[Return] [Catalog]

1 guest@cc 2019-06-26T13:50:44 [ImgOps] [iqdb]
File: 2019-06-20-010726_334x419_scro… (PNG, 168.9 KB, 334x419)
Language based interfaces(Shell language+utils, things like lisp environments, etc) are usually preferable to graphical interfaces for the same reason standard musical notation is preferable to tab notation. Its usually better to be able to just say what you mean than to have to demonstrate it.
2 guest@cc 2019-06-26T15:13:42
They cover vastly different use cases and are aimed at vastly different users

A text only interface is ideal if you're doing low-level systems type tasks like running a server or working with machinery, but for things like audio production or graphics editing it's usually a bad idea.

Text interfaces are very light and very direct, but by nature they're bad at providing feedback, and there's lots of things that, like it or not, require it
3 guest@cc 2019-06-26T17:59:19
>A text only interface is ideal if you're doing low-level systems type tasks
Running a server is not "low level", and a text based interface is not preferable only for "low-level" systems.
Note the word "usually". Obviously in case of audio or graphics, "saying what you mean" doesnt work, unless you're the "ideas guy"(hurhurhur).
Text based systems are superior for daily system use, though.
I dont need feedback to move a file, or open an image/directory of images, or a song. Id rather just say 'play this song'(as people actually prefer to with phone based assistants, in fact) than point and click.
Killing a process, for example. If you consider that a "low level" "techie" task you can really go eat shit, since all programs can stall and need to die. Its more convenient to say "kill the process named this" than to hunt for it in the task manager. that would translate to 'kill `{pgrep program}'.
Text interfaces are not only for 'advanced' users or 'programmers', and are not only for 'low-level' tasks. They're usually preferable for most daily tasks when using a system. The tasks they're not suited to are very obvious(running multiple programs at once via x instead of some shell shit, painting.)
4 guest@cc 2019-06-26T19:24:44
Maybe running {geg oppo yeo program jeaj} makes tons of sense to you, but for most it's complete nonsense. You are, like it or not, a power user. You use computers more than most people, and understand them way more than most people. And like it or not, most interfaces aren't designed with you in mind. GUIs are made for people who need the utility of computers but don't really understand them. Your average Joe barely gets what a task manager is. How the hell is he supposed to get a TUI?
5 guest@cc 2019-06-26T19:29:35
Elitist attitude. People dont understand text interfaces because they never learned one. Not because they're too stupid and only special "computer people" can touch them.
6 guest@cc 2019-06-26T20:46:53
You greatly overestimate the average person's ability to learn. If you know how to use a text interface you have a scientific mind which means you can learn new things way quicker than most. I've met multiple people who've been unable to learn how to use fucking macs.
7 guest@cc 2019-06-26T21:34:59
>If you know how to use a text interface you have a scientific mind which means you can learn new things way quicker than most.

Thats complete bullshit. I know how to use a text interface because I started picking up the bare basics when I was 12, which let me learn a little more easier some years later, and then just used it more for a while until I had a handle on it.
Macs aren't easy to use. A macs interface is totally arbitrary and meaningless, just like any other computer interface. Every computer interface is a meaningless arbitrary standard. If someone cant figure out macs they probably never learned to use GUI, then never stuck with using a computer for anything.
You aren't special and smart because you can use cli and neither am I, anyone could probably even do so better than you or I if they just learned it first instead of windows or mac at school and then went on to use it on their computer for daily tasks.
8 guest@cc 2019-06-26T21:35:34
To drive that second point home, there are boomers who can use DOS perfectly well, but cant figure out windows at all.
9 guest@cc 2019-06-27T00:56:56
>there are boomers who can use DOS perfectly well,...

Doubt it.
10 guest@cc 2019-06-27T01:03:18
In my experience text based applications are far more "standardized" than GUI ones.
There's basically 2 or 3 main keybinding sets that get reused (vi, emacs, and just your basic dumb arrow-key navigations)
Once you get comfortable with those then you can almost use any CLI interface.

They also tend to share the same optional flags (e.g. -h, -v, -r, etc), and share the same escape codes and such.
From what I can tell "learning" GUI's is like re-learning every single individual application and there's not a lot of overlap.
11 guest@cc 2019-06-27T19:58:53
Didn’t Lisp machines already have a graphical interface?
12 guest@cc 2019-06-27T20:11:14
so did UNIX with X, and plan 9 after it. Its not mutually exclusive. I say its better for most daily tasks, not that you should uninstall your window system and live like stallman.
13 guest@cc 2019-06-28T15:37:39
My happy medium is to run PekWM so I can multitask and run applications like with a traditional WIMP interface, but to use xterm as my file manager, program launcher, text editor, ect.
14 guest@cc 2019-06-28T22:33:13
Thats what I meant.

[Return] [Catalog]
Delete Post: