• rottingleaf@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    The point frankly was that I don’t see your point.

    Unix-like systems have Unix shell as the most basic and universal interface.

    If your point was that it’s a downside that it even exists, then you are basically saying that something you can’t use should be taken away from those who can. Not many allies.

    • SplashJackson@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      I didn’t say it should be taken away, did I?

      My first computer was all terminal, all the time. It was called the Commodore 64. After that, MS-DOS on an IBM PC (& compatible). I can do the typity-type. But most new adopters of tech aren’t using terminals or command lines… they’re using touch screens and voice commands.

      Microsoft and Apple adapted, making their graphical user interfaces more robust, user-friendly, and compatible with modern workflows… and in turn, those workflows evolved syncretically. The terminal, or command-line, is still accessible, but it’s no longer the primary method for installing or accessing programs.

      No Linux distribution that I know of has reached the same level of usability, and I think it’s because Linux is a platform built by nerds, specifically for nerds to use. I’m a massive nerd myself, but I can see how a lot of new users, who are used to being able to use their computer with just a mouse, would feel excluded and unable to invest the time to learn to adapt.

      There’s no need for bad faith replies; there is nothing attacking nor scathing in my words.

      Is my viewpoint unreasonable?