2 ms·
This is really "in addition to total commander" as far as I'm concerned. Far is great on the CLI, but when you're not working with terminals you generally want
by TheRealPomax 4y ago
This is really "in addition to total commander" as far as I'm concerned. Far is great on the CLI, but when you're not working with terminals you generally want a normal looking application. Both Far and TC are basically "two sides of the same coin", you can use either one, but using both in their respective environments makes life even better.
- BeetleB 4y ago> Far is great on the CLI, but when you're _not_ working in the CLI you want a normal looking application. I have Far as an icon on my desktop/shortcuts bar. I just click it and it runs. When I quit it (F10), the window goes away. Most people will not even realize it's a CLI program. What exactly would be the problem using it this way?
- TheRealPomax 4y agoI never said there was a problem, I said that having _both_ vastly increases usability. If you're the kind of person who looks at a DOS era UI and goes "this is fine, what's the problem?" then there isn't one for you. But if you're the kind of person who wants to see terminal graphics when they're doing terminal work, and a normal user interface that follows the OS conventions that every other user interface uses as well when you're doing "normal" work, then having both installed so you can run each in the context they make sense in vastly improves your computerin' life. (And if you're the kind of person who rarely has to use the terminal (or only ever use the terminal inside a code editor, IDE, or other application that follows OS UI conventions) or literally never uses a terminal, then something that looks like a 1980's DOS application is almost certainly going to be a hard nope)