How can linux gain popularity

bongski55 · 10-23-2006, 11:34 AM

I would like to interrupt with a question-Is linux gaining on windows today compared to the past?

Trio3b · 10-24-2006, 02:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hangdog42

And here is where your beloved GUI falls flat on its face. The commands to carry out the vast majority of work are the same in all distros. I would guess that greater than 95% of the commands you learn in Fedora work in Debian and Slackware. Not so for the GUI. Take Yast (PLEASE!). Suse uses it for a wide variety of things, including configuring a wirless card. However, Suse is the ONLY distro where you will find Yast. So if you are a Suse user and suddenly find yourself confronted with a Fedora machine, unless you understand the underlying commands that Yast was using, you are completely screwed. Now if that same user has bothered to learn the iwconfig command, even if they have no clue what GUI tool Fedora uses to configure a wireless card, they can pop open a console and configure it that way.

Have heard this caveat many times and have to respectfully disagree. You are using an acedemic truth in a specific instance to make it appear that there is a GLOBAL truth that CLI is better than GUI. The only reason the CLI is the same in most distros is because it evolved AS AN AGREED STANDARD....which is what will eventually happen to the GUI as the marketplace has its way with linux.

As a way to interact between man and machine, it is generally accepted that we are visual, tactile mammals. This is why we have levers, pedals, and GRAPHICALLY representative avionics in jet fighters, space shuttle, etc. You don't fly a commercial jetliner with input to a keybord. (flat level flight -yes, but during critical operations such as landing or takeoffs -no) Sticks and rudders (eg., representative TOOLS) - give the best combination of tactile feedback to the pilot. Same for surgeons. Same for race car drivers, painters, sculptors, mechanics, etc...... I would hardly call this interactive protocol "neanderthal" as others sometimes insinuate.

Example -> chmod could just as easily have been chgmod, which is just as arbitrary as chmod. Same with YAST or aptget or whatever. When someone says that the CLI is better than GUI, what they really mean is that at this point in time most everyone has agreed to use a certain text command to accomplish a certain task. It doesn't mean that GUI is INHERENTLY inferior. Its just that no one has written a GUI script to accomplish this task, so it is by default, NOT BY SUPERIOR methodology, that the CLI "wins" in this SPECIFIC instance.

If I want to shred a list of junk files by GUI, I can use Krusader to shred, but I have to select each file individually (maybe I'm doing it wrong), but in CLI I can just shred -vzu * and poof! 50 files are gone. SO..... the CLI is better for that task, but NOT because text input into the console is more INTELLECTUALLY superior. It's because NO ONE has written a GUI frontend to a script to accomplish the same task. Now if someone would write a GUI front end to the "shred" command, and I wanted to shred only selected .txt files, the CLI might now become more "clunky", whereas with the GUI I could just point 'n click the files I want to remove.

I would agree 1000% about opening a console and configuring WIFI..... if and only if linux documentation had the SAME UNIFORMITY AND STANDARDS that you hold up as a selling point in the defense of the CL.

Bottom line is....as mentioned in another post...GUI and CLI each have their uses. I have noticed that the vehement denouncement of the GUI by diehard CL zealots has really waned in the last year or so. I would venture to say that there is a GOOD REASON for the inclusion of the GUI in modern distros and it is that most developers are intelligent people and have come to the reasonable conclusion that a GUI is a natural, logical, comfortable way for users to communicate with the software/hardware. There is an excellent article on user interface design here -> http://www.joelonsoftware.com/uibook/fog0000000249.html

This is not meant to inflame and I do agree with most of the rest of the post, I just think there's so much energy wasted on Windows vs. GNU/linux or CLI vs. GUI. I would like for OS community to adopt some form of standards regarding documentation and more importantly the user interface to weed out cluttered, non-intuitive and abandoned or poorly maintained opensource projects. This is NOT a comparison, as there have been horrible Windows based
applications as well.

Cheers

aldimeneira · 10-24-2006, 08:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by b0uncer

Now remember, the "commands" are actually programs or aliases to some programs, or scripts to run some programs or even aliases to scripts (you got the point now). So, if you pick up two distributions with the same programs - yes, they have the same commands. Pick up two distributions that have partly same programs, but partly not, and you'll have two distributions "with different commands". But that does not mean you couldn't install the programs to the other distribution you haven't learnt yet -- or create aliases for that. Some people who still stick around with DOS commands do alias rm to del etc.

So, after all it's not frustrating - you just got to do something about it. Now you probably thought you're not going to have to do anything about it -- but if you want to do something, you'll have to work for it. If learning a new 'command' (a program) is too much for you, you can just install the one you have already learned, or do some fancy scripting and/or aliasing to achieve the same result; your possibilities are virtually endless.

Of course, for a good flame war, you can pick up two distributions that share a minimum amount of programs, are very different in nature and perhaps even restrict the easy installation of the programs you already know - but if you think that twice, you may not have to do so. All the programs are there, and since most of them (especially if we're talking about the "basic commands", the common programs like rm, mv, cp etc.) are open source, you can just compile them for your system if you don't have a nice binary package lying around.

I would ask the question the other way around: how could Linux not gain popularity? How can The Other OS gain popularity? I mean, nowadays it's restricting your actions more every day, and if you miss some GNU program ("command"), you're going to have to do a whole lot of work to get it working there..

I don't get it. How is a text-based frontend so special to you? This programs can easily have graphical frontends (drag to trash, etc). Do you realize that the CLI is english-only? Both the CLI and GUI mix interface with back-end. The GUI at least "translate it" to something more universal than English-based commands.

The functionality is the same, how a user access it is what makes the interaction different. Honestly it's not that relevant (...or "flame" worthy). If it's safer to drag or move files to the trash than rm everything then fine. If a large file locks when moved to the Trash then rm it. PC users are too concerned of CLI vrs GUI. I don't see it that way. It's texts and graphics as interface elements. Use each accordingly (...it will be nice to have a translated CLI though ...but that's another matter).

aldimeneira · 10-24-2006, 09:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hangdog42

(...)

And here is where your beloved GUI falls flat on its face. The commands to carry out the vast majority of work are the same in all distros. I would guess that greater than 95% of the commands you learn in Fedora work in Debian and Slackware. Not so for the GUI. Take Yast (PLEASE!). Suse uses it for a wide variety of things, including configuring a wirless card. However, Suse is the ONLY distro where you will find Yast. So if you are a Suse user and suddenly find yourself confronted with a Fedora machine, unless you understand the underlying commands that Yast was using, you are completely screwed. Now if that same user has bothered to learn the iwconfig command, even if they have no clue what GUI tool Fedora uses to configure a wireless card, they can pop open a console and configure it that way.

The bottom line is that if you had bothered to learn about Linux before complaining, you would have realized that it is the command line that is the constant and the GUI is all over the map.

Now despite your groundless belief, I'm not anti-GUI. In fact I probably spend most of my time in a GUI. What I am is anti-ignorance. If you want to use Linux, then it is your responsiblity to learn HOW to use Linux. If you find that requirement intolerable, then don't use Linux. Both Windows and OSX are perfectly fine operating systems. Yes, Linux is likely to evolve better GUI tools in the future, but it is equally likely to continue down the fractured path it has been taking for the past several years. In either case, it will still ALWAYS be a requirement for a new user to invest in learing how to productively use Linux. No GUI tool will ever change that.
(...)

That says more about the inconsistency of free interfaces than about the usefulness of GUI in itself.

aldimeneira · 10-24-2006, 09:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by b0uncer

It's not completely impossible. To get a sharp picture of the whole you do need something better than command line/ASCII graphics, but if you're good visualizing stuff in your head, you could have a CLI CAD program. One of the biggest CAD programs is controlled trough a command line, it's just the results that are displayed in a graphical way, for the obvious reason.

A bit off topic, maybe, but I really wanted to correct that

Making art with a WACOM tablet using Photoshop or Painter?

Stop the non-sense. Some applications can only be done on the GUI, and some are better suited for the CLI and don't have other front-end.

metallica1973 · 10-24-2006, 09:55 PM

gentlemen,

This is good stuff!