12 ms·

I don't like text UIs. They try to emulate GUI but do it poorly. You should either make a classic console program, that can be scripted, piped, etc., or a real

I don't like text UIs. They try to emulate GUI but do it poorly. You should either make a classic console program, that can be scripted, piped, etc., or a real GUI.

10000truths 5y ago
Same here. Never liked using console text editors, in particular. When editing remote files, I always prefer using something like sshfs/WinSCP + Sublime Text.
ComputerGuru 5y ago
Hard disagree. What’s wrong with htop? Do you propose installing a full desktop environment on your servers and then using X forwarding just to monitor live CPU usage? It’s just a live-refreshing ps. With colors to make it easier to grok at a glance. Then making it slightly interactive so you can click on column headers with the mouse to sort accordingly?
stjohnswarts 5y ago
Eh there is plenty room for all gray areas of tui. You are talking about CLI and not TUI, completely different world. TUI is great if you work remote and can present a lot of information quickly in such situations. Plus some people prefer them and that's all it really requires for there to be some awesome TUI programs. All you really have to do is ignore them if you don't like them.
veddox 5y ago
> They try to emulate GUI but do it poorly I dispute that point. Firstly, because TUIs and GUIs were developed pretty much in parallel, as far as I‘m aware. But secondly (and more importantly), because TUIs fill a different niche and follow a different philosophy to GUIs. TUIs are primarily intended for environments where GUIs are either not available (e.g. SSH), unnecessary (e.g. servers), or overkill (e.g. very old computers). In terms of design and UX philosophy, they are much more concentrated on keybased rather than mousebased interaction, and bring their own set of conventions that are markedly different from GUI design philosophy. So, while you are entitled not to like TUIs (they can be difficult to work with), calling them a bad emulation of GUIs really misses the point.
- badsectoracula 5y ago
  > TUIs are primarily intended for environments where GUIs are either not [...] or overkill (e.g. very old computers). You'd have to be using a very old computer considering Windows 3.0 worked even on an original IBM PC. Though granted, you needed at least a 386 for it to be usable. Chances are your GUI toolkit is too bloated, but that is the fault of the toolkit you chose, not GUIs themselves - use a more lightweight toolkit. > In terms of design and UX philosophy, they are much more concentrated on keybased rather than mousebased interaction This is up to the application, there is nothing that forbids GUIs to be fully keyboard controlled (in addition to mouse of course). > and bring their own set of conventions that are markedly different from GUI design philosophy. Pretty much every TUI either has its own set of conventions or mimics established GUIs or a mix of both, so not really.

I don't like text UIs. They try to emulate GUI but do it poorly. You should either make a classic console program, that can be scripted, piped, etc., or a real GUI.

10000truths 5y ago

Same here. Never liked using console text editors, in particular. When editing remote files, I always prefer using something like sshfs/WinSCP + Sublime Text.

ComputerGuru 5y ago

Hard disagree. What’s wrong with htop? Do you propose installing a full desktop environment on your servers and then using X forwarding just to monitor live CPU usage? It’s just a live-refreshing ps. With colors to make it easier to grok at a glance. Then making it slightly interactive so you can click on column headers with the mouse to sort accordingly?

stjohnswarts 5y ago

Eh there is plenty room for all gray areas of tui. You are talking about CLI and not TUI, completely different world. TUI is great if you work remote and can present a lot of information quickly in such situations. Plus some people prefer them and that's all it really requires for there to be some awesome TUI programs. All you really have to do is ignore them if you don't like them.

veddox 5y ago

> They try to emulate GUI but do it poorly I dispute that point. Firstly, because TUIs and GUIs were developed pretty much in parallel, as far as I‘m aware. But secondly (and more importantly), because TUIs fill a different niche and follow a different philosophy to GUIs. TUIs are primarily intended for environments where GUIs are either not available (e.g. SSH), unnecessary (e.g. servers), or overkill (e.g. very old computers). In terms of design and UX philosophy, they are much more concentrated on keybased rather than mousebased interaction, and bring their own set of conventions that are markedly different from GUI design philosophy. So, while you are entitled not to like TUIs (they can be difficult to work with), calling them a bad emulation of GUIs really misses the point.

badsectoracula 5y ago
> TUIs are primarily intended for environments where GUIs are either not [...] or overkill (e.g. very old computers). You'd have to be using a very old computer considering Windows 3.0 worked even on an original IBM PC. Though granted, you needed at least a 386 for it to be usable. Chances are your GUI toolkit is too bloated, but that is the fault of the toolkit you chose, not GUIs themselves - use a more lightweight toolkit. > In terms of design and UX philosophy, they are much more concentrated on keybased rather than mousebased interaction This is up to the application, there is nothing that forbids GUIs to be fully keyboard controlled (in addition to mouse of course). > and bring their own set of conventions that are markedly different from GUI design philosophy. Pretty much every TUI either has its own set of conventions or mimics established GUIs or a mix of both, so not really.