"Why Do Command Lines Still Exist?" is getting it wrong

[Limit64]

29 minutes ago, YoungBlade said:

You misunderstood my hypotheticals. I'm talking about a world where GUI and SMS are already fully established. The CLI and telegraph were never invented. We have modern smartphones and computers. No one has ever seen either of those technologies.

I understood that, I just don't agree with your reasoning. I'm not suggesting that CLI would have any chance to become the main interface for the majority of users. But GUIs are also not a practical replacement for CLIs in certain use-cases. People using CLI today are not using it because they don't know anything else but because it's more convenient to do so for what they want to achieve.

 

29 minutes ago, YoungBlade said:

Now, you go to Apple or Samsung and pitch them Morse Code communication. Instead of texting, you can tap a pattern on the phone, and then the other user receives a series of beeps instantaneously. Not saved for later - only instant communication.

And afterwards go to the next pilot, fire fighter, police officer or disaster crew and ask them why they still use radio instead of mobile phones.

 

29 minutes ago, YoungBlade said:

In the same way, you go to Microsoft and tell them that, instead of the GUI based control panel and other utilities, you can now open a blank screen and type in memorized words and then it will display outputs as simple text.

People did that and MS gave them the Powershell.

[YoungBlade]

7 minutes ago, Limit64 said:

And afterwards go to the next pilot, fire fighter, police officer or disaster crew and ask them why they still use radio instead of mobile phones.

What does radio have to do with Morse Code in 2021? None of those professionals use Morse Code today. The fact that early radio used it is only because the telegraph did, and the telegraph only did because people hadn't figured out how to make a telephone.

 

I'm no stranger to using obscure pieces of technology. Nor am I a stranger to being given weird looks for learning something that no one cares about. I actually speak Esperanto and I truly believe that it would be a good option for global communications, but my opinion of that doesn't matter. Imperial languages will always win, be that Latin, French, or English. That's because it has lower friction, not because they're better.

 

In the same way, basic, inefficient interfaces will always win. It's the Jellyfish all over again. People will pay more for a worse solution if they don't have to take the time to change the way they do things.

[leadeater]

3 hours ago, YoungBlade said:

Most software made today has no CLI

Most user interactive software designed to have a GUI yes, most software... mmm how do you want to measure that? There's a hell of a lot of Linux server tools and none will have a GUI. There's a lot of modern and new software with zero GUI at all and it's the literal bedrock of the internet and all the services you use. Do you watch Youtube? Netflix? Disney+? Access websites with content hosted on CDNs?

 

If you isolate your world view to desktop computing then yes I would agree and it would be natural to come to the conclusion and thought that you did, however there is a lot outside of desktop computing.

 

There's a huge wide world of computing outside of desktop computing and end user applications. I suspect you think it's a lot smaller and niche than it actually is. I mean there are certainly more mobile phones in the world than physical servers, probably virtual servers too (literally wild ass guess on that one).

 

Each quarter 3 million servers are sold, each server could host anywhere between 30-60 VMs or hundreds of websites, databases, API endpoints etc etc blah blah. Desktop PC hovers around 70 million and smartphones 350 million.

 

I won't bore you either by listing every T-SQL DB engine there is or Object DB engine or DB distributed cache or web server application or configuration management software etc because the list in each is not small and that's not every category and all of these are installed and maintained either exclusively or largely with CLI.

 

So yes I think it is actually is fair to divide user applications and non user applications and talk about them separately because they really are subject matters of their own and I really doubt many that are exclusively in the group that interact and uses end user applications actually care or understands the other. It honestly does not matter and you should not care, knowing everything and being aware of everything is literally impossible so it's not worth trying. 

[leadeater]

21 hours ago, Hairless Monkey Boy said:

"Luxury" and "Convenience" are literally synonyms. Can you even tell which of these definitions is from which word? You are splitting hairs...

 

2a: something (such as an appliance, device, or service) conducive to comfort or ease

 

2a: something adding to pleasure or comfort but not absolutely necessary

That entirely depends on what specific definition you want to pull out to make your case, btw even your attempt to obscure it is actually very simple, the second one is Luxury.

 

There mere fact that something is not a necessity entirely defeats your whole point you are trying to make.

 

Here let me pull out the actually most common definition

Quote

a state of great comfort or elegance, especially when involving great expense

 

Or the most applicable to this context

Quote

a pleasure or an advantage that you do not often have

Does this sound like a GUI? Doesn't does it...

 

Lets not have a dictionary fight over the blindingly obvious.

[Hairless Monkey Boy]

7 minutes ago, leadeater said:

Here let me pull out the actually most common definition

So it's up to you what definition someone means when they use a word with multiple meanings?

 

Because this absolutely describes a GUI...

 

2a: something adding to pleasure or comfort but not absolutely necessary

Quote

That entirely depends on what specific definition you want to pull out to make your case

I'm not sure what you mean by this. The word "case" means:

 

Quote

A box or receptacle for holding something.

 

So the argument makes no sense. You can't make "a box or receptacle for holding something" out of a definition.

[leadeater]

Just now, Hairless Monkey Boy said:

I'm not sure what you mean by this. The word "case" means:

Yes you do, you only want to say you don't for arguments sake and as stated not going to have a dictionary definition debate over the obvious. You're welcome to be incorrect, you can be that as much as you like and I'm not going to stop you.

[Riccardo Cagnasso]

3 hours ago, xAcid9 said:

No idea what you guys arguing, they both overlap each other functionality and will co-exist for a very long time. 
I personally use command for some tasks because it's simply faster to do so like pinging a website. 

My argument - which everyone is ignoring because it's more fun to bash people for personal preferences - it's that the GUI is so much more expensive that it cannot substitute the CLI in all applications even if the GUI were objectively better. (spoiler: its' not).

2 hours ago, YoungBlade said:

If the GUI was invented first, do you think the CLI would've been invented later? Do you think Morse Code would have been invented if SMS was created first?

 

All I'm saying is that the reason the command line exists today is that it was invented first, and the reason it was invented first is because the hardware of the time did not allow for a GUI.

 

You don't seem to grasp how technology works. You can't just "invent" things. You need a theoretical framework and the tools needed to develop something new. Big part of what makes SMS possible is the theory that derives from Morse Code. If you have SMS you have Morse Code or something akin. Same for the GUI and the CLI. You can't develop a software without some form of functioning CLI, because you have to have a way to encode strings and then you have a text based human interface at some point. Because you think with words.

[Hairless Monkey Boy]

  

1 hour ago, leadeater said:

[I'm] not going to have a dictionary definition debate

This is literally exactly what you have been doing. It's the reason why I am here typing at you. The utter lack of self awareness is truly baffling.

 

Examples:

Spoiler

Defining "luxury" vs "convenience" (incorrectly):

On 11/15/2021 at 12:12 AM, leadeater said:

I wouldn't go round saying potato peelers are a luxury compared to a knife, neither are luxuries and a potato peeler is literally useless for anything other than peeling. It may be the most convenient way to peel a potato or carrot but among the least convenient ways to de-bone a chicken or dice vegetables.

 

Claiming (incorrectly) that "luxury" and "convenience" are not synonyms with regard to comfort:

On 11/15/2021 at 1:57 AM, leadeater said:

GUI is not a luxury, it's a convenience

 

Using a different definition of a word (either deliberately or unintentionally) than the one intended by the original poster:

On 11/15/2021 at 2:20 AM, leadeater said:

FYI Luxury is synonymous with scarcity and expense

 

Again, using definitions other than what was intended by the original author:

Quote

Here let me pull out the actually most common definition

  Quote

a state of great comfort or elegance, especially when involving great expense

 

Or the most applicable to this context

  Quote

a pleasure or an advantage that you do not often have

 

 

This is the obvious intended meaning of the original statement.

Quote

Im kinda glad I never have to type commands in anywhere its a real luxury [comfort] that only I and anyone who uses windows 95 and higher can really enjoy.

 

It is you who are pedantically arguing over a definition, because it is you who misinterpreted the meaning of a sentence. That's fine. The English language is messy. But what is not fine, is to then assert that your misinterpretation must be the one and only correct one, even after the author of the statement made an attempt to correct you. It's okay to be wrong sometimes. You don't have to be a jerk about it.

[tkitch]

5 hours ago, YoungBlade said:

Most software made today has no CLI.

Most AAA games made today include their own CLI.

 

It's called a Console, and it's hella powerful, and does a shit-ton you can't do in the GUI. 

[leadeater]

1 hour ago, Hairless Monkey Boy said:

This is literally exactly what you have been doing. It's the reason why I am here typing at you. The utter lack of self awareness is truly baffling.

Nope it's what you wanted to have.

 

It's very simple and it's exactly what I pointed out to you in the first reply about this. Your incorrect dictionary attack, that ignores and has no baring on context and does not understand what a synonym actually is and how subject context is crucial but I'm not here to give you an English lesson.

 

Your argument relied on "necessity". Well let me tell you something, a user interface to an application is a necessity hence your entire comment wasn't valid. Now we can debate which interface type is the necessity or all of them however none is not a possible option. So either a GUI, CLI, Voice or any combination of these are a necessity which means it's possible that one of these is a Luxury, or none of them.

 

So anyone arguing that a GUI is the best, most common, preferred or whatever else application user interface means it cannot be a Luxury.

 

Case closed.

[WkdPaul]

@leadeater , sorry but, let me introduce you to the underside of a bus ;

 

 

@Hairless Monkey Boy I get the luxury / convenience thing got brought up by the current topic, but let's keep the word definition fights out of it, if you want to discuss definitions and who's right or wrong, feel free to move this to a PM.

[dragonfly43]

I worked with S/38 (later renamed AS/400) from 1984 to 2008. I retire now but the AS/400 keeps living on.

I despised GUIs, but old age get me. Now I am into Linux (just for fun, and an antidote to dementia), and use mostly GUI when I can - supplemented by Command Lines that are copied and pasted from helps via the net.

[Dat Guy]

In 1985, a graphical terminal named "(the) Blit" became the primary user interface in Research Unix version 8 which evolved into "V9 UNIX" and "V10 UNIX", both of which were never released as a coherent operating system. Some time during that period, the Unix developers moved on from emulating old teletypes for basic communication with their new, modern computers which had displays instead of line printers. The result was (and still is) the mouse-centric Plan 9 operating system, containing direct successors to the Blit.

 

For some yet unknown reason, operating systems in 2021 still prefer to emulate old teletypes, citing "the efficiency" of Unix although Unix had already been transported into the age of the GUI after 1979. I think that many so-called "professionals" should finally move on to the 80s. There is no sane reason to emulate an old teletype anymore. You actually have Full HD screens these days, guys!

[Riccardo Cagnasso]

On 11/16/2021 at 3:48 PM, tkitch said:

Most AAA games made today include their own CLI.

 

It's called a Console, and it's hella powerful, and does a shit-ton you can't do in the GUI. 

Yes. And why is there? Because it contains parts of the game that are useful only to the developers who can use the command line interface.

Why then they want to use the command line interface for people that can use it? Because it's handier? Not really in this case. The game console is usually quite unrefined, it doesn't have auto completion and stuff that makes moder CLIs powerful. It's just way faster and cheaper to implement these functionalities inside the console. That's the main reason. Everything else comes second.

[tkitch]

2 hours ago, Riccardo Cagnasso said:

Yes. And why is there? Because it contains parts of the game that are useful only to the developers who can use the command line interface.

Why then they want to use the command line interface for people that can use it? Because it's handier? Not really in this case. The game console is usually quite unrefined, it doesn't have auto completion and stuff that makes moder CLIs powerful. It's just way faster and cheaper to implement these functionalities inside the console. That's the main reason. Everything else comes second.

none of which I argued either way.  

The statement was "Modern software doesn't have a CLI" and I pointed out that AAA Games basically all do have a CLI.

[xAcid9]

2 hours ago, tkitch said:

none of which I argued either way.  

The statement was "Modern software doesn't have a CLI" and I pointed out that AAA Games basically all do have a CLI.

Hard to please these extremist, on both sides. 

[Arika]

3 hours ago, xAcid9 said:

Hard to please these extremist, on both sides. 

This entire thread is just a massive pile of "omg who cares?"

[Riccardo Cagnasso]

13 hours ago, tkitch said:

none of which I argued either way.  

The statement was "Modern software doesn't have a CLI" and I pointed out that AAA Games basically all do have a CLI.

I wasn't contraddicting you. I was using your example because is the perfect one to prove my initial point.

[Mark Kaine]

This discussion always is a weird one, the people advocating that typing obscure "commands" is the only (best) way are always missing that this form of interaction is ancient (goes straight back to typewriters basically)

 

 

Couldn't you just talk to the computer instead, wouldn't that be faster, and more accessible?

 

I mean Star Trek already got that right in the 60s...  no one thought we would still use archaic "code languages typed on a mechanical typewriter device" to communicate with a computer in 2021...

 

 

And don't tell me voice recognition tech "isn't quite there yet"... it very much is .

 

 

[Avocado Diaboli]

39 minutes ago, Mark Kaine said:

And don't tell me voice recognition tech "isn't quite there yet"... it very much is .

Me: "Hey Alexa, run chkdsk"

Alexa: "Ok, I will run fdisk"

[Riccardo Cagnasso]

53 minutes ago, Mark Kaine said:

This discussion always is a weird one, the people advocating that typing obscure "commands" is the only (best) way are always missing that this form of interaction is ancient (goes straight back to typewriters basically)

 

 

Couldn't you just talk to the computer instead, wouldn't that be faster, and more accessible?

 

I mean Star Trek already got that right in the 60s...  no one thought we would still use archaic "code languages typed on a mechanical typewriter device" to communicate with a computer in 2021...

 

 

And don't tell me voice recognition tech "isn't quite there yet"... it very much is .

 

 

Well this discussion is always a weird one because some people seems like to be hellbent to ignore the fact that if the vast majority of professionals in computer science are using it, there has to be some reason to it.

[tikker]

On 11/15/2021 at 11:28 PM, YoungBlade said:

Do you really think that the CLI is the future of computing? I don't mind using it, but I'd be shocked if usage of the command line isn't in decline.

I think what needs to be separated in this thread is CLI driven software and actively using the CLI for your daily computer stuff. For day-to-day use like writing and building software, browsing the web, checking your mail, spreadsheet stuff, word processing stuff, printing a document etc. the CLI is for sure not needed, arguably archaic and GUI applications are available.

 

The CLI is and always has been the "future of computing" though in my opinion, in the sense that GUIs aren't necessary for the code that does the heavy lifting. Simulating the Universe doesn't need a GUI, processing a telescope signal or fitting distributions or functions to data don't either. For inspection it can write plots to disk, but those would of course need a GUI to display unless you print them. So we depend on the GUI for certain things, but the CLI is not obsolete. They just have specific use cases just like GUIs.

On 11/16/2021 at 12:15 PM, Limit64 said:

Sure, but you have to do it manually. Now imagine you want to do something like that for a whole collection of pictures, you will sit there for hours while with CLI tools, you just type in a single line and the whole workflow will run without any user interaction.

That heavily hinges on what the task is though. Sometimes manual effort is just the reality of it. The CLI is immensely useful, also for batch processing, but I disagree with the superiority sentiment. It's not "better" or a magic wand that you just wave and it takes all the effort away from you.  Sure a command line interface could crop your picture, remove certain unwanted pixels, colour correct it, touch it up, restore it a bit etc. Will that really be faster and less effort than just firing up Photoshop, magic-wanding out the colours you don't need, cropping it, seeing nice histograms as visual feedback for colours and saving it? Probably not.

On 11/16/2021 at 11:24 AM, YoungBlade said:

And I don't see how you can extend the functionality of a CLI program. It just does what it was designed to do. Unless you combine it with other programs, but that's just combining functions.

That has been more or less the intent as well. It does one thing and it does it well, or it's a series of things in disguise. "cp" copies stuff, "rename" renames stuff, "rm" removes stuff etc. They provide the building blocks that you can then combine into more complex programs. There is a perfectly valid place for (random example) Bulk Rename Utility providing a nice GUI for batch renaming files, because the entire point of these GUIs is so you don't have to remember all the arcane incantations of the command line to simply insert a zero-padded number somewhere in a file name, while simultaneously trimming off the end and capitalising each word.

 

I like it being there. Sometimes I know exactly what I want it to do, which in some cases is faster for me to just type in the terminal (because I am familiar with the commands) then to click and drag on GUIs for, or remember in which section of the settings it was. Also useful in cases like remote access, where GUIs can be slow and a pain sometimes.

[Bramimond]

GUI was a mistake.

 

CLI/TUI is so much easier to get shit done with. It's also way faster than doing anything in a GUI.

All CLI/TUI has stacked against it is that the learning curve is high.

 

Usually, enthusiasts accept that there's a learning curve, but with the CLI a lot of people have an attitude of superiority for not learning it, which is weird. 

What they kinda fail to understand is that people do not use the CLI because it is hardcore, they use it because it is easier. 

 

Except on Windows, of course. And that's kinda the biggest schism between Linux and Windows. Then you get Windows users coming in to Linux, for whathever reason, but without even having the desire to now do things differently. Yeah, there are some half baked GUI solutions for Linux that try to be windows user friendly, but you are expected to eventually stop using training wheels, you know?

 

And that's basically what sums up the GUI best: it's training wheels and lets you drive your bike before you know how to really drive a bike. 

Once you can drive your bike for real, having training wheels attached will feel stupid. That's how I feel about GUI. 

 

I'm even doing a good 60% of image editing throuth the CLI (imagemagick) nowadays. Its just easier than doing the GUI way. Unless you need a pointing device, there's no need for GUI when image editing. 

[Mark Kaine]

2 hours ago, Riccardo Cagnasso said:

the fact that if the vast majority of professionals in computer science

What does this even mean, seriously (?) "computer science" ?

To be totally honest I think when people use a "cli" they're mostly doing this because there isn't anything better available, after all "computer science" is pretty old, and in some aspects hasn't evolved much,  but in other aspects it has, you don't really need "to write code" to program a game for example,  even if you probably could-- it would be cumbersome, take much longer and would lack visual feedback.

 

I'm not saying there's no place for a cli *currently* im saying its a very outdated concept and not the future  -- at least not for anything that requires any sort of creativity. 

 

Like is that really so hard to understand,  you are just telling the computer what its supposed to do, and a cli is the most basic way to do this, but certainly not the easiest/ fastest or most natural one. Sure, there might not be a solution for every situation yet, but in the future there will be, despite being basically just "simple" turing machines computers and AI are progressing hella fast , at some point there will just be no reason to type things to communicate with a computer anymore. 

 

2 hours ago, Riccardo Cagnasso said:

 there has to be some reason to it.

Yeah and it does come off as hardcore gate keeping. 

 

 

 

 

 

[igormp]

38 minutes ago, Mark Kaine said:

after all "computer science" is pretty old, and in some aspects hasn't evolved much

Hmmm, except that it's computer science that made everything you currently use with technology, from GUIs to stuff like alexa and even ABS on a car, and I can guarantee you the people behind those things used CLIs daily.

40 minutes ago, Mark Kaine said:

ou don't really need "to write code" to program a game for example,  even if you probably could-- it would be cumbersome, take much longer and would lack visual feedback.

Except that you do? There's a reason there are so many programmers in game studios, and I can assure you they're not doing art or storylines lol

 

41 minutes ago, Mark Kaine said:

Like is that really so hard to understand,  you are just telling the computer what its supposed to do, and a cli is the most basic way to do this, but certainly not the easiest/ fastest or most natural one. Sure, there might not be a solution for every situation yet, but in the future there will be, despite being basically just "simple" turing machines computers and AI are progressing hella fast , at some point there will just be no reason to type things to communicate with a computer anymore. 

Are you aware that those AI stuff you see going around are built with CLIs? That's the point @Riccardo Cagnasso was trying to make, even though you as a end-user don't need to see any CLIs, the people that build the stuff you use and like to call "modern" do use CLIs daily.