4 ms·

There are a lot of things that you can do in a terminal that you can't in an IDE. Terminal gives you way more flexibility. Try using a GUI for git and then the

There are a lot of things that you can do in a terminal that you can't in an IDE. Terminal gives you way more flexibility. Try using a GUI for git and then the terminal version. Can't be compared. The downside is it might not be as intuitive and might be slower than the GUI version for the most important things. I still disagree with the original poster, who judges someone by the OS they use instead of the code they write.

jameshart 12y ago
"Can't be compared" True. The terminal version can't give me a graphical view that displays the commit timeline for a file, color coded by contributor and weighted by commit size, with simple mouse-hover annotation to show me the commit message, and a single click to take me to the related diff, colored to visualize code age and authorship, with hyperlinks to related code files. (* features may not exist in any actual git client, I'm actually describing an SVN browser I once helped write that was never made available publicly) Anyway, the terminal version of git runs just fine on Windows, so... why not have both?
- farresito 12y ago
  > Anyway, the terminal version of git runs just fine on Windows, so... why not have both? That's exactly my point: that each of them offers different features and both are complementary :)