• TheOakTree@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    edit-2
    4 days ago

    GUI is a generic swiss army knife. It’s easy to introduce to someone, and it has a whole array of tools ready for use. However, each of those tools is only half-decent at its job at best, and all of the tools are unwieldy. The manual is included, but it mostly tells you how to do things that are pretty obvious.

    CLI is a toolbox full of quality tools and gadgets. Most people who open the box for the first time don’t even know which tools they’re looking for. In addition, each tool has a set of instructions that must be followed to a T. Those who know how to use the tools can get things done super quickly, but those who don’t know will inevitably cause some problems. Oh, but the high-detail manuals for all the tools are in the side compartment of the toolbox too.

  • MonkeMischief@lemmy.today
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 days ago

    People can do whatever they like, and heck I find CLI intimidating sometimes, but I’m always learning something new a little bit at a time.

    I’m tired of seeing it in every field of interest that has any kind of payoff, whether art or FOSS.

    “I’m [(almost always) a guy] who (maybe has kids and) has a job. I stopped learning anything after I got my job-paper / degree / highschool diploma. I shouldn’t have to learn anything anymore. I am happy to shell out disposable sad-salary-man money (and maybe my soul idk) to any mega-corp that offers me a “create desired outcome button” without me having to think too much. It’s [current year]! I shouldn’t have to think anymore! Therefore Linux is super behind and only for nerds and I desire its benefits so much that I leave this complaint anywhere these folks gather so they know what I deserve.”

    Agh. I gotta go before this rant gets too long lol

  • LovableSidekick@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    26
    ·
    edit-2
    5 days ago

    Having started out in programming before the GUI era, typing commands just feels good to me. But tbh Linux commands really are ridiculously cryptic - and needlessly so. In the 1980s and 90s there was a great OS called VMS whose commands and options were all English words (I don’t know if it was localized). It was amazingly intuitive. For example, to print 3 copies of a file in landscape orientation the command would be PRINT /COPIES=3 /ORIENTATION=LANDSCAPE. And you could abbreviate anything any way you wanted as long as it was still unambiguous. So PRI /COP=3 /OR=LAND would work, and if you really hated typing you could probably get away with PR /C=3 /O=L. And it wasn’t even case-sensitive, I’m just using uppercase for illustration.

    The point is, there’s no reason to make everybody remember some programmer’s individual decision about how to abbreviate something - “chmod o+rwx” could have been “setmode /other=read,write,execute” or something equally easy for newbies. The original developers of Unix and its descendants just thought the way they thought. Terseness was partly just computer culture of that era. Since computers were small with tight resources, filenames on many systems were limited to 8 characters with 3-char extension. This was still true even for DOS. Variables in older languages were often single characters or a letter + digit. As late as 1991 I remember having to debug an ancient accounting program whose variables were all like A1, A2, B5… with no comments. It was a freaking nightmare.

    Anyway, I’m just saying the crypticness is largely cultural and unnecessary. If there is some kind of CLI “skin” that lets you interact with Linux at the command line using normal words, I’d love to know about it.

    • Olgratin_Magmatoe@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      4 days ago

      Anyway, I’m just saying the crypticness is largely cultural and unnecessary. If there is some kind of CLI “skin” that lets you interact with Linux at the command line using normal words, I’d love to know about it.

      This is far more manual than you probably had in mind, but Linux has support for a command called alias, which allows you to basically rename anything you like:

      https://phoenixnap.com/kb/linux-alias-command

      • LovableSidekick@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        4 days ago

        Alias lets you rename commands but not options. For example you could alias “grep” as “search”, but you couldn’t alias the “-h” option as “-nonames” and type “search -nonames” . You still have to type “search -h”.

    • boonhet@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      5 days ago

      typing commands just feels good to me

      That’s because for the most part, it’s faster. You don’t have to lift one hand off the keyboard. Also using the cursor and clicking on something requires more precision and effort to get right compared to typing a word or 2 and hitting enter.

      This is me kinda bragging, but at my typing speeds, something like ls -la is under half a second. Typing cd proj (tab to auto complete) (first few letters of project name if it’s fairly unique) (tab to auto complete), hitting enter, and then typing a quick docker compose up is an order of magnitude faster than starting the containers in docker GUI.

      But tbh Linux commands really are ridiculously cryptic - and needlessly so.

      Agreed. Okay, to be fair, for parameters, most of the time you have the double-dash options which spell out what they do, and for advanced users there’s the shorthands so everyone should be happy. But the program/command names themselves. Ugh. Why can’t we standardize aliases for copy, move, remove/delete? Keep the old binaries names, but make it so that guides for new users could use actual English aliases so people would learn quicker?

      • A Phlaming Phoenix@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        5 days ago

        At least part of this is the decentralized/complied nature of a FOSS operating system. You don’t get a command called grep because someone making design decisions about a complete system holistically decides that tool should be called grep. You get it because some random programmer in the world needed a way to find patterns in text so they wrote one and that guy called it grep and someone else saw utility in packaging that tool with an OS. It’s a patchwork, and things like this are a culture of sorts.

        • Val@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          4 days ago

          interesting you used grep because it’s a command that has a very clear origin.

          in ed/vi the g command was used to run commands on some pattern. eg g/[regex pattern]/[command]

          the p command was used to print current line so to print any line that matched the string “grep” you would do: g/grep/p.

          when this was made into a seperate command it was called grep: g/re/p. using re to denote regex.

      • LovableSidekick@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 days ago

        The standard VMS text editor (EDT) assigned editing functions to the number keypad. Using it became so natural to me I eventually didn’t think about pressing keys, it was like using a car gearshift. I’ve never gotten to that point with any GUI editor, even with heavy use of keyboard shortcuts.

      • LovableSidekick@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        4 days ago

        Like I said, you could abbreviate any way you liked as long as it was unambiguous. I think the ease of remembering meaningful words overrides the bit of extra typing It drives me more insane - and takes more time - looking up one-letter options that have no relation to what they do.

        • EarlGrey@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          4 days ago

          The great thing about the core philosophy of unix is that you could easily do what you suggest and maintain compatibility with applications that rely on the traditional coreutils (Which is the major reason why no one will really suggest changing the traditional syntax. It’ll break way too much.).

          Just build a series of applications that actively translates your “less ambiguous” commands into traditional syntax. I’ve done it for a number of things where the syntax is long and hard to remember.

          In fact I think a “nuutilus” would actually be fairly well received for distributions that are more new user focused and a pretty worthwhile endeavor.

          • LovableSidekick@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            4 days ago

            I agree it’s definitely possible but I wouldn’t call it “easy” or describe it as “just build…”. If it were that that simple it would exist already - and possibly it does. In my DCL days - Digital Command Language, which I just remembered was the actual name of the VMS shell language - I had an elaborate set of shortcuts in my .bashrc equivalent, whatever it was called. But I don’t know bash anywhere near enough to take on creating a skin for it. Just making cheat sheets and gradually memorizing what I use most seems more realistic - and would be an easier process if the commands and options were more natural to begin with.

            • EarlGrey@discuss.tchncs.de
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              4 days ago

              I say “easily” because it wouldn’t require a major effort on the scale of coreutils. It could just be a series of fancy automation scripts. It’ll take effort, but not the most intense of exercises.

              I made a handful of them at an old job because we had a few specific tasks that we would regularly do, but not enough to commit it to memory. I just spent an afternoon here and there slapping together python scripts with just the options we would need and tossed it into /bin

  • BoiBy@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    37
    ·
    edit-2
    5 days ago

    I use Linux and I prefer GUIs. I’m the kind of person that would rather open a filemanager as superuser and drag and drop system files than type commands and addresses. I hope you hax0rs won’t forget that we mere mortals exist too and you’ll make GUIs for us 🙏🙏🙏

    • Lv_InSaNe_vL@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      23
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 days ago

      Tbf, the file explorer is actually one really good argument for GUIs over terminals. Same with editing text. Its either simple enough to use Nano or I need a proper text editor. I don’t mess around with vim or anything like that that.

      Its all tools. Some things are easier in a file manager, some things are easier in a GUI.

      • trashgirlfriend@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        5 days ago

        I think it depends, if I have a simple file structure and know where stuff is, it’s pretty efficient to do operations in the terminal.

        If I have a billion files to go through a file manager might be easier.

      • BoiBy@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        5 days ago

        Yeah I prefer fancy text editor too. And my biggest heartbreak was learning that I can’t just sudo kate (there’s a way to use Kate to edit with higher privileges but I never remember how, edit: apparently it’s opensuse specific problem).

        Born to Kate, forced to nano

        • Illecors@lemmy.cafe
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          5 days ago

          The problem is running GUI code as root as it’s never been vetted for that. What you want, effectively, is to have EDITOR variable of your session set to kate and open system files using sudoedit. I’m a terminal guy myself, so this exact thing is enough for me. Having said that - I’m sure someone will chime in with a plugin/addon/extension/etc that adds this to the right click context for what I assume is KDE. Or you can try looking for that om your favourite search engine.

    • Korhaka@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      5 days ago

      I use both, depends a bit on the task at hand. Generally simple tasks GUI and complex ones CLI. Especially if I want anything automated.

    • TwoBeeSan@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      edit-2
      5 days ago

      I tried to learn superfile thinking it could make terminal more exciting but nah.

      Gimme that comfy file explorer gui.

      Totally agree.

    • utopiah@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      5 days ago

      FWIW I do use the file browser too when I’m looking for a file with a useful preview, e.g. images.

      When I do have to handle a large amount of files though (e.g. more than a dozen) and so something “to them”, rather than just move them around, then the CLI becomes very powerful.

      It’s not because one uses the CLI that one never used a file browser.

      • takeheart@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        5 days ago

        Yeah, when I need to inspect lots of images I just open the folder in gwenview.

        For peeking at a single picture or two through you can hold down control and click/hover on the filename when using Konsole. Love that feature. You can even listen to .wav files this way.

        • utopiah@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 days ago

          Very nice, I don’t seem to have that option available but I can right-click on a filename to open the file manager in the current directory. Good to know!

      • BoiBy@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        5 days ago

        I once did rm \* accidentally lol. I now have a program that just moves files to trash aliased as “rm” just in case. I just don’t feel confident moving files in CLI

    • Shanmugha@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      5 days ago

      I would say “why not, to each their own” if not the thought about what else the filemanager is going to do with root access (like downloading data from web for file preview). But the general sentiment still stands, it is absurd to think that computer must be used only in one way by all people

    • 3xBork@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      31
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      5 days ago

      Not really. But you know, gotta find ways to feel smarter than other people so here we go.

      • rustydrd@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        17
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        5 days ago

        And those Windows evangelists! Don’t we all know 'em with their strong opinions about operating systems? *shakes fist at cloud*

        • 3xBork@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          5 days ago

          Yeah you just can’t be in a server room anymore without some dude trying to sell you on Office365 and Cortana, sigh.

          • rustydrd@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            5 days ago

            Do you have a moment to talk about our Lord and savior, the Microsoft App Store, and his enlightened prophet, Candy Crush Saga?

    • JayDee@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      edit-2
      5 days ago

      It’s not that they are mad others use CLI, it’s that they’re mad that Linux devs regularly stop creating P&CI features, instead opting for CLI with no P&CI equivalent action.

      It’s kind of obvious why - CLI is already very flexible right out of the box, and it takes much less work to add functionality within CLI rather than creating it for the P&CI.

      At the same time, I understand the P&CI folk’s frustration, since one of biggest obstacles to getting more people on Linux is the lack of P&CI solutions, and the fact that many actions on Linux are explained solely via CLI.

      CLI folks have invested the time to use terminals effectively and view overuse of the P&CI as beneath them, and P&CI folks have no interest in dumping time into learning CLI to do something they could do on Windows with P&CI.

      • pinball_wizard@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        5 days ago

        they’re mad that Linux devs regularly stop creating P&CI features, instead opting for CLI with no P&CI equivalent action.

        I’ve never seen this?

        It’s typically a completely different developer who creates the CLI first, and then one of us adds a P&C after.

        So if something is brand new, sure there might be no P&C, yet.

        I promise There’s no conspiracy to not have nice things. Haha.

        • JayDee@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          4 days ago

          I was specifically trying to not sound conspiratorial. I’m pointing out that it’s a matter of having learned a paradigm vs having to learn a new paradigm.

          Devs have already gotten used to CLI and very rarely make full P&CI suites because of it. Even if the original Dev only did CLI for the app and someone came back and made a P&CI for that app, those P&CI interfaces are still fairly barebones. This is both a mix of devs knowing how good CLI can be and because it’s all open source volunteer work.

          Layman users of P&CI-focused DEs actively avoid CLI so they don’t have to learn it. This means that using most Linux apps are something to be avoided for most Windows users, making the OS base mostly unusable for them.

          To be clear, when I am talking about P&CI-focused DEs, like windows and iOS, I mean that if you cannot perform an action with the P&CI, then that action essentially does not exist for the average user. Contrast that with Linux DEs, where it’s quite common to have to directly edit configs or use the CLI to perform various actions.

          As a veteran user, CLI does not bother me. I do understand the frustration of those who want some Linux DEs to become as default as Windows and iOS, because lack of P&CI does damage that effort.

          This is not every app in Linux obvi, but the ones that are best at making sure the P&CI is full-flddged, are the apps that develop for windows and iOS as well as Linux - Blender, LibreOffice, Logseq, Godot, etc. The most common offenders are the utility apps, such as those that handle drivers, sound systems, DE functions, etc.

          • pinball_wizard@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            4 days ago

            This means that using most Linux apps are something to be avoided for most Windows users, making the OS base mostly unusable for them.

            I take your point. And this was very much the case for a long time.

            But it’s worth pointing out that Gnome and KDE are both done, now.

            I haven’t been forced to reach for command line to change something - anything - on either of my last couple of Linux installs.

            Edit: I almost didn’t notice, but it feels worth celebrating and raising awareness.

      • FauxLiving@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 days ago

        Linux is the terminal.

        The GUI applications are just terminal applications where you press buttons instead of typing. Creating the buttons and UI is extra overhead for developers.

        CLI folks have invested the time to use terminals effectively and view overuse of the P&CI as beneath them, and P&CI folks have no interest in dumping time into learning CLI to do something they could do on Windows with P&CI.

        There are people who have learned to use Linux, using whatever tools are best for the job and people who have decided that the only way to interact with a computer is with a mouse and refuse to learn anything else.

        You don’t have to swap away from Windows. But, if you choose to, know that you will have to learn a new operating system and, on Linux, this means becoming familiar with the terminal.

        If you’re going to artificially limit yourself, despite the chorus of Linux users telling you otherwise, by deciding that any terminal use indicates a failure of the OS or of developers, then you should not use Linux.

        It’s hard enough to learn a new OS. Artificially restricting yourself to only using your mouse is going to severely limit your ability to function.

        • JayDee@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          4 days ago

          Obviously I’m talking about the DE packages, not the kernel or CLI base. We are talking about windows users switching to linux-based DEs, which are directly trying to compete with Windows and iOS.

          This is not me having issue with CLIs. I’ve been on Linux for decades. I am pointing out the perspective of those that are frustrated with Linux DEs being blatantly unready for mass-adoption, specifically because they expect layman users to learn CLI. See my previous comment and this comment for more details.

          • FauxLiving@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            4 days ago

            I do understand their perspective.

            It’s just that their expectations do not align with reality and they’re only going to hurt their experience by thinking that there is a path to using Linux without using the terminal. Some distros do a really good job of creating something that seems like a pure GUI experience, but that illusion only lasts right up until there is a problem that the UI designers didn’t anticipate and the only way forward is to type terminal commands.

            I’m not trying to be an asshole when I say this kind of thing.

            It’s just disingenuous for people to recommend Linux and also say ‘Don’t worry, you won’t need the terminal’ or to foster the illusion, in new users, that their fear of the terminal is justified. I get that, of all things Linux, the most alien thing from a Windows/Smartphone user’s perspective, is a text-based interface.

            It seems difficult and social media is full of people acting like the terminal is incredibly difficult to learn so people believe that they can simply opt out of using the terminal. You can’t, and trying to do so is going to make users have a horrible experience. It’d be like telling people that Windows doesn’t require a mouse, that’s possibly true but if a person artificially limits themselves in that way, they’re going to have a much harder time than they would have if they’d spend the time to use the OS properly.

            • JayDee@lemmy.sdf.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              4 days ago

              This is kind of erasing the author with your description of the issue. The reason that apps eventually require CLI to complete tasks is because devs think of CLI first and then produce a stop-gap P&CI over top of it. It is explicitly how devs in the Linux environment operate which creates a gap between CLI and P&CI. If apps were developed with P&CI in mind first, with CLI added after, this would not be a problem - and we know this because of every app developed for both Windows and Linux, which lack these gaps in functionality - or lack CLI entirely.

              Your stance also de-emphasizes the difficulty of learning CLI for the first time. It’s not the most difficult thing ever, but it can be fairly frustrating. It’s not something you want to deal with when just trying to unwind after work on your PC, or while you’re trying to do your job at work. I think it’s pretty reasonable most people don’t want to have to learn yet another paradigm just to do what they’ve already figured out how to with a P&CI.

              Being realistic, of course, this paradigm shift is not going to happen. Linux will continue to be only a small portion of total computers used by end users because of this, and various other reasons it’s found unpalatable.

              I’ve heard that KDE and GNOME, however, are both at a level now where P&CIs are all you really need. I have not tried them myself, though.

              • FauxLiving@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                4 days ago

                The CLI is first because Linux is, first and foremost, an operating system built for terminal access. It was based on Unix, a mainframe operating system that served terminals.

                I’ve heard that KDE and GNOME, however, are both at a level now where P&CIs are all you really need. I have not tried them myself, though.

                Between all of my devices at home and work, I use KDE, XFCE and hyprland.

                KDE has a pretty comprehensive GUI, but to say that they’re all you need is a gross exaggeration. Sure, you can connect your bluetooth device via the GUI but if there is any problem with it the GUI is woefully insufficient for troubleshooting. Similarly, you can adjust the volume in the GUI… but if your device is using the wrong bitrate or you want to do anything more complicated than control the device that sound is sent to, then you’re going to be editing dot files and using the terminal.

                In Linux, the GUI applications are a convenience but the core of the system is the terminal interface. That’s what everything has been designed for since the beginning. Graphical Desktop environments are not, at all, a replacement for the terminal.

                Your stance also de-emphasizes the difficulty of learning CLI for the first time. It’s not the most difficult thing ever, but it can be fairly frustrating. It’s not something you want to deal with when just trying to unwind after work on your PC, or while you’re trying to do your job at work. I think it’s pretty reasonable most people don’t want to have to learn yet another paradigm just to do what they’ve already figured out how to with a P&CI.

                I don’t think that it is reasonable to want to swap operating systems without learning the new operating system.

                If a person has decided that they never want to use anything but a mouse to solve their problems then Linux is not the OS for them. Learning a new operating system means learning how the operating system works, not declaring how you think it should work and declaring anything outside of your expectations as unreasonable.

                If you’re coming into this with the idea that you’re going to swap to Linux but only use your Windows/Mac knowledge to puzzle through a GUI and also refuse to touch anything that is in the terminal then you should not use Linux. If you’re asking for help and then telling the people trying to help you that you’re not going to use the terminal, you’re going to face a lot of negative responses.

    • jj4211@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      5 days ago

      In a pretty high end high tech company, there’s still lots of people who see a terminal and think “ha hah, they are still stuck in old mainframe stuff like you used to see in the movies”.

      My team determined long ago that we have to have two user experiences for our team to be taken seriously.

      A GUI to mostly convince our own managers that it’s serious stuff. Also to convince clients who have execs make the purchasing decisions without consulting the people that will actually use it.

      An API, mostly to appease people who say they want API, occasionally used.

      A CLI to wrap that API, which is what 99% of the customers use 95% of the time (this target demographic is niche.

      Admittedly, there’s a couple of GUI elements we created that are handy compared to what we can do from CLI, from visualizations to a quicker UI to iterate on some domain specific data. But most of the “get stuff done” is just so much more straightforward to do in CLI.

    • rebelflesh@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      5 days ago

      I don’t think so, but I do criticize not having an option, that is why I stopped using Cisco personally and professionally, some things are fast using the cli, some things just need an Ui, you need both.

      • jj4211@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        5 days ago

        Like I get and appreciate the CLI and for networking, that’s pretty much all I’m using anyway, but I am shocked that enterprise networking doesn’t even bother to do any GUI. Once upon a time Mellanox Onyx bothered to do a GUI and I could see some people light up, finally an enterprise switch that would let them do some stuff from a GUI. Then nVidia bought them and Cumulus and ditched their GUI.

        There’s this kind of weird “turn in your geek card” culture about rejecting GUIs, but there’s a good amount of the market that want at least the option, even if they frankly are a bit ashamed to admit it. You definitely have to move beyond GUI if you want your tasks to scale, but not every engagement witih the technology needs to scale.

    • renzev@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 days ago

      I posted a meme a while back and out of the woodwork comes some guy ranting about how apt install sshfs is confusing. Like, the meme wasn’t even about CLI vs GUI lol. Nobody was claiming superiority, but there they go ranting anyway.

      • daggermoon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        5 days ago

        To me apt is confusing but that’s because I’ve become so used to pacman. The only package manager that comes close to pacman for me is xbps.

        • renzev@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          5 days ago

          Yeah apt tends to shit itself very often. I don’t like how it’s actually two different programs (dpkg and apt) glued together with perl and python. It all feels too fragile. A friend once tried updating a package, and it failed because… he was issuing the apt command from with a python virtual environment. Can’t say for pacman because I’ve never used arch, but xbps is just one set of self-contained binaries, which feels much more robust. Alpine’s APK fits that bill as well, lovely little package manager. Tho I guess apt predates both of those, so it’s not a fair comparison. Someone had to make those mistakes for the first time.

          I also really dislike the Debian/Ubuntu culture of fucking around with the sources file to add other people’s repositories on top of the distro-default ones (ubuntu calls this PPA). It’s a good idea in theory, but in practice those third party repos always fuck up in some way and brick your package manager. Just search for “apt Failed to fetch” in your favourite internet search engine, and you will see hundreds of people confused about it. You can do it with almost any package manager, but for some reason it’s mainly the debian/ubuntu people who like shooting themselves in the foot like this.

    • tux7350@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 days ago

      I have a coworker that likes to pick fun at my usage of CLI tools. He said it’s confusing “why would I use a terminal when the GUI was made after?”. They vehemently hate anytime they have to work with CLI.

      I watched them use an FTP program to download and change one value in a .conf file. Like they downloaded the file, opened it in notepad++, changed one thing, saved it, reuploaded / overretten the original. I tried to show them how to just use nano and got told their way was “better since you could ensure the file was replaced”. Its okay, I’ve secretly caught them using it a couple times lol

      • zarkanian@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        4 days ago

        Fortunately, Linux terminals are gorgeous and easy to use. I never wanted to use Windows’ com because it was so ugly and user-hostile. I know Powershell is a thing now, but it still looks ugly to me.

    • ZeroOne@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      5 days ago

      Yes, that’s a real thing. They use it as an excuse to dog on linux distros & say “Muh linux not great yet”

  • Tin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    edit-2
    4 days ago

    I do most of my work at the command line, my co-workers do think I’m nuts for doing it, but one of our recent projects required us all to log into a client’s systems, and a significant portion of the tasks must be done via bash prompt. Suddenly, I’m no longer the team weirdo, I’m a subject matter expert.

  • Honytawk@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    4 days ago

    Nothing wrong with CLI. It is fast and responsive.

    Unless you want mainstream use. Because the majority of people can’t even use a UI effectively. And CLI is much worse.

    • nfreak@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      4 days ago

      This is the core of the argument. You can’t expected the average casual user to use CLI at all if you want mainstream adoption. The vast majority of people can barely operate Windows as-is, telling them to use a Linux CLI would be asinine.

      • Camelbeard@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        4 days ago

        There was a time before Windows where a lot of people used MS-DOS and it was all terminal. Maybe computers where less popular back in those days because of the learning curve, but still many people used a PC with just the terminal.

        • Fluffy Kitty Cat@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          4 days ago

          Computers were definitely way less popular, and if you are an office worker you not only had the Baseline level of Education of an office worker but you probably received Technical training, and there was probably an IT department who could help. You might have also only know in just the things you specifically need for your job

        • nfreak@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 days ago

          Oh absolutely. We’re in a very different age today though. Like hell I can’t imagine either of my own parents understanding the basics.

    • thevoidzero@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      4 days ago

      Yup. I made a scientific analysis program. Using CLI and your own editors you can do so much. And instead of focusing on making the algorithms, I had to focus on making a GUI for months because people need things to click.

      And then even with very responsive and easy GUI, with like just 5 types of “views” and probably like <5 buttons/inputs each, people are like “it seems complicated” within like 1 minutes of demo. They haven’t even tried to use it or tried to learn anything. I even modeled the views to be as similar to another software they use.

      I feel like people just don’t like computers.

    • ArchRecord@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 days ago

      Exactly. Most things need to optimize for the lowest common denominator of understanding, and buttons with words and fields that have explicit purposes and positioning are a much easier starting point than “use command -help and figure out the syntax yourself,” even if someone who learns the syntax could then possibly be more efficient at using it.

  • thedeadwalking4242@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    4 days ago

    Tbh the terminal is super convenient. No random UI placement. Most things follow one of several conventions so less to get used to. It’s easy to output the results of one command into another making automation obvious, no possibility for ads. It’s pretty sweet

      • Badabinski@kbin.earth
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        5 days ago

        I genuinely use vim inside of termux on a daily basis. I dunno if I’m sick in the head or what, but I kinda like vim on my phone.

        • renzev@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          5 days ago

          Yeah I was gonna say that while it sounds completely unusable, it’s surprisingly not too bad actually. Some of the more complex shortcuts can get pretty tedious, but nothing that a good config can’t solve.

          I remember once my friend’s laptop died, and while it was in RMA he was using his phone with an external keyboard and mouse to develop a webapp lol. Just goes to show that any computing device that can run a web browser and VIM covers 90% of your daily software needs haha.

    • skulblaka@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      5 days ago

      Personally I just run gotop at startup and keep it on my second monitor. I know it’s a small waste of resources but I enjoy watching the blinkenlights.

  • TootSweet@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    55
    ·
    5 days ago

    The only thing worse than reading documentation/tutorials about how to do things in GUIs is writing documentation about how to do things in GUIs. It’s just screenshot after screenshot. And following it is like playing a ScummVM game, only less fun and lots more alt+tabbing.

    • pivot_root@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      31
      ·
      5 days ago

      Screenshots? Look at Mr. Speedy Pants over here!

      In my experience, half the time it’s a bloody YouTube video. Nothing says “fun” like having to seek back around in a video to find the next step without waiting 20 extra seconds because you already had to seek back and pause the video after it breezed past an overcomplicated and poorly explained step.

      • jaybone@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        5 days ago

        And the audio is text to speech because it was created by some 12-year-old neckbeard (is that a contradiction?) who is too embarrassed to use their voice on the video they made just to get likes and subscribers.

    • glitchdx@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      5 days ago

      If the GUI is good, then it’s self documenting.

      I’ve got a new favorite quote: “I don’t need tutorials, I need verbose tooltips.” -Wonderbot

  • _____@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    48
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    5 days ago

    meanwhile Windows users: let me drop into this random strangers discord who claims he will make my PC faster by dropping this .bat file that will run thousands of commands to “debloat” my install. also let me edit the registry and add random values to keys that I don’t know what they’re used for. this process is basically irreversible because I will inevitably forget which keys I’ve edited over time, wow windows is so simple and easy and intuitive 🤡

    • the_crotch@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 days ago

      That’s not a windows problem, it’s a user problem. The same scenario could play out with a shell script that modifies a hundred dotfiles. Lots of solutions on Linux help forums are “Paste this into your terminal. Don’t forget the sudo!”

    • ZkhqrD5o@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      5 days ago

      Amen. I remember having to frequently reinstall the system to keep it performant. Thanks windows rot.

    • ulterno@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      5 days ago

      I actually used to make backups (Export) of each edited key and keep them in folders with context, so I could later look them up or even set them again in case of a reinstall.

      Now, they are lying, forgotten, on some NTFS drive that I haven’t opened in years.

  • dalekcaan@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    ·
    5 days ago

    It’s all a matter of preference anyway (assuming you have both options anyway). CLI is less intuitive and takes longer to learn, but can be wicked fast if you know what you’re doing. GUI is more intuitive and faster to pick up, but digging through the interface is usually slower than what a power user can accomplish in the CLI.

    It depends on what your use case is and how you prefer your work flow. The only dumb move is judging how other people like their setup.