On Sat, 2008-04-26 at 09:24 -0700, Les wrote: > CLI has an advantage because of the ability to express compound and > unique capabilities using small tools. > That particular capability has not made it to the "drag and click" > crowd, not because it cannot be done, but because of a lack of vision in > understanding what they are missing. The closest equivalent is the > ability to create compound database relationships in Microsoft SQL with > the GUI, but even there it is not well implemented. And you still have > to use the keyboard to express some aspects of the process. And this is > the major strength of UNIX, small programs that do one thing well, > coupled with the ability to combine them with pipes, scripts and > redirection to accomplish complex tasks with a minimum of effort. That > is why most admins with experience in all kinds of systems generally > support them via a CLI of one form or another. Additionally many of the > tools and techniques of UNIX and other CLI systems have been expressed > on other systems simply because they give the user that power. > > Point and click is faster for things you do repetitively on single > items, CLI scripting, piping and redirection work better in a more > flexible way to perform complex operations on a one time unique basis > across a number of similar items, or for a really difficult complex task > that must be done repetitively. These last two describe most of the > Admin tasks. The first most user tasks. Additionally GUI's restrict > input to only effective operations and minimize errors of entry, so they > are making inroads to Admin tasks for things done less often that are > prone to input errors, such as the add-user add-group and other > occasional somewhat unique tasks done by Admins. > > Personally I am a programmer. I appreciate that some kinds of programs > could or can currently be automated better with a GUI, but I also know > that a GUI is limiting in some aspects, while freeing in others, and the > issues for programmers is where does one become more valuable than the > other. In other words, we need both tools and concepts to be the most > effective in our class of work. I really like dabbling in the bits and > stuff on unique things. I hate having to regenerate a "window > application" in C code, and would much prefer to find a GUI that will > create a good basic Window or two that I can then flush out with the > appropriate code. One of the best things about GUI's I think are the > "balloon hints", which can help you understand the "next step" or an > error on the fly. These reduce debug times, increase my effectiveness > and let me concentrate on the "good stuff" rather than on the mundane. > > But finding, or creating such tools is difficult, and finding the > correct balance a truly mystifying task to a bit oriented guy like me. > > On Linux and networking and the bits for networking, I know the > underlying formats, protocols and even a lot of the code, but I still > don't have a good clear "big picture". To me it is like examining an > elephant through a microscope. I know what the hair, hide, blood, and > veins look like, but I have no concept of the elephant yet. (a bit of > an exaggeration, but I am sure you get my drift). > Here! Here! I'll agree with that! Definitely me too- and a very good analogy if I do say so myself... > A gui that shows a network with my system, my router and my other local > systems would help me see that. Balloon help to describe each bit and > what it does would be even better, so I could mouse over the router, and > it would bring up the router system window and tell me what it does. > Mousing over the workstation would show me the required bits to make it > work with the router as a menu, and each would then have a good > explanation of how it interfaces to the rest of it. Then I could get a > graphical view of the elephant. > > None of this network, admin stuff is difficult, it is just very complex > by the number of bits that all have to be right to make it work > effectively and without errors. As I tell my students in programming, > there is no magic, just misunderstood technology. (and yes I know there > is a quote about this or maybe three or four, but I didn't know that > when I first started using the phrase in the 70's.) So here I have a question: do you teach programming? At what level- shell, C, or assembler? If so, what text books do you use to teach (or recommend)? (even if it is assembler...) -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
