[besson3c]

Originally Posted by goMac

Why would I script when I could wrap it in a Cocoa GUI?

Because unless you are a kick ass Cocoa programmer I could write a shell script in a fraction of the time, and it would use the error checking and logging mechanisms already provided by the software?

Comon GoMac, you might want to pose your assertions in the form of questions if you plan to be flat-out wrong.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by tooki

"Easily" is highly relative. Some of us HATE programming. I don't want to learn shell scripting. I prefer pressing buttons.

tooki

You'd rather press the same button 200 times rather than automating the task? What if the GUI for the CLI program doesn't support Automater or Applescript?

[zmcgill]

I think

[analogika]

Originally Posted by besson3c

Sure, Dashboard widgets and simple GUIs can be great compliments to CLI tools. Do you know it's actually faster to use scp or rsync to copy certain files in a directory matching certain criteria (e.g. a file extension) to a remote server?

Not if I have to learn how those work, first, it ain't.

And that's the point, here.

A click-and-point interface is something I understand in 15 seconds.

I have absolutely no interest in learning a whole new set of skills or seeking out a man page for a command I need maybe once every three or four months.

yeah, I can look up the man page for the killall command, run top to find the PID, and do that - or I can hit the Apple menu and select "Force Quit".

I still don't understand what you're arguing.

[zmcgill]

you should keep

[zmcgill]

posting three or four times in a row.

[goMac]

Originally Posted by besson3c

Because unless you are a kick ass Cocoa programmer I could write a shell script in a fraction of the time, and it would use the error checking and logging mechanisms already provided by the software?

Comon GoMac, you might want to pose your assertions in the form of questions if you plan to be flat-out wrong.

Huh? Writing it in Cocoa isn't that much harder than doing a script. You're just calling terminal commands from Cocoa. There are a few ways to do that, but none of them that much harder than scripting.

[zmcgill]

for at least five more pages.

[analogika]

Originally Posted by besson3c

Because unless you are a kick ass Cocoa programmer I could write a shell script in a fraction of the time, and it would use the error checking and logging mechanisms already provided by the software?.

Yes, but in doing so, you wouldn't provide five million other people with the same capability *without* their having to become a command-line jockey, would you?

Is this about some elitist geek crusade?

[goMac]

Originally Posted by besson3c

You'd rather press the same button 200 times rather than automating the task? What if the GUI for the CLI program doesn't support Automater or Applescript?

Then you could write your own button that does it 200 times when you want it to? Heck, you could use a widget and write it in JavaScript.

[CharlesS]

Originally Posted by besson3c

You'd rather press the same button 200 times rather than automating the task? What if the GUI for the CLI program doesn't support Automater or Applescript?

What if you just want to do something five times, but on five different objects? "click, click, click, click, click" is a heck of a lot faster than "type command, return, up, left arrow, left arrow, left arrow, left arrow, left arrow, left arrow, left arrow, left arrow, left arrow, backspace, backspace, backspace, backspace, backspace, backspace, backspace, type, type, type, type, type, type, type, repeat 3 more times".

[Spliffdaddy]

cover me.

I'm going in.

gotta save besson.

[shunt]

Dont go !!

If they capture you, you have to take the cyanide !!!!

[tooki]

Originally Posted by besson3c

You'd rather press the same button 200 times rather than automating the task? What if the GUI for the CLI program doesn't support Automater or Applescript?

If learning to code (I am not a programmer!!) or create scripts takes me longer than it would to just do the task, why bother? Besides, I honestly don't think I personally have ever needed to do a major batch conversion. If I did, and it was a big enough batch that learning to script would take less time than doing the work manually, I would learn to script. But for renaming 3 files here and there it's not worth it.

tooki

[FeLiZeCaT]

A to B is sometimes, the shorter route. Like it or not, it is all about economy of effort.

I prefer to erase files with rm -rf than using the mouse, click here and there and all that crap. Too much work.

Faster to use mkdir pr0namazingchicks than doing mouse-file-create new folder, then type the damn name after clicking again and again.

But I ain't no programmer. I am just a cat.

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by CharlesS

What if you just want to do something five times, but on five different objects? "click, click, click, click, click" is a heck of a lot faster than "type command, return, up, left arrow, left arrow, left arrow, left arrow, left arrow, left arrow, left arrow, left arrow, left arrow, backspace, backspace, backspace, backspace, backspace, backspace, backspace, type, type, type, type, type, type, type, repeat 3 more times".

Like I said, scripting for repetitive tasks.

Code:
[object1, object2,object3,object4,object5].each {|obj| `command #{obj}`}

It's actually simpler than creating a GUI app.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by CharlesS

What if you just want to do something five times, but on five different objects? "click, click, click, click, click" is a heck of a lot faster than "type command, return, up, left arrow, left arrow, left arrow, left arrow, left arrow, left arrow, left arrow, left arrow, left arrow, backspace, backspace, backspace, backspace, backspace, backspace, backspace, type, type, type, type, type, type, type, repeat 3 more times".

I think we're veering off into something else here...

Yes, one could write a GUI to automate some tasks. Yes, one could write a command line script to automate some tasks. Both would have their advantages and weaknesses, comparing them is somewhat like comparing apples vs. oranges.

What I was trying to get at was that anybody who already knows the terminal commands necessary to do a task could string them together in a shell script without any (or little prior) knowledge of any programming language. Writing a shell script can be as easy as running a batch set of Unix shell commands. Cocoa, on the other hand, would require a little prior knowledge to create.

The end result? You can create double-clickable shell scripts that you can execute right out of the finder to invoke a set of commands in the terminal. If the job you wanted to do was simple, needed little to no user interaction, a shell script would probably suffice just fine - it would not be enhanced tremendously by a GUI if all the GUI did was provided a big fat "go" button.

All this is to say that it's simply about choosing the right tool for the job, and also choosing what will get you going the fastest. Honestly, even to a non CLI junkie certain sequences of Unix commands/tasks that need to be automated may be far easier to setup as a shell script. Anything that required more user interaction, a more robust and complete set of visual feedback (e.g. progress bars, etc.) may be better suited for a GUI.

Have I said anything controversial here that will lead to further scoffing and ridiculing, or have I managed to step on the right eggshells?

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by tooki

If learning to code (I am not a programmer!!) or create scripts takes me longer than it would to just do the task, why bother? Besides, I honestly don't think I personally have ever needed to do a major batch conversion. If I did, and it was a big enough batch that learning to script would take less time than doing the work manually, I would learn to script. But for renaming 3 files here and there it's not worth it.

tooki

I agree....

The whole point of this thread is that I think that sometimes it is advantageous both financially and in use of time to remove layers of abstraction and learn the command line tool rather than a GUI for the command line tool. I say *sometimes* because this isn't always the case.

I also pointed out that it seems that many Mac users (particularly of the power user type variety) are of the mentality that when they need something the first thing they do is look for shareware. That's not always a bad approach, but I think that sometimes users can be pleasantly surprised by how easy it can be to simply learn the command line tool, and how doing so can offer some flexibility a (lacking and/or buggy) GUI cannot offer.

Of course, this isn't always the case. Sometimes the CLI tool would take too long to learn. Sometimes the GUI is a a great time saver... but, sometimes the GUI is just another "thing" to contend with (i.e. if something doesn't work as expected, a bug in the GUI is a possible culprit), and sometimes tasks and interfaces don't need faces that are enhanced by a GUI. For instance, why would somebody pay $5 for a GUI ping tool when they can just do the same thing in the Terminal (should such a thing exist)?

Of course, all of this is somewhat limited to users who are more likely to use certain kinds of tools - content creation stuff is not going to touch the CLI, nor are many other areas. However, system administration and other sorts of "geeky" jobs do (e.g. networking, software development, etc.), and in these cases I feel that it sometimes is in the best interest to simply dig in and learn the tools which are provided for free (and work very well at the usually single tasks they are designed for) in the OS.

The rest of this thread is primarily me providing examples, trying to clarify my opinion against backlash I wasn't really expecting.


What I'm *not* saying is that:

- Everybody and their grandma should learn the command line
- Everything is enhanced in the command line, the command is inherently "better" than a GUI
- There is something inherently wrong with a GUI
- There is something wrong with people who use GUIs or don't like command line interfaces

This is a rather hard argument to articulate, but if you speak to certain kinds of people, they can connect with these ideas based on their experiences and understand exactly what is meant (I've tried this) - particularly in the Linux/Unix world, but also in the Mac world.

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by FeLiZeCaT

Faster to use mkdir pr0namazingchicks than doing mouse-file-create new folder, then type the damn name after clicking again and again.

I use apple-N. One keystroke = faster than typing "mkdir." Unless you have an insanely fast typing speed, the GUI can actually be quite a bit faster in many situations if you use it efficiently.

[Brass]

Originally Posted by besson3c

I agree....

The whole point of this thread is that I think that sometimes it is advantageous both financially and in use of time to remove layers of abstraction and learn the command line tool rather than a GUI for the command line tool. I say *sometimes* because this isn't always the case.

I also pointed out that it seems that many Mac users (particularly of the power user type variety) are of the mentality that when they need something the first thing they do is look for shareware. That's not always a bad approach, but I think that sometimes users can be pleasantly surprised by how easy it can be to simply learn the command line tool, and how doing so can offer some flexibility a (lacking and/or buggy) GUI cannot offer.

Of course, this isn't always the case. Sometimes the CLI tool would take too long to learn. Sometimes the GUI is a a great time saver... but, sometimes the GUI is just another "thing" to contend with (i.e. if something doesn't work as expected, a bug in the GUI is a possible culprit), and sometimes tasks and interfaces don't need faces that are enhanced by a GUI. For instance, why would somebody pay $5 for a GUI ping tool when they can just do the same thing in the Terminal (should such a thing exist)?

Of course, all of this is somewhat limited to users who are more likely to use certain kinds of tools - content creation stuff is not going to touch the CLI, nor are many other areas. However, system administration and other sorts of "geeky" jobs do (e.g. networking, software development, etc.), and in these cases I feel that it sometimes is in the best interest to simply dig in and learn the tools which are provided for free (and work very well at the usually single tasks they are designed for) in the OS.

The rest of this thread is primarily me providing examples, trying to clarify my opinion against backlash I wasn't really expecting.


What I'm *not* saying is that:

- Everybody and their grandma should learn the command line
- Everything is enhanced in the command line, the command is inherently "better" than a GUI
- There is something inherently wrong with a GUI
- There is something wrong with people who use GUIs or don't like command line interfaces

This is a rather hard argument to articulate, but if you speak to certain kinds of people, they can connect with these ideas based on their experiences and understand exactly what is meant (I've tried this) - particularly in the Linux/Unix world, but also in the Mac world.

Surely you're not trying to suggest "different strokes for different folks"?

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Chuckit

I use apple-N. One keystroke = faster than typing "mkdir." Unless you have an insanely fast typing speed, the GUI can actually be a lot faster if you use it efficiently.

We could go back and forth here all day and night debating which specific functions are faster within a GUI vs. CLI, but to me it really seems to come down to the following set of differences between the two:

GUI for a command line tool:

- rich set of visual feedback, easier to create clear, complex interfaces with a minimal learning curve. Most sensible to create with apps that require user interaction.

- another "thing" to program, another point of failure

- may need to recreate all or parts of error checking and logging mechanism

- will need to create task scheduling mechanism

Command line tool:

- good for simple and/or faceless applications that require little to no user interaction

- can be scripted, invoked in a crontab, run in the background

- can be accessed remotely over an SSH session (faster than VNC, encrypted tunnel, convenient for Unix system administrators)

- intimidating learning curve for those not comfortable with CLI interfaces (the majority of "normal" users)

- standards for logging and error checking to standard output, verbose feedback through a Unix shell


OS X is comprised of tons of these little faceless apps that just do stuff behind the scenes. If you truly want to get inside a Unix system like OS X, the Unix command line is something that can be advantageous to learn.

Hope you find my summary list accurate and comprehensive.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Brass

Surely you're not trying to suggest "different strokes for different folks"?

That and that "right tool for the right job" adage, and that in a Unix system like OS X sometimes the only available tool is the command line.

[CharlesS]

Originally Posted by Chuckit

Like I said, scripting for repetitive tasks.

I'm quite aware of how to write a shell script, thanks.

It's actually simpler than creating a GUI app.

But it's not necessarily faster than using a GUI app, especially if that GUI app already happens to do what you want.

Originally Posted by besson3c

Have I said anything controversial here that will lead to further scoffing and ridiculing, or have I managed to step on the right eggshells?

The thing is, you started the ridiculing with your very first post in the thread. I don't think any of my posts in this thread qualify as "ridiculing", but yours on the other hand...

[Chuckit]

Originally Posted by CharlesS

But it's not necessarily faster than using a GUI app, especially if that GUI app already happens to do what you want.

I agree completely. I was just arguing against the "But you have to keep hitting up and backspace!" argument. If you know how to use the shell, you won't be doing that. I was just illustrating that repetitive tasks are not as time-consuming as you were making them out to be.

[FeLiZeCaT]

Originally Posted by Chuckit

I use apple-N. One keystroke = faster than typing "mkdir." Unless you have an insanely fast typing speed, the GUI can actually be quite a bit faster in many situations if you use it efficiently.

No doubt.

Maybe I should have added that I like my terminal window?

But still, it feels faster to me to use it for some tasks. The debate GUI vs CLI is useless; some aspects of GUI are better, and sometimes, the CLI is faster, And there are efficient combinations of both too.

[Kevin]

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by CharlesS

But it's not necessarily faster than using a GUI app, especially if that GUI app already happens to do what you want.

That's why I qualified what I said by saying a *lacking* GUI, and I've run across deficient and/or buggy GUI to CLI tools.

The thing is, you started the ridiculing with your very first post in the thread. I don't think any of my posts in this thread qualify as "ridiculing", but yours on the other hand...

Sorry, that was directed at people responding to this thread as a whole, I didn't mean to single you out.

If I'm doing any ridiculing myself, it's unintentional - likely me being defensive in reaction to the backlash I've experienced in here. I don't mean to sound like I think I'm a martyr or something, but it seems like everything I've said has been dissected, almost as if some are simply looking for some sort of weaknesses and opening as if they decided in advance of reading my post that they want to find me wrong somehow.

[Silky Voice of The Gorn]

I suspect it's utilities like this that curdles besson's cheese:
http://www.macupdate.com/info.php/id/18778

(but hey it's free, not "spending $20")

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by besson3c

Sorry, that was directed at people responding to this thread as a whole, I didn't mean to single you out.

People were responding to this thread before your first post?

If I'm doing any ridiculing myself, it's unintentional

And we are pointing it out, so you wont do it anymore. You have a habit of "unintentionally" ridiculing people. BTW after reading back in this thread, there are many times you obviously INTENTIONALLY were being condescending to people that didn't agree with you. Just oldschool besson.

- likely me being defensive in reaction to the backlash I've experienced in here.

Oh come on besson, you were like this from post 1. No backlash. Stop blaming others for your mistakes or behavior. The reason you are getting the reaction you are is because of what YOU have said. Not the other way around.

I don't mean to sound like I think I'm a martyr or something, but it seems like everything I've said has been dissected, almost as if some are simply looking for some sort of weaknesses and opening, as if they decided in advance of reading my post that they want to find me wrong somehow.

Or it could be you came off as a condescending jerk to begin with as many people have told you, and people reacted justly to it.

The way people react to you besson is a direct result of how you are acting.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by Silky Voice of The Gorn

I suspect it's utilities like this that curdles besson's cheese:
http://www.macupdate.com/info.php/id/18778

(but hey it's free, not "spending $20")

And really, why would this make someone upset?

I can only think if someone had a control problem with having things the way THEY WANT THEM to be. No... must.. use... command.. .line....

I really have no clue why such a thing would curdle anything. Why would you even care?

I don't care how the next person uses the computer they bought. That goes into the obsessive compulsive slot.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Silky Voice of The Gorn

I suspect it's utilities like this that curdles besson's cheese:
http://www.macupdate.com/info.php/id/18778

(but hey it's free, not "spending $20")

That's not a bad example of one scenario I've outlined. By the time you download this thing, get it installed, blah blah, you could have just typed:

defaults write com.apple.screencapture type pdf

But yeah, it being free doesn't make it a perfect example. Suppose that it offered a GUI for a few options, and suppose that part of the time they simply didn't work, or there was some bizarre feedback in the GUI that made one question whether the option stuck... In other words, suppose that there was some sort of point of failure to bring into question - some sort of quirk...

In the context of something this simple, this is rather far-fetched, but that's sort of what I was describing. I've provided a few examples of my own.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Kevin

People were responding to this thread before your first post?

Kevin, quite sincerely, you probably don't want to even bother wasting your time responding to me, I've added you back to my internal little ignore list. I didn't bother even reading past this sentence. You are simply too exhausting.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by besson3c

Kevin, quite sincerely, you probably don't want to even bother wasting your time responding to me

Or... I can just keep doing what I want within the boundaries of the rules.

One thing I have noticed in MacNN. When someone puts another person on ignore, it usually has less to do with the person being on ignore doing anything wrong, and more to do with the ignorer just not wanting to "hear it" because they have thin skin. If I was making outlandish claims, you'd care less.

It upsets these same people when said ignored person STILL responds. And they attempt to get them to not respond by saying what you just did above.

I've added you back to my internal little ignore list.

Why did you take it off? Didn't you say in your LAST post you added me to it? Why are you STILL responding to me when I am on your ignore list?

I didn't bother even reading past this sentence. You are simply too exhausting.

Funny, it seems everyone that has replied to this thread feels the same about you.

Yet you don't see it.


You know that man
You hate?
You look more like him
Every day everyday
Hi-di-hos!
2 good shoes
Won't save your soul

[ism]

Originally Posted by Doofy

While we're here, how does one go about sending man pages to the printer?

This hint and the comments after it are a good way to do this. Easily view man pages with Preview.

I'm sure there are other ways, but this works nicely from the command line.

[chris v]

Originally Posted by besson3c

You'd rather press the same button 200 times rather than automating the task? What if the GUI for the CLI program doesn't support Automater or Applescript?

But Automator is teh suck GUI!1!!

Jeebous. 5 pages? Sorry for the snark, but good lord.

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by ism

This hint and the comments after it are a good way to do this. Easily view man pages with Preview.

I'm sure there are other ways, but this works nicely from the command line.

Cheers. I'll have a look at that later.

[Doofy]

So, I've been playing around with getting Automator to download stuff off web sites. Gotta say, it sucks - since it isn't persistent enough it gave up and just returned an "operation failed".

Wget sailed through the same task with absolutely no problems at all.

[Dakar]

Originally Posted by Doofy

So, I've been playing around with getting Automator to download stuff off web sites. Gotta say, it sucks - since it isn't persistent enough it gave up and just returned an "operation failed".

Wget sailed through the same task with absolutely no problems at all.

That damn lazy robot! Typical American.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by ism

This hint and the comments after it are a good way to do this. Easily view man pages with Preview.

I'm sure there are other ways, but this works nicely from the command line.

Nice trick!

I just tried a variation of that:

man tar > tar.txt

I was able to open up tar.txt in TextEdit, it is a simple text file.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Dakar

That damn lazy robot! Typical American.

Ironically, the only time wget can't do its job is when there is a robot.txt file in the Document Root blocking spider crawls


Wget is a good way to find out what parts of your site are inaccessible though, since it works just like a search engine spider would, AFAIK.

[TETENAL]

Originally Posted by besson3c

For instance, why would somebody pay $5 for a GUI ping tool when they can just do the same thing in the Terminal (should such a thing exist)?

You don't have to shell out $5 for a ping GUI. Apple made one and it's preinstalled on every computer. Look into your Utilities folder. If a GUI to these kind of tools is so ridiculous, why did Apple make one?

Originally Posted by besson3c

If I'm doing any ridiculing myself, it's unintentional - likely me being defensive in reaction to the backlash I've experienced in here.

In your very first post you called Mac users "wimpy" for not using the command line often enough. That set up the tone for the rest of the thread.

[TETENAL]

Originally Posted by besson3c

man tar > tar.txt

I was able to open up tar.txt in TextEdit, it is a simple text file.

Wimpy. I want to see you send the text file to vi and send it to the printer. All in one line. No clicking around in the GUI for a simple printout please.

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by besson3c

Ironically, the only time wget can't do its job is when there is a robot.txt file in the Document Root blocking spider crawls

And there's ways and means to get around that. My wget (on my Linux server, not a Mac) is set to look and act like a copy of Netscape.

[zmcgill]

Originally Posted by Kevin

I agree, I searched on Google for a while for pictures like this one but couldn't find one I liked. Please thread, just die.

[zmcgill]

I need to post twice in a row like besson.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by TETENAL

You don't have to shell out $5 for a ping GUI. Apple made one and it's preinstalled on every computer. Look into your Utilities folder. If a GUI to these kind of tools is so ridiculous, why did Apple make one?

I'm aware of that utility, my $5 ping GUI was a hypothetical example used to help convey the meaning I was trying to convey. I'm not exactly sure how the Apple utility is used in real life, I don't use it myself.

In your very first post you called Mac users "wimpy" for not using the command line often enough. That set up the tone for the rest of the thread.

I suppose I should have toned down my language, but my intention was to illicit some conversation and for that original post to launch us into this discussion. I've not gotten in anybody's face prior to that original post, I don't think, and certainly not on a personal basis accusing any one individual of being wimpy.

Whatever, it seems like what seemed like over-compensated backlash has died down a little now, so I'll move on.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Gossamer

I agree, I searched on Google for a while for pictures like this one but couldn't find one I liked. Please thread, just die.

Does this thread have some sort of magnetic pull or something? Last I checked, there are plenty of others.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Gossamer

I need to post twice in a row like besson.

Yes, posting twice in a row is virtually criminal! Good detective work in calling me out here, we can't have any of this back-to-back posting nonsense, it harms animals and affects our ecosystem and gravational pull.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by TETENAL

Wimpy. I want to see you send the text file to vi and send it to the printer. All in one line. No clicking around in the GUI for a simple printout please.

You probably could pipe it straight to CUPS, but I've never done so... I have virtually no experience with printing stuff in Unix.

[CharlesS]

Originally Posted by besson3c

That's not a bad example of one scenario I've outlined. By the time you download this thing, get it installed, blah blah, you could have just typed:

defaults write com.apple.screencapture type pdf

Actually, it is a bad example. The reason is that unless you've done this enough times that you've memorized the domain and key for defaults, you've got to Google for that info first. It's no different than having to go on MacUpdate and find your GUI app, with the exception that unless you have an excellent memory, you're going to have to Google for that domain and key every subsequent time you want to change that setting, whereas the download you'd only have to do once.