hardcore cmd line users are lost in time???

moljac024 · 2010-04-14 21:32:52

You're all missing the point here. I agree with the professor, in that people using the command line excessively (not even starting X) are really lost in time. There are so many things you can't do in a terminal today, just as there are so many things you can't do without it.

Missing out on the 20+ year old ability of a computer to display pictures is retarded.

That being said, where appropriate, I do enjoy a lot of command line applications.

EDIT: Science damn it, why do my posts most often break to the second page of a thread? </rant>

Last edited by moljac024 (2010-04-14 21:33:55)

Keveam · 2010-04-14 21:47:21

His argument is akin to the idea of low-level vs high level programming language. The low level language forces you to focus more on the bits and pieces instead of the big picture, but is much more powerful and gives the user ultimate control. A high level language allows the programmer to focus on the big picture, and the cost of flexibility.

Conclusion: Both GUI and CLI are powerful and suited for different things.

Peasantoid · 2010-04-14 22:01:15

Cdh wrote:

Peasantoid wrote:
I would never try to watch a video as ascii art, as awesome as it is.
Do you consider the framebuffer a "gui"?
There is mplayer -vo fbdev2 that plays a video perfectly on the commandline (if your graphics driver support it).

Not to be a pedant [he said, being a monumental pedant], but a) I know that and b) I did say 'ascii art'. Perhaps I wasn't clear - I was referring to text interfaces. The fbdev2 output driver *is* a graphical interface.

Perhaps you do not know what ascii art is - I suggest looking it up if that is the case. In a purely text interface, you would have no means of viewing a video other than rendering it as text, which somewhat detracts from the experience. Your shell is a text interface, while mplayer is a graphical interface when playing a video, no matter whether it uses the framebuffer or X to render graphics.

Also - fbdev2 does not, per se, play a video 'on the command line'. What it does is play it on the framebuffer, at the time happening to overlap the Linux console. When using this output driver, I suggest you try switching VTs to see what I mean. The video displays independent of the state of the console - thus it is in no way attached to it. The framebuffer and the console are distinct layers.

   framebuffer
     /    \
console  mplayer

For an example of ascii art, I suggest you try running mplayer with -vo caca. That's what I was talking about.

Last edited by Peasantoid (2010-04-14 22:17:30)

Cdh · 2010-04-14 22:23:34

I do know but I still don't consider playing a video in the framebuffer as using a "gui" because it is "graphical" but it do not see a "user interface". There's nothing like a window or window decoration or window controls... It's just displaying the contents of a file like less does. (I am not speaking about technical realisation but about the concept "using the cli").

Peasantoid · 2010-04-14 22:31:22

Hrm. True, there is not much UI there. However, because it renders graphics, I see it as a graphical interface. I'd like to see you do that over an SSH session, which is purely text-based (ignoring for the sake of argument the various tunneling methods).

Anyway, let's try not to derail this thread too much...

Last edited by Peasantoid (2010-04-14 22:31:39)

fukawi2 · 2010-04-14 22:59:31

vik_k wrote:

So i just want to know that are there other linuxers who think same (that cmd line should be obsolete) or using cmd line is a matter of pride???
for me, it's actually a matter of pride

It's a matter of practicality as far as I'm concerned. Where I work, we maintain around 160 Linux boxes around Australia, New Zealand, USA and UK -- managing them via a GUI using VNC, Remote X, FreeNX etc would just be painful and we'd get no work done. Using SSH and the CLI means we can actually get work done without wasting time on waiting for screen refreshes.

vik_k wrote:

I tried to argue with him but he was not ready to listen.

Just give him a shiny, sparkly pony to distract him while you get some real work done

Bralkein · 2010-04-14 23:10:41

fukawi2 wrote:

Where I work, we maintain around 160 Linux boxes around Australia, New Zealand, USA and UK -- managing them via a GUI using VNC, Remote X, FreeNX etc would just be painful and we'd get no work done. Using SSH and the CLI means we can actually get work done without wasting time on waiting for screen refreshes.

Oh hell yes, there are those sort of situations as well. Reminds me there's nothing quite like the satisfaction of administering a headless box through a serial terminal when the network is misbehaving - just whip out your laptop and a USB -> RS232 and off you go None of that faffing about with KVM switches or lugging a big monitor and keyboard around. A serial interface is also best in a lot of embedded contexts, due to its relative simplicity and cheapness. Good luck getting that done with a GUI!

xenofungus · 2010-04-14 23:25:29

Command line doesn't mean text interface only. Browsers like vimperator or uzbl use command line for input, some videogames have command lines too (half life, quake engine games, etc can set options via command line).

A command line interface is very useful when dealing with a big number of options. Everything is "one command" away. I really hate when I have to navigate through dozens of menus and / or tabs to look for a command. I understand an empty command line fills intimidating, specially for people who are not used to it, but UI developers should stop and think that menus don't work when you have hundreds or even thousands of different options (I'm looking at you, openoffice)

tlvb · 2010-04-15 00:44:08

I think that the method of interacting should fit the data being operated on, a yes/no question does only need the answer yes or no, moving the mouse pointer to from where it is, to the button with the appropirate label, does not add anything to the data exchanged and should be possible to remove. On the other hand I would not dream of drawing images by entering coordinates.
I am convinced that his "linux developer status" is that he develops applications in a linux environment, not that he works on linux.

thousand words painted
when only three are needed
too high SNR

Lexion · 2010-04-15 02:09:57

To rebutt his argument, hammers haven't changed for thousands of years, yet we still use them. The CLI is useful for many tasks and I therefore use it 90% of the time. Although I still use chrome for browsing, the gimp for image processing, and xpdf for image viewing. I use it as a tool, but I don't restrict myself.

P.S. cli ftw!

Anikom15 · 2010-04-15 03:11:23

GUI vs. CLI is very much like many new technology, e.g. teletype and telephone, CRT and LCD, mail and e-mail, film and video. Neither are superior (i.e. debatable), but each has pros and cons.

vik_k · 2010-04-15 04:24:47

fscked wrote:

A Linux dev you say? Now with all the confusion in naming, etc. I'd like to clarify if he has ever submitted anything for inclusion in the kernel. Cause I have never heard of a kernel dev who shuns the command line.
If he is a kernel dev, you might learn a thing or two.
If he isn't, prepare for war.

he is not a kernel dev, he's just an application developer for Linux platform.

tlvb wrote:

I am convinced that his "linux developer status" is that he develops applications in a linux environment, not that he works on linux

exactly..

that's why he was advising me not to teach students about linux, it's basics & system administration.
He was emphasizing to tell them how to do application development for Linux. So he uses Linux but only as a "platform" for his apps.

but still, he should be using some cmd line in his day to day tasks if he's running Linux

Last edited by vik_k (2010-04-15 04:28:51)

Berticus · 2010-04-15 04:58:16

What do you guys mean you prefer a gui for watching movies? Lack of gui doesn't mean you have to watch it in ascii. While I was teaching my brother linux commands last summer, he never started X, and just used mplayer to watch movies just fine. No ascii or whatever. We could still use 0, 9, left, right, up, down, page up, page down, space, etc. for controls. Even with X, a frontend for mplayer, so far for me, has been completely unnecessary. Didn't even have to specify the video output driver to work.

In any event, I think it depends on what the task is. For something more functional, containing patterns, or anytime you really know what you want to have done, you can use the cli and it's abilities to pipe/redirect input and output or glob. Something more abstract, like image/audio/video editing (more than simple resizing and transformations) a gui is more useful. It's beyond what you can "describe." Many games have to have a gui, because they're more like simulations that need to simulate real life. Or if you think about something like minesweeper, it's a lot faster and easier to think about an area than it is to describe it.

I don't take pride in being a cli user. I just do it because I see how efficient it is. I know what I want, and I can have it done at the speed of my thoughts. No need to navigate anywhere, and point and click.

Also, having cli apps does not mean we're against X. Plenty of cli users, like myself and some people in the screenshot threads, who use X, but most of our apps are cli.

Lastly, I don't see how us cli users are holding anyone back. For the most part, people seem to forget about us anyway.

---Edit---
Oops, didn't read the second page...

Last edited by Berticus (2010-04-15 05:03:55)

jasonwryan · 2010-04-15 05:01:29

Berticus wrote:

Lastly, I don't see how us cli users are holding anyone back. For the most part, people seem to forget about us anyway.

LOL. I'd warrant that most of the developers who build and maintain the myriad of GUI interfaces that people use would probably fall into that category...

smakked · 2010-04-15 05:36:38

It all comes down to personal choice. Saying one is better then the other is a null point both have good and bad.
I see alot of Linux users who think they are l33t because they use cmd line for everything lol. but who cares.

In saying that i have an old Eccentric uncle that refuses to install X on his system, he is an old school developer and his defense is " If i wanted to look at pictures i would turn on the tv or pick up a magazine".

Use what you like and what gets your work done.

But i cant see how that professor thinks using cmd line is holding up development ???

Last edited by smakked (2010-04-15 05:38:07)

Acecero · 2010-04-15 06:19:43

smakked wrote:

But i cant see how that professor thinks using cmd line is holding up development ???

It's likely because in his opinion, he thinks that programming CLI apps is a waste of time.

Actually the idea a CLI/GUI hybrid design mentioned earlier sounded interesting. I wonder how that would work? Maybe developing smaller gui apps in an environment where a user can mix and match them together for different functionality as if it were piping commands on the CLI?

Last edited by Acecero (2010-04-15 06:20:10)

JohannesSM64 · 2010-04-15 06:33:15

some-guy94 wrote:

IMO, some things are better as point and click (eg. most browsing, do you want to keep pressing tab just to click 'Sign in' on a website?)

Err what? Vimperator, Vimprobable and uzbl-browser have link following, where you hit a key, each link is assigned a number, and you hit the number and go. A specific application having horridly designed keyboard navigation for a task (like, in this case, having to press tab over and over again until you reach the link) doesn't automatically make point 'n click the superior navigation method for the task.

Last edited by JohannesSM64 (2010-04-15 06:37:37)

Ashren · 2010-04-15 06:34:43

Imagine the horror of doing Unix/Linux system administration with GUI only!

*shudder*

z0phi3l · 2010-04-15 18:18:00

I learned how to use Linux via command line mostly
We did use DUI apps when the need arose

Was one of the main reason most hated the Linux classes, they were too dependent on GUI apps to get anything done, me I'm from the DOS days so hopping from one to another is just fine

samuele.mattiuzzo · 2010-04-15 18:43:15

my typing speed is usually very high, so i find it easier to use the shell except for some application (launched by awesome's wm Mod - r macro, kinda alt-F2)

lifeafter2am · 2010-04-15 18:47:29

z0phi3l wrote:

I learned how to use Linux via command line mostly
We did use DUI apps when the need arose
Was one of the main reason most hated the Linux classes, they were too dependent on GUI apps to get anything done, me I'm from the DOS days so hopping from one to another is just fine

Stupid DUI apps.

dunc · 2010-04-15 21:47:07

Maybe it's spending most of the last 20 years using Amigas and most of the 10 years before that using 8-bit home computers, which had command line interfaces but not the hard distinction between text and graphic modes that the "IBM" x86 PC does (particularly noticable under OSes that use X), but I've never been on one side or the other. GUIs are great, but the commandline is often more useful. I can see why most people prefer a GUI - ooh, pretty pictures - but I've never understood the irrational fear of the CLI. They're just different ways of tackling the problem.

On the other hand, I also find it hard to accept that the only way to make, say, 10 year old PII-era machine productive is to ignore the GUI altogether and run something that looks like an early-'80s dumb terminal. My first Amiga had a 12MHz processor, 512Mb of RAM, one 880K floppy drive, and a fully functional 16-colour GUI desktop. It only tends to confirm what we all thought at the time: PCs suck.

fukawi2 · 2010-04-15 23:51:22

Bralkein wrote:

Reminds me there's nothing quite like the satisfaction of administering a headless box through a serial terminal when the network is misbehaving - just whip out your laptop and a USB -> RS232 and off you go None of that faffing about with KVM switches or lugging a big monitor and keyboard around. A serial interface is also best in a lot of embedded contexts, due to its relative simplicity and cheapness. Good luck getting that done with a GUI!

Serial presents it's own problems though of course
http://www.wandin.net/dotclear/index.ph … GA-Console

Bralkein · 2010-04-16 01:29:19

fukawi2 wrote:

Bralkein wrote:
Reminds me there's nothing quite like the satisfaction of administering a headless box through a serial terminal when the network is misbehaving - just whip out your laptop and a USB -> RS232 and off you go None of that faffing about with KVM switches or lugging a big monitor and keyboard around. A serial interface is also best in a lot of embedded contexts, due to its relative simplicity and cheapness. Good luck getting that done with a GUI!
Serial presents it's own problems though of course
http://www.wandin.net/dotclear/index.ph … GA-Console

Not at all, the fact that a GUI can't operate over a serial terminal is a problem with GUIs, not with serial terminals!
Of course I think we can agree that the real issue there is that he was trying to install CentOS on a machine which clearly would have been better served by Arch

oli · 2010-04-16 14:08:28

vik_k wrote:

hii guys,
I'm having a linux workshop in my college & regarding that i went to another college for campaigning.
There i met a professor who's been a linux developer for ~10yrs. While talking with him i got his view that he thinks cmd line users are actually holding the computer world from developing, while users using a full blown gui setup (like him, he uses KDE) & only IDEs for development are real gems. Since i'm a cmd line user i found that kinda insulting. I tried to argue with him but he was not ready to listen.
So i just want to know that are there other linuxers who think same (that cmd line should be obsolete) or using cmd line is a matter of pride???
for me, it's actually a matter of pride

Using the commandline is a matter of productivity for me since using SGI Irix back in the early 90s. Using a full-blown desktop environment is a lost cause for me, but I don't have a problem with it. Open Source is about the freedom of choice.

Arch Linux

#26 2010-04-14 21:32:52

Re: hardcore cmd line users are lost in time???

#27 2010-04-14 21:47:21

Re: hardcore cmd line users are lost in time???

#28 2010-04-14 22:01:15

Re: hardcore cmd line users are lost in time???

#29 2010-04-14 22:23:34

Re: hardcore cmd line users are lost in time???

#30 2010-04-14 22:31:22

Re: hardcore cmd line users are lost in time???

#31 2010-04-14 22:59:31

Re: hardcore cmd line users are lost in time???

#32 2010-04-14 23:10:41

Re: hardcore cmd line users are lost in time???

#33 2010-04-14 23:25:29

Re: hardcore cmd line users are lost in time???

#34 2010-04-15 00:44:08

Re: hardcore cmd line users are lost in time???

#35 2010-04-15 02:09:57

Re: hardcore cmd line users are lost in time???

#36 2010-04-15 03:11:23

Re: hardcore cmd line users are lost in time???

#37 2010-04-15 04:24:47

Re: hardcore cmd line users are lost in time???

#38 2010-04-15 04:58:16

Re: hardcore cmd line users are lost in time???

#39 2010-04-15 05:01:29

Re: hardcore cmd line users are lost in time???

#40 2010-04-15 05:36:38

Re: hardcore cmd line users are lost in time???

#41 2010-04-15 06:19:43

Re: hardcore cmd line users are lost in time???

#42 2010-04-15 06:33:15

Re: hardcore cmd line users are lost in time???

#43 2010-04-15 06:34:43

Re: hardcore cmd line users are lost in time???

#44 2010-04-15 18:18:00

Re: hardcore cmd line users are lost in time???

#45 2010-04-15 18:43:15

Re: hardcore cmd line users are lost in time???

#46 2010-04-15 18:47:29

Re: hardcore cmd line users are lost in time???

#47 2010-04-15 21:47:07

Re: hardcore cmd line users are lost in time???

#48 2010-04-15 23:51:22

Re: hardcore cmd line users are lost in time???

#49 2010-04-16 01:29:19

Re: hardcore cmd line users are lost in time???

#50 2010-04-16 14:08:28

Re: hardcore cmd line users are lost in time???

Board footer