open season.
Likely one of: /etc/ /etc/appname/ /usr/appname/etc/ /usr/local/appname/ /usr/local/appname/etc/ /usr/local/etc/ /usr/local/etc/appname/ /opt/appname/etc/
~/.appname/
$PATH/appname/
or wherever they damn well felt like it.
120 characters ought to be enough for anyone
But XDG-BaseDir spec is not followed. There are thousands of config file formats and none of them enforce the type of data - ie. boolean, string. Often, config files may be made or are executed (rc configuration)
I do not find XML configuration files human-readable. Inline comments can be annoying
Permissions can not be set on a section of a config file, so the config file would have to be broken into smaller include files further adding to the clusterfuck that are config files.
Sure, config files have their place. And the windows reg. leaves much to be improved... but it has its strengths
120 characters ought to be enough for anyone
Just restore the relevant sections of the registry and make sure you use regserv32 to register the dependant dlls the application uses - that will most likely add the regristry keys you missed. The problem most have is they know about the application, but not the apps dependancies which are installed behind the scenes. Same like any *nix except it is often more obvious.
120 characters ought to be enough for anyone
4, because its large binary files rather than individual text files, disk corruption is more damaging and harder to recover from
Ill go let the mySQL guys know right away, so they can get on converting back to individual plaintext files-- since those are so clearly more reliable.
Seriously? "Just" find out the relevant sections of the registry and dependant dlls of every application you have installed before you can properly back them up?
If you are serious and this is some 'best practice' for backing up please direct me to some info about this because I'd like to use it. More likely this suggestion is totally impractical and unusable.
- For the complete works of Shakespeare: cat
Even though the CLI is more difficult for new users, it is essential for doing most operating system administration, and I think that all users should be aware of how to run basic commands in it. I find it very useful for handling batch tasks for example, and prefer it. But, that's just me. Even Windoze uses CLI with powershell now. It's just part of using an operating system.
Burn the heretic! Burn! Death to the heathen infidels! Burn! *chews on desk, mouth frothing* ;)
But that's not really a "linux" problem - more a distro problem. And if it were used in the corporate environment, A, it wouldn't always be the latest and greatest, and B, IT would test versions before rollout... Like they do on Windows. Just setup a corp APT repo with tested/OKed software, and you're good to go.
Damn Microsoft for not supporting the pre-installation of drivers for to-be-installed hardware with their installer!
FTFY
And for the record, Ubuntu (and every other Linux distro out there) allows you to install ANY driver you want and doesn't give a fuck if you've physically connected/installed it yet
That's exactly what I said, but without explaining WHY firefox/chrome "works" and "ubuntu" doesn't when it comes to common websites/software.
Can you say reliable, repeatable and with unique, custom results? Just wrap your script and provide \1....
Running mysql queries from the CLI is a good example.
Besides the CLI will evolve better than GUI as speech2text becomes more practicable. Can't wait for that day, a Siri for the desktop!
resist propaganda
...since Win 3.x CLI based OSes...
Really? It was Windows 3.1 (1992) that excited the entire world about a GUI? ARE YOU FUCKING SERIOUS??!!!!! Because I remember a much different history.
If you think your OS is so superior step right up and take the hairyfeet challenge. Simply remove CLI from your OS for 1 YEAR, that's all. Personally I doubt you'll even get it to boot, much less make even the 6 month mark, simply because CLI has become the all purpose crutch in Linux. Don't believe me, go ask for help with a common problem like say WiFi issues in ANY Linux forum and tell them you need a non CLI solution, I dare you. You'll will get cursed and insulted because in reality THEY CAN'T DO IT WITHOUT CLI.
If you think your OS is so superior step right up and take the uptime challenge. Simply remove rebooting from your OS for 1 YEAR, that's all. Personally I doubt you'll even get it to stay up a week, much less make even the 6 month mark, simply because rebooting has become the all purpose crutch in Windows. Don't believe me, go ask for help with a common problem like say WiFi issues in ANY Windows forum and tell them you need a non rebooting solution, I dare you. You'll will get cursed and insulted because in reality THEY CAN'T DO IT WITHOUT REBOOTING.
The Admin and the Engineer
Contrary to our willingness to follow trends real technological progress is much slower than the hype.
CLI is finally becoming a mature interface. Bash is pretty good. It's taken decades to get to this point.
We still don't really know how to make a good interface that uses a mouse and a touchscreen is 22nd century stuff. Sure, you can get stuff done with those tools but often it is only a specific thing and as software becomes newer the technology and usability of it decreases/changes. Good things that work get forgotten or overlooked. There are plenty of GUI advances in the 90s that we don't have anymore. Evolution takes millions of years. Human progress is faster but it is still generations.
For example:
Skype style video is at least as old as the 1960s. It's become usable now by a lot more people but it really took that long. But then the company Skype with their proprietary interface might not last forever. So it might have to be re-invented again.
Stupidity is its own reward.
You critize the XDG-Basedir because some devs don't follow it, but I'm sure there's plenty of windows devs that don't follow the registries conventions. Heck, there's even plenty that don't even use the registry.
Why would you want standard config-file format? Use what's best for your application, and document it properly, period.
You say inline comments CAN be annoying. Then delete them, and let them be for those who find them useful, what's so hard in that?
Finally, why on earth would you want permissions on different parts of a configuration file. That makes absolutely no sense, there's no possible scenario where that would be useful.
You're either spreading FUD on purpose or you just botched things up. In all the the hundreds of installs I've seen and the handful I've done, Win 7 works quite well and is one of the most stable Windows versions since W2K.
Quite possibly the stupidest article ever on Slashdot.
In Reason We Trust
As a mathematician working in medical research I do not like GUI software for analytical purposes because everything I do needs to be replicatable. A script provides a permanent (in the second sense of the word) record of what I had to do to find out that, for example, smoking causes cancer. Indeed, "replicatable results" is the latest catch-phrase finding its way into the lexicon of medical research (as evidenced by events as UseR2012). Even commercial packages like Enterprise Miner (SAS) provide a way to get at the underlying scripts that the GUI produces precisely because of the need to be able to track where all that click-and-dragging got you. Of course, 95% of GUI-level users never peek under the hood to see what just happened, but that's another story (I am a statistician too, so I can make up my own statistics, do not try this at home).
"There is no god but allah" - well, they got it half right.
I make a good living being the command line guy in a world of gui-constrained idiots. I don't mind keeping it that way.
"No good deed goes unpunished"
The CLI is for power users and those who want to do some digging for themselves. The day they drop the CLI from an OS is the day all end-users will be treated as retards, if they haven't already. MicroCrap is slowly removing all useful functionality from the CLI whilst Canonical is making it harder to access the cli in Ubuntu to get useful work done. Both companies are hostile to users having control over their own desktop. Google is probably the worst offender with it's blatant privacy abuses and proprietary use of FOSS code but that's another issue alltogether.