• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    121 year ago

    Recently I tried a new, modern distro: Solus.

    After installation, I survived about 10 minutes without a command line and the next thing I needed was their package manager’s manual (because that fancy GUI software shop simply killed itself)

    No big deal for me. I feel safe on these paths. But IMHO “Linux without command line” is still only a dream.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      31 year ago

      I think that is simply because it was some new random distro. I bet debian or fedora with kde and the discover app would be just fine for most people.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    11 year ago

    Why would you want to?

    How can I trust an application that was installed by a “Software Manager” that doesn’t have super cow powers?

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      21 year ago

      This is more a question for non-power users. They are the key to widespread adoption and supplanting Windows. The OS has to be user friendly to the point that people don’t need to worry about the terminal unless absolutely necessary but still flexible enough to not alienate the power users that want to dive deep into it.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    51 year ago

    I think tools like YaST help to save time, instead of editing the bootloader in config files, you can simply enter, search for “Boot Loader” and edit there, be following a tutorial or official documentation. I sometimes prefer to use YaST just so I don’t do things wrong. it’s like the old Control Panel in Windows.

  • ChaoticNeutralCzech
    link
    fedilink
    25
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Even basic things in distros are quite different, for example the frontend for settings, so tech support threads will show how to do it in the backend. Oh well, but then there’s someone who suggests

    sudo nano /etc/default/grub
    

    If you’re a noob, run this and get a “nano: command not found” error, you’ll google it and learn to resolve it using apt. However, Manjaro’s package manager is pacman but you don’t know, so you install apt using a weird guide without knowing what it even is. The next update then wreaks havoc on your system.

    My first install ended in a dependency hell because of this.

    • Possibly linuxOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      151 year ago

      Well no one in there right mind should use Manjaro so that was mistake no. 1

      • Dablin
        link
        fedilink
        61 year ago

        Why, what is the problem with Manjaro in respect to other distros and would imply someone is mentally impaired to use it?

        • Possibly linuxOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          41 year ago

          People aren’t mentally impaired because they use Manjaro. However, Manjaro is problematic as a distro and should be avoided if possible.

            • Possibly linuxOP
              link
              fedilink
              English
              21 year ago

              That’s probably for the best. If Manjaro was a little more honest and straight forward I wouldn’t have an issue. The problem is that they say they are kind ignorant of there mistakes.

              Honestly they could ask for help and the community would step up.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    11 year ago

    You can. Most things have gui options.

    But you quickly learn for somethings. The terminal is just easier.

    If you ignore odd stuff. Most everyday stuff to maintain the system is available in a controlled panal like program. It varies based on distribution and windows manager. But the basic setup is there for most things.

    Its when you want to do something creative it gets more complex. While most commands have gui apps. Most online guidance will just find the terminal an easy way to guide you.

  • Eugenia
    link
    fedilink
    English
    51 year ago

    Ιt depends on your competence. My mom’s laptop is Debian with XFCE (2 GB RAM old Chromebook converted to run Debian) and of course, she doesn’t use the terminal. But then again, she doesn’t even know how to open a new tab on Chrome. She just uses 1 tab at the time (which is why it’s enough with 2 GB of RAM). So she’s never going to see a terminal in her life, and it’s going to work just fine for her, since the only thing she does on a computer is load 1 tab on Chrome, and mostly use Facebook, or youtube, or news/recipe sites that I have put on her bookmark bar. When the computer needs to be updated, I do it for her once a month or so (using the terminal).

    But if you’re trying to do a lot more than that, then maybe, sometimes, you will need to fix or change things using the terminal.

  • southsamurai
    link
    fedilink
    91 year ago

    Yeah, obviously, or the title wouldn’t even have happened.

    And it’s been that way for a while now. Back when windows 10 happened, I was able to install mint, get most of my preferred programs set up, and handle data transfer with zero CLI use. Which was awesome, because my dyslexic ass would have taken forever otherwise. It wasn’t until I started putzing around for pop and giggles that I even opened a terminal.

    My mom w as able to jump right in after installation of mint, and go through the gui to try things out, no issues.

  • Captain Aggravated
    cake
    link
    fedilink
    English
    231 year ago

    I’ve been daily driving Linux Mint for 10 years now. The answer to this question is “for what most people consider everyday usage, you have to use the Linux terminal about as often as you have to edit the Windows registry.” And in fact over the 10 years I’ve been a Linux user, GUI tools in Linux are increasingly available, and I’ve heard Windows normies talking about the registry more.

    When I started out, Mint shipped with Synaptic Package Manager, and a lot of distros didn’t include a GUI at all. Now GUI package managers are the rule rather than the exception and most have bespoke polished app store -like things. You of course can still use apt or dnf or pacman or whatever, but you decreasingly have to.

    I never once touched the registry on my Win 98, Win XP, Win Vista or Win 7 machines. Win 8 required a couple registry keys to turn off that…curtain that you had to click away to get to the login screen? and a few other “tablet first” features Win 8 had, and now I hear “just go and add these registry keys to put the start menu on the left, turn off ads, re-enable right click and retract the rectal thermometer.”

    Linux is becoming more normie friendly while Windows is genuinely becoming less normie friendly.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    5
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Package management is probably the biggest thing a Linux user might need to use the terminal for. The graphical package managers used by default on most desktop environments are far too limited.

    KDE’s Discover for instance is capable of installing (graphical) desktop applications, uninstalling packages and performing updates. Sure, it supports native packages on the majority of distros through PackageKit, as well as Flatpaks and Snaps, but it can only perform very basic package manager operations. I imagine most users will at some point need to install a package that isn’t a graphical desktop application, such as a driver or an optional dependency and they will need to use the terminal for it.

    To my knowledge, this is also the state of most other graphical package managers that take the form of “software centers” like Discover. More powerful graphical package managers do exist, usually specific to a specific package manager such as Octopi for Pacman. Few distros ship with them, however. I believe one notable exception is OpenSUSE with YaST. There’s also dnfdragora on Fedora, which is pretty basic, but might be good enough for most purposes.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      2
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      There is also Synaptic which is a graphical front-end for apt, although I would definitely class it as less user friendly than Discover and the like.

      I know if I was doing some Linux challenge with no terminal it would have to be my crutch.

      Edit: Arch Linux has pamac which I used more frequently than the terminal back then.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    81 year ago

    For me, the terminal is something I’ll learn once I’m more familiar with which apps I like. Until then, it’s nice to have something like pamac to help me find the thing I need.

  • @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    3
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    To be fair you can’t use windows without using the terminal. And you have to open regedit to turn off a lot of annoying crap

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      2
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Not truth. I’m an only Linux user for 5 years now, but windows could work without terminal for 99% of the users.

      If you are an exception, like me, it doesn’t count.