"Anything that can be done in GUI is better than in terminal"

Yes it's wrong and stupid. Let Microsoft fans disagree.

Depends on scenario but it can go the other way around

Well, I wouldn't like to be editing video in the terminal...

@JonnyCodewalker imagine playing video games via command line

@JonnyCodewalker I wasn’t talking about text games >:)

I will argue to the day I die that git gui's like sourcetree are necessary.

Sick and tired of working with terminal fan boys, giving me their reasons why they love terminal, only to come back to them 2 days later to debug where their code is gone.

Terminals are not user friendly and are limited in capability.

GUI's can be and when they are can be a highly efficient means of working.

It all boils down to the requirements of the application, if it just asks a series of inputs then a terminal makes more sense, anything more complicated then i would suggest a GUI.

Then i will stay in the middle. Very middle.

TUI !!!

Even in Windows I use cmd/powershell when I can

Wow, there are still kids around that are that insecure about their code that they need to have a terminal open to feel cool and like they're manipulating the matrix... You are supposed to be a dev. The primary purpose of a dev is to build things that make our lives easier. We utilise reusable code to create libraries for each other that means we don't have to keep reinventing the wheel and so that we can focus on innovating and creating cool shit. We build tools so that we can quickly and easily materialise our ideas and we build upon the work of others to push us forward as a technological species! If there is an option to press one button and perform the exact same task as typing each character of a command over and over, push the fucking button you lame fuck and get on with it!

I like to use them both. Terminal and GUI. Each situation asks for a different way to solve them, so I use accordingly.

Depends on what it is. Also, no one likes a steroid CLI cheerleader.

@ALivingMemory

Have to disagree.

The problem lies in composability of operations.

In bash I can run my unit tests, and pipe the result into a text file. Or convert an image to tiff, OCR the contents, parse it through awk, and send it as a post request to an API.

GUI applications rarely chain together like that.

But yeah, if I have to crop a png I tend to prefer the GUI of Gimp/Photoshop over the command line options of ImageMagick as well.

building -git stuff from the pacman/aur gui feels like it takes WAY longer than installing through the terminal

For i in *wav ; ffmpeg -i $i $i.mp3 ; done

How you gonna do that in a damn gui.

Tbh i love both. Both are fantastic UIs. xfce4 on Fedora 4eva

@ALivingMemory to be honest I am a sysadmin in disguise

@wolt Don't get me wrong, I have no problem with shells etc and I also use them all the time. I was not labelling everyone who uses them as insecure, it's just people that have that snottiness about it and who deliberately avoid using any GUI or tool because they are too cool for that. Granted, a lot of GUI solutions to command line based processes are generally shit, (source control like git or svn is a good example, most GUIs are clunky and dated). However, others can be more efficient and even better if you can get shit done quickly within your IDE, for example, so there is less switching of contexts. It's actually relatively easy to chain actions in a UI and build a command using dropdowns and user selections. One of the main issues we have is that most GUIs we get stuck with as developers are slapped together by other developers that do not always utilise the science behind effective UI design etc. Some devs do have an eye for design and usability, and some really do not lol