command line vs gui
in [General Linux]
|
Prev: micro solution backpack cd-writer hell
Next: "...error while loading shared libraries: libg2c.so.0"
From: Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz on 22 Nov 2005 18:15 In <nlsgDpHpvGea092yn(a)visi.com>, on 11/22/2005 at 02:31 AM, rsteiner(a)visi.com (Richard Steiner) said: >This frightens me -- it reminds me of an IBM ISPF panel. :-) The editor of choice on my PC, Tritus SPF, is an ISPF/PDF look-alike. I'll give up TSPF when they pry it out of my cold dead fingers. >There are three places where I sometimes find a GUI more useful than >a CLI, Indeed, and, like you, I want the best of both worlds. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT <http://patriot.net/~shmuel> Unsolicited bulk E-mail subject to legal action. I reserve the right to publicly post or ridicule any abusive E-mail. Reply to domain Patriot dot net user shmuel+news to contact me. Do not reply to spamtrap(a)library.lspace.org
From: Richard Steiner on 23 Nov 2005 01:00 Here in comp.os.linux.misc, "Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz" <spamtrap(a)library.lspace.org.invalid> spake unto us, saying: >In <3u6eglFvkoi2U1(a)individual.net>, on 11/18/2005 > at 04:40 PM, blmblm(a)myrealbox.com (blmblm(a)myrealbox.com) said: > >>Maybe I lack experience with really well-written GUIs -- very >>possible since I'm a little fanatical about doing most things from a >>command line. I did say that GUIs are good for some purposes. Can >>you give an example of a GUI you think is "state of the art" >>(whatever that means)? > >WPS in OS/2, although it could be improved. Possibly OpenDoc, had it >not been stillborn. The WPS really needs to be made more fault-tolerant, though. But that is an implementation detail, not a functional criticism. WPS grouping features like workgroup folders are so darned useful, and I still can't believe the Gnome or KDE folks haven't implemented them yet. It's the result of unfamiliarity, I suspect... >>Also, since some of the earlier post was specifically about the Unix >>"find" command and whether it's feasible to build a GUI for it .... >>How would you do this? > >I'd present a panel with al of the options, with subpanels for such >purposes as providing help on specific option and displaying selection >lists for file names. It would take a fair amount of work to do it >right, but I've seen more complicated things. I'd present a panel containing fill-ins for a few of the most common options, and expect the user to drop to the underlying shell for more complex tasks. I don't like seeing multi-level text panels anymore than I like seeing multiple confirmation dialogs in a GUI. >>Or maybe your point was that it's a false dichotomy? > >Exactly. Part of good interface design is to make simple things easy >without adding to the difficulty of more complicated things. That >applies as much to a GUI as to anything else. There are good GUIs and poor ones just as there are good CLIs and poor ones, and either one can fall into the classic trap of favoring form over function. Not that being pretty is bad, but it shouldn't get in the user's way, unless it's part of a game or something where the UI is part of the challenge. :-) -- -Rich Steiner >>>---> http://www.visi.com/~rsteiner >>>---> Mableton, GA USA OS/2 + eCS + Linux + Win95 + DOS + PC/GEOS + Executor = PC Hobbyist Heaven! WARNING: I've seen FIELDATA FORTRAN V and I know how to use it! The Theorem Theorem: If If, Then Then.
From: Richard Steiner on 23 Nov 2005 00:56 Here in comp.os.linux.misc, "Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz" <spamtrap(a)library.lspace.org.invalid> spake unto us, saying: >In <nlsgDpHpvGea092yn(a)visi.com>, on 11/22/2005 > at 02:31 AM, rsteiner(a)visi.com (Richard Steiner) said: > >>This frightens me -- it reminds me of an IBM ISPF panel. :-) > >The editor of choice on my PC, Tritus SPF, is an ISPF/PDF look-alike. >I'll give up TSPF when they pry it out of my cold dead fingers. I was never really fond of the pieces of ISPF that I got to play with at a former job (DCF, CHANGEMAN/INFOMAN, various report viewers), but my big system background is more UNIVAC/CDC/VAX than IBM, so I'm sure I have a different set of expectations. My PC editor of choice is FTE (was the fullscreen console version for Linux ever resurrected?), but I'll use either pico or vim in a pinch. >>There are three places where I sometimes find a GUI more useful than >>a CLI, > >Indeed, and, like you, I want the best of both worlds. I already have (...close to...) the best of both worlds. :-) -- -Rich Steiner >>>---> http://www.visi.com/~rsteiner >>>---> Mableton, GA USA OS/2 + eCS + Linux + Win95 + DOS + PC/GEOS + Executor = PC Hobbyist Heaven! WARNING: I've seen FIELDATA FORTRAN V and I know how to use it! The Theorem Theorem: If If, Then Then.
From: news on 23 Nov 2005 02:26 not...(a)nothome.com wrote: > As a professional CAD user, I realize both the keyboard and the mouse > are invaluble input devices. In this primarily graphic environment, > the mouse is not only king, it's irreplaceable. I can do without the > keyboard, but not the mouse. .... Good !! I was thinking that only a professional CAD user would be most qualitied to judge. > After more than a couple bouts with Repeated Strain Injury (RSI), I > finally settled on a very efficient and low physical impact solution > for CAD. A one handed keyboard (left) and a really good mouse. My 'proper' OS Oberon-S3; uses a TUI, with mouse-cording. eg. right & then left buttons, cuts the 'selected' text to the buffer, and left & then mid. buttons pastes the buffer to the caret. Etc..etc. The cords become instinctive - I had to 'do it & note what I did' to write the instructions above. Where could I read about the 'one handed keyboard (left)' ? I'll try google now, first ? I guess the 'one handed keyboard (left)' also soon becomes instinctive ? How would I know that a mouse is "good" before I've confirmed by driving a million miles ? Recent mouse switches quickly develop contact-bounce. > The CLI requires the user actually > know a command and have it committed to memory. A gui typically > provides clues and/or prompts. It's like taking a test and really > knowing the answer to the question versus taking a multiple choice > test. No ! Do you "know" how to ride a bicycle, or do you just recall instinctively [by recognition] what to do under various situations ? If you want to be able to 'articulate' it, eg. as tutoring others, you have different requirements to just being able to DO it. Can you [do you want to] articulate what your mother looks like, or do you just recognise when you need to ? Do you want to remember arbitrary telephone numbers, or just the minimum key-entry-points which allow access to the rest of the info ? Do you want to remember if the file is named: GloriaCleggWP or GClegg.wp or .... I don't want to have to remember arbitrary facts, when I can just easily recognise them. And because the recognition is visual [by far the highest bandwidth channel for humans - dogs can smell better than see], the recognition 'items' are on the screen [changing context accordingly], so a quick pointing device is needed to get them. I won't waste time defending absurd speech input - for normal humans. == Chris Glur. PS. Alan Connor wrote: > This posts says Re: on the Subject line but has no References: > header. > I believe the "in reference to" refers to the subject-thread ? Besides I'm not much for name-dropping. Contents is more important than frequent-flyer-miles credited ? > Add that to the fact that they don't have a name in their From > header and I think I'll just leave the article on the server, and > the same for any responses to it. My minimalist [no auto-threading Newsreader] OS makes me 'work at the coal-face' instead of having it auto-magically done. And because of the very flashy cutNpaste facilities I hand craft my format. Almost the opposite of the M$-outsp00k posters who can't NOT top post, because the sytem puts the cursor on top. But I appreciate your annoyance at posters who mess-up your 'threading system', like I hate [apparently increasing lately] htm-emailers, top-posters and these absurd rtf-characters ... I'll give consideration to your point[s].
From: notbob on 23 Nov 2005 03:25
On 2005-11-23, news(a)absamail.co.za <news(a)absamail.co.za> wrote: > The cords become instinctive - I had to 'do it & note what I did' > to write the instructions above. too bad > Where could I read about the 'one handed keyboard (left)' ? > I'll try google now, first ? > I guess the 'one handed keyboard (left)' also soon becomes > instinctive ? yes > How would I know that a mouse is "good" before I've confirmed > by driving a million miles ? try "driving a million miles". > Recent mouse switches quickly > develop contact-bounce. define > No ! Do you "know" how to ride a bicycle, or do you just recall > instinctively [by recognition] what to do under various situations ? > If you want to be able to 'articulate' it, eg. as tutoring others, you > have different requirements to just being able to DO it. > Can you [do you want to] articulate what your mother looks like, > or do you just recognise when you need to ? Are you on drugs? > Do you want to remember arbitrary telephone numbers..... braindead troll.. nb |