The command line as a superior interface for new users?

calvinb

http://www.osnews.com/story/6282/The_Co ... ce_/page1/

Interesting observations here. I'm pretty sure someone here is a hobbyist UX person, care to chip in?

Kirk

I often like to refer people to the command line. If you (the person I'm helping) has no idea what you're doing, it's much easier for me to get you into a command prompt than to try to figure out the interface you're running.

Usually people can't tell me if they're running Windows XP, Vista, or 7. (People do tend to know when they're running 8 at least.) Rather than trying to figure out which interface they're on, it's usually easier to get them into a command prompt and give them commands to run.

On Linux the same would be true, as we wouldn't know whether they were running GNOME, KDE, XFCE, etc. All the terminal commands would be similar.

As an advanced user of Linux, I prefer the terminal for most things, but I do use GUI environments for certain purposes. In general I configure everything (even GUI programs) via terminal means, but sometimes it's convenient to have a GUI.

I am very grateful for starting out on MS-DOS 6.22 as a newbie, as it gave me a good underlying foundation for understanding the command line and understanding how the software works under the hood. People who grow up just using GUIs (tablet operating systems, Windows, etc) and do not learn to use any commands are setting themselves up to be technically inept in the future.

I have also noticed over recent years (GNOME 3, Windows 8) that the GUI designs are getting pretty far out of touch with what the users really want.

SomeGuy

Kirk wrote:

I often like to refer people to the command line. If you (the person I'm helping) has no idea what you're doing, it's much easier for me to get you into a command prompt than to try to figure out the interface you're running.

This is actually a failure in "modern" GUIs. We were complaining about this same stuff back in the DOS/Windows 3.x days. When talking to people, you could never be sure what mode their UI was currently in. It was insanely wonderful when Windows 95 came out, you could always tell a user "click start, settings, control panel then open add/remove programs", and that would ALWAYS be valid unless their system was horribly messed up.

But of course they had to go and mess with something that worked well. With XP you never knew which mode the start menu was in (XP or classic), or which view the control panel was in (Normal list or retarded HTML). Then to "simplify" things, they took out the start menu all together... duuuuuh.

Perhaps in Windows Eleventy they should switch the language from English to that new fangled Esperanto. You know, just for the sake of changing something.

thinkpadman

If for example Win XP and Win 8 had the exact same GUI, I'd say many of the general public would say "what's the difference?" and not bother upgrading until they bought a new branded PC. The same applies to mobile phones - most people wouldn't even know what version of Android or iOS they're using. As long as they can look at Facebook, download TV shows, and pay their bills, the OS is the last thing they care about. If they do a little bit, it's usually broken down to just "I prefer Mac/Windows". Only power users, IT departments, and computer enthusiasts care about changes to Active Directory, implementation of IPv6, the new ReFS file system, etc. GUI updates in effect are suppose to be able to appeal to the mass public and for many is the only way they can see any "progress" being made. This is why most criticism around Windows 8 is simply behind the metro interface and lack of a traditional Start menu IMO. I never hear criticism with Hyper-V in Win 8 Pro...

I remember when Windows 95 came out as well, though many people were bitching saying there was nothing wrong with Program Manager. Then when XP was released, it was the new "Fisher Price" theme. The more things change, the more they stay the same.

I attempted installing Ubuntu Server on my new home server I built earlier in the year, but after realising it was all command line based decided to wipe the drive and install Windows Server 2012. I just wanted it to be up and running within a couple of hours, instead of spending a couple of hours just to figure out how to set up user accounts and file sharing.

calvinb

this can be turned into a general ux thread, imo

One thing I notice was the sorta failure of the "document oriented" approach of the Windows 95 UI, which took things further than the Mac one with the New menu.

calvinb

Another interesting series of articles about this topic:

http://stephenramsay.us/2011/04/09/life ... mmand-line

http://stephenramsay.us/2011/07/25/the- ... an-finger/

http://stephenramsay.us/2011/08/05/the- ... ftermath//