The short answer is yes. But the interesting part - and I’m talking from personal experience - is that from the moment you realize just how easy and powerful using the console is, you learn how to use it.
And it does not mean you are going to turn into a full on expert or geek, tinkering around the console. You just learn a few simple commands that enable you to do something (or somethings) quicker, easier and cleaner than going through a GUI.
Can you? Yes. Should you? No.
I’ve always thought GUIs felt more like doing things by hand and CLIs felt more like having the computer do it for you. Like if you want to do some complicated task that requires multiple programs and lots of menus using a GUI, it’s easy the first time, but once you need to do it a second time you have to do it all over again by hand. But if you do it from the command line, while it might be harder the first time, subsequent times are zero effort because you can just run the exact same commands again from your history or combine them into one or a script to make it even easier.
That it is. In GUI, you’re working for the computer to achieve your goals. At the CLI, you invest time teaching the computer what you want done, and it works for you.
For many people it’s not quicker or easier. If they’ve not used CLI before, they’d need to learn multiple new things. Going to a Web browser for help every time, before doing something is not quick. Memorising precise command strings that mean nothing to the user, is not easy for many either. For them it’s bad usability.
from the moment you realize just how easy and powerful using the console is, you learn how to use it
Yes, I understand that; there is a learning curve. For some, too steep.
And even if you did manage to do something 2 years ago, you can’t remember how to do it today. Do you really want up go down that same rabbit hole again? Spending 5 minutes reading stuff and running a single command takes a lot more time than 15 mouse clicks.
Agreed. I’m not super computer geeky compared to this website. A bunch of people here would probably not even consider me techy.
That said, I hated the command line and would actively avoid it as often as possible. Once I started using it (just to paste code from tutorials) and then later to cd into folders so I can run an old game .exe with WINE, and then to straight up command line tools for converting .bin and .cue files into workable ISOs (also for old games), I started seeing with the command line is so sick.
I’m converted. It’s great. It’s not as spooky as it looks. Make the background 50% transparent.
Make the background 50% transparent.
I love this little line tacked at the end of your comment. I love that this is how the terminal is no longer scary-looking.
I feel like I only use ls, cd and apt update & apt upgrade. Other commands are for when e.g. hardware malfunctions.
If that is enough for your needs, that’s fine.
Kinda disappointing.
The article is really trying to sell us, the reader, that using Linux without knowing how to use the command line is not only possible but totally feasible. Unfortunately, after each paragraph that expresses that sentiment we are treated to up to several paragraphs on how it’s totally easier, faster, and more powerful to do things via thé command line, and hey did you know that more people like coding on Linux than windows? Did you know you can do more powerful things with bash, awk, and sed than you ever could in a file manager?!
FFS
vimandnanoare brought up and vim’s “shortcuts” are praised… in an article on how you can totally use Linux through a gui and never need to open up the command line.Who is this written for? outside of people who not only already use Linux but are convinced that using any other OS is both a moral failing and a form of self-harm?
For clarity’s sake: I have been daily driving Linux, specifically ArchLinux, for the past 9 years, across a rotation of laptop and desktop computers. I do almost everything in the command line and prefer it that way.
I still think if you want people to try Linux you need to chill the removed out on getting them to use the command line. At the very least, until they’re actually interested in using Linux on their own.
It is for the sake of combatting the commonly held belief that you can’t do anything without the terminal in Linux.
Progress on the accessiblility, and GUI centric applications and functionality in Linux has been huge in the last decade or two. It is now entirely possible to use a Linux system while rarely needing the terminal. And if you have someone techy helping set it up for you then it is possible to never have to.
Yes, my mom does.
Mine, too!
Yes you can but you often see the terminal used when helping people online. This is because it works across desktop environments and mostly across distros, however it does give the impression that the terminal is needed.
Even basic things in distros are quite different, for example the frontend for settings, so tech support threads will show how to do it in the backend. Oh well, but then there’s someone who suggests
sudo nano /etc/default/grubIf you’re a noob, run this and get a “nano: command not found” error, you’ll google it and learn to resolve it using
apt. However, Manjaro’s package manager ispacmanbut you don’t know, so you installaptusing a weird guide without knowing what it even is. The next update then wreaks havoc on your system.My first install ended in a dependency hell because of this.
Well no one in there right mind should use Manjaro so that was mistake no. 1
Although shaming newcomers for their distro choice is not a welcoming move 💢
True, the blame is on those who recommend it
Why, what is the problem with Manjaro in respect to other distros and would imply someone is mentally impaired to use it?
TL;DR, ddosing AUR multiple times, poorly maintained certificates, and a generally bad take on Arch that causes lots of problems for the uninitiated.
People aren’t mentally impaired because they use Manjaro. However, Manjaro is problematic as a distro and should be avoided if possible.
The recommendations seemed favorable when I tried it. I have since switched to Mint.
That’s probably for the best. If Manjaro was a little more honest and straight forward I wouldn’t have an issue. The problem is that they say they are kind ignorant of there mistakes.
Honestly they could ask for help and the community would step up.
I didn’t see anyone else mention this but, as someone who uses Linux Mint, if you are going to install software through the Software Manager, read the reviews for the app you want before downloading it. Linux Mint’s Software Manager is full of apps that are so outdated that some of them aren’t even compatible with the current version of Linux Mint. There are other issues as well, like how there are at least 20 different versions of Wine and most of them are very old versions. I’d understand if they want to keep legacy apps for the older, still supported, versions of Linux Mint but it can be confusing to use sometimes.
The real question is: “would you want to?”
Or “why would you?”
Heck yeah I would love to never use the terminal. The terminal is the biggest roadblock for me adopting Linux. I never, ever want to open it. If I have to open it, Linux has failed for me as a windows replacement.
I want to try Linux again, and I have dipped my toes many times, but the terminal is the major block for me, a slightly above average pc user.
You forgot the
/s
👏👏👏👏👏👏👏
The real question is “Why are people so scared of the terminal, when they’re perfectly aware of and comfortable with cmd on windows?”
Are they?
Good question. Should be. Stuff as seemingly simple as converting a couple dozen text documents to pdf requires it if you don’t want to sit around for an hour, clicking away. Many such examples.
Of course.
But why would you want to!?
Dyslexia!
Dislexia* /j
Cixelsydm’i
I’ve been daily driving Linux Mint for 10 years now. The answer to this question is “for what most people consider everyday usage, you have to use the Linux terminal about as often as you have to edit the Windows registry.” And in fact over the 10 years I’ve been a Linux user, GUI tools in Linux are increasingly available, and I’ve heard Windows normies talking about the registry more.
When I started out, Mint shipped with Synaptic Package Manager, and a lot of distros didn’t include a GUI at all. Now GUI package managers are the rule rather than the exception and most have bespoke polished app store -like things. You of course can still use apt or dnf or pacman or whatever, but you decreasingly have to.
I never once touched the registry on my Win 98, Win XP, Win Vista or Win 7 machines. Win 8 required a couple registry keys to turn off that…curtain that you had to click away to get to the login screen? and a few other “tablet first” features Win 8 had, and now I hear “just go and add these registry keys to put the start menu on the left, turn off ads, re-enable right click and retract the rectal thermometer.”
Linux is becoming more normie friendly while Windows is genuinely becoming less normie friendly.
The author argues that you don’t need to use the terminal but constantly argues that you should. The average computer user doesn’t even know which version of Windows they’re using. Many don’t even know if they’re using Windows or Mac. Until Linux gets over the obsession with the terminal we’re never going to have the year of Linux.
I agree with the author then.
What’s wrong with using the cli? People act like it’s some arcane dark magic…
You’re typing things in a small box here rather than clicking on icons to reply. Sometimes text is just better.
The problem with the cli is you need to memorize a whole bunch of new words and syntax in order to do anything. You also need to memorize what not to do so you don’t accidentally erase your system while using rm or cp or whatever.
Even something as simple as copying and pasting, which works the same in every single other program has new rules in the terminal. I mean, think about that. If you’re just learning bash, then the first thing you’ll be doing is copy pasting commands. But even that has the hurdle of 'oh, I guess this is the one program where ctrl-c means something else
Like, how do you look at sudo, cat, man, and apt, and think ‘yeah that’s intuitive’. And forget about multitasking, new users won’t even know how to quit most programs (is it ctrl-q? Just q? Esc? Ctrl-c? Ctrl-d? Wait how do I undo that, is it ctrl-z? Wait where did the thing go
For Vi: Esc :q or :q! or :wq or Shift+ZZ
I disagree. Many people like to have control over there computer even if they don’t want to learn a bunch of new skills.
Linux isn’t for everyone but its gotten to the point where someone could figure it out if they so choose. It no longer is the unstable mess it was 10-20 years ago.
If you want a non-terminal os based on linux you just have to make something like android or chromeos or steamdeckos.
Those are and pretty popular, so I don’t know who can claim linux is “terminal obsessed” it’s just a kernel and there is a wide diversity of os based on it.Debian , fedora , suse etc might all be “obsessed” with the terminal.
For me that’s just the obvious economical way to offer features. decent GUI costs a lot more to develop and document - so you have to have less features for a given amount of dev time. Or you have google /valve/microsoft type amounts of resources to spend.I always thought this “year of linux” thing was a meme to make fun of canonical or idiotic tech journalists .
Is anyone realitsitcally interested in volunteering their time to win over legions of Microsoft fanboys. removed me sounds like hell.And frankly the use of terminal is going to be far from the first blocker to linux adoption for those who don’t even know they’re using windows or mac.
This whole threat is a HUGE circle jerk and a collection of all the “I USE ARCH BTW” variations imaginable.
“WHY WOULDN’T ALL PEOPLE WANT THE KNOWLEDGE TO CRAFT COMMANDS TO MANIPULATE, FILTER AND SEARCH TEXT IN A WHOLE FILE SYSTEM WITH JUST ONE COMMAND? UNCULTURED PESANTS”
Come, not everyone is a computer nerd, nor everyone ones to optimize 30s in the workflow if it means memorizing a bunch of commands, their syntax and options.
If you want to use Linux without the terminal nowadays it’s pretty easy. But also I think the fear of the terminal is part of the culture that consumer electronics have cultivated where people don’t know (or want to know) how their systems work.
If you take the time to use it, not only can you save yourself time, but also learn a lot more about how you can fix things when they go wrong! That kind of knowledge gives you so much more ownership of your system, because you don’t have to rely on your manufacturer to solve problems for you.
Same for Mac and Windows too, the terminal is something that shouldn’t be necessary, but when it is it helps to know what you’re doing. :)
There is a large degree of willful ignorance. Its 2024 and the degree of computer illiteracy is astounding.
I was an 80s kid but even I grew up with computers: Atari, Commodore and Amstrad. I then learnt PCs with DOS. All pretty much self learnt from 8 years old as no one else in my family knew removed about computers so I was on my own.
These days computers are so user friendly ad practically run themselves, even Linux but the amount of people who cant perform basic computer tasks even in Windows is unbelievable. Do they even still teach computers at schools anymore?
That’s because in the 80’s you had to know computers to use them, and most people never touched them. Only geeks like you and me.
Now everyone uses a computer (at least the screen-only computer in their pocket) without knowing anything about it.
It doesn’t mean there are less people who really know how computers work. Just that now even clueless people use them.
Do you know how everything in your house works? How to repair everything? No right?
Would you be brave enough to mess with the grounding of your house, or the AC or the heaters, the washing machine, the doors? Not eveyone wants mess with every (subsystem) thing in their house/live"
Most of the people I know want their PC to work and if somwthing goes wrong they just send it to repair or ask somebody else to fix it, they don’t wanna do it themselves, which I find normal, they have little to no interesting in PCs, and that is compleatly fine.
And before someone says "Yeah, but the computer won’t kill you if you removed up the fixing or messing, let me tell you, a “sudo rm -r” or “sudo chown -R” can removed you system BAR, making you loose important data and info.
-…But refugee -I hear you about to type-, they SHOULD have 10921 back-ups in atleast 2542 independent locations. Yo, they don’t wanna even see the terminal, and you want them to interest themselves for data integrity and redundacy? Come on.
I didn’t say you have to know everything, just like I don’t know everything in my house and how it works, but I do know how to do basic repairs so I don’t pay loads of money for a guy to come and unclog a drain. I know how to reset my circuit breakers, how to change a fuse, how to change a lightbulb.
That’s what the terminal is. No one here is telling you to write a bootloader in assembly or meticulously study kernel environment parameters. No one advocating for basic knowledge of a terminal likely has knowledge on subnet masks, compilers, or other low level systems that a modern Linux abstracts for you.
But! I know how to update my packages from a terminal. I know how to install a package outside of a repository, or one that’s not listed on my graphical package manager. I know how to export an environment variable to get my software to work how it should.
That’s what “knowing the terminal” gives you. It’s a basic skill that unlocks you from being a mere “user” of a system to an owner of a system. I don’t think everyone will ever need the terminal, but there are people who are replying to me that seem to have a genuine fear that people have knowledge of their computers in a meaningful way.
Knowledge is autonomy for whatever you do, and there’s a reason why the most profitable of systems are the very systems that are locked down abstracted and “user friendly” in all ways that harm a user’s rights and freedoms.
I’ll coincide with you in that first-aid-quick-repairs is something people should in the best of cases know how to do, but setting a envirental variable or installing a package is not a “simple thing”. I’ve worked with engineers that programmed math models for a living that had no idea what a enviromental varible even was. Yes is easy to do, but the concept behind it, what it is, what it does and why are not simple, without the right background or the will to learn about the topic.
And, about user and owner. Sure, I get your point and personally I share it. But again, that is an opinion, tell a non-interested-user that they don’t really own their rig until they know how to use the terminal and I assure you that most of them will disagree.
Edit cause I wrongly posted before finishing: Comparing uncloging -manually pushing and pull a bar- or chaning a light -turn left, change, then right- or a breaker -literally just pulling a tab up- are WAY simpler actions. Yes, running apt upgrade is easy, but how you know is all well? That it work? + if I run apt update everyday I see almost no diference in my system, why should I even do something like that
the will to learn about the topic
I think this is the bigger issue, to be honest. Like your example of environmental variables, it’s not a complicated concept, but when a guide says to set the variable for Editor rather than a context menu asking you to choose the default program to open this type of file in the future, all of a sudden, people lose their minds about how complicated it is.
Comparing uncloging -manually pushing and pull a bar- or chaning a light -turn left, change, then right- or a breaker -literally just pulling a tab up- are WAY simpler actions. Yes, running apt upgrade is easy, but how you know is all well? That it work? + if I run apt update everyday I see almost no diference in my system, why should I even do something like that
These examples don’t make sense to me as a point against using the terminal, especially since GUI package managers are a thing these days. Many upgrades are under the hood, so to speak, and don’t produce visible changes for most users, and this applies just as much to other operating systems as it does to Linux. When Windows finishes upgrading and reboots, or Chrome tells a user updates are available, and they restart it, how do they know all is good? For the most part, they take it as a given that all is good as long as there’s no new, undesired behavior that starts after the upgrade.
Just because I haven’t been exploited by a security vulnerability or encountered a particular bug is no reason to remain on a version of my OS or programs that is still liable to either of them. That’s just a bizarre argument against staying up to date.
Not to be adversarial, but Yes, I know how everything works in my house and how to fix it, or maintain it. Same as my car, or PC. i just see it as understanding the fundamentals of the world we access.
I’ve tried to run Ubuntu, mint, Debian, and couple other distros without the terminal to see if I can actually recommend it to non-geeks. And every time, I conclude I can’t because the removeding “software center” (or whatever it’s called) is always garbage, and it’s easier to just use apt.
The only time I’ll recommend Linux to a non-tech person is when the hardware is so old that it would just be junked without Linux.
Not sure if Bauh is available for Debian and it’s derivatives, but it’s an amazing software center. If anything, use synaptic on Debian. It’s much better than any software center there.
And apt is just the beginning of it. It’s not that uncommon for apt to not work either.
Specially when it’s hijacked to run other things instead (cough cough snaps).
Keep in mind, most people would be coming from windows where installing software is going to some website, hoping it isn’t a fake malware site, running their exe with admin privileges, and clicking next through a bunch of eulas until it finally is done. By comparison even the worst software centers are an improvement.
Using screenshots, demonstrate to me how the current edition of Linux Mint’s Software Manager application is “garbage” and show me how the Apple App Store, Google Play Store or the Windows Store is better.
I can agree that there are not great software managers out there, Pop!_Shop always felt like it was malfunctioning to me, and Synaptic Package Manager works but has some significant klunk, but…what’s wrong with Mint Software Manager that anyone else gets right.
no.
And there it is.
I am a gui only user. AMA. I have to use command line occasionally but it’s less than once a month, if that. Im on EndeavourOS desktop for over 2 years with Bauh managing updates. My home server runs Unraid with a web GUI interface maybe used CLI twice in 5 years? They told me Linux could be what I wanted it to be. I don’t want to use command line, so I don’t!
On the rare occasions you need to use a terminal, how often is it for something completely new? Something you need to look up to understand?
Also, how often is the MAN page enough lookup, without having to sift through 17 sites than are describing subtly different things?
I find the documentation to be very good for Arch based distros. The EOS forums or Archlinux.org wiki almost always has what I need. Otherwise the github page usually has Arch install directions that are very clear. The major things I’ve had to do in terminal is just initial set up of applications, enabling things to run on startup or changing configs. For example, and this is the most complicated example I can think of. I use grub-btrfs to put my Timeshift snapshots into the grub menu. All I really had to do was 3 commands:
sudo systemctl start grub-btrfsd
sudo systemctl enable grub-btrfsd
sudo systemctl edit --full grub-btrfsd
The first two commands start the daemon and set it to run on start up, the 3rd command is editing the config so I could use Timeshift over Snapper. Again this is the most complicated example I can think of and its 3 lines. Not only that but I was able to find documentation on two different sites. In under a minute of googling.
Endeavour is a great example for gui only users for sure.
Yes. I’ve been using Ubuntu and now Kubuntu for about 12 years and I don’t use the CLI. I don’t play computer maintenance guy, so don’t need any weird hacks. I just use my applications, which all have GUIs. I don’t need the CLI despite people telling me I need to use it. They have never tried GUI only. So they don’t know what they are talking about. The next lot, who typically have no idea about usability, tell me I’m missing out on something. But it’s always something I’ve never needed. If I were to use the CLI, I would need to spend ages researching not just some command, but a whole lot of other concepts that I have no clue about, only to forget it all if I ever need that again. So not as fast as people claim. Luckily, Desktop Environment developers know this and put a lot of effort into making them user friendly. They understand usability. And that different users have different needs.
So I never planned on using the cli, but the thing is, when you’re following a tutorial — say you’re installing/configuring something new — it is so much easier to copy/paste commands than it is to read instructions and then translate them to your own particular GUI environment. Once you’ve done that a few times, you’re already one of us
It’s better to learn how to do it in your own environment, than having to learn a whole new strange environment. Especially one that is not user friendly, with poor visual feedback, intolerant of any mistype, and requiring memorising.
But the GUI also requires memorizing — often steps that are not consistent across desktop environments, or even versions of the same one! Terminal commands otoh can be noted down for later use — and the terminal remembers them. I use the GUI for some things too tbc — it depends on your use case obvs — but you don’t need to pretend the terminal is this genius-hacker level of inaccessible, because it’s really not
Memorising does not need to be precise with a GUI, as you are given visual cues and can see the next step to click. You don’t need to remember precisely every letter or it fails. You don’t even need to remember the name of an application. The desktop app launcher shows you which apps you have installed. I often pin apps to favourites as a reminder. Some Appimage apps don’t appear in the launcher. I forget I have them installed and they don’t get used.
Differences between Desktop Environments are easily found when you change. As GUIs are in many users comfort zone. We use them all the time. People know their home environment, and differences need only just that discovering. Not a whole new environment.
Yeah tbc once again I do actually use a GUI as well, I just think you’re doing yourself a disservice if you refuse to even try using the terminal, because it’s not as hard as you’re telling yourself it is. For example, typing ‘firefox’ and hitting enter is way easier than looking for the icon and clicking it. When I was first starting out with it, I mainly worked by cycling through previous commands with the up key. Then you learn about Ctrl+R and you are flying.
Again, if you don’t want to use the terminal that’s up to you, and a perfectly reasonable preference. But don’t make out that you couldn’t learn it very quickly if you wanted to, because you definitely could!
I launch favourite commands with 2 clicks. Once on the App launcher button, and once on the App itself. My hand is on the mouse anyway. So it’s fast. Way faster than typing a whole bunch of characters. For less used apps It’s 3 clicks as I’d open a category like “Media” or “Games”. And doing that, I get to see what I have in there. This builds up a picture in the users head for future use. Learning “Add to favourites” is time well spent. It can even be called “Pin to Start” or “Bookmark on Launcher” it doesn’t matter. You don’t need to memorise that exactly like the CLI. And right-clicking things is already second nature to huge numbers of users.
So I have no incentive to use text commands. It’s not faster. My hand is on the mouse for my apps anyway. And the CLI has terrible usability, via poor learnability, zero tolerance, and poor visual feedback. And completely useless for most things I do, like working with 3D models, images or drawings. I’m not a “text-worker” like IT tend to be. Plus, I want more non-IT people to use Linux, so discovering the easy ways to do things can help spread the word to them.
For me it would be like stepping off a high-speed train and walking over uneven ground instead.
Ok but if we’re talking about our own personal rigs, I launch favorite commands with one keystroke. I absolutely guarantee I can boot up my computer, navigate to whatever working directory and already have gotten to work before you’ve clicked on your second icon. But it’s different use cases isn’t it? I can definitely see how if you’re using the mouse anyway, a GUI suits you better. I work mainly with text, but so do most people, I think? It’s terms like “terrible usability” etc that I’m taking issue to here, because you’re talking out of your arse. You admit that you’ve never bothered to learn, then make sweeping proclamations as if everyone on earth uses their computer primarily for Blender
In my firs time with linux I install ubuntu (maybe 12.04, I dont’t remember, it was gnome 2) in the only PC in my parents home, I delete windows, and we was using it 2 years without knowing what is a terminal and everything went fine, the problems appeard when I was discover the terminal hahahaha
