Seriously - Linux needs a standardized config schema spec. Something that programs should provide which an application can read and provide a frontend interface for the users to adjust config files.
This particular program would work great in combination with old school German/Dutch toilets with the poop shelf, take a pic after the deed and let the program tell you how you need to adjust your diet.
The premise is solid: unify config so it’s standardized and machine parse-able for better integrations like an easier-to-build UI/UX. It could even have ramifications for cloud-init and older IaC tech like Puppet.
The problem is Linux itself. Or rather, the subsystems that are cobbled together to make Linux a viable OS. You’re not going to get all the different projects to pivot to a common config scheme, so this YAML standard would need a backend to convert to/from whatever each little deamon and driver requires. This creates a few secondary problems like community backlash (see systemd), and having multiple places where config data must be actively synchronized.
I think the current crop of GUI config systems are aleady well down the most pragmatic path: each config panel touches one or more standard config files, wherever they are, and however they are structured. It’s not pretty under the hood, and it’s complicated, but it works. These tools just need a lot more polish on the frontend.
They could still use whatever config format they wanted - this would just be for providing their config schema. It also doesn’t need to be YAML, that’s just the easiest one for me to type on my phone. In fact, I think most schema validation programs rely on JSON as it is.
I also don’t think programs should be required to provide it. Many core programs and kernel modules would likely take years if they ever were able to add it just to avoid the risk of mistakes causing any major issues, especially if they haven’t needed an update in years. There are also many config files that use their own nonstandardized schema. A possibility is that they could be allowed to provide a CLI tool which could update the config or they could just ignore it entirely.
But creating a common schema for… well, the config schema would make it easier for systems to provide a frontend interface for updating your configs.
The user is never be expected to type a command into a terminal.
Nope! Absolutely not. This is where Windows 95 fucked us all over. Prior to 95, windows was an application executed from a DOS prompt. Users may not have known many commands, but they learned that commands could be given.
Windows 95 tried to convince us that a GUI developer knew better than the user everything the user wanted to be able to do with that computer. It did make simple use easier, but the way it did it was by hiding the average user away from any simple ability to automate. It took away virtually all command line utilities that could be scripted to run themselves, and replaced them with GUI-driven applications that required the human’s time and attention, repeatedly and monotonously sorting through graphical menus and prompts to achieve a task that the computer could easily be “trained” to do itself. It did it by dumbing down the user, reducing their expectations to the few idea the GUI allowed them to express.
GUIs are Fisher-Price toys. They are the bright and shiny, but functionally crippled. There is no need for a distro that deliberately impairs the user in the way that you describe.
What is your goal? Are you content with Linux being niche?
If not, what group do you think this appeals to?
The casual device user continues to ignore Windows desktops and use their phone let alone Linux at this point.
The normie desktop user who just wants a internet browser and basic office software can easily be won over to Linux Mint. You advocating everything be CLI based will kill that.
The casual desktop enthusiast & PC gamer will get irritated and impatient and go back to comfy Windows. They mostly just want their games to run smoothly and maybe look pretty. Maybe install an application that does something moderately technical for them with tweaks here and there.
You already have the hardcore techy users. They don’t need to be converted.
In my opinion, Linux and its various distro’s main goal ought to be to undermine for-profit OS. Not to turn everyone into computer techs. The latter is a pipe dream anyway.
In my opinion, Linux and its various distro’s main goal ought to be to undermine for-profit OS. Not to turn everyone into computer techs.
Turning everyone into “computer techs” is how we undermine for-profit OS. The command line is a spoon. In the hand of a toddler, it goes flying across the room, along with the mashed potatoes it held. Microsoft’s answer to that flying spoon is to teach the kid that they can never touch the spoon; they must let mommy do it for them (and here is “mommy’s” bill for that “service”).
Microsoft teaches that it is a “pipe dream” for the average person to ever have sufficient mastery over the spoon to be able to feed themselves. They taught us that spoons are scary and dangerous.
Linux keeps putting that spoon on her tray, and encouraging her to use it.
My “goal” has less to do with bringing Linux to the masses and more with bringing the masses to Linux. The “pipe dream” argument you presented should not be ported in. The “normie” should be taught from a very young age that the command line isn’t “unfriendly”, but wildly powerful, and well within their capacity to wield.
Microsoft is not the reason I believe its a pipedream to turn people into computer techs. Its a cold hard reality.
Even particularly smart people have to want to be computer techs. I work with teachers, genuinely smart people, who have zero desire or motivation to learn computer use outside how it can help them teach in a fairly “if its not broke don’t fix it” mentality. They aren’t incurious but they have limited time and resources and they use such elsewhere. My attempts to get them to even try Linux Mint has thus far failed, the idea that I could get them to learn CLI is absurd.
Don’t get me wrong, I believe even dim wits could learn to be computer techs and use a command line, but that requires them to want that. Most people do not intrinsically desire that.
The only things that people “intrinsically” want are food and fornication. Everything else, they have been taught and trained. The training they have received from Microsoft domination has been “don’t learn how to use a computer”.
That training is something to despise and reject, not incorporate into Linux.
The only things that people “intrinsically” want are food and fornication. Everything else, they have been taught and trained.
EVERYTHING? I enjoy doing things that aren’t eating and sex on a intrinsic level that I was never trained to enjoy. I just… wanted to do those things. A lot of things are intrinsically fun that are not eating and sex.
The training they have received from Microsoft domination has been “don’t learn how to use a computer”.
Why didn’t people adopt personal computers en masse before Windows came to be then? After Windows 3.0, personal ownership of computers more than doubled over the course of 5-6 years and then continued to balloon, speeding up adoption well beyond the previous decade.
Look, I’m not a fan of Microsoft either but this is conspiracism.
EVERYTHING? I enjoy doing things that aren’t eating and sex on a intrinsic level that I was never trained to enjoy.
No, not “intrinsically”, you don’t. Food, fuck, sleep, that’s about it. You likely enjoy other things as well, but not intrinsically. I enjoy Sudoku, but that is something I learned. There is no “enjoy sudoko” element within me that I did not put there myself.
Why didn’t people adopt personal computers en masse before Windows came to be then?
They did. Everyone I knew back in the Windows 3.1 days already had computers. Most of those people didn’t have Windows, and used standalone applications. The increase in ownership came when hardware prices finally fell enough for them to be affordable. Windows development was a result of that uptick, not the cause.
I enjoy Sudoku, but that is something I learned. There is no “enjoy sudoko” element within me that I did not put there myself.
You didn’t enjoy learning Sudoku in the first place? Did you have to force yourself? Did someone teach you how to enjoy sodoku after you learned how to actually play?
Maybe there isn’t a specific Sudoku drive in human beings but that’s not what intrinsically means. There is an intrinsic drive to follow your natural intellectual and physical interests that do not have to be taught. They are variable depending on the person’s personal inclinations, but you are not “trained” to enjoy something. Even as seemingly fundamental like reading. You might have to learn how to read first, but that’s not being “trained to enjoy” reading. Whether you enjoy it depends on the type of person you are.
Like, if I saw someone doing something that looks fun or interesting, I’d want to participate intrinsically.
If someone offered me money to participate I would be extrinsically motivated.
They did. Everyone I knew back in the Windows 3.1 days already had computers. Most of those people didn’t have Windows, and used standalone applications. The increase in ownership came when hardware prices finally fell enough for them to be affordable. Windows development was a result of that uptick, not the cause.
I mean, maybe, price is obviously a compelling aspect here. Its hard to separate correlation and causation, though I’ll hand you that price was probably more compelling.
That said, the people you knew who already owned computers were part of a minority, only about 15% of American households had a computer when Windows 3.1 released.
Do you also think that anyone that wants a car should be a mechanic? Anyone that wants a house should be a builder? Anyone that wants to have electricity should be a electrician? Anyone that wants to listen to music should be a musician? Anyone that wants to eat they should learn how to farm? Anyone that wants a drug should be a pharmacist?
People put their time and effort in different things, you might’ve learned how to program and became tech literate, but that doesn’t mean everyone else wants or should do the same.
Sure life would be easier if everyone was an expert in every field, but that’s a clearly ridiculous proposition.
Maybe realize the sheer privilege that is wanting everyone to be a “computer tech” just because you are one yourself. Maybe realize that the only reason you can afford to be a “computer tech” is because someone else is a “hardware tech” or a “architecture tech” or a “electricity tech” or whatever else, and those people would likely also want you to be a “tech” in their field so they don’t need to make things that “just work” for non-“tech” people.
Do you also think that anyone that wants a car should be a mechanic?
I reject the premise.
I think that anyone who wants to be a driver should be able to understand that the brake pedal squeezes the pads against the rotor.
I don’t think that everyone who can identify a brake rotor is a mechanic.
Anyone that wants a drug should be a pharmacist?
I think that anyone who wants any sort of medicine should have enough medical, mathematical, and statistical knowledge to understand that vaccines don’t cause autism. I don’t think that everyone with such knowledge is a pharmacist, mathematician, or statistician.
The idea that the command line is “unfriendly” and that decelopers should hide it away is, in my opinion, the computer equivalent of the antivax movement.
People see computers the same way they see clothes, it’s a tool for a job. Some people know a lot about them and some people make their living making or modifying them. But most people just want it to be usable.
In the same vein, saying people should be able to use the terminal to use a computer is like saying that people should be able to sew to wear clothes.
Much like how people don’t want to pick up a needle to patch a hole in their clothes, they don’t want to mess with the terminal to troubleshoot any errors. People expect things to “just work” and that’s not an unreasonable expectation.
It’s easy for you to say that everyone should just know how to use the terminal, but it’s also easy for someone that sews to say that everyone should know how to use a sewing machine; or for someone that likes hardware to say everyone should be able to open their computers and swap components; or for someone that how to drive to say that everyone should know too; or for someone that diets a lot to say that everyone should know how to count calories; etc. etc. etc.
Point is that people learn different things, not everyone has the same interests or specialties. And just because they don’t share specialties, doesn’t mean they should be shut out of important or useful tools.
P.S.: the antivax movement happens because of lack of trust in medical institutions. People should be able to trust qualified doctors to inform them and recommend proper procedures, people shouldn’t need to be “medicine savvy” enough to know what each drug or procedure does before they seek treatment. If anything, this need for “medicine savviness” is what pushes people into “doing their own research” and becoming antivax.
they don’t want to mess with the terminal to troubleshoot any errors.
I reject your premise that the purpose of the terminal is to troubleshoot errors. That is part of the widespread misconception I am talking about.
The terminal is simply for using the computer. With all the command line utilities available, and their widespread interoperability, the terminal should be one of the first tools a user looks for.
A GUI is a hammer. The CLI is the Snap-On tool truck.
I understand where you’re coming from, but this may simply be a difference in goals.
If your goal is that people become more computer-literate, then yes, perhaps we should use the GUI less. People who are already Linux users aren’t going to have that big of an issue using apt instead of a GUI software manager.
If your goal is that more people use Linux, then you need to have GUI support. If anything else, it eases them in so that they’re not drinking from the firehose all at once.
My litmus test would be “could I feasibly teach my grandparents how to use this?” Which I think is true of Linux Mint (yes, you need terminal for good driver management, but it’s not like my grandparents do that via Windows GUI)
Also, I’m not really aware of any Linux distros that remove command line utilities - mostly, they just have the same thing in both GUI and commands
indeed 30 years ago it might have made sense.
But it’s 2025 now users want the less pain in the neck usage of a os.
if my whole family is to use a Linux environement thet moment they will see a consol they will run away.
if my whole family is to use a Linux environement thet moment they will see a consol they will run away.
Then they will never script anything. They will never automate a task themselves. They will only ever operate a computer manually, interactively, rather than programmatically.
Windows pushed users to remain toddlers their entire lives. They charge us for the privilege, so they want to keep spoon feeding us for our entire lives. When we see a spoon anywhere but in their hands, they want us to throw it across the room rather than pick it up and try to use it.
Microsoft wants your family to run away screaming, rather than asking what that console is and what it can do.
The objective of Linux is to put the spoon on the tray of your toddler’s high chair. Linux encourages her to pick it up, poke it at her food, and keep encouraging her to learn, to develop and build on her skills, until she is asking for the fork, the knife.
Then they will never script anything. They will never automate a task themselves. They will only ever operate a computer manually, interactively, rather than programmatically.
Here’s the thing.
Most people don’t care about automation. They just don’t.
The objective of Linux is to put the spoon on the tray of your toddler’s high chair. Linux encourages her to pick it up, poke it at her food, and keep encouraging her to learn, to develop and build on her skills, until she is asking for the fork, the knife.
And your still refusing the point. People don’t want a knife and a fork. You can’t make them want it. They want something they can intuitively understand. Because to most people, tech is a basic tool to get another job done.
Most people only need a basic hammer, screwdriver, etc…
That’s all they need to do what they need day to day to get other things done.
Machinists need more complicated tools with tons of settings, complicated setup and saftey to know. So they spend the time learning. But you don’t need a wood shop to hang a picture frame.
This is before we even talk about accessibility. That means much more than large fonts or screen readers. It’s also about the fact humans exist on distribution curves in every possible way. For some people, it will just never make sense. No matter what you do. Because it’s just not how their brains work. In the same way mine can’t do languages very well. It just doesn’t click for me. And deep dives into computers wont click for some. Should they never learn to use a computer? Or can they learn basic enough functions from good GUIs to get by.
It’s even fine to say linux isn’t meant for that. But if you want everyone to get away from macOS and Windows, you need a viable alternative for everyone
Most people don’t care about automation. They just don’t.
Microsoft would certainly have us believe that. Decades of operant conditioning by Microsoft and Apple have given us that attitude.
Most people certainly do want automation; they don’t know how to automate. There was a meme floating around recently about a temp who replaced hours and hours of tedious, daily transcription between two applications with ctrl-c, ctrl-v.
We have all seen plenty of examples like this, with users doing excessive manual labor out of simple ignorance of absurdly simple automation.
And your still refusing the point.
The point arises from the very attitude I am challenging, so yes, I am refusing the point. We should not be encouraging or supporting the behaviors you describe, but should instead be promoting the tools that allow the average user to identify menial tasks and relegate them to the machine.
Windows doesn’t even cover everything you just said. The number of times Windows 10 broke my Bluetooth devices and I had to much around in registry to remove the device profile just to try to repair the device, is part of the reason I switched to Linux in the first place.
Yes, many distros need a little refining and smoothing for the general public, but only because people are so used to dealing with bullshit troubleshooting on Windows that they don’t see it as bullshit anymore.
That’s a low bar, but importantly they’re still correct that technically Windows looks like it can handle those things as far as a regular consumer can see. Windows is unholy trash, but it at least doesn’t tell people who can’t even navigate their basic file explorer that they are expected to use scary terminal commands they likely found on a forum or third-party website.
Personally I think a little more tinkering spirit would do the whole world good, not just with computers, but reality is the way that it is for the moment(things can change, fingers crossed).
but at least people who can’t even navigate their basic file explorer that they are expected to use scary terminal commands.
This! I work in IT, in fact, I’m the director of both the IT and software teams at my company and I am constantly teaching my new techs and reminding my existing techs that they need to remember just how little the “average” person knows about computers, and how much more that is than what they’d actually care to learn.
99% of people don’t care about computers, or how to make things “more efficient”, or anything else. They just care about the easiest way to do something. And like it or not, the easiest way for the vast majority of people is through a GUI.
And that’s even before you get to the security problems! I am constantly trying to prevent users from going to FreeNuclearCodes.com or sending passwords and social security numbers to [email protected] (actual email address I had to block last week)
You were absolutely right about everything up until your very last sentence.
We need a distro that comes with GUIs for everything indeed, but shipping without a terminal would be both a bad idea and would cause the distro maintainer to go up in flames immediately.
Every KDE distro can do all of these except whatever adjusting kernel parameters means? I don’t know how to do any of this in the command and I’ve been using Linux for 8 years.
I’ve been a happy daily linux user for over 20 years. No need to wait for “linux to succeed” whatever that means. It has gotten better and more advanced every year since I first switched.
I dont understand, why do we want Linux to go mainstream? Eveyone constantly says it yet nobody has an answer. In order to become mainstream it would need to be so dumbed down that people like me would stop using it.
A true mainstream Linux distro would need guidelines like this:
This especially includes:
The only distro that comes close to this is Linux Mint, but not even Mint covers everything I just mentioned.
If we want Linux to succeed, there needs to be at least one distro that confidently ships without a terminal.
Been using fedora on a laptop for a year with no command line intervention.
I don’t mind the command line, but it has been uneccesary.
Seriously - Linux needs a standardized config schema spec. Something that programs should provide which an application can read and provide a frontend interface for the users to adjust config files.
Could be something like:
schema_version: 1.0 application: name: Poo Analyzer icon_path: /etc/pooanalyzer/images/icon.png description: Analyzes photos of poo schema: - config_file: path: /etc/pooanalyzer/conf/poo.conf conf_type: ini configs: - field: poo_directory type: dir_path name: Poo Image Directory description: Directory of Poo Images icon_path: /etc/pooanalyzer/images/poo.png - field: poo_type type: list name: Poo Types description: Types of Poo to Analyze values: - dog - cat - human - brown bear icon_path: /etc/pooanalyzer/images/animal.png ...Any distro could then create any frontend they’d like to manage this - the user could even install their own.
This particular program would work great in combination with old school German/Dutch toilets with the poop shelf, take a pic after the deed and let the program tell you how you need to adjust your diet.
Ever heard of xdg?
I agree and disagree.
The premise is solid: unify config so it’s standardized and machine parse-able for better integrations like an easier-to-build UI/UX. It could even have ramifications for cloud-init and older IaC tech like Puppet.
The problem is Linux itself. Or rather, the subsystems that are cobbled together to make Linux a viable OS. You’re not going to get all the different projects to pivot to a common config scheme, so this YAML standard would need a backend to convert to/from whatever each little deamon and driver requires. This creates a few secondary problems like community backlash (see systemd), and having multiple places where config data must be actively synchronized.
I think the current crop of GUI config systems are aleady well down the most pragmatic path: each config panel touches one or more standard config files, wherever they are, and however they are structured. It’s not pretty under the hood, and it’s complicated, but it works. These tools just need a lot more polish on the frontend.
They could still use whatever config format they wanted - this would just be for providing their config schema. It also doesn’t need to be YAML, that’s just the easiest one for me to type on my phone. In fact, I think most schema validation programs rely on JSON as it is.
I also don’t think programs should be required to provide it. Many core programs and kernel modules would likely take years if they ever were able to add it just to avoid the risk of mistakes causing any major issues, especially if they haven’t needed an update in years. There are also many config files that use their own nonstandardized schema. A possibility is that they could be allowed to provide a CLI tool which could update the config or they could just ignore it entirely.
But creating a common schema for… well, the config schema would make it easier for systems to provide a frontend interface for updating your configs.
The reason I had no problem whatsoever editing config files is because I’d been doing it for decades already in Windows with .ini files.
And not needing a terminal is different than not having access to one. Windows has a terminal.
I think it even ships with 3(?) terminals for some reason now for some reason lol
No pc OS available meets your requirements for this lol, not linux, windowns or crapple osx
Sure would be nice if linux was the first available though.
Nope! Absolutely not. This is where Windows 95 fucked us all over. Prior to 95, windows was an application executed from a DOS prompt. Users may not have known many commands, but they learned that commands could be given.
Windows 95 tried to convince us that a GUI developer knew better than the user everything the user wanted to be able to do with that computer. It did make simple use easier, but the way it did it was by hiding the average user away from any simple ability to automate. It took away virtually all command line utilities that could be scripted to run themselves, and replaced them with GUI-driven applications that required the human’s time and attention, repeatedly and monotonously sorting through graphical menus and prompts to achieve a task that the computer could easily be “trained” to do itself. It did it by dumbing down the user, reducing their expectations to the few idea the GUI allowed them to express.
GUIs are Fisher-Price toys. They are the bright and shiny, but functionally crippled. There is no need for a distro that deliberately impairs the user in the way that you describe.
What is your goal? Are you content with Linux being niche?
If not, what group do you think this appeals to?
The casual device user continues to ignore Windows desktops and use their phone let alone Linux at this point.
The normie desktop user who just wants a internet browser and basic office software can easily be won over to Linux Mint. You advocating everything be CLI based will kill that.
The casual desktop enthusiast & PC gamer will get irritated and impatient and go back to comfy Windows. They mostly just want their games to run smoothly and maybe look pretty. Maybe install an application that does something moderately technical for them with tweaks here and there.
You already have the hardcore techy users. They don’t need to be converted.
In my opinion, Linux and its various distro’s main goal ought to be to undermine for-profit OS. Not to turn everyone into computer techs. The latter is a pipe dream anyway.
Turning everyone into “computer techs” is how we undermine for-profit OS. The command line is a spoon. In the hand of a toddler, it goes flying across the room, along with the mashed potatoes it held. Microsoft’s answer to that flying spoon is to teach the kid that they can never touch the spoon; they must let mommy do it for them (and here is “mommy’s” bill for that “service”).
Microsoft teaches that it is a “pipe dream” for the average person to ever have sufficient mastery over the spoon to be able to feed themselves. They taught us that spoons are scary and dangerous.
Linux keeps putting that spoon on her tray, and encouraging her to use it.
My “goal” has less to do with bringing Linux to the masses and more with bringing the masses to Linux. The “pipe dream” argument you presented should not be ported in. The “normie” should be taught from a very young age that the command line isn’t “unfriendly”, but wildly powerful, and well within their capacity to wield.
Microsoft is not the reason I believe its a pipedream to turn people into computer techs. Its a cold hard reality.
Even particularly smart people have to want to be computer techs. I work with teachers, genuinely smart people, who have zero desire or motivation to learn computer use outside how it can help them teach in a fairly “if its not broke don’t fix it” mentality. They aren’t incurious but they have limited time and resources and they use such elsewhere. My attempts to get them to even try Linux Mint has thus far failed, the idea that I could get them to learn CLI is absurd.
Don’t get me wrong, I believe even dim wits could learn to be computer techs and use a command line, but that requires them to want that. Most people do not intrinsically desire that.
The only things that people “intrinsically” want are food and fornication. Everything else, they have been taught and trained. The training they have received from Microsoft domination has been “don’t learn how to use a computer”.
That training is something to despise and reject, not incorporate into Linux.
EVERYTHING? I enjoy doing things that aren’t eating and sex on a intrinsic level that I was never trained to enjoy. I just… wanted to do those things. A lot of things are intrinsically fun that are not eating and sex.
Why didn’t people adopt personal computers en masse before Windows came to be then? After Windows 3.0, personal ownership of computers more than doubled over the course of 5-6 years and then continued to balloon, speeding up adoption well beyond the previous decade.
Look, I’m not a fan of Microsoft either but this is conspiracism.
No, not “intrinsically”, you don’t. Food, fuck, sleep, that’s about it. You likely enjoy other things as well, but not intrinsically. I enjoy Sudoku, but that is something I learned. There is no “enjoy sudoko” element within me that I did not put there myself.
They did. Everyone I knew back in the Windows 3.1 days already had computers. Most of those people didn’t have Windows, and used standalone applications. The increase in ownership came when hardware prices finally fell enough for them to be affordable. Windows development was a result of that uptick, not the cause.
You didn’t enjoy learning Sudoku in the first place? Did you have to force yourself? Did someone teach you how to enjoy sodoku after you learned how to actually play?
Maybe there isn’t a specific Sudoku drive in human beings but that’s not what intrinsically means. There is an intrinsic drive to follow your natural intellectual and physical interests that do not have to be taught. They are variable depending on the person’s personal inclinations, but you are not “trained” to enjoy something. Even as seemingly fundamental like reading. You might have to learn how to read first, but that’s not being “trained to enjoy” reading. Whether you enjoy it depends on the type of person you are.
Like, if I saw someone doing something that looks fun or interesting, I’d want to participate intrinsically.
If someone offered me money to participate I would be extrinsically motivated.
I mean, maybe, price is obviously a compelling aspect here. Its hard to separate correlation and causation, though I’ll hand you that price was probably more compelling.
That said, the people you knew who already owned computers were part of a minority, only about 15% of American households had a computer when Windows 3.1 released.
Do you also think that anyone that wants a car should be a mechanic? Anyone that wants a house should be a builder? Anyone that wants to have electricity should be a electrician? Anyone that wants to listen to music should be a musician? Anyone that wants to eat they should learn how to farm? Anyone that wants a drug should be a pharmacist?
People put their time and effort in different things, you might’ve learned how to program and became tech literate, but that doesn’t mean everyone else wants or should do the same.
Sure life would be easier if everyone was an expert in every field, but that’s a clearly ridiculous proposition.
Maybe realize the sheer privilege that is wanting everyone to be a “computer tech” just because you are one yourself. Maybe realize that the only reason you can afford to be a “computer tech” is because someone else is a “hardware tech” or a “architecture tech” or a “electricity tech” or whatever else, and those people would likely also want you to be a “tech” in their field so they don’t need to make things that “just work” for non-“tech” people.
I reject the premise.
I think that anyone who wants to be a driver should be able to understand that the brake pedal squeezes the pads against the rotor.
I don’t think that everyone who can identify a brake rotor is a mechanic.
I think that anyone who wants any sort of medicine should have enough medical, mathematical, and statistical knowledge to understand that vaccines don’t cause autism. I don’t think that everyone with such knowledge is a pharmacist, mathematician, or statistician.
The idea that the command line is “unfriendly” and that decelopers should hide it away is, in my opinion, the computer equivalent of the antivax movement.
Here is a simpler one:
People see computers the same way they see clothes, it’s a tool for a job. Some people know a lot about them and some people make their living making or modifying them. But most people just want it to be usable.
In the same vein, saying people should be able to use the terminal to use a computer is like saying that people should be able to sew to wear clothes.
Much like how people don’t want to pick up a needle to patch a hole in their clothes, they don’t want to mess with the terminal to troubleshoot any errors. People expect things to “just work” and that’s not an unreasonable expectation.
It’s easy for you to say that everyone should just know how to use the terminal, but it’s also easy for someone that sews to say that everyone should know how to use a sewing machine; or for someone that likes hardware to say everyone should be able to open their computers and swap components; or for someone that how to drive to say that everyone should know too; or for someone that diets a lot to say that everyone should know how to count calories; etc. etc. etc.
Point is that people learn different things, not everyone has the same interests or specialties. And just because they don’t share specialties, doesn’t mean they should be shut out of important or useful tools.
P.S.: the antivax movement happens because of lack of trust in medical institutions. People should be able to trust qualified doctors to inform them and recommend proper procedures, people shouldn’t need to be “medicine savvy” enough to know what each drug or procedure does before they seek treatment. If anything, this need for “medicine savviness” is what pushes people into “doing their own research” and becoming antivax.
I reject your premise that the purpose of the terminal is to troubleshoot errors. That is part of the widespread misconception I am talking about.
The terminal is simply for using the computer. With all the command line utilities available, and their widespread interoperability, the terminal should be one of the first tools a user looks for.
A GUI is a hammer. The CLI is the Snap-On tool truck.
That was an example not a premise. But whatever. I give up.
I understand where you’re coming from, but this may simply be a difference in goals.
If your goal is that people become more computer-literate, then yes, perhaps we should use the GUI less. People who are already Linux users aren’t going to have that big of an issue using apt instead of a GUI software manager.
If your goal is that more people use Linux, then you need to have GUI support. If anything else, it eases them in so that they’re not drinking from the firehose all at once.
My litmus test would be “could I feasibly teach my grandparents how to use this?” Which I think is true of Linux Mint (yes, you need terminal for good driver management, but it’s not like my grandparents do that via Windows GUI)
Also, I’m not really aware of any Linux distros that remove command line utilities - mostly, they just have the same thing in both GUI and commands
indeed 30 years ago it might have made sense. But it’s 2025 now users want the less pain in the neck usage of a os. if my whole family is to use a Linux environement thet moment they will see a consol they will run away.
Then they will never script anything. They will never automate a task themselves. They will only ever operate a computer manually, interactively, rather than programmatically.
Windows pushed users to remain toddlers their entire lives. They charge us for the privilege, so they want to keep spoon feeding us for our entire lives. When we see a spoon anywhere but in their hands, they want us to throw it across the room rather than pick it up and try to use it.
Microsoft wants your family to run away screaming, rather than asking what that console is and what it can do.
The objective of Linux is to put the spoon on the tray of your toddler’s high chair. Linux encourages her to pick it up, poke it at her food, and keep encouraging her to learn, to develop and build on her skills, until she is asking for the fork, the knife.
Here’s the thing.
Most people don’t care about automation. They just don’t.
And your still refusing the point. People don’t want a knife and a fork. You can’t make them want it. They want something they can intuitively understand. Because to most people, tech is a basic tool to get another job done.
Most people only need a basic hammer, screwdriver, etc…
That’s all they need to do what they need day to day to get other things done.
Machinists need more complicated tools with tons of settings, complicated setup and saftey to know. So they spend the time learning. But you don’t need a wood shop to hang a picture frame.
This is before we even talk about accessibility. That means much more than large fonts or screen readers. It’s also about the fact humans exist on distribution curves in every possible way. For some people, it will just never make sense. No matter what you do. Because it’s just not how their brains work. In the same way mine can’t do languages very well. It just doesn’t click for me. And deep dives into computers wont click for some. Should they never learn to use a computer? Or can they learn basic enough functions from good GUIs to get by.
It’s even fine to say linux isn’t meant for that. But if you want everyone to get away from macOS and Windows, you need a viable alternative for everyone
Microsoft would certainly have us believe that. Decades of operant conditioning by Microsoft and Apple have given us that attitude.
Most people certainly do want automation; they don’t know how to automate. There was a meme floating around recently about a temp who replaced hours and hours of tedious, daily transcription between two applications with ctrl-c, ctrl-v.
We have all seen plenty of examples like this, with users doing excessive manual labor out of simple ignorance of absurdly simple automation.
The point arises from the very attitude I am challenging, so yes, I am refusing the point. We should not be encouraging or supporting the behaviors you describe, but should instead be promoting the tools that allow the average user to identify menial tasks and relegate them to the machine.
So fuck people with disabilities then?
Your still believe computers are machines and not hand tools at this point.
How much copy paste do you think the average user actually uses of their computer?
deleted by creator
…
Just realized that person above wants that. Was too focused on the part you quoted, my bad. That’s indeed outlandish.
No worries!
There can never be a distro that ships without a terminal. I will burn it with the fire of a thousand suns. Even Windows has a terminal
Windows doesn’t even cover everything you just said. The number of times Windows 10 broke my Bluetooth devices and I had to much around in registry to remove the device profile just to try to repair the device, is part of the reason I switched to Linux in the first place.
Yes, many distros need a little refining and smoothing for the general public, but only because people are so used to dealing with bullshit troubleshooting on Windows that they don’t see it as bullshit anymore.
That’s a low bar, but importantly they’re still correct that technically Windows looks like it can handle those things as far as a regular consumer can see. Windows is unholy trash, but it at least doesn’t tell people who can’t even navigate their basic file explorer that they are expected to use scary terminal commands they likely found on a forum or third-party website.
Personally I think a little more tinkering spirit would do the whole world good, not just with computers, but reality is the way that it is for the moment(things can change, fingers crossed).
This! I work in IT, in fact, I’m the director of both the IT and software teams at my company and I am constantly teaching my new techs and reminding my existing techs that they need to remember just how little the “average” person knows about computers, and how much more that is than what they’d actually care to learn.
99% of people don’t care about computers, or how to make things “more efficient”, or anything else. They just care about the easiest way to do something. And like it or not, the easiest way for the vast majority of people is through a GUI.
There is even an XKCD about this
And that’s even before you get to the security problems! I am constantly trying to prevent users from going to FreeNuclearCodes.com or sending passwords and social security numbers to [email protected] (actual email address I had to block last week)
You were absolutely right about everything up until your very last sentence.
We need a distro that comes with GUIs for everything indeed, but shipping without a terminal would be both a bad idea and would cause the distro maintainer to go up in flames immediately.
Interesting, i kinda read that quickly and took awsay from it more of a
Ships without the expectation to need a terminal, not actually ship without one at all
Every KDE distro can do all of these except whatever adjusting kernel parameters means? I don’t know how to do any of this in the command and I’ve been using Linux for 8 years.
OpenSuse does all of this or almost all of this.
They don’t need to take away the command line. Just to make it so a low skill user can get by without it. Even windows ships with PowerShell.
I’ve been a happy daily linux user for over 20 years. No need to wait for “linux to succeed” whatever that means. It has gotten better and more advanced every year since I first switched.
I dont understand, why do we want Linux to go mainstream? Eveyone constantly says it yet nobody has an answer. In order to become mainstream it would need to be so dumbed down that people like me would stop using it.