5 ms·

I find it brilliant, personally. Users of sysdig tend to be sysadmin or devops with a strong *nix background, so the CLI sounds like 'from the comfort of your c

by marklgr 10y ago

I find it brilliant, personally. Users of sysdig tend to be sysadmin or devops with a strong *nix background, so the CLI sounds like 'from the comfort of your command line" to them.

microcolonel 10y ago
I second the "From the comfort of your command line" feeling. I feel like many tools today are unnecessarily tied to a web browser, which makes for harsh context switching; and often worse usability. Sysdig is a killer product, and (crucial to me) is open source. I'm sure the cloud service is excellent as well.
- panic 10y ago
  Yeah, that's a good point. It would be neat to have a way to draw full GUIs in the terminal without having to context-switch.
  - shermanyo 10y ago
    There are several options here, ncurses being a popular choice. I found an example that creates a subwindow and moves it based on keyboard input: http://www.paulgriffiths.net/program/c/srcs/curwin1src.html http://www.paulgriffiths.net/program/c/srcs/curwin1src.html
    - panic 10y ago
      By full GUIs I mean something with a full-resolution, full-color framebuffer, not just character-mode stuff.
      - infinite8s 10y ago
        And that works remotely? So the X protocol?
        panic 10y ago
        Sure, that's one option. You could also implement something like NeWS where the graphics code runs locally.
      - vidarh 10y ago
        Most people would just use X or VNC today, but I agree having more graphic integration reliably available in the shell is interesting. Apart from various experimental support for new mechanisms in various terminal apps, there are two old formats that is supported reasonably widely: ReGIS [1] and Sixel [2] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ReGIS https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ReGIS [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sixel https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sixel
      - digi_owl 10y ago
        The issue there is standards. How do your program talk to the kernel and hardware such that all this gets drawn? Especially in a modern multitasking environment, where no single binary, outside of the kernel, has complete control of the hardware.
      - fnord123 10y ago
        We have full resolution full colour frame buffers. But instead of typing into them, we end up with grunt and poke interfaces. FWIW, Bloomberg Terminals might be something in line with what you want.
  - adrianratnapala 10y ago
    I think the world missed an opportunity around about the '90s. Instead of evolving, command lines stagnated and got sidelined by terrible GUIs that are only now evolving to get out of people's way. We should have developed command lines with graphics and hypertext. Thus you could do `ls` and double-click on one of the resulting files to open it. Browse the web with wget. Of course users don't want to learn lots of commands. But notice how Windows 7 onwards and most linux desktops have a "fuzzy search" that really is a kind of command line.
    - vidarh 10y ago
      There has been many attempts, but they've universally not gotten things "right enough" to gain much traction. E.g. Mozilla's XMLTerm [1] was one such experiment. [1] http://www.xml.com/pub/a/2000/06/07/xmlterm/index.html http://www.xml.com/pub/a/2000/06/07/xmlterm/index.html
    - digi_owl 10y ago
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archy Anyways, if i am to speculate then GUI took over because of discoverability and ease of translation. A CLI is damn hard to translate. With a GUI you change the labels, and thats it. And finding something in a menu or similar was, before programs grew into massive behemoths, simpler than trying to guess what command, for most outside the english speaking world, named in a foreign language, to give to get something done.

by marklgr 10y ago

I find it brilliant, personally. Users of sysdig tend to be sysadmin or devops with a strong *nix background, so the CLI sounds like 'from the comfort of your command line" to them.

microcolonel 10y ago

I second the "From the comfort of your command line" feeling. I feel like many tools today are unnecessarily tied to a web browser, which makes for harsh context switching; and often worse usability. Sysdig is a killer product, and (crucial to me) is open source. I'm sure the cloud service is excellent as well.

panic 10y ago
Yeah, that's a good point. It would be neat to have a way to draw full GUIs in the terminal without having to context-switch.
- shermanyo 10y ago
  There are several options here, ncurses being a popular choice. I found an example that creates a subwindow and moves it based on keyboard input: http://www.paulgriffiths.net/program/c/srcs/curwin1src.html http://www.paulgriffiths.net/program/c/srcs/curwin1src.html
  - panic 10y ago
    By full GUIs I mean something with a full-resolution, full-color framebuffer, not just character-mode stuff.
    - infinite8s 10y ago
      And that works remotely? So the X protocol?
      - panic 10y ago
        Sure, that's one option. You could also implement something like NeWS where the graphics code runs locally.
    - vidarh 10y ago
      Most people would just use X or VNC today, but I agree having more graphic integration reliably available in the shell is interesting. Apart from various experimental support for new mechanisms in various terminal apps, there are two old formats that is supported reasonably widely: ReGIS [1] and Sixel [2] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ReGIS https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ReGIS [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sixel https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sixel
    - digi_owl 10y ago
      The issue there is standards. How do your program talk to the kernel and hardware such that all this gets drawn? Especially in a modern multitasking environment, where no single binary, outside of the kernel, has complete control of the hardware.
    - fnord123 10y ago
      We have full resolution full colour frame buffers. But instead of typing into them, we end up with grunt and poke interfaces. FWIW, Bloomberg Terminals might be something in line with what you want.
- adrianratnapala 10y ago
  I think the world missed an opportunity around about the '90s. Instead of evolving, command lines stagnated and got sidelined by terrible GUIs that are only now evolving to get out of people's way. We should have developed command lines with graphics and hypertext. Thus you could do `ls` and double-click on one of the resulting files to open it. Browse the web with wget. Of course users don't want to learn lots of commands. But notice how Windows 7 onwards and most linux desktops have a "fuzzy search" that really is a kind of command line.
  - vidarh 10y ago
    There has been many attempts, but they've universally not gotten things "right enough" to gain much traction. E.g. Mozilla's XMLTerm [1] was one such experiment. [1] http://www.xml.com/pub/a/2000/06/07/xmlterm/index.html http://www.xml.com/pub/a/2000/06/07/xmlterm/index.html
  - digi_owl 10y ago
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archy Anyways, if i am to speculate then GUI took over because of discoverability and ease of translation. A CLI is damn hard to translate. With a GUI you change the labels, and thats it. And finding something in a menu or similar was, before programs grew into massive behemoths, simpler than trying to guess what command, for most outside the english speaking world, named in a foreign language, to give to get something done.