• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

Should the Command Line Be Deep-Sixed?

CommanderFrank

CommanderFrank

Cat Can't Scratch It
Joined
May 9, 2000
Messages
75,399
Every year or so, we hear it: It’s time for the command line to go. This time it’s coming from inside the Linux Community itself.

TuxRadar was the one to ask the question this time, and it's been echoing around the blogosphere ever since."Is it finally time to do away with the command line?" TuxRadar asked in a recent podcast.Linux geeks had their answers ready.
Click to expand...
 
As a sysadmin that scares the living crap out of me. So many things I just would not be able to do anymore without a command line available. And the amount of work it would take to create UI versions of everything seems like a very daunting task.

Never mind how much time I would waste going through menus of stuff to preform all the things I could do with a simple script.
 
CLI and GUI both have their strengths and weakness. I would not want to use an OS which only supports either. Even in Windows I use the CLI frequently. While in Linux/BSD I often long for a better GUI than the POS that is X.

They both compliment each other. Period.
 
No, command line will always be available if only for debugging output. ask any vendor. Of the 20 or so different vendors I use I at work not a single one is without command line. Most use some variety of Unix/Linux.
 
just to be clear you cant DO AWAY with current command line apps because they are obviously still in use

what you CAN do is have a discussion about whether or not NEW software should have command line functionality
 
If you want to make sure that your OS isn't used in the embedded community by all means get rid of your CLI.
 
The whole OS is sewn together with command line scripts, getting rid of the command line won't happen anytime soon.
 
In the Linux/Unix world, absolutely not. The command line is essential for administration and other task requiring "elevated" privileges. Unlike a GUI, it is not hampered by some developers form design. Even Windows is moving back to CLI administration with Powershell.

I should point out that in the Linux world it would help the adoption rate if the average user wasn't forced to use the CLI to install applications or update drivers (i.e. having to recompile to match the current kernel). This was the only part of the original article I agreed with.
 
i just wish they would simplify the commands that are under linux and make the package managers work reliably (any type of error can F it up)

main problem with linux and there distributions is all the program is doing is running an command script and if it does not work correctly you just get an stuck GUI or an random error that means nothing
 
Having used "command lines" since the Commodore 64 launch, I understand the younger generations wanting to leave CLI in the past, but until a graphical interface has all the features, the speed, the detail and the lot we get from CLI use and crashed, broken, trouble-shooting machines no longer require it, 10 print "get the hell off my lawn " 20 goto 10
 
As a developer, I would like to take the opportunity to say not only no, but hell no on the concept of abandoning the cli. That is all.
 
Why get rid of the command line especially in linux? So you can bring about even more confusion and difference?

The one thing you can find between different distro, even ones that use the same managers is that things don't stay the same, the app manager, control applets can have vastly different names and places and sometimes functions move from one place to the other, about the only place that stays mostly the same is the command line.
 
Even on Windows, lots of admins still use the command line for some things, especially with Server Core. So it should definitely remain in Linux.

Another example of the Linux community confusing "dumbed down" and "user friendly". Linux, over the years, has been made so stupidly simple that your grandma could install it from scratch. It's much, much easier to install and operate than Windows *as long as* everything works right. It's when a piece of hardware or software doesn't work right that all hell breaks loose and you have no option but to search Google and message boards for a possible solution. This is exactly the same as it was ten years ago.
 
Not only no, but hell no for both Windows and Linux. What Linux still needs to do though is improve their UI's to the point they are actually useable for a non-experienced user. I've seen a lot of distros where you make changes in the UI's that just don't take or save properly and I still have to use the CLI or edit a config file. It isn't bad as it used to be, but is still a big problem (video and networking usually are the worst offenders).

The CLI needs to be there for those that know how to use it, but all configuration/troubleshooting/maintenance should be able to be performed from the UI.
 
I'm not even at the level of working on systems at a medium/high level and I find myself still using the command line to do stuff, either because it is easier to do than finding a GUI counterpart, or because I have yet to find a GUI method.

So if I still have to use it just for systems at home from time to time, I cannot even imagine how much admins and techs rely on it.

So no, and HELL NO. from a guy that doesn't even use it for job related work.
 
Uhhhhhhhhhhhhh....

No... really, really, really, really, no. Not for Linux, and not for Windows.

Mac, sure, you can ditch the command line on that. Most Mac owners don't know what a command line is.
 
There's just so many more stuff you can do in cli that you can't even think about doing it away in windows or linux.
 
Those wanting to get rid of the command line are probably victims of UI crappiness. The GUI is a failure if you have to go to the command line to make a trivial change that any non-expert should be able to make.
 
Absolutely not, everything would take so much longer cause we'd be fumbling through gui's and menu's.
 
Elledan said:
CLI and GUI both have their strengths and weakness. I would not want to use an OS which only supports either. Even in Windows I use the CLI frequently. While in Linux/BSD I often long for a better GUI than the POS that is X.

They both compliment each other. Period.
Click to expand...

I think you are confusing X with gnome/kde/etc.

They look completely different based upon which you select...
 
JimmiG said:
It's much, much easier to install and operate than Windows *as long as* everything works right. It's when a piece of hardware or software doesn't work right that all hell breaks loose and you have no option but to search Google and message boards for a possible solution. This is exactly the same as it was ten years ago.
Click to expand...

Sorry, you're either on crack or completely high.

With Windows 7, you insert a CD, click THREE times on pre-defined choices, with clear explanations of what each one does, and then you're done. An hour later, every is installed, all of your drivers are AUTOMATICALLY downloaded and installed. Even 10 year old bizzare serial printers and scanners automatically work.
 
I gotta agree.... H, E, Double Hockey sticks NO! in both windows and linux I use the command line constantly, even for simple tasks that you really could use the GUI for... I find even file organization goes faster in the windows CLI then in explorer. Under linux... some programs might have web interfaces, but I have no desktop manager installed on either of my 2 boxes.
 
Get rid of the command line? No! That would be stupid, and counter productive for the professionals that use it.

Improve the gui's for Nix so that your average user never needs to use the CLI? Yes! Or forever remain a tiny niche on the desktop.
 
Windows has probably advanced the most toward this goal, as there are few features in CLI the average user can benefit from vs. their GUI counterpart.

The question doesn't even make sense, though. How on earth do you "get rid of" the underpinning of the OS? If you don't get rid of it but instead hide it, why would you do that?

OS X is probably a good example of how a powerful CLI provides for a powerful and extensible GUI. "Disabling" the terminal or the features accessed therein wouldn't be immediately crippling to most users but it still greatly reduces the functionality and troubleshooting options.
 
Robstar said:
I think you are confusing X with gnome/kde/etc.

They look completely different based upon which you select...
Click to expand...

No, I'm talking purely about the X libraries and protocol. It's an incredible kludge which has persisted and accumulated more cruft over the years. It's dysfunctional and a hindrance to the progress of OSS operating systems on the desktop. Plus the X protocol makes me want to smack the developers in the face, but that aside.

:)
 
Glenn Beck had his rally. Stewart and Colbert are having theirs soon. Kyle should organize our own rally to save the command prompt in Washington DC!
 
I think the CLI should be replaced. Not wuth a GUI, but an even better CLI, in 3D, so you need the glasses... :cool:
 
KatalDT said:
Uhhhhhhhhhhhhh....

No... really, really, really, really, no. Not for Linux, and not for Windows.

Mac, sure, you can ditch the command line on that. Most Mac owners don't know what a command line is.
Click to expand...


Hehe, pretty much.
 
I'd love to know the ages of the people responding, just to get a feel for whether votes for or against CLI is influenced by it. Do people prefer CLI because they've been using it so long, or have they been brought up on GUIs and evolved to CLI?

When having to use a CLI for extended periods of time, I'll inevitably get the syntax on something wrong. After trying every combination that occurs to me at lest twice each, I'll just start typing insults to the command prompt before Googling for a GUI utility. :p CLI has it's place, but there's a reason why the Windows 7 WAIK CD has only been booted form twice around here before being shelved. Why in the hell did Microsoft make their bootable CD without a GUI? Linux live cds have been offering complete GUIs for years.
 
I don't think age has much to do with it, I mean I grew up using DOS with it's CLI, but today I need the CLI (powershell mostly) to do things quick and easy that the GUI and associated programs are not preprogrammed to do. Although I suppose I could, with a little more difficulty, write GUI programs for all of these functions, it just doesn't make sense since the CLI has bad effects, at least on Windows, in that it's never necessary to use the CLI it just compliments the already powerful GUI. Now if you have OSes where the cmd line is necessary to do things, well those issues should just be fixed and the CLI left in as a complimentary tool for power users. But to answer your question Mr. Perfect, I'm 33.
 
Damn, "since the CLI has bad effects" should be "since the CLI has NO bad effects."
 
Here is the answer: the question is irrelevant.

In every area where the CLI could present a difficulty for the "average user" it has already been eliminated. For any areas where it persists it's an asset or an option for power users. CLI commands to fix an issue being the best example.

It's infinitely faster to have someone copy and paste a series of commands than it is to walk them through every single GUI step to do the same, assuming that is you actually know what commands are required.
 
computerpro3 said:
Sorry, you're either on crack or completely high.

With Windows 7, you insert a CD, click THREE times on pre-defined choices, with clear explanations of what each one does, and then you're done. An hour later, every is installed, all of your drivers are AUTOMATICALLY downloaded and installed. Even 10 year old bizzare serial printers and scanners automatically work.
Click to expand...

If you're lucky. If you're not so lucky and you don't have common hardware you get to do the insert driver cd, install, restart routine. Either way you get to spend awhile after installing the mandatory anti-malware, office software, browser of choice, etc, etc, etc. and a number of those things love to force restarts too.

What do you think people do to install Linux? Chant IRQ numbers and pray to Linus?

In Linux once I have it installed I can open apt-get or yast, or what have you (or just stay on the cli) and within a few minutes have installed ten different applications, all of which will have any updates to them installed simultaneously through the same place.

Then I can update the entire system and all installed applications at once, restart only once, and I'm done. Then whenever anything on the system needs to be updated I can go to that same place and let it update itself and very rarely actually have to restart either.

Windows? Go to website, download update, install, possibly restart, repeat as necessary. Maybe you get lucky and it's run update tool, ok update installing, possibly restart, repeat as necessary.

The efficiency gains I can enjoy when using Linux instead of Windows are insane.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top