On Tue, 2 Jan 2018 15:07:19 -0500, "Mayayana"
wrote:

"Gene Wirchenko" wrote

| I'll have to read the vast
| command line switch docs to figure that out.
|
| It can easily be the same way with a GUI system. Where did the
| GUI program stick the file?

No, that's one of the points of GUI. If it's designed
intuitively and follows standards then most of it is
self-explanatory. I download a video in Firefox by
clicking an icon. There's nothing to read. For console
I need to study the various incantations and make sure
I get the spaces/switches right. youtube-dl has *a lot*
of them.

When I download in Firefox, I always specify the destination.
Otherwise, I do *NOT* know where it puts it.

GUI can be just as obtuse as CUI.

Even just a slight wrapper, like an HTA or VBScript,
could make the whole thing a lot easier. Copy the
Firefox URL, double-click a script, paste the URL in and
click, having already pre-coded all the required command
line mess. (If I had any use for youtube-dl that's what
I'd do before I started using it.)

| If I am creating a program, I will be working on implementing the
| algorithm first. If I can get that going, then I work on the user
| interface. If I can not get the basic program going, then the user
| interface is irrelevant.

Obviously. If your code doesn't work then
neither command line nor UI will help.

But if you have something worth
putting together then part of the job is to
plan the best way to present it. It's not
easy making a really good UI design that's
intuitive. But it makes a big difference if one
uses the software often. Console is OK for
a one-time operation. That's what it's for.
But if you want to open files 200 times you
want a menu in a GUI. Why be limited to
1980 technology? If you're really going
to do the job right the GUI should accomodate
drag/drop, so I can just drag a file into the
window -- or onto a script -- and not have
to type a path.

Ah, but I can and do create batch files to automate a lot of
that. I have not seen a good system for that for GUI.

Unfortunately, the OSS people are often
hardcore geeks who code well but don't relate
well to humans. Many of them take pride in
not writing docs, as though that were a job
for some kind of cleanup lackeys who they
expect to be following behind them. And many
like the obstacle of command line. They don't
want unappreciative civilians easily enjoying
their work. They want to share it with peers --
incantation-typing geeks in dark cellars who
will appreciate it.
Linux, GIMP, 7-Zip and so many more programs
are typical examples: The stability is there but
not the usability.

Windows.

| There is a lot of promotion of how difficult it is to use the
| command line. Consequently, some people never look.

Why would anyone look if they don't have to?

I should have gone further. They do not look, *AND* they repeat
the statement that command line is so difficult.

What typical task on a modern computer is better
done with command line? Especially for someone
who's not used to it? Explorer wasn't invented
for kicks. It was invented because typing all those
lines is a pain in the neck. BAT and script files
exist for the same reason: If you have to do it
more than once or twice it's worth automating.

Yup.

I'll use command line if
I have to. The last time I can remember actually
needing it was when I moved XP to a dual-core CPU
from single core and had to swap out hal.dll. A one-
time job. A rare task. A convoluted command string.
But that was OK because it's one-time. I don't
expect Microsoft to make a hal.dll swapout UI
program. But a program for downloading videos,
maybe daily? Yes, I expect a UI.

Command line *is* a UI. There are cases where it is better.
There are cases where GUI is better. There are cases where it does
not matter much.

I use both according to circumstances. Typically, I use a
command line for programmer-type stuff and GUI for end-user-type
stuff, but the demarcation is not absolute.

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko