I have used Arch for >13 years (btw) and use the terminal every single session. I also work with Linux servers daily, so I tried the other families with DEs (Debian/Ubuntu, RHEL/CentOS/AlmaLinux/Fedora).
I’m comfortable (and prefer) doing everything with CLI tools. For me, it’s a bit difficult to convert my Windows friends, as they all see me as some kind of hackerman.
What’s the landscape like nowadays, in terms of terminal requirements?
Bonus question: Which distribution is the most user-friendly while still updated packages? Does anything provide a similar experience to Arch’s amazing AUR?
You must log in or # to comment.
I choose to use terminal because I can update my software without requiring a restart (I used Debian btw); for some reason, GNOME’s Software app cannot do this without restarting. I also prefer terminal-based text-editing for coding and scripting.
Depending on use-case, you can absolutely just use the distro without ever touching the terminal. It requires extra work to sift through all the online advice and docs that center around CLI commands though. The Average Windows User won’t be digging that deep in their system to customize the shit out of it like an Arch user, so they won’t need to touch the stuff that can only be accessed via command line. The Above Average Windows User will already be comfortable with the command prompt anyway.
Which distribution is the most user-friendly while still updated packages?
All of them? Why would a distro choose to be hostile to its users? (/s)
I assume you mean “beginner friendly”? In that case, I would stick to Debian: more stability than windows, harder to break than Arch, and lighter-weight than Fedora.
Those are the only 3 I’ve daily driven in the past couple of years, and that’s my takeaways. I can’t give informed input on any of the popular derivatives, except Ubuntu which I did use for awhile (back in 2014-2016): it was more prone to breaking shit than Debian, less beginner-friendly too (fuck Snaps, and fuck your Pro subscription data-harvesting up-selling bullshit).
there’s three thing I use the terminal for:
Updating my apps and systems Running development apps Quick and easy edits or file movements
So I am a new Linux user (Bazzite) and what I have experienced so far is that for my daily driver use I don’t need the terminal at all. But the moment I want to do anything even slightly more complex, or even just to use a program I want that is not in bazaar, all the user documentation gives me terminal commands.
So while I am sure it is possible, in reality the terminal still remains prominent and it feels really important to know to use it.
over the years i’ve had trouble with the various app stores like Discover and Pop!_Shop which for me led to the use of the terminal. other than that there is the occasional permissions issue that may have a graphical solution but i’ve always used chown on the command line.
Just lie and say they will never need to touch the terminal, then help them out when they need to and eventually they will see its not a big deal
I’ve been using Bazzite for a year without ever touching the terminal. I came from Windows.
Fellow Windows-to-Bazzite migrant here
I had to use the terminal to address some Nvidia driver weirdness, but aside from that, I really don’t use it much if at all.
The terminal feels to me like it did on Windows - a useful tool to troubleshoot things - rather than a necessity.
This is also coming from someone who isn’t uncomfortable using a CLI, but just prefers GUI for my day-to-day tasks.
Yes, generally you can. I run Linux Mint and can count the number of times that I HAD to use the terminal. There are plenty of times where I choose to use the terminal because it’s faster though.
Can I? Yes. Will I? No.
Some things are just faster to do via terminal so I learned to use it over GUI for some scenarios.
SUSE has had graphical administration tools for literally decades. Somehow people always forget that.
Installing stuff works well from UI as well? I on/off did stuff with Ubuntu and every time I tried the App Store there was useless.
IMO the gnome store is lacking. Fedora KDE has Discover for it’s store. It has more buttons (GASP) and has easier control over which additional repos are shown in the store.
Yes, of course.
I kind of ‘force-moved’ my wife to Fedora about 2 years ago, and she had never seen the terminal until last week. I saw she was about to open ‘discover’ to update everything, and I stopped her, opened the terminal and ran a dnf update, one ‘put your password in there’, and she was looking at it as if it was magic. Can you use it without the terminal entirely? Pretty sure you can. Now, should you?
Nope. Every Linux distribution I’ve used has needed access to command line at some point. If anything goes awry people will always give you steps how to fix it from command line.
Now I’m not saying all this couldn’t be done graphically, but you very rarely find steps that way.
I rarely touch my terminal and do so only because I am already familiar with it. I should use it more. I don’t think its any more necessary to use the terminal in linux than it is in windows for a computer user. I consider zorin the most user friendly and mainly because its out of the box (when its installed it has software already on that fits for most things people want to do with a computer.)
The allergy to CLI is always strange to me. Computers didn’t always have mice, or GUIs, and people had to learn them when they came around. It’s like saying “I want to ride a bike but I don’t want to learn how.” After a certain point, I don’t really know what to say to something like that. You have to learn how to do anything that is new to you. That doesn’t make it bad, or even necessarily difficult…but anything you don’t know will be unfamiliar, and one just has to be OK with that for a while until it’s not anymore. I think the usability of most mainstream distros is right where it should be. GNOME and KDE have done a very good job of it (edit: barring some very important accessibility concerns, which the GNOME and KDE teams have both shown to be open to learning from and improving on).
Its the age-old “new good, old bad!” Thinking of unintelligent people. Theyre unable to realize when something is just good.
Like a non-javascript web page. My friends think I’m on the dark web if I send them something that isnt off of corponet with shiny beveled buttons with shadows and shading.
Not saying the opposite either; guis are fine if theyre well designed and use words instead of meaningless symbols. But a lot of them arent well designed.
Also, for dyslexic people the terminal is a big challenge, near impossible.
The allergy to CLI is always strange to me.
I get it. Every single other application a GUI user has used in their life: Ctrl-C = copy, and Ctrl-Z = undo. Open the terminal, and now Ctrl-C is an interupt, and Ctrl-Z is like a pause. Every terminal emulator has the option to change these keymappings. But doing that has a bunch of consequences once you start running more than basic file operations and nano. I think this is usually the first big hurdle to get over. It’s muscle memory that needs to be suppressed.
And then there’s the documentation aspect. With a GUI, you can visually look around to see what can be done in a program. With the CLI, there’s options that you just kinda have to know. There’s -h or --help, then there’s the man pages. But even just navigating the man pages brings up the previous problem of unfamiliar/unintuitive keybindings. so you could also install tldr for faster help, but the vast majority of the time, it’ll be faster to just search online.
All that being said, I prefer the CLI for pretty much everything, and think it would be interesting if there was a sort of pedagogical distro to teach the command line. Imagine a file browser that displays the underlying utilities/commands being used. Like, when you open your home folder maybe there’s a line showing ‘ls -al /home/me | grep [whatever params to get the info being displayed]’. Or, when you go into the settings, it shows you the specific text files being edited for each option. Something that just exposes the inner workings a little more so that people can learn what they’re actually doing as they’re using the GUI
If a thing like that existed, I’d use it. Software that has graphical controls but also tells you exactly what it’s doing is my favourite, I’ve seen a small handful of it out there. The terminal is wicked cool, but the documentation and discoverability issue makes it a bit unapproachable.
Different user types have different capabilities. Some think in terms of text. Others are more visual. Neither is wrong. Just like a left handed person is not wrong. Good usability is about adapting the software to the person. Not the person to the software. For a lot of what I do there is no text command. And for many, the CLI is an unfamiliar interface. So it’s a productivity disadvantage to switch over to a CLI just for a single command when the rest of the time you are in a GUI.
Using Linux Mint, most of what I use I could without terminals if I wish. However, just like with Windows, terminal intervention will be needed sooner or later, usually to figure out why a given program isn’t working.
Exactly. You can get away without using the terminal on a lot of linux distros in the same way you can get away without using CMD on Windows… until one very specific thing breaks and suddenly it’s time to run
sfc /scannowfor the millionth time.I personally don’t understand why that command doesn’t run every time the system starts up by default, I wrote a script that ran it on startup years ago and I can’t tell you how many times it tells me that there were files that needed repairing.
There’s a sysd GUI that you can use to look at logs. It’s much faster to just refresh the UI than searching your history for the right command
deleted by creator
