The CLI is a universal master control panel, of course you need to learn it. Unlike windows, Linux terminals are fun.
What scares me is that I’ve tried to hook multiple “geekier” teenagers on Linux, and they aren’t interested. Even the math-y ones don’t know the difference between an operating system and a browser. My main computer is Arch with xmonad and it disturbs and confuses them.
We have a lost generation when it comes to computers. Lots of the little geeks that would have been playing around in the registry or learning powershell 15 years ago are so stuck in walled gardens that they don’t even know there’s a world outside of them.
A meme is a great way to avoid their fury; Lynx doesn’t show images.
It’s open source, they can just make their own distro.
And that attitude is why Linux is struggling to gain market cap imho.
Yes they can, but maybe we need to embrace those who arent tech saavy?
Saying if you dont like it, go do your own thing is not very welcoming.
We should encourage people to create their own distribution, but maybe welcome people with open arms first, guide them to a flavour that works for them, and then encourage them to learn how to make it exactly what they want
Market cap? Which stock symbol is it? 😉
Couldn’t think of a more appropriate term, feel free to suggest some better terms
Market share
I can understand people not wanting to learn a ton of CLIs, I cannot understand people refusing to use any at all. They have the distinct advantage that you can copy + paste stuff, whereas in Windows you sometimes have to follow like a dozen steps to do whatever you want to do in a 2000s GUI.
I’ve used PowerShell in Windows for the past 15 years. Following dozens of steps in a GUI is not required.
I also use Linux, with bash and Python for automation. I’ve also grown to love NixOS for its automation options.
Both operating systems feature rich automation options. Both have ClickOps oriented interfaces for those that want it or are unwilling to learn to automate / use a CLI.
Doing ClickOps is a choice and a mindset, not a requirement of Windows. Using a CLI in Linux is not a requirement depending on the distro or your use case.
Dude, in a previous job I had a superior aggressively refuse to let me teach him how to do some extremely basic things on his computer (he’d just call me over to do it whenever he needed it done) and told me he did not know what an internet browser was (he used one everyday).
Now, I did not understand his thought process, but he exists. There are 100% people who understand the basics but experience intense cognitive stress at the mere sight of a command line.
I got blocked by someone here for the same idea that I thought was balanced: it is a useful tool, it makes it easy to share how to do something.
That’s it. Use it if you want, or don’t, but it’s not a negative thing. And I too don’t advocating sitting up at night reading man pages or anything…
I couldn’t see anyone in my family using a CLI, they’d either be scared of it or get annoyed that they have to remember things. They’d quite happily spend all day clicking around a GUI to avoid 5 seconds of scary terminal words.
“I don’t want to learn/use the CLI” is equivalent to saying “I only want to use features that have a GUI”, which you can already do on any operating system (including Linux).
No, it means not needing terminal to have a usable system or to fix it
even Windows sometimes doesn’t meet this
What? No, it doesn’t mean that.
If you want audio, but will have to use CLI to fix the issue. You have a feature you want, but can’t use because of CLI.
Same with installing software or using advanced settings. If that is only accessible through CLI, it is a major flaw for any user.
It’s a major flaw for those who doesn’t want to learn how to copy-paste to CLI and take the first few steps into the terminal. Which is a valid approach.
I believe Linux distros aimed at nontechnical users should strive to not need a user to ever use a terminal, but I also believe folks should be encouraged to try them anyways.
nah fuck that noise. thats what i use.
its good to know it more deeply, but i want the practicality of a stable system that gets out of the way of my shitposting.
if anything, easy stable distros are more worthy because it allows just anyone to ditch windows. instead of being a nerd’s plaything, that is.
I’ll be honest, as a macos & Linux user, even macos, the (self proclaimed) Holy Grail of accessibility and user friendliness,required me to run a few commands to fix bugs (not in weird softwares, just stuff which stopped working through reboots in the OS itself).
You can’t expect to use a computer without CLI, or what you get is windows (and even then, you might get around the CLI but you gonna need to do some cursed regedit at the first attempt of slight customization, or bug).
The only exception to this is phones, and for good reason; you hardly can do shit in phones anyway, and if it bugs all you can do is wait for the devs to fix it for you
Almost all maintenance tasks and fixes on windows come back to the command line. So I have no idea why people keep bringing it up about Linux.
Because Windows hides its (ugly ass) terminal in shame so the user never has to see its putrid face.
Linux encourages terminal use, including it as one of the base starting icons in most distros.
That’s my guess, anyways.
and if it bugs all you can do is wait for the devs to fix it for you.
“Oop, sorry, we only promised 2 major updates! Your 2 year old device is abandoned now.”
–The mobile industry
We need a decently-hardwared Linux phone so badly…
Or maybe decent mobile producers. New Pixels get 7 years of updates, Fairphone 5 gets 10.
A true mainstream Linux distro would need guidelines like this:
- The user is never be expected to type a command into a terminal.
- The user is never be expected to edit a configuration file.
- There is a graphical UI for every possible action the user might want to (or have to) do.
This especially includes:
- Configuring audio devices
- Installing graphics drivers
- Updating the operating system
- Managing applications and storage space
- Connecting to networked storage
- Adjusting kernel parameters (This is neccessary on certain hardware, yet, barely any distro has a graphical UI for it.)
The only distro that comes close to this is Linux Mint, but not even Mint covers everything I just mentioned.
If we want Linux to succeed, there needs to be at least one distro that confidently ships without a terminal.
Been using fedora on a laptop for a year with no command line intervention.
I don’t mind the command line, but it has been uneccesary.
Seriously - Linux needs a standardized config schema spec. Something that programs should provide which an application can read and provide a frontend interface for the users to adjust config files.
Could be something like:
schema_version: 1.0 application: name: Poo Analyzer icon_path: /etc/pooanalyzer/images/icon.png description: Analyzes photos of poo schema: - config_file: path: /etc/pooanalyzer/conf/poo.conf conf_type: ini configs: - field: poo_directory type: dir_path name: Poo Image Directory description: Directory of Poo Images icon_path: /etc/pooanalyzer/images/poo.png - field: poo_type type: list name: Poo Types description: Types of Poo to Analyze values: - dog - cat - human - brown bear icon_path: /etc/pooanalyzer/images/animal.png ...Any distro could then create any frontend they’d like to manage this - the user could even install their own.
This particular program would work great in combination with old school German/Dutch toilets with the poop shelf, take a pic after the deed and let the program tell you how you need to adjust your diet.
I agree and disagree.
The premise is solid: unify config so it’s standardized and machine parse-able for better integrations like an easier-to-build UI/UX. It could even have ramifications for cloud-init and older IaC tech like Puppet.
The problem is Linux itself. Or rather, the subsystems that are cobbled together to make Linux a viable OS. You’re not going to get all the different projects to pivot to a common config scheme, so this YAML standard would need a backend to convert to/from whatever each little deamon and driver requires. This creates a few secondary problems like community backlash (see systemd), and having multiple places where config data must be actively synchronized.
I think the current crop of GUI config systems are aleady well down the most pragmatic path: each config panel touches one or more standard config files, wherever they are, and however they are structured. It’s not pretty under the hood, and it’s complicated, but it works. These tools just need a lot more polish on the frontend.
They could still use whatever config format they wanted - this would just be for providing their config schema. It also doesn’t need to be YAML, that’s just the easiest one for me to type on my phone. In fact, I think most schema validation programs rely on JSON as it is.
I also don’t think programs should be required to provide it. Many core programs and kernel modules would likely take years if they ever were able to add it just to avoid the risk of mistakes causing any major issues, especially if they haven’t needed an update in years. There are also many config files that use their own nonstandardized schema. A possibility is that they could be allowed to provide a CLI tool which could update the config or they could just ignore it entirely.
But creating a common schema for… well, the config schema would make it easier for systems to provide a frontend interface for updating your configs.
You were absolutely right about everything up until your very last sentence.
We need a distro that comes with GUIs for everything indeed, but shipping without a terminal would be both a bad idea and would cause the distro maintainer to go up in flames immediately.
Interesting, i kinda read that quickly and took awsay from it more of a
Ships without the expectation to need a terminal, not actually ship without one at all
OpenSuse does all of this or almost all of this.
Every KDE distro can do all of these except whatever adjusting kernel parameters means? I don’t know how to do any of this in the command and I’ve been using Linux for 8 years.
Windows doesn’t even cover everything you just said. The number of times Windows 10 broke my Bluetooth devices and I had to much around in registry to remove the device profile just to try to repair the device, is part of the reason I switched to Linux in the first place.
Yes, many distros need a little refining and smoothing for the general public, but only because people are so used to dealing with bullshit troubleshooting on Windows that they don’t see it as bullshit anymore.
That’s a low bar, but importantly they’re still correct that technically Windows looks like it can handle those things as far as a regular consumer can see. Windows is unholy trash, but it at least doesn’t tell people who can’t even navigate their basic file explorer that they are expected to use scary terminal commands they likely found on a forum or third-party website.
Personally I think a little more tinkering spirit would do the whole world good, not just with computers, but reality is the way that it is for the moment(things can change, fingers crossed).
but at least people who can’t even navigate their basic file explorer that they are expected to use scary terminal commands.
This! I work in IT, in fact, I’m the director of both the IT and software teams at my company and I am constantly teaching my new techs and reminding my existing techs that they need to remember just how little the “average” person knows about computers, and how much more that is than what they’d actually care to learn.
99% of people don’t care about computers, or how to make things “more efficient”, or anything else. They just care about the easiest way to do something. And like it or not, the easiest way for the vast majority of people is through a GUI.
There is even an XKCD about this
And that’s even before you get to the security problems! I am constantly trying to prevent users from going to FreeNuclearCodes.com or sending passwords and social security numbers to i7716tvq_88@gmail.com (actual email address I had to block last week)
There can never be a distro that ships without a terminal. I will burn it with the fire of a thousand suns. Even Windows has a terminal
The reason I had no problem whatsoever editing config files is because I’d been doing it for decades already in Windows with .ini files.
And not needing a terminal is different than not having access to one. Windows has a terminal.
I think it even ships with 3(?) terminals for some reason now for some reason lol
They don’t need to take away the command line. Just to make it so a low skill user can get by without it. Even windows ships with PowerShell.
No pc OS available meets your requirements for this lol, not linux, windowns or crapple osx
Sure would be nice if linux was the first available though.
The user is never be expected to type a command into a terminal.
Nope! Absolutely not. This is where Windows 95 fucked us all over. Prior to 95, windows was an application executed from a DOS prompt. Users may not have known many commands, but they learned that commands could be given.
Windows 95 tried to convince us that a GUI developer knew better than the user everything the user wanted to be able to do with that computer. It did make simple use easier, but the way it did it was by hiding the average user away from any simple ability to automate. It took away virtually all command line utilities that could be scripted to run themselves, and replaced them with GUI-driven applications that required the human’s time and attention, repeatedly and monotonously sorting through graphical menus and prompts to achieve a task that the computer could easily be “trained” to do itself. It did it by dumbing down the user, reducing their expectations to the few idea the GUI allowed them to express.
GUIs are Fisher-Price toys. They are the bright and shiny, but functionally crippled. There is no need for a distro that deliberately impairs the user in the way that you describe.
What is your goal? Are you content with Linux being niche?
If not, what group do you think this appeals to?
The casual device user continues to ignore Windows desktops and use their phone let alone Linux at this point.
The normie desktop user who just wants a internet browser and basic office software can easily be won over to Linux Mint. You advocating everything be CLI based will kill that.
The casual desktop enthusiast & PC gamer will get irritated and impatient and go back to comfy Windows. They mostly just want their games to run smoothly and maybe look pretty. Maybe install an application that does something moderately technical for them with tweaks here and there.
You already have the hardcore techy users. They don’t need to be converted.
In my opinion, Linux and its various distro’s main goal ought to be to undermine for-profit OS. Not to turn everyone into computer techs. The latter is a pipe dream anyway.
In my opinion, Linux and its various distro’s main goal ought to be to undermine for-profit OS. Not to turn everyone into computer techs.
Turning everyone into “computer techs” is how we undermine for-profit OS. The command line is a spoon. In the hand of a toddler, it goes flying across the room, along with the mashed potatoes it held. Microsoft’s answer to that flying spoon is to teach the kid that they can never touch the spoon; they must let mommy do it for them (and here is “mommy’s” bill for that “service”).
Microsoft teaches that it is a “pipe dream” for the average person to ever have sufficient mastery over the spoon to be able to feed themselves. They taught us that spoons are scary and dangerous.
Linux keeps putting that spoon on her tray, and encouraging her to use it.
My “goal” has less to do with bringing Linux to the masses and more with bringing the masses to Linux. The “pipe dream” argument you presented should not be ported in. The “normie” should be taught from a very young age that the command line isn’t “unfriendly”, but wildly powerful, and well within their capacity to wield.
Microsoft is not the reason I believe its a pipedream to turn people into computer techs. Its a cold hard reality.
Even particularly smart people have to want to be computer techs. I work with teachers, genuinely smart people, who have zero desire or motivation to learn computer use outside how it can help them teach in a fairly “if its not broke don’t fix it” mentality. They aren’t incurious but they have limited time and resources and they use such elsewhere. My attempts to get them to even try Linux Mint has thus far failed, the idea that I could get them to learn CLI is absurd.
Don’t get me wrong, I believe even dim wits could learn to be computer techs and use a command line, but that requires them to want that. Most people do not intrinsically desire that.
Most people do not intrinsically desire that.
The only things that people “intrinsically” want are food and fornication. Everything else, they have been taught and trained. The training they have received from Microsoft domination has been “don’t learn how to use a computer”.
That training is something to despise and reject, not incorporate into Linux.
The only things that people “intrinsically” want are food and fornication. Everything else, they have been taught and trained.
EVERYTHING? I enjoy doing things that aren’t eating and sex on a intrinsic level that I was never trained to enjoy. I just… wanted to do those things. A lot of things are intrinsically fun that are not eating and sex.
The training they have received from Microsoft domination has been “don’t learn how to use a computer”.
Why didn’t people adopt personal computers en masse before Windows came to be then? After Windows 3.0, personal ownership of computers more than doubled over the course of 5-6 years and then continued to balloon, speeding up adoption well beyond the previous decade.
Look, I’m not a fan of Microsoft either but this is conspiracism.
EVERYTHING? I enjoy doing things that aren’t eating and sex on a intrinsic level that I was never trained to enjoy.
No, not “intrinsically”, you don’t. Food, fuck, sleep, that’s about it. You likely enjoy other things as well, but not intrinsically. I enjoy Sudoku, but that is something I learned. There is no “enjoy sudoko” element within me that I did not put there myself.
Why didn’t people adopt personal computers en masse before Windows came to be then?
They did. Everyone I knew back in the Windows 3.1 days already had computers. Most of those people didn’t have Windows, and used standalone applications. The increase in ownership came when hardware prices finally fell enough for them to be affordable. Windows development was a result of that uptick, not the cause.
Do you also think that anyone that wants a car should be a mechanic? Anyone that wants a house should be a builder? Anyone that wants to have electricity should be a electrician? Anyone that wants to listen to music should be a musician? Anyone that wants to eat they should learn how to farm? Anyone that wants a drug should be a pharmacist?
People put their time and effort in different things, you might’ve learned how to program and became tech literate, but that doesn’t mean everyone else wants or should do the same.
Sure life would be easier if everyone was an expert in every field, but that’s a clearly ridiculous proposition.
Maybe realize the sheer privilege that is wanting everyone to be a “computer tech” just because you are one yourself. Maybe realize that the only reason you can afford to be a “computer tech” is because someone else is a “hardware tech” or a “architecture tech” or a “electricity tech” or whatever else, and those people would likely also want you to be a “tech” in their field so they don’t need to make things that “just work” for non-“tech” people.
Do you also think that anyone that wants a car should be a mechanic?
I reject the premise.
I think that anyone who wants to be a driver should be able to understand that the brake pedal squeezes the pads against the rotor.
I don’t think that everyone who can identify a brake rotor is a mechanic.
Anyone that wants a drug should be a pharmacist?
I think that anyone who wants any sort of medicine should have enough medical, mathematical, and statistical knowledge to understand that vaccines don’t cause autism. I don’t think that everyone with such knowledge is a pharmacist, mathematician, or statistician.
The idea that the command line is “unfriendly” and that decelopers should hide it away is, in my opinion, the computer equivalent of the antivax movement.
I reject the premise.
Here is a simpler one:
People see computers the same way they see clothes, it’s a tool for a job. Some people know a lot about them and some people make their living making or modifying them. But most people just want it to be usable.
In the same vein, saying people should be able to use the terminal to use a computer is like saying that people should be able to sew to wear clothes.
Much like how people don’t want to pick up a needle to patch a hole in their clothes, they don’t want to mess with the terminal to troubleshoot any errors. People expect things to “just work” and that’s not an unreasonable expectation.
It’s easy for you to say that everyone should just know how to use the terminal, but it’s also easy for someone that sews to say that everyone should know how to use a sewing machine; or for someone that likes hardware to say everyone should be able to open their computers and swap components; or for someone that how to drive to say that everyone should know too; or for someone that diets a lot to say that everyone should know how to count calories; etc. etc. etc.
Point is that people learn different things, not everyone has the same interests or specialties. And just because they don’t share specialties, doesn’t mean they should be shut out of important or useful tools.
P.S.: the antivax movement happens because of lack of trust in medical institutions. People should be able to trust qualified doctors to inform them and recommend proper procedures, people shouldn’t need to be “medicine savvy” enough to know what each drug or procedure does before they seek treatment. If anything, this need for “medicine savviness” is what pushes people into “doing their own research” and becoming antivax.
they don’t want to mess with the terminal to troubleshoot any errors.
I reject your premise that the purpose of the terminal is to troubleshoot errors. That is part of the widespread misconception I am talking about.
The terminal is simply for using the computer. With all the command line utilities available, and their widespread interoperability, the terminal should be one of the first tools a user looks for.
A GUI is a hammer. The CLI is the Snap-On tool truck.
I understand where you’re coming from, but this may simply be a difference in goals.
If your goal is that people become more computer-literate, then yes, perhaps we should use the GUI less. People who are already Linux users aren’t going to have that big of an issue using apt instead of a GUI software manager.
If your goal is that more people use Linux, then you need to have GUI support. If anything else, it eases them in so that they’re not drinking from the firehose all at once.
My litmus test would be “could I feasibly teach my grandparents how to use this?” Which I think is true of Linux Mint (yes, you need terminal for good driver management, but it’s not like my grandparents do that via Windows GUI)
Also, I’m not really aware of any Linux distros that remove command line utilities - mostly, they just have the same thing in both GUI and commands
indeed 30 years ago it might have made sense. But it’s 2025 now users want the less pain in the neck usage of a os. if my whole family is to use a Linux environement thet moment they will see a consol they will run away.
if my whole family is to use a Linux environement thet moment they will see a consol they will run away.
Then they will never script anything. They will never automate a task themselves. They will only ever operate a computer manually, interactively, rather than programmatically.
Windows pushed users to remain toddlers their entire lives. They charge us for the privilege, so they want to keep spoon feeding us for our entire lives. When we see a spoon anywhere but in their hands, they want us to throw it across the room rather than pick it up and try to use it.
Microsoft wants your family to run away screaming, rather than asking what that console is and what it can do.
The objective of Linux is to put the spoon on the tray of your toddler’s high chair. Linux encourages her to pick it up, poke it at her food, and keep encouraging her to learn, to develop and build on her skills, until she is asking for the fork, the knife.
Then they will never script anything. They will never automate a task themselves. They will only ever operate a computer manually, interactively, rather than programmatically.
Here’s the thing.
Most people don’t care about automation. They just don’t.
The objective of Linux is to put the spoon on the tray of your toddler’s high chair. Linux encourages her to pick it up, poke it at her food, and keep encouraging her to learn, to develop and build on her skills, until she is asking for the fork, the knife.
And your still refusing the point. People don’t want a knife and a fork. You can’t make them want it. They want something they can intuitively understand. Because to most people, tech is a basic tool to get another job done.
Most people only need a basic hammer, screwdriver, etc…
That’s all they need to do what they need day to day to get other things done.
Machinists need more complicated tools with tons of settings, complicated setup and saftey to know. So they spend the time learning. But you don’t need a wood shop to hang a picture frame.
This is before we even talk about accessibility. That means much more than large fonts or screen readers. It’s also about the fact humans exist on distribution curves in every possible way. For some people, it will just never make sense. No matter what you do. Because it’s just not how their brains work. In the same way mine can’t do languages very well. It just doesn’t click for me. And deep dives into computers wont click for some. Should they never learn to use a computer? Or can they learn basic enough functions from good GUIs to get by.
It’s even fine to say linux isn’t meant for that. But if you want everyone to get away from macOS and Windows, you need a viable alternative for everyone
Most people don’t care about automation. They just don’t.
Microsoft would certainly have us believe that. Decades of operant conditioning by Microsoft and Apple have given us that attitude.
Most people certainly do want automation; they don’t know how to automate. There was a meme floating around recently about a temp who replaced hours and hours of tedious, daily transcription between two applications with ctrl-c, ctrl-v.
We have all seen plenty of examples like this, with users doing excessive manual labor out of simple ignorance of absurdly simple automation.
And your still refusing the point.
The point arises from the very attitude I am challenging, so yes, I am refusing the point. We should not be encouraging or supporting the behaviors you describe, but should instead be promoting the tools that allow the average user to identify menial tasks and relegate them to the machine.
So fuck people with disabilities then?
Your still believe computers are machines and not hand tools at this point.
How much copy paste do you think the average user actually uses of their computer?
deleted by creator
Dude, nobody wants to take away the CLI on Linux
…
If we want Linux to succeed, there needs to be at least one distro that confidently ships without a terminal.
Just realized that person above wants that. Was too focused on the part you quoted, my bad. That’s indeed outlandish.
No worries!
When are you REQUIRED to use cli? The app store works well, many apps have installers, and will be perfect for average users.
Advanced users should already be familiar with CLI and just need to learn a little more.
To be fair the absolute majority of online help posts involve the CLI. Want to change language on my Debian install? It’s off to the CLI!
But they come with instructions usually. Copy paste done.
Sure, but if CLI is for advanced users and the community points towards CLI for changing the GUI language, is changing language an advanced task? Is the community making it more difficult/intimidating than necessary?
In my case I had to pull the language data AND use a TUI configuration to change language. No biggie for someone who’s comfortable with CLI, an unsurmountable hinder for those not comfortable with the terminal.
inb4 “Why didn’t you use the built in GUI?”. Desired language wasn’t an option and no obvious way to DL it either.
Yes I agree this could be made easier. When did you do this, maybe it’s been added since?
To be honest, I have no idea where to install language packs for windows either.
Bugfixing.
Falls under advanced users or copy paste from forums with instructions.
“The new Windows Terminal is so slick! And PowerShell is soooo awesome! When will Linux get cool neat powerful stuff like this?”
“Uh… About three decades ago?”
(To be honest, PowerShell is neat. But it’s also cross platform, so if I really want it on Linux I guess I can get it there too? I don’t really need to, I’m in middle of rewriting some PowerShell stuff in Python)
I actually love the cross platform PowerShell stuff for two reasons. One it’s really nice to be able to have something that works on my windows environment and the Linux one, and 2 because PowerShell is enormously better than bash.
GUIs are an awesome tool. Humans as a species have 5 senses, and instead of limiting computers to the narrow portion of sight needed for typing, they make full use of both our visual and aural senses.
That being said, they add another layer of abstraction away from the hardware on top of the already very abstract userspace utilities that abstract away the kernel that abstracts away the machine code that abstracts away the hardware.
All of which is to say that “Just Works” is shorthand for “I don’t want to actually learn how this complex tool that I’m using works, I just want it to do everything I think it should be able to based on my lack of understanding, and do so in the way that makes sense to my ignorance. And I want it to do all that without learning why we do some steps (and then I’m going to complain about how little sense it all makes).”
That mentality is what allows predatory software companies to not only take advantage of their customers—by hiding shady practices outside of the GUI, and drawing attention to and manufacturing outrage about inconsequential “features” (like ads on the start menu)—but also exist in the first place. Pushing back against that “I shouldn’t have to learn the tool to use it” mentality is one of the ways we keep scam artists and spyware dealers out of Linux spaces.
Have to ask, do you gdb everything you run ? You think of big sofwares like office or things like that. There are GUI tool who replace the command line better. I am thinking about the configure display GUI specifically. X config was a pain… We are better of with the GUI and drag and dropping screen to place them.
We got to approach this nuanced though. Yes, a strong stance against all the enshittification (incl. dark patterns and all that) is absolutely necessary to preserve the good things most Linux distros have in common. For example once KDE e.V. and the Gnome Foundation have finished their work at the payment backend for Flatpak repos we absolutely need to bolster Flathub + a handful of others (to avoid centralization) so they become a default, and through that are able to enforce a strong “no bullshit” moderation as companies are trying to “capture the market”. This will be an inevitable shitshow as Linux-based OS’ become more popular.
Meanwhile we have to admit that not providing comprehensible and well integrated GUIs for everything - and that includes stuff like Bootloader settings, Systemd Services Management, sysctl configuration etc. - is a shortcoming that should be remedied in the future. On rare occasions even average users will have to open these things, and it’s way better if they do so through an environment they can understand and navigate. Anything else is just gatekeeping.
Linux should be accessible to everyone - that includes normies as well as those who may not be mentally able to understand or memorize CLI. This fear of enshittification is understandable in our current landscape, but it absolutely doesn’t help if it stifles development towards more user-friendliness. After all nobody argues to take away the CLI in any capacity, just to add another abstraction layer for those who either need or want it. Which, assumably, are most people.
ITT: Nerds that want mass Linux adoption but don’t want to deal with people who don’t share their interests and opinions
It’s always going to feel like this even if you never need a terminal for one simple reason:
When you google “how to XX on linux,” you’re going to find a stackexchange page where someone else asked, and someone answered with a terminal command instead of “Ok what DE are you using? Ok, so you’re gonna want to click these seventeen different menu options, and I don’t remember them without looking at them myself.” It’s just always going to be easier to send someone a string of ~30char to type than to try and figure out their GUI without screensharing.
Yep. Every Linux problem has the exact same solution: ctrl-c, ctrl-v.
Tbf, of course it is better to understand what those commands do too, but it always starts there! (And maybe a youtube tutorial or two for cd, ls, pwd, history, etc.)
