• 3xBork@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      31
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 days ago

      Not really. But you know, gotta find ways to feel smarter than other people so here we go.

      • rustydrd@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        17
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        3 days ago

        And those Windows evangelists! Don’t we all know 'em with their strong opinions about operating systems? *shakes fist at cloud*

        • 3xBork@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 days ago

          Yeah you just can’t be in a server room anymore without some dude trying to sell you on Office365 and Cortana, sigh.

          • rustydrd@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            3 days ago

            Do you have a moment to talk about our Lord and savior, the Microsoft App Store, and his enlightened prophet, Candy Crush Saga?

    • ftbd@feddit.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      23
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      3 days ago

      There are definitely people who think it is reasonable to memorize button locations and 10 levels of menus in GUI programs but would rather go into cardiac arrest than use something like program --option input-file output-file.

      • the_crotch@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        3 days ago

        As far as I’m concerned “windows key, start typing the name of the application” or “CMD+space, start typing the name of the application” is the right way to handle GUI. Apple nailed it with Spotlight and it’s vastly improved Windows and a variety of Linux DE’s

    • jj4211@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      3 days ago

      In a pretty high end high tech company, there’s still lots of people who see a terminal and think “ha hah, they are still stuck in old mainframe stuff like you used to see in the movies”.

      My team determined long ago that we have to have two user experiences for our team to be taken seriously.

      A GUI to mostly convince our own managers that it’s serious stuff. Also to convince clients who have execs make the purchasing decisions without consulting the people that will actually use it.

      An API, mostly to appease people who say they want API, occasionally used.

      A CLI to wrap that API, which is what 99% of the customers use 95% of the time (this target demographic is niche.

      Admittedly, there’s a couple of GUI elements we created that are handy compared to what we can do from CLI, from visualizations to a quicker UI to iterate on some domain specific data. But most of the “get stuff done” is just so much more straightforward to do in CLI.

    • tux7350@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 days ago

      I have a coworker that likes to pick fun at my usage of CLI tools. He said it’s confusing “why would I use a terminal when the GUI was made after?”. They vehemently hate anytime they have to work with CLI.

      I watched them use an FTP program to download and change one value in a .conf file. Like they downloaded the file, opened it in notepad++, changed one thing, saved it, reuploaded / overretten the original. I tried to show them how to just use nano and got told their way was “better since you could ensure the file was replaced”. Its okay, I’ve secretly caught them using it a couple times lol

      • zarkanian@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 days ago

        Fortunately, Linux terminals are gorgeous and easy to use. I never wanted to use Windows’ com because it was so ugly and user-hostile. I know Powershell is a thing now, but it still looks ugly to me.

    • rebelflesh@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      3 days ago

      I don’t think so, but I do criticize not having an option, that is why I stopped using Cisco personally and professionally, some things are fast using the cli, some things just need an Ui, you need both.

      • jj4211@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        3 days ago

        Like I get and appreciate the CLI and for networking, that’s pretty much all I’m using anyway, but I am shocked that enterprise networking doesn’t even bother to do any GUI. Once upon a time Mellanox Onyx bothered to do a GUI and I could see some people light up, finally an enterprise switch that would let them do some stuff from a GUI. Then nVidia bought them and Cumulus and ditched their GUI.

        There’s this kind of weird “turn in your geek card” culture about rejecting GUIs, but there’s a good amount of the market that want at least the option, even if they frankly are a bit ashamed to admit it. You definitely have to move beyond GUI if you want your tasks to scale, but not every engagement witih the technology needs to scale.

    • renzev@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      3 days ago

      I posted a meme a while back and out of the woodwork comes some guy ranting about how apt install sshfs is confusing. Like, the meme wasn’t even about CLI vs GUI lol. Nobody was claiming superiority, but there they go ranting anyway.

      • daggermoon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        3 days ago

        To me apt is confusing but that’s because I’ve become so used to pacman. The only package manager that comes close to pacman for me is xbps.

        • renzev@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 days ago

          Yeah apt tends to shit itself very often. I don’t like how it’s actually two different programs (dpkg and apt) glued together with perl and python. It all feels too fragile. A friend once tried updating a package, and it failed because… he was issuing the apt command from with a python virtual environment. Can’t say for pacman because I’ve never used arch, but xbps is just one set of self-contained binaries, which feels much more robust. Alpine’s APK fits that bill as well, lovely little package manager. Tho I guess apt predates both of those, so it’s not a fair comparison. Someone had to make those mistakes for the first time.

          I also really dislike the Debian/Ubuntu culture of fucking around with the sources file to add other people’s repositories on top of the distro-default ones (ubuntu calls this PPA). It’s a good idea in theory, but in practice those third party repos always fuck up in some way and brick your package manager. Just search for “apt Failed to fetch” in your favourite internet search engine, and you will see hundreds of people confused about it. You can do it with almost any package manager, but for some reason it’s mainly the debian/ubuntu people who like shooting themselves in the foot like this.

    • ZeroOne@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      3 days ago

      Yes, that’s a real thing. They use it as an excuse to dog on linux distros & say “Muh linux not great yet”