Linked by fran on Sat 24th Dec 2011 10:08 UTC
Windows "The new Windows PowerShell is coming. Actually, Microsoft has just launched a Community Technology Preview of Windows PowerShell version 3, although the final version 3 probably won’t ship until it comes out with Windows 8. It also will be available for Windows 7 and Windows Server 2008 R2. The CTP will install on those OSes."
Thread beginning with comment 501239
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Window shell width
by WorknMan on Sun 25th Dec 2011 03:33 UTC in reply to "RE: Window shell width"
WorknMan
Member since:
2005-11-13

e.g. I use bash terminal as my only file-manager.. I fire up thunar on some rare occasions where thumbnails are needed, but have found that bash is almost always faster and more effective than GUI, if one know how to use it.


That's because you guys have shitty file managers on *nix, and I wouldn't use them either. But if you ever spent any serious time with Directory Opus on Windows, you'd never make this claim:

http://reviewlagoon.com/viewarticle.php?articleID=50

Of course, if you wouldn't pay for a quality text editor, you'd never pay for a quality file manager either, especially not for what they're charging for it. Note: I don't want to get into a CLI vs GUI pissing contest here, as I use both; I just find it humorous when somebody on a platform full of bad file managers talks about how much file managers suck.

Reply Parent Score: 5

Ahh, the Windows geek arrogance.
by Soulbender on Sun 25th Dec 2011 10:22 in reply to "RE[2]: Window shell width"
Soulbender Member since:
2005-08-18

Always so charming.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[3]: Window shell width
by Laurence on Sun 25th Dec 2011 11:45 in reply to "RE[2]: Window shell width"
Laurence Member since:
2007-03-26


That's because you guys have shitty file managers on *nix, and I wouldn't use them either. But if you ever spent any serious time with Directory Opus on Windows, you'd never make this claim:

http://reviewlagoon.com/viewarticle.php?articleID=50

If you ever used Dolphin on Linux then you'd never have made that claim. :p

Clearly you've only ever used GNOMEs default file manager and assumed you're now an expert on *nix as you seem to miss the point that there's just as many alternative file managers for Linux as there are for Windows.

Of course, if you wouldn't pay for a quality text editor, you'd never pay for a quality file manager either, especially not for what they're charging for it.

Why pay over the odds for a text editor and file manager when your desktop comes with advanced versions of these applications already integrated ;) KDE comes with KWrite / Kate, which are just as advanced as Notepad++ or EditPlus for Windows.

If you don't like KDE4 and don't fancy running Qt apps on your GTK+ desktop of choice, then there's plenty of GTK+ alternatives too. You see, Linux has this novel concept where you can install 3rd party applications (you hinted at a similar feature in Windows). So if you don't like the default programs, then change them.

Also don't moan about a default *nix file manager then harp on about this really cool 3rd party file manager you bought for Windows - because that's just preaching double standards.

Note: I don't want to get into a CLI vs GUI pissing contest here, as I use both; I just find it humorous when somebody on a platform full of bad file managers talks about how much file managers suck.

You're arguing a different point (and one that's still wrong as per my points above).

His point was the CLI is quicker, not better.
If I want to delete any file according to a pattern match or all the ZIP archives from a directory structure, then it is quicker doing that in the CLI (both in Windows and Linux). For some tasks, the CLI /is/ quicker. That's not elitism nor arrogance, that's just a fact of life.

Edited 2011-12-25 11:56 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[4]: Window shell width
by f0dder on Sun 25th Dec 2011 15:19 in reply to "RE[3]: Window shell width"
f0dder Member since:
2009-08-05

If I want to delete any file according to a pattern match or all the ZIP archives from a directory structure, then it is quicker doing that in the CLI (both in Windows and Linux). For some tasks, the CLI /is/ quicker. That's not elitism nor arrogance, that's just a fact of life.
Only if your file manager of choice doesn't have decent pattern-based file selection :-)

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[4]: Window shell width
by zima on Sat 31st Dec 2011 19:23 in reply to "RE[3]: Window shell width"
zima Member since:
2005-07-06

His point was the CLI is quicker, not better.
If I want to delete any file according to a pattern match or all the ZIP archives from a directory structure, then it is quicker doing that in the CLI (both in Windows and Linux). For some tasks, the CLI /is/ quicker. That's not elitism nor arrogance, that's just a fact of life.

Though too many take it too far (with barely any hint of "for some tasks").

Plus, really (particularly for them^), that's also just a cognitive illusion of life ( http://www.plan9.bell-labs.com/wiki/plan9/Mouse_vs._keyboard/index.... or the points by Moonbuzz here http://www.osnews.com/comments/25359 , /me also trying to get through with similar ones to the CLI faithful ...but it's hard)

(also, at the point of "for some tasks" you are essentially programming the file manager or text editor, so of course text UI is suitable - but then, Google search, Gmaps or... IM & SMS are another kind of UI with also text input, and not really CLI)

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Window shell width
by Yoko_T on Sun 25th Dec 2011 19:21 in reply to "RE[2]: Window shell width"
Yoko_T Member since:
2011-08-18

"e.g. I use bash terminal as my only file-manager.. I fire up thunar on some rare occasions where thumbnails are needed, but have found that bash is almost always faster and more effective than GUI, if one know how to use it.


That's because you guys have shitty file managers on *nix, and I wouldn't use them either. But if you ever spent any serious time with Directory Opus on Windows, you'd never make this claim:

http://reviewlagoon.com/viewarticle.php?articleID=50

Of course, if you wouldn't pay for a quality text editor, you'd never pay for a quality file manager either, especially not for what they're charging for it. Note: I don't want to get into a CLI vs GUI pissing contest here, as I use both; I just find it humorous when somebody on a platform full of bad file managers talks about how much file managers suck.
"


Never used Midnite Commander have you? Blows the crap out of any Windows file manager and it's intergrated text editor makes most windows txt editors cry too.

Edited 2011-12-25 19:23 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[4]: Window shell width
by f0dder on Mon 26th Dec 2011 10:35 in reply to "RE[3]: Window shell width"
f0dder Member since:
2009-08-05

Never used Midnite Commander have you? Blows the crap out of any Windows file manager and it's intergrated text editor makes most windows txt editors cry too.
You do realize that MC was modeled after tools like Norton Commander (from the good old DOS days), and that there's several comparable Windows file managers?

Total Commander would probably be the first one that comes to mind, but there's other powerful ones like xplorer^2, xyplorer, FAR Manager, Directory Opus (ohaithar, Amiga days!), et cetera ad nauseam.

Reply Parent Score: 2