GeneralThis forum is for non-technical general discussion which can include both Linux and non-Linux topics. Have fun!
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
Think of the majority of programs you use regularly. Do you seem to prefer CLI or GUI?
[p.s.: Think Desktop/Workstation.. not Server because in that case it is obvious. And by workstation I mean.. well.. software development workstation.. or any kind which does not imply GUI tools ONLY.. thus talking about boxes where you have a choice between CLI and GUI programs]
Also, do you think a 100% CLI box is usable/justifiable [on a ..pretty modern box (read: not old hardware)] ?
I used to prefer CLI, I even used to be 100% CLI. Now I seem to be 100% GUI and am considering I go either 100% cli.. or.. framebuffer [thus "minor" GUI features].. or.. something like.. FluxBox/FVWM but only CLI tools [all run out of xterms].. am pondering about it.
I suppose CLI can give you a bonus proficiency.. as some are more likely to be able to switch/manage/etc. different programs faster and easier if they are only using a keyboard. Disadvantages for 100% CLI are obvious.
In my opinion, there's no point to prove by choosing either GUI or CLI. The two are not mutually exclusive by any means. Personally after years of using Linux, it seems to me that it doesn't matter, so long as you're productive in what you do.
GUI is suitable for some tasks. CLI for others. I don't see any conflicts in that...
Last edited by vharishankar; 10-29-2006 at 09:55 AM.
On my box at work I only have a CLI (I don't have an X Server installed), because all I do is manage other servers over SSH, or do programming using vi. For web browsing I use Lynx, and for checking e-mail I use Pine. Both of these programs in the gray area of GUI, because they only use keyboard input, but has menus and buttons of a GUI.
I like just using the CLI because when all I am dealing with is text, there is no point in having a colors that just take up screen space and CPU time. Another benefit of using the CLI is that it promotes a greater understanding of Linux, beyond what you get when clicking on the icons. Although I don't like to admit it, it does make you look very important/smart when the boss walks by and can understand none of what appears on your screen (after the last cubical he walked by where the occupant was playing solitaire).
As for my home system, I use a GUI (Fluxbox), mainly because of Firefox. I do tend to have a number of x-terms open at any given time, however.
Voted gui. Where is the "whatever is most convenient" option?
Most apps/utilities seem to have a frontend and I prefer working that way.However if an option isn't available from the frontend it's off to the cli. For a simple example, if a batch type of process is needed a 'for loop' is much handier than searching for a frontend with that option.
edit/ forgot to mention error messages are more informative with cli.
Last edited by muddywaters; 10-29-2006 at 12:38 PM.
90% of the time I'm dealing with servers, so 90% of the time it's CLI. Do I prefer one over the other? Sure, CLI for all administrative tasks, editing files, etc. GUI comes into play when I'm editing graphics or browsing the web.
They aren't mutually exclusive. I use a GUI mostly, but have a CLI icon on the top-right corner (google FITTS+law+interface)... deleting large files takes forever on the GUI (but I think it's more due to a poor implementation), for small software modules I prefer compiling on the CLI, etc.