Linked by Eugenia Loli on Mon 24th Oct 2005 04:14 UTC, submitted by Eric
Windows Ars Technica has posted a lengthy article on the new promising Microsoft Command Shell. It looks at MSH from the point of view of both coders and Windows admins.
Thread beginning with comment 50435
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: hmm...
by ma_d on Mon 24th Oct 2005 05:42 UTC in reply to "hmm..."
ma_d
Member since:
2005-06-29

"can i exit the gui and come back to said shell without having to reboot the whole system?"
This is actually generally considered to be a bad thing by X developers. Because you actually have two drivers for the display loaded at all times, one gets halted and the other takes over. Apparently it causes some odd complications. Although, I've found occasional use for multiple X Servers, I've never found use for using the virtual terminals while I have an X session (except to kill the one that's broken because of the mediocre nvidia driver).

I think this shell is just another .net language, which expains how they threw it together in under a year.

I honestly don't think this shell is intended for users at all. It's for scripters.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: hmm...
by on Mon 24th Oct 2005 05:57 in reply to "RE: hmm..."
Member since:

"I honestly don't think this shell is intended for users at all. It's for scripters."

And scripters aren't users nor users, scripters.

Reply Parent Score: 0

RE[3]: hmm...
by ma_d on Mon 24th Oct 2005 21:26 in reply to "RE[2]: hmm..."
ma_d Member since:
2005-06-29

Correct. I know you were being sarcastic, but you're wrong. Scripters are not users, they're more aptly named administrators; especially in the Windows world.
Makeing a 6 line script does not make you a "scripter," it makes you a power user. Power users also aren't "users", they're a subset/superclass of users.
When you say "user" in this context, you mean Joe Schmoe using Joe Blow's Office Program. Not, Joe Power fixing Joe Blow's Office Program ;) .

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: hmm...
by on Mon 24th Oct 2005 14:30 in reply to "RE: hmm..."
Member since:

actually monad (the codename) has been under development for about 3 years now, and thankfully its finally being brought to the forefront

Reply Parent Score: 0

*onad.
by on Mon 24th Oct 2005 19:03 in reply to "RE[2]: hmm..."
Member since:

...just in time to face its GNU equivalent.

Yes, you know what it will be called.

Expect it any moment now..

Reply Parent Score: 0