Posted by: Anonymous Coward
on January 06, 2004 10:44 AM
It all depends on how often you perform a given task. Typically, a command line is "faster," as long as you know the particular sets of commands and various options to do exactly what you want. I find it far faster to pop open a term window (typically the one I have lying around all the time) than to use a file navigator, click to where I want to go, and then select the viewing options. CLIs are also easier to script, which is often what you end up doing for highly repetitive tasks.
In constrast, GUIs serve to prompt the user through tasks that they are familiar with, but don't do all the time and thus don't quite remember. The GUI layout, buttons, etc., serve as a mnemonic for various functions for the user. So, when I have to reconfigure the various services that are running on my Linux box and don't quite remember the various commands for fiddling around with various files in<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/etc/rc.d, I just use Red Hat's services GUI and it works perfectly.
Reconfiguring services is not something I do often (like once every couple of months max). I don't need to script it, so a GUI works fine. Getting a list of files in a directory is something I do all the time, so being able to make it quick and painless is nice.
In short, I support the author's general characterization, with the caveat that I think a good system really has both methods available. Windows really sux without a good CLI, and old-school UNIX was way too reliant on it.
Finally, it's important to note that GUI doesn't necessarily mean a full bit-mapped, high resolution display, etc. I find that sometimes a nice curses-based "GUI" that runs in a term window (great over a remote SSH or telnet link) is just what the doctor ordered, bridging the gap between the two modes of working. Heck, there are those who believe that Emacs is just the generalization of this, being the uber-character-mode-GUI for all sorts of tasks.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;-)
Learn about Linux
Download Linux
Get Linux help
Depends on your task repetition rate
Posted by: Anonymous Coward on January 06, 2004 10:44 AMIn constrast, GUIs serve to prompt the user through tasks that they are familiar with, but don't do all the time and thus don't quite remember. The GUI layout, buttons, etc., serve as a mnemonic for various functions for the user. So, when I have to reconfigure the various services that are running on my Linux box and don't quite remember the various commands for fiddling around with various files in<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/etc/rc.d, I just use Red Hat's services GUI and it works perfectly.
Reconfiguring services is not something I do often (like once every couple of months max). I don't need to script it, so a GUI works fine. Getting a list of files in a directory is something I do all the time, so being able to make it quick and painless is nice.
In short, I support the author's general characterization, with the caveat that I think a good system really has both methods available. Windows really sux without a good CLI, and old-school UNIX was way too reliant on it.
Finally, it's important to note that GUI doesn't necessarily mean a full bit-mapped, high resolution display, etc. I find that sometimes a nice curses-based "GUI" that runs in a term window (great over a remote SSH or telnet link) is just what the doctor ordered, bridging the gap between the two modes of working. Heck, there are those who believe that Emacs is just the generalization of this, being the uber-character-mode-GUI for all sorts of tasks.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;-)
#