Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 28th Jan 2013 22:38 UTC
Hardware, Embedded Systems "Acer, the Taiwanese computer maker that's suffered two consecutive annual losses, posted strong sales of notebooks using Google's Chrome platform after the release of Microsoft's Windows 8 failed to ignite the market. Chrome-based models accounted for 5 percent to 10 percent of Acer's U.S. shipments since being released there in November, President Jim Wong said in an interview at the Taipei-based company's headquarters. That ratio is expected to be sustainable in the long term and the company is considering offering Chrome models in other developed markets, he said." HP is also planning a Chrome OS laptop, and it's been at the top of Amazon's charts (whatever that means) for a while now. In case you haven't noticed - the desktop world, too, is changing. Nobody wants Windows 8 (touch or no), so OEMs are finally looking elsewhere. We're finally getting what we wanted 13 years ago.
Thread beginning with comment 550653
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Tractor
Member since:
2006-08-18

Of course it is.

I know no-one in the non-geek world which find it a good idea to even being shown a terminal, let alone have to type any obscure command line in it.

However, i know of a few geeks which consider that basically anyone without the knowledge nor the will to use a terminal should not even be authorised to touch a computer.

Jesus, what an elitist/corporatist/extremist point of view. This is the very reason why Linux has never been a mainstream computer (and been a darling to IT/programmers).

I'm glad this mentality is getting hammered these days by Google and its imitators.

Edited 2013-01-29 00:03 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 6

Neolander Member since:
2010-03-08

Why has it to be one or the other ?

Shells are fine as a computer administration interface. They use up little system resources, make few assumptions about what works and what doesn't, are easily scriptable, and their commands can be trivially transmitted from one person to another.

GUIs, on their side, are generally more practical for everyday use. They allow for more advanced tasks, it's easier to find out how they work without piles of documentation, they make more efficient use of screen estate, and they tend to be more aesthetically pleasing too.

Now, what I can't wrap my mind around is why there hasn't been more work on scriptable software that can work well with both interfaces and then some more, considering how anyone who designs modern GUI software also ends up creating a form of CLI interface in the backend code at some point.

The way people currently end up creating dumb GUI frontends whose sole purpose is to feed a CLI interface, or give up on GUI or CLI altogether, strikes me as suboptimal. Especially when people subsequently end up creating nonstandard CLIs in an attempt to go beyond the limitations of a pure GUI approach, as with voice interfaces.

Edited 2013-01-29 05:33 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 5

moondevil Member since:
2005-07-08

Now, what I can't wrap my mind around is why there hasn't been more work on scriptable software that can work well with both interfaces and then some more, considering how anyone who designs modern GUI software also ends up creating a form of CLI interface in the backend code at some point.


Do you mean like ARexx on the Amiga, OLE Automation on Windows or AppleScript on Mac OS X?

Reply Parent Score: 2

JAlexoid Member since:
2009-05-19

And you assume that Linux is unusable without an access to the terminal.Yet Chrome OS is exactly that - Linux without a terminal.

I use Ubuntu and, with the exceptions where I need terminal access to compile my software or install something that is really old and very technical, I barely use the terminal. It's no longer an essential tool for day-to-day use.

Reply Parent Score: 3