Re: GUI vs Command Line
And of course more Powerful if your command line happens to be PowerShell ;-)
Demand for IT professionals with Linux skills is stronger than ever, but a new worldwide survey of more than 850 hiring managers and 2,600 Linux professionals indicates that companies are having a hard time finding qualified hires. Among the findings of the survey, which was conducted by careers website Dice and the Linux …
And of course more Powerful if your command line happens to be PowerShell ;-)
Whatever you say, Jack - you're the master race.
You're an arse
Why the hell would I use the CLI if I had a GUI to do the same job
I work in CNC programming, power up the CAM, import the drawing, pull the dimensions off the picture, say to the CAM give me a pocket that shape and hit the button to spew out the code. and throw the code in the machine and hope
Or I could do it the CLI way and write the code to machine out the same pocket.... but that will take ages and hope I remember the right code to use.
The fact I can do it both ways wont stop me from doing it the quickest way, if it needs a minor tweak, do it at the machine, if its quicker to do a complete re-write, CAM it
I'm not going to pull out a terminal on my linux box and then read up exactly what options I need on a ping command, if I have a GUI tool I can just type in the IP and hit a button.
But then I suspect you're an old school person who uses 1 tool for everything from putting a nail in to removing a gas pipe....
"if Linux were the super-operating system you claim it to be, then how come Microsoft are still in business?"
I am not a CNC expert, but I suspect there exist command-line tools which do what you described. Those who know the relevant command line switches and some Perl post-processing will do the same job as you described in 1/10 of the time, as soon as they have their scripts readily developed.
I know of lots of people in electronic design automation who have these nice, colored GUI tools and the experts always turn to Perl to automate tedious tasks. Finally, electronic design has moved from GUI tools (schematic entry) to ASCII-based-tools such as VHDL. They basically need a GUI to dump signal trains from the simulator then and now. The interaction is being done using Emacs, vi or any other proper text editor.
There is a reason the Sign Language Cave Men were less advanced than Those Who Could Write In Letters.
you have side stepped the point - Linux has been around since the early 90's. Steve Ballmer himself has stated that 60% of web servers run Linux as recently as 2008, so does that mean that Windows server has eroded the Linux web server share over the last 23 years? Before answering, dont forget that Microsofts first foray into the server world was in '93(ish I think), which came after the release of Linux, with NT.
Again, we come back to one central thing - Microsoft is making money from selling Windows Server. If what you assert is true, that Microsoft are simply hoodwinking people into buying their software, do you also assert that people are simply willing to go with this practice?
Do you not think that people would get wise to this somehow and choose not to buy Microsofts software?
If that were to be the case, then how would people come to the conclusion that Microsoft produces crap? The only way they could come to this belief is by using said software. Do you think perhaps that once people were wise to the fact that Microsoft is peddling crap, that they would continue to buy and use it? For tens of years?
I would like to think that people, including business, are not that stupid, however that is merely my opinion, not a fact. Much the way your statement that Linux is a richer OS is not really a fact, but an expression of your opinion.
When I look at these Linux and Windows Server, I simply see tools. Tools to get a job done, or not. I pick the one that fits the requirement/challenge/problem and use it.
When it comes to my own machine at home, I choose whatever I would like to use. Right now, I use Windows 7, next week I will be upgrading to Windows 8.
And why do I choose to do this? Because they do everything I need from an OS in a relatively uncomplicated way.
Oh, and dont throw the "Linux is free card at me", it really annoys me. In my situation, my Windows OS's were given to me (they are legal as well). People seem to think there is no cost involved in using Linux, granted there is no capital expense in using it, but there is a strangely high organisational expense attached - something that is backed up by this very article we are commenting on, if you go by the salaries.
In my personal opinion, Windows and Linux offer both strengths and weaknesses - I wont go into them here.
You will be waiting for that memo for a very long time...
@Eadon - If you'd have read my post, rather than knee jerking, you would have noticed that I never specified which GUI on which OS or which command line on which OS. I'm perfectly aware that Linux has GUIs, I use it every day.
I'm sure you know that there is no "The linux CLI" there are various shells which have various relative advantages and disadvantages. Non of them, to my knowledge, are object orientated, other than the port of powershell which is underway.
Someone who works as a backup or Storage admin on a server team, may need to be able to carry out tasks on UNIX, Linux and Windows, it's highly unlikely that this person will be an expert on all three, they will know what they need to do and can work out much more easily how to achieve it through a GUI. Not everyone can be an expert on everything.
As for the rest of your post - I know that you want to congratulate yourself on how smart you are by holding up your chosen OS as an example of this, but: It's time to grow up: Choice of an OS doesn't make you smart, it just means that you know that OS.
Personally I use Linux, Windows, Mac OS, UNIXes and various other obscure OSes, this doesn't make me hyper intelligent, it just means that I know a bunch of OSes.
To sum up: If I want to rename a bunch of files, CLI is best. If I want to find which file is a picture of a dog, the GUI is best.
@Altes Schlachtross - There is a world of distance between a master at something and a "half-trained monkey".
CLI is great if you're a master at the particular OS, GUI can enable a master at another OS to do what he needs to do, without spending a long time researching.
See ? The Command Line is Better !
Microsoft sells the idea that you don't need skilled people to run your stuff.
Corporations love to think they are saving money.
Plus you've got all of the legacy desktop stuff that Microsoft can use for leveraging.
Windows suffers as much from it's own faults as it does the notion that it can be run by a trained monkey that can't get past a shiny happy GUI.
> Why the hell would I use the CLI if I had a GUI to do the same job
It probably can't.
Knowing what needs to be done to a sufficient level of details typically requires as much "bother" as dealing with text based commands. This is why some very fancy GUI applications still have command line interfaces. If you need precision and repeatability, pointing and clicking probably isn't going to cut it.
A GUI typically forces you to do a lot of busy work over and over again.
A CLI tends to avoid that. Do it once and let the machine do it on it's own after that.
GUIs tend to automate poorly because they tend to be designed with the expectation that everyone is a trained monkey unwilling to work, or think, or plan ahead.
Nice to see the old-school "Anyone who uses a GUI is stupid argument" being used again. Saves me bothering to build a time machine and go back a decade. Of course, apparently you've used one and accidentally set it to 9-year old mode. Oopsie :)
"The interaction is being done using Emacs, vi or any other proper text editor."
Ohhhh, right. It's only proper text editor if you're not using a GUI, isn't it?
Finally, with regard to your first statement :
"I am not a CNC expert, but I suspect there exist command-line tools which do what you described. Those who know the relevant command line switches and some Perl post-processing will do the same job as you described in 1/10 of the time, as soon as they have their scripts readily developed."
Amazing how often "I suspect there's something" or terms like "probably" come up in arguments where Linux zealots are saying everything can be done better in Linux without actually checking or providing details of what they're talking about. Such as your schematic/VHDL example. I rather suspect you're talking only about chip design, which narrows down the field somewhat for such a broad statement, but - well, no examples. So all you've done is some hand-waving about why GUIs are crap and destroyed your credibility by engaging in childish willy-waving (to borrow someone else's phrase.) Are you an undergrad or something? The hubris is often an indicator.
Eadon said, "Real men administer Linux."
Nah, real men (I prefer the term 'professionals') administer whatever they are capable of administering be it Windows, Linux, BSD or whatever... and they do so without whining incessantly and repeatedly telling us just how superior they or their favourite little kernel are.
That's not true. They offer certifications for all their servers / software. You can't say it's easy to learn then offer 5+ step certifications. The point of the GUI is it increases productivity over all. Sure, some people are more productive at command line than the average GUI, but overall, GUI increases productivity of your most expensive labor (tech).
My opinion of Windows is that it just works for me - in the context of my own personal laptop.
When it comes to doing actual work, then I choose the tool that most suits the job.
Your opinion that Linux is superior is just that. Your opinion doesnt make it a fact.
The fact that Linux is better at a lot of jobs over Windows is supported all by itself.
Actually MS does not. They have a qualification/certification program that extends well past the "Microsoft Certified Solitair Expert" and is structured similar to Sun/Oracle or LCI. Windows Admins worth the name and title are as qualified and trained as a similar Solaris/Linux/Whatever admin.
What MS sells you is that a simple Client or a small home server can be as easily set up/used as the home computers of old (Atari, Amiga, Acorn etc). And that works for 95+ percent of the users that buy their boxes assembled, configured and ready to use.
"Microsoft sells the idea that you don't need skilled people to run your stuff."
Except for all of those professional qualifications which you need to get a first foot in the door.
MS sell the idea that complex computing can be carried out more easily than it used to be. For example: you no longer need to know how to do everything at the command line - you can do it at the command line or GUI, but you don't need to do it at the command line. There is a gulf of difference between knowing what you need to do, how to engineer it, then doing it at the GUI and being unskilled.
@Eadon - So basically you've changed your tune and agree that it's sensible to use the GUI for some thing and the CLI for others and that it makes you "no less of a man"?
You've just made the point that a bunch of us were making.
what is it on Windows 2013 Server?
Actually, Eadon, on Windows 2013 the GUI is nothing more than a frontend for Powershell. Every single click on the 'Apply' button runs a Powershell command, and it even tells you what the command is so that you can copy it down and save yourself the clicks the next time. And, speaking as a fellow Linux geek, if you call Powershell a 'toy CLI' then you truly do show your ignorance. It is just as powerful as bash, provided you take the time to learn how to use it. I use both on a regular basis, so believe me when I say there's nothing bash can do that Powershell can't (except, of course, run on Linux). Fortunately ignorance is curable, provided you're willing to open your eyes.
You really should broaden your perspective. No OS is the perfect solution in all situations or for all people. What do you accomplish by constantly bashing Windows?
Only in your Microcosm. In the real world, Microsoft's share in the X86 server market is still over 50% and is still growing...
Web servers are one of the few areas where Microsoft are not leading the server market...
And there it is leading mainly because it is cheap. Pay an enthusiastic student little money to set up his Distro of choice, roll out and use until it falls apart, repeat.
Internal data centers still prefer other systems due to better long term stability, less versions and in quite a few situations better performance/stability on the same hardware.
Quite a lot of positions I have seen floating about lately ask for Windows and Linux admin skills equally.
I am not sure if there has been a sudden mass death of Linux admins recently.
"Linux bash" 138 hits
"Windows MSCE" 2 hits
"Linux gcc" 9 hits
"Windows Visual C++" 146 hits
"Linux Perl" MORE THAN 200 hits (200 is the limit)
"Linux Qt" 51 hits
"Windows Qt" 44 hits
I have had load of agents get in touch re: Germany recently. There does seem to be a big demand for it over there. One or two from Poland too.
But I've only just moved back to the UK so I have no intention of going anywhere for the forseeable.
There was a very good article on "More or Less" (Radio 4) a few months ago about why you shouldn't support arguments with search engine hits. I'm not going to go into it here, but just don't, it's wildly inaccurate.
For a start it's "Microsoft MCSE" - There are Server, SQL and Cloud MCSEs...
From Jobserve, a rather better known jobsite:
Microsoft Server - 5,835 jobs
Microsoft MCSE - 4,693 jobs
Linux Admin - 2,756 jobs
Visual C++ 1,483 jobs
Linux Perl 1,293 jobs
Linux bash 1,178 jobs
Thanks for the correction. "Windows MCSE" is 140 hits on ArbeitsAgentur.
Looks like the one he's using is the equivalent of the UK DWP, so I'd tend to look askance at his figures.
I don't know about DWP, but ArbeitsAgentur does have proper jobs in their listings. The search engine works properly. Of course there are tons of other agencies around here.
And yeah, search engine statistics are certainly not the Objective Picture Of Reality. Maybe someone can come up with the URL to that one !
"I don't know about DWP ..."
I didn't know about ArbeitsArgentur myself. So I went there. If you do the same with the DWP you might get my point.
"And yeah, search engine statistics are certainly not the Objective Picture Of Reality. Maybe someone can come up with the URL to that one !"
And yet, you used those statistics to try to make your point. So I don't know what you're actually trying to say there. Anyway, don't worry about. Everyone here seems to trawl for a site - any site - to support their point. Anyhoo, in your short time since joining, you've demonstrated you're another Eadon (if not just a sock puppet,) so I'll pop you in the same "Troll - don't respond or vote" bin. Please try to avoid posting too much - it's a pain scrolling past this kind of stuff. Thanks.
Is that like "PIN Number"?
Said the AC troll...
"...if a company standardises on Windows then they will have to employ more people to administer them"
Eadon, I'd employ 500 of the blighter's if it meant that I didn't have to be confronted with your incessant, inane drivel. It's gone beyond funny and into the realm of unreasoned bullshit tinged with a little occasional reality.
Time to finish writing the EadonKillfile browser extension for here I think.
Eadon, that's only really the case in web hosting. Pretty much all other uses, when you compare delivering like for like enterprise level functionality - windows has a lower TCO by requires less support, and fewer resources.
In terms of scalability - well maybe you are right in terms of number of CPUs in a physical box - But Windows is more efficient and scales better across multiple CPUs at least up to standard X86 box sizes with up to 64 CPU cores.. For instance delivering 1 million IOPS in a single VM, and by far the worlds fastest file server and NFS server....
Wait, so the biggest chunk you found was jobs for PERL PROGRAMMERS??? I thought Germany was supposed to be ahead of the times in these things, not living in the last decade.
windows has a lower TCO by requires less support, and fewer resources.
If you're going to get your facts form Microsoft's 'Get The Facts' campaign then don't bother. Their tailored studies don't carry much weight with people familiar with the true operating costs of Linux.
Ah, die Bodensatz-Verwertungsstelle aka Agentur für Arbeit.
The german "Agency for Employment" is well known as the LAST place to look for qualified IT personal. The jobs offered are the low paying ones aimed at elder (post 40 with not up to date skills) and those approaching the "will take anything but HarzIV" (a very low level bread and water level stipend) time after 12-18 month of unemployment.
Higher level hiring is done through recruiting agents, adds in the press and adds on ones website. Not to mention that the search engine is legendary bad...
Depending on what type of server we are speaking of Linux is the least scaleable unit. Try running JAVA on it - everything out-performs J2EE, Tomcat etc on Linux on the same hardware. Not only Solaris (that is to be expected) but even Windows does nicely.
When it comes to file servers - SOLARIS scales a lot better and has the best file systems you can get on Intel hardware for that job. And NTFS is a fine, stable journaling system as well these days.
Mail/Workgroup is mostly a software matter. If you are using Domino all three will do. Exchange will require Windows. Free software that can replace either - none.
Having been accused of being a fanboi countless times here among these hallowed pages I am sure my penguin compatriots and I will be quietly smirking and rolling in the dosh soon.
But seriously, Linux is a natural successor to Unix, which was seen as a multi-tasking, multi-user operating system well-suited for small to medium organisations who could not justify or afford the cost of a mainframe. Having cut my teeth and made a living on it, I am glad to see its return in its present Linux incarnation. As for the dosh - well, I'll leave that to the current generation. I'm quite happy to spend the last phase of my working life in quieter waters accumulating my pension paid for by Windows.
However, agencies please take note - I shall be available for Linux and Unix consultancy services...!
It does seem that Linux is making more in-roads into UNIX serving than Windows serving and certainly Windows desktop. There are an increasingly large amount of big companies who are realising that Big Iron proprietary UNIX no longer has the bang for buck that it used to command. This is particularly an issue when the reliability that it used to have can easily be achieved by Linux or Windows on commodity servers, such as a proliant. I've worked at a couple of companies who now have a strategy of Linux/Windows on VMware, usually with some z/OS and z/Linux as well.
It does seem that Linux is making more in-roads into UNIX serving than Windows serving
That certainly fits with my experience - in part this was due to the UNIX admins being happier to give Linux a go in the first place but it was also possible to make savings that way that just weren't possible with a switch of a subset of the Windows servers.
Still, everywhere I've worked that I am still in contact with has at least some Linux servers, even one place that is a Windows shop as a matter of company policy, and a foot in the door is often all that is needed as I saw when Windows took over from Mainframe / UNIX / NetWare in the 90s
@Eadon - Do you think that Google, Facebook, Amazon, Twitter and CERN may be edge cases, or that they're representative of every company on the planet?
I only ask because the major processing that is being done at the last few companies I worked for was on a Z server and I am thinking of getting one...
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2017