Re: Why in the hell are @Rick Giles
But I served my time using GCOS on advanced military systems in the days before time, and I'm not afraid of the command line, I just can't be bothered with such a counter intuitive, user unfriendly approach these days.
Holy JFK at the Grassy Knoll, you operated operationally back in your youth and consider today's command line "counter intuitive and unfriendly"???? WHAT!
Well, let's just consider what it means when
"I want to do X"
1) Find out whether doing X is possible
2) Find out how to do X
3) Do X
4) Verify that X is done
5) Verify side-effects of doing X
6) Possible integrate "Do X" into an automation scenario,
1) Generally Supported (apropos and man are your friend, I haven't been friendly with the GNU info ever)
2) Somewhat Supported, you may have to use Google
3) Generally Supported but may demand workarounds or Perl/Bash/Python/Tcl etc.
4) Generally Supported.
5) Somewhat Supported
6) Supported if you know Perl/Bash/Python/Tcl etc.
1) Somewhat Supported (the "Help" may help, but generally does not)
2) Unsupported, you may have to use Google and even then will get screenshots and bad path descriptions that changed at last release
3) Supported if some good soul foresaw you might be "doing X", Unsupported otherwise.
4) See 3)
5) See 3)
6) Mostly Unsupported.
Personally, I believe the future is in a merging of these approaches - Graphics on the Command Line, if you will, but only as needed, and without all the crap clutter of modern windowing systems.