command line vs gui [General Linux]

Prev: micro solution backpack cd-writer hell
Next: "...error while loading shared libraries: libg2c.so.0"

From: Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz on 16 Nov 2005 10:54

In <1132105571.611524.150710(a)g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, on
11/15/2005
at 05:46 PM, silicono2(a)yahoo.com said:

>I've had a Unix-using acquaintance tell me that he much preferred
>command lines over GUI, even when using Windows. For all the
>advantages of GUI I agree that it's much easier to issue a series of
>commands in a command line or do something like "copy *.* a:" as
>well. Can we get the best of both worlds with an interface using
>charts/fields of text?

I'm not sure what you mean by "charts/fields of text", but it is
certainly possible to design a scriptable GUI. The Apple/IBM OpenDoc
and the IBM WPS are examples. And, yes, a GUI that you cannot easily
script is user hostile.

--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT <http://patriot.net/~shmuel>

Unsolicited bulk E-mail subject to legal action. I reserve the
right to publicly post or ridicule any abusive E-mail. Reply to
domain Patriot dot net user shmuel+news to contact me. Do not
reply to spamtrap(a)library.lspace.org

From: John Hasler on 16 Nov 2005 11:28

Seb writes:
> I might not be a UNIX user (yet) but I can follow the gist. And there's
> no blaming me that my ISP isn't bothering with a news server so I have to
> use google's simple but underpowered reader.

There are many alternatives. I suggest www.newsguy.com.

You could also learn how to use Google Groups correctly.
--
John Hasler
john(a)dhh.gt.org
Dancing Horse Hill
Elmwood, WI USA

From: notbob on 16 Nov 2005 12:06

On 2005-11-16, silicono2(a)yahoo.com <silicono2(a)yahoo.com> wrote:
> I've had a Unix-using acquaintance tell me that he much preferred
> command lines over GUI, even when using Windows. For all the advantages
> of GUI I agree that it's much easier to issue a series of commands in a
> command line or do something like "copy *.* a:" as well. Can we get the
> best of both worlds with an interface using charts/fields of text?

I remember the very first time I saw a 1st gen MacIntosh. The friend
who had one proudly put the keyboard out of reach and proceeded to
astound me for several hrs with all the things he could accomplish on
the little box with just that little "mouse" thingie. I was truly
amazed. But, years later, the other side of the coin was painfully
revealed when our company changed from a Unix based shell database to
Windows based Oracle. It was absolute Hell.

For me, it breaks down into not gui vs cli, but mouse vs keyboard. I
see no difference between selecting a highligthed/colored curses/shell
field and a graphic icon. Both are similar in the mental process. A
cli command is a series of carefully constructed txt options. A gui
is a series of carefully chosen ...more often than not, text!...
graphic options. The question is, which is faster and/or requires
the least effort. For me, a longime touch typist, the keyboard is
infinitely more efficient.

While I consider the mouse a necessary input device, I loath to reach
for the damned thing. It's a major pain to take my whole
hand/wrist/arm away from it's rested/supported position at the
keyboard and reach over and grab a hunk of plastic when I can just
extend a pinky and execute a couple taps. But, the mouse is
irreplaceable in certain applications. How can a keyboard easily
create a diagonal line? It can't. So, it depends on what one is
doing on the computer.

As a professional CAD user, I realize both the keyboard and the mouse
are invaluble input devices. In this primarily graphic environment,
the mouse is not only king, it's irreplaceable. I can do without the
keyboard, but not the mouse. OTOH, the mouse is still a lousy choice
for most input functions, even in CAD. Much quicker to tap a single
key under a well place finger than drag a cursor clear across a screen
to reach a bar full of icons. Even worse is having one hand
constantly going back and forth from the keybd to the mouse.

After more than a couple bouts with Repeated Strain Injury (RSI), I
finally settled on a very efficient and low physical impact solution
for CAD. A one handed keyboard (left) and a really good mouse. No
kidding! Neither hand need leave their respective device. Keyboard
for one or two tap command input and mouse for spacial graphics input.
It worked like a charm and my RSI probs disappeared.

But, back in the real non-CAD world, I still prefer the keyboard and
have reverted over the years back to as many CLI based applications as
I can get away with. I also prefer keyboard shorcuts in windows based
environments if they don't require too many keystrokes. I imagine
this would not be the case with someone who was not a proficient
typist. Also, I suspect there's another less obvious reason for the
overwhelming popularity of gui. The CLI requires the user actually
know a command and have it committed to memory. A gui typically
provides clues and/or prompts. It's like taking a test and really
knowing the answer to the question versus taking a multiple choice
test.

nb

From: John Thompson on 16 Nov 2005 19:05

From: news on 17 Nov 2005 01:26

> On 2005-11-16, silicono2(a)yahoo.com wrote:
> > I've had a Unix-using acquaintance tell me that he much preferred
> > command lines over GUI, even when using Windows. For all the
> > advantages
> > of GUI I agree that it's much easier to issue a series of commands in a
> > command line or do something like "copy *.* a:" as well. Can we
> > get the
> > best of both worlds with an interface using charts/fields of text? The
> > only example I can think of is BIOS config (also DOSshell a while ago),
> > obviously it hasn't caught on.
> > Of course you can argue that a fields/charts interface is in fact a
> > GUI, with "true" graphics simply replaced by ASCII graphics?
>
Chris F.A. Johnson wrote:
> There have been other attempts to do this, but there are good
> reasons they didn't catch on.
>
What are those "good reasons" ?!

> I just read about two of them in an old (1988) book, Understanding
> UNIX, A Conceptual Guide. It mentions ASSIST, "a menu-driven.
> forms-based utility that helps the user construct Unix commands",
> and Visual Shell in XENIX, "a menu-driven user interface patterned
> after the MultiPlan spreadsheet".
>
> In order to be a viable alternative to the command line, a menu
> system would have to be huge and unwieldly.

That's exactly what computing is for: to hide/protect the user from
'huge and unwieldly'. The 'huge and unwieldly' calculations are
hidden from me if I press a few buttons on my pocket calculator
to find 'the 3rd root of 17'.
BTW thanks for the lead. I'll goog: 'ASSIST' & 'Visual Shell'.
The closest for me is mc the killer ap. well cloned from the
original AFAIK DOS-nc.

> Imagine writing a
> front-end to a command such as find without emasculating it.
>
I've got very strong feelings about this topic.
And apparently the opposite ideas to you.
Your use of the word "emasculating" suggests that you don't want
to be isolated from the fascination of the internals of "find" when
you use it ? If "find" has fascinating irregularities like the english
language which makes it unsuitable for structuring/compacting
into a menu-tree, then it's not for computing.

If I'm doing an important/fascinating pencil & paper drawing,
[computing task] I don't want to be distracted by the details
to pencil-sharpening [the 'find' comand sysntax].

Robert Heller wrote:-
] Right. For some commands (such as find), there is no real chance of
] ANY viable 'graphical' interface.
I don't [want to] know the detailed syntax of find, but if it can't be
'structured' in a menu, then it's a mess and should be replaced.
]And for others a CLI interface might
] make no sense. The only sort of 'best of both worlds' is a GUI desktop
] that includes an 'shell window' (xterm+shell).
]
] The only sort of 'unifying' interface is going to be an *intelligent*
] voice-recognition / natural-language type of interface, ala Star Trek.
]
That's very wrong, but thanks for raising it.
There are 'two different worlds:
1. musician, rigourous/trained thinkers, software developers ...
2. CD-poppers, regular-rappers, M$-users ...

Certain skills require a minumum of training and inate intelligence.
Even if you just want to be a 'ball player', you can't just get the skills
from an aerosol-can or a pill.

Natural-language might be great eg. for simple stuff 'in the dark'
or if you've got your hands full.
Speech is much slower than 'mousing' and the visual channel is
far superior to the audio chanel in humans.
The see-recognise [vs. recall and type] and select is a winning
strategy. My prefered OS oberon-S3 is a text-based point & do.
The mouse is [possibly] corded, and the cords become instinctive.
So eg. you will visually scan the [usually multiple frames/windows
on the] screen and 'think' "I'll open that text file"; and your fingers
will instinctively cords the 'open file cord' when the cursor is over the
file-name. Or you will 'think' "I'll execute that command"....

Importantly you don't need to burden you memory with:
is the command called Backup.DeleteFiles, or deleteBakFiles or ....

I just can't explain why people would want to remember and type
in the required syntax for 'find', except that they like to think that
they are communucationg directly with 'the little man in the box'
instead of selecting from a predetermined set of options.

] One way of thinking about the differences between a GUI (aka
] 'point-and-click') and a CLI and how they relate to how effectively one
] can communicate with one's computer to get stuff done is to consider
] that a GUI interface is not really much different than a pre-lingual
] communication system. One can replace 'point-and-click' with
] 'point-and-grunt' (ala proto-humans) or 'point-and-scream' (ala
] infants). In all of these cases, the communication is limited to the
] choices at hand, literally (the finite and *limited* set of things
] available on the screen). A CLI interface is not so limited. It has
] all of the advantages of a full blown language and can refer to things
] that are 'off screen' (things that are not visible).

I suspect this whole debate is based on personality types: left-brain
vs. right-brain ?

== Chris Glur.

First | Prev | Next | Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
Prev: micro solution backpack cd-writer hell
Next: "...error while loading shared libraries: libg2c.so.0"