While I agree with you that reluctance to use the terminal for literally anything is way too high, regular users shouldn’t have to. And some distros make that easy for them to never have to stick a toe into the terminal, and this is not a bad thing.
I don’t think it’s a bad thing that there are some tasks that can be done in a GUI.
I don’t believe that any Linux DE is at the point where a regular user never needs to use the terminal. Knowing how to use the terminal is, currently, a required skill for using Linux.
Now, don’t take this to mean that I think someone’s grandmother needs to be a terminal user. By “regular user” I mean “average person who has chosen to use Linux” and not “random person off the streets”, that person should probably use Windows still because Linux isn’t ready for everyone.
my friend, I want to impart something on you. I write this with the sincere hope it changes your mind.
Theaverage userof a computerdoes not wanttoeven think aboutthe operating system it uses.
Most people, myself included, want to work on our computer, not work on our computer (which is why I use Mint). An operating system should be the software version of a motherboard – an invisible plinth upon which all the other things you actually care about, sit. In a hardware context the things you care about are all the components plugged into the motherboard – your GPU, CPU, RAM, storage devices, and so on. In a software context, this is email, web browsing, video games, and office software, the programs the average user actually gives a shit about. Notice: Nowhere in that list does it say getting up into the systems guts via terminal or command prompt or whatever flavor of blinking cursor you prefer. Most users just want their programs to run and to never think about the underlying system, and that is okay. Not everyone needs to be technical, and shouldn’t have to be to use a computer and reap the full benefits of using one. I choose to be because I’m a fucking spaz, but that doesn’t mean someone who doesn’t want to be should instead be condemned to inferior offerings from the likes of Microsoft and Apple. If Linux were, indeed, the best – as Microsoft seems determined to prove via Windows enshittification – then it should be, ideally, just as easy for nontechnical people to pick up as Windows. If it isn’t, that’s a problem with Linux that is yet to be solved, not a problem with people.
Fortunately, my experience using Mint for the past year has been largely exactly that. It’s very close to that ideal, if not already there – I’ve had a few very minor issues, but, nothing I was unable to fix via a quick internet search.
I say all this in the hope you’ll understand, if you want Linux to take off, it needs to be accessible to the average idiot. It must be, because I don’t know if you’ve seen the news, but we are not cumulatively getting smarter.
The average user of a computer does not want to even think about the operating system it uses.
That is certainly true.
Not everyone needs to be technical, and shouldn’t have to be to use a computer and reap the full benefits of using one. I choose to be because I’m a fucking spaz, but that doesn’t mean someone who doesn’t want to be should instead be condemned to inferior offerings from the likes of Microsoft and Apple. If Linux were, indeed, the best – as Microsoft seems determined to prove via Windows enshittification – then it should be, ideally, just as easy for nontechnical people to pick up as Windows. If it isn’t, that’s a problem with Linux that is yet to be solved, not a problem with people.
[…]
I say all this in the hope you’ll understand, if you want Linux to take off, it needs to be accessible to the average idiot.
You seem to be misinterpreting what I am saying.
I am not here as a Linux evangelical, trying to spread the Source Code Word of Linus. It’s admirable that you want that, you should contribute to the many open source projects that are bringing that closer to reality.
I’m here as a user of Linux trying to read Linux memes in c/linuxmemes and so I focus my attention on the present state of being a user in Linux, not some hypothetical reality that, though desirable, doesn’t yet exist.
In the current state of things, Linux is not for everyone. It is a good operating system, but not everyone has the time to use it. I will certainly tell people of the advantages that it has over Windows and, for those capable, I will recommend it.
For the people that choose to use Linux today, the 1st of April in the Year of our Lord 2025: you will have to use the Terminal. It isn’t optional. Nor, despite the griping of newbies, is it a difficult thing to learn and you should become comfortable with it if you want to be a successful user of Linux. Artificially limiting yourself to GUI applications is going to make the operating system seem less capable than it actually is and you will be frustrated by a much larger set of problems.
Until that glorious day in The Future when the universal GUI DE comes out, learn to use the terminal.
This is the kind of mindset that prevents mass adoption of Linux. Sure the terminal should be available but there still should be distros catering to less tech-savvy people if we want the year of the Linux desktop to arrive at all. Some governments are looking to replace Windows with Linux, and you cannot expect the average desk worker to know or even care about doing stuff in a terminal.
You don’t need to do everything on the terminal – even today, you don’t have to. But you should not fear the terminal, the same way you should not fear a piano because you play a violin. Windows also has a terminal, there’s stuff that tells you to go there to enable some Powershel things, and no one complains.
You really don’t understand who you’re talking to here. The average person hasn’t heard about browser extensions. I’m serious. The amount of even engineers that work with me who are incredibly good at one specific thing, like autocad design, but don’t really know or care about general computer things is pretty high, let alone non technical personnel. I’ve had people ask me to explain extensions and how to use ad blocking software. People just want a computer that works and does the thing they want it to without fancy things.
People don’t fear the terminal, they just don’t understand it and they don’t care to memorize things to learn it. If Linux wants to be an end user desktop, you need to do everything by the GUI. What is intuitive, interesting and easy to you is a nightmare for other people. I’m assuming vice versa if the accountant gives you a 10 dimension excel spreadsheet or something. It might just be me projecting my fear of accounting excel spreadsheets.
Great comparison, because playing either piano or violin is beyond 99% of all people who just want to listen to music. Common users and office workers have never even heard of Powershell.
You should not have to learn for years before being comfortable using a computer. If everyone has to do that it’s not something that will be adopted widely, as we can obviously see with Linux on Desktop. It’s both a Software problem (either lack thereof or bad design) as well as a culture problem; the latter is what I criticize, because it’s so utterly unnecessary and alienates common people.
And the Windows Shell really isn’t comparable, it’s 100% optional.
Learn for years? Dude you just search on the internet if you need to find out how to do something in the terminal that you don’t know how to do. This isn’t the 90s where you had to have a bookshelf of technical manuals to install and run your favorite distro.
Then you have the security issue that comes from teaching users they should just trust whatever random people tell them to do when facing an issue with their computer.
Lol okay, just enter a command from the internet you don’t understand. What can possibly go wrong?
The learning isn’t about being able to enter something, but to know what not to copy and paste. Just executing commands from the internet is the fastest way to fuck up your computer, to use the CLI regularly you have to understand what happens. And to do so is something that grows over years; years of broken systems, at least if you wildly enter stuff from the internet.
This is not good enough if we ever want Linux to be mass adopted. And expecting it is even worse if this is to ever change; In my many years being into Linux I read outright warnings for e.g. Linux Mint users to not ever look for help outside of Mint forums because of this culture. Which is ridiculous, it shouldn’t be this way.
You don’t need years for a terminal, at least not for the stuff a normal user would have to expect to do with it (so eg.: not browsing files, that has good UIs already). But you should expect to have to learn something. We require people to learn and even certify their learning when they are to drive a car for example, and for computers we are not even askng 1/6th of that, even tho the last few decades show we maybe should.
Why? A computer is not a car. You should have to learn to use certain programs, sure. Can’t expect people to master spreadsheet or video editing programs by default. And maybe you should learn about the dangers of the Internet. But, at least in my opinion, the operating system should require as little attention as possible. It should be as intuitive as possible for anyone touching it for the first time. CLI is useful, sure. But it’s definitely not intuitive and thus inaccessible for many users.
The moment you need a secondary resource to be able to use your system, that system has failed for the vast majority of users. And it’s near impossible to learn how to use the terminal without a secondary resource. A good GUI you can figure out pretty quickly.
Terminal usage is a tool just like GUI tools, I don’t think it’s helpful either to preload people with the belief that it’s some arcane tool that takes years before you can start using it, like anything you pick it up by doing.
Can’t really say it’s 100% optional as a blanket case either, heavily depends on a user, my work I’ve depended on having a terminal for years, and that was even before I moved into SWE, I’ve seen lots of business developed processes put together as an amalgam of batch files, VBA/VBS, and python because they needed to put something together with what they had rights to.
Be honest that I don’t see the terminal as a barrier to Linux anyhow, for the use case of “I browse the internet and use office programs”, you absolutely do not need to drop to the CLI, at least not for Debian or Mint, can handle installs and updates through their graphical package managers. Most people probably aren’t setting up services or the like on their machines, and if they are they already require terminal usage on any operating system.
Touching virtual buttons on a multitouch screen wasn’t how novice users interacted with a computer until it was.
To me this feels like recommending Android to someone and then people on social media saying that I’m elitist for expecting someone to use a computer with only a touchscreen when everyone knows that you interact with computers with a mouse and keyboard.
I’m not speaking hypothetically, this was the exact argument people were using when smartphones were still nerd toys and not a standard part of human experience. “Nobody will ever use them”, “they’re too confusing”, “typing on a screen is too clunky at least my flip phone has buttons”.
People can learn. As soon as the iPhone came out suddenly everyone was capable of using a touchscreen interface and learning a new OS.
Linux isn’t for everyone. But if you’re going to choose make the leap to Linux, you will be using the terminal occasionally. You don’t have to be a terminal-only user, most people use a GUI for daily tasks.
As long as you’re okay learning how to do some basic terminal tasks you’ll be fine. But if you come into with the mindset that the terminal shouldn’t be needed and get upset at people for telling you otherwise, you’re going to have a bad time.
Thing is, terminal came first, then came a gui tool make things easier, more intuitive and then came touch to make things even easier.
Saying users should just get used to using the terminal feels to me more like someone designing a smartphone in 2025, that requires you to use a trackball and physical keyboard and then complaining about people wanting touchscreens, when they clearly could just get used to the trackball.
Of course they could, but why should they want to?
Using the terminal is not the next evolution, it’s technically two steps back. That doesn’t mean it’s bad or doesn’t have it’s place. It can be incredibly efficient for power users. But most users aren’t power users. They want the operating system to get out of their way so they can focus on what they actually want to do. And that’s not learning how to update their system via the CLI.
We’re not talking about most users, Linux isn’t for everyone.
Every time this argument comes up people always point at someone like their grandmother and her inability to learn the terminal as if that is the target audience for Linux. It isn’t, Linux isn’t for everyone. It’s an operating system built by and for enthusiasts.
There has been a lot of improvements to Linux so that ‘enthusiasts’ need to do less work but even the most user friendly distro requires you to use the terminal for some tasks.
But why shouldn’t it be for everyone? Why do grandmothers have to use Windows or macOS?
I mean, yes, for now, Linux isn’t a everyman‘s OS. But why shouldn’t the community strive to make it so? Isn’t the idea behind FOSS „by the people for the people“ not „by enthusiasts for enthusiasts“?
And I’m not saying that every distro should be idiot proof. The Arches and Gentoos do have their rightful place. I just think, the mindset should be more „how can we make Linux as a whole more accessible and inviting for everyone, so FOSS can become the dominant type of software one day“ and less (and I’m exaggerating here) „how dare regular people want to benefit from the same freedom as me, this should be for enthusiasts only“.
Because at the moment, only valve is really doing something to make Linux more mainstream and do you really want that movement in the hand of a company instead of the people?
I’d take it a step further that by “by enthusiasts, for enthusiasts”, they’re really meaning “it’s for the elites”. They like that it’s hard, they had to work to learn it and they’ll be damned if anyone should get it easier, and also it’s a way to flex on people.
I may be overstating this person’s take on it and reading more into it than is there, but that’s my general view of this enthusiast (elitist) mindset, and really, it isn’t doing anyone any favors.
Regular joes can’t really hurt the direction of this ecosystem; corpos are limited in the influence they have over it, and anyone can exclude their contributions (even systemd can be left out still). But more people using it means more resources available to improve things and more interest in that happening. It also means more direct support for mainstream programs rather than just a hodge podge of companies throwing out minimally usable versions as a proof of concept and not bothering to go further with the work of Wine, Valve through Proton and Steam Deck, and CodeWeavers, to pick up the slack and try to get things to mostly work right.
Anyway, tl;dr, I agree with you… The Gentoos and Arches aren’t going away just because there’s more mainstream interest, if anything they’ll get more enthusiasts to join because they got the itch from the easier distros, much like a gateway drug.
I’d take it a step further that by “by enthusiasts, for enthusiasts”, they’re really meaning “it’s for the elites”. They like that it’s hard, they had to work to learn it and they’ll be damned if anyone should get it easier, and also it’s a way to flex on people.
I may be overstating this person’s take on it and reading more into it than is there, but that’s my general view of this enthusiast (elitist) mindset, and really, it isn’t doing anyone any favors.
You’re going to always have a negative view of people that disagree with you if you simply create an strawman position and declare it as their beliefs rather than listening to what they’re saying.
I’ve never been against GUIs, as I’ve said in my previous comments. But, like the user I was replying to, treating terminal use like a failure of UI design instead of the core reason that Linux was developed is just ignorant of the history of the operating system.
If some people want to make a fully graphical UI for the everyman, that’s perfectly fine but that is only one small use case for Linux and since, as of today, such a UI doesn’t exist then everyone using Linux will need to learn to use the terminal because some tasks will require it. That’s the reality of Linux today.
Absolutely! Honestly I feel like human apathy towards leaning new things has increased exponentially over the years. People are thinking less and less, especially with Ai enabling people to put their brain in a jar and forgo critical thinking themselves.
I am very proficient with the terminal. But there are many use cases when I want a OS that does not need the terminal at all. For instances media dedicated pcs.
I have a pc that I only use from the couch, for playing games a viewing media, and using the terminal from my remote size keyboard is a bore, I would prefer a 100% gui solution for that usage.
For gaming and media consumption, you can run Steam Big Picture Mode or Plex/Jellyfin which are designed for controller use.
But you’re not doing system administration with a TV remote on any operating system. By having a system that you can fully control from the terminal, you can just ssh into it to fix any issues without wasting system resources on a GUI that you will rarely use.
I’ve gone back and forth on this topic over the years, but I’ve finally just come to the conclusion that the year of the Linux Desktop just…shouldn’t come, and I hate when I see this argument that people shouldn’t have to learn to use the terminal.
The terminal is about as difficult to learn as a Word Processor or a Spreadsheet Application.
Sure, it can get complicated sometimes, but most of the time you just become familiar with your daily habits in it and when something weird comes up that’s what a search engine is for.
A lot of the time when I hear “Computer users shouldn’t have to learn how to use the terminal,” what I hear is “Computer users shouldn’t have to learn how to use the Computer.”
f you want to play basketball but don’t want to pick up a ball or learn how to dribble, then you don’t want to play basketball. Maybe you just like to watch basketball?
But using a computer is not a spectator sport, you’re typing and clicking and touching, etc. You’re interacting with the computer, and thusly you have to speak it’s language, at least a little, to get stuff done.
Additionally, most Linux Distros these days have made things incredibly user friendly, just not as braindead easy as Windows or MacOS.
Beginner friendly distros (Ubuntu, Mint) generally require you to open up a terminal to update your system and install/uninstall new software, and that’s usually all you have to do. That is a couple commands to remember and one password.
If most people can’t manage that then, yeah, I’m sorry, Linux will never be for you, and distros shouldn’t inherently have to create an autoupdate fix all errors back end for you just for the sake of getting every idiot under the sun using Linux.
You don’t want to learn how to use the terminal? Then you don’t want to use Linux. You just hate Windows, and hating Windows does not mean you love Linux.
But why not make Linux idiot proof? What would you lose from the existence of a distro that has an easy gui tool for everything an average computer user would ever do?
The terminal wouldn’t go away or lose it’s functionality, if that’s how you prefer doing things but it would open up the benefits of Linux to a way bigger audience.
Because knowing how to use a terminal is not the same as knowing how to use a computer. Windows doesn’t need you to use the cmd for anything most people would ever do. Neither does macOS, Android, iOS, even ChromeOS. Only Linux can’t get rid of that stigma and I just don’t get why.
Why is it better to force users to run updates via the terminal than having a menu for that in the settings or the „AppStore“ (graphical package manager) or a „Update“ app?
Why don’t you want Linux to become easy enough to use that my grandma could handle it?
Because the use of the terminal is as intuitive as using a Word Processor. Learning to use the terminal is as important as learning how to type. Without this knowledge, I’d argue you’re not using your computer, you’re spectating. Which is fine if you’re paying for support, but with Linux you are doing no such thing unless you use Redhat.
As soon as computers hit the general public, there should have been a mass effort to teach people that the terminal is the main interface through which everything happens on a computer, just like there were a ton of men suddenly learning to type in the early 70s when computing suddenly became important to everyday work. Prior to that typing was considered the sole domain of female secretaries. But this never happened for use of the terminal for better or worse.
Ultimately I get that people don’t have time to learn everything, but, again, the terminal is as ubiquitous as the Word Processor and ten thousand times more powerful. The fact it is not a staple in the arsenal of anyone who has ever sat in front of a Computer screen is a sad state of affairs.
The argument I’m making is that we have multiple generations of people where the majority of them simply don’t speak the language of computers while the majority of them have to use them everyday. It’s no wonder they all get so frustrated. If only someone had taught them how to use it in the first place rather than gave them a bandaid solution that hides the majority of what’s happening behind the scenes.
While frustrating to learn at first, that is all learning, it is always hard to learn something new. Picking up a Word Processor is hard, learning to use Graphics Manipulation Program is hard, etc. But people rarely argue you shouldn’t learn to use those tools, even though the terminal is just as essential to modern computer use as those tools. Again, we have multiple generations who generally lack the knowledge on how to use something as essential as the Word Processor, and that is a damn shame.
The CLI is very much an enthusiast/professional tool. It isn‘t and it shouldn’t be the default in this day and age. Saying everyone should know how to use the CLI is like saying everyone should know how to use a DSLR camera instead of just relying on their phone’s or everyone should know how to drive a manual transmission car. Those are all great skills to have but most people just want a snapshot or a car that gets them from A to B safely. They don’t want to think about it. And most people just want a computer that gets out of their way. And why shouldn’t they have it?
And I’m not saying the terminal shouldn’t exist and that people shouldn’t be encouraged to learn about how it functions. But there should always be the option to completely avoid it. Because of you want mainstream adoption, you need to face the sad reality, that the Mainstream doesn’t want to look under the hood. And if you don’t want mainstream adoption, why?
I do want mainstream adoption … of the terminal. The terminal is not just a professional tool. In fact, whenever anything goes wrong with your computer silently, I can almost guarantee there’s some helpful output that you’d see had you been invoking that program from the terminal. So what ends up happening? You go to a “professional” who looks at that output, search engines the output, and uses the online documentation to attempt a fix.
The analogy to the car is somewhat apt. I’d argue we’d all be better off if we knew how to at least do some basic mechanic work. This is the same thing. I’m not saying we all need to live in the terminal…I’m saying we all should know the very basics around it. Update our system, read and search error problems should they arise, and know when and where to reach out to others for help when we can’t solve it. I don’t think it’s unreasonable to suggest everybody learn a tool, especially when, again, that tool becomes ubiquitous amongst anyone who does any troubleshooting with computers on a regular basis (i.e. everyone who ever encountered an error ever).
I don’t care about mainstream Linux adoption. I care about mainstream curiosity into how things we use everyday work and attaining a basic knowledge of it.
Many attempts have been made at graphical package updaters, and honestly they always end up just outputting an error message when something goes wrong. The reason it frustrates new users so much is that they aren’t used to having to troubleshoot their own systems. If they don’t wish to do so, that’s fine, but then they should pay for support since that requires other people’s time, efforts, and skills to do so.
Arguing that everything should just work on Linux, a free OS, without having to troubleshoot things on your own (which, again, 99% of the time, involves the terminal regardless of what OS you’re using), is simply a case of wanting to have your cake and eat it too. If you want to run Linux, and you refuse to pay for it, then complain that it should be more “user friendly”, which is just another way of saying “I want tech support but don’t want to pay for it”, then it shows you probably shouldn’t be using that OS, and maybe you don’t understand even the basics of how a computer works?
If you’re just not willing to do even the bare minimum to open up a terminal, attempt to run the program, read the output, and then research said output, then you should be on a platform that will provide the support you need should anything go wrong. In other words, you should be on Windows or MacOS.
If you all want the year of the Linux Desktop, and you all seem to be proclaiming it can’t happen until it can operate without the use of the terminal, then you should pay a group of developers to develop it and provide support for it. Until then, you are the maintainer of your own computer, and you should probably just do the work and open the terminal up and do the bare minimum, or shutup and go back to Windows/MacOS.
The terminal will never reach mainstream adoption because it already had in the 80s and 90s and people progressed away from CLI and towards GUI. It’s archaic. It’s a fallback. It’s useful, sure. I use it regularly. But not because I‘d not just prefer having a graphical front end. It’s only more useful because the respective front end is lacking.
Also, the „shut up and go use Windows/macOS“ attitude seems very elitist to me. You‘d rather have the non techies suffer high prices, privacy violations, etc., have them suffer microsoft/Apple instead of making the system more inviting for them? And you‘d rather have another company (like valve is doing right now btw) swoop in and offer what you refuse to entertain because you want everyone to do things the way you like to do things.
If you see having to use the terminal as a failure of the operating system then you shouldn’t use Linux
You don’t have to live in the terminal, but the amount of people who treat the terminal like it’s lava is too damn high.
While I agree with you that reluctance to use the terminal for literally anything is way too high, regular users shouldn’t have to. And some distros make that easy for them to never have to stick a toe into the terminal, and this is not a bad thing.
I don’t think it’s a bad thing that there are some tasks that can be done in a GUI.
I don’t believe that any Linux DE is at the point where a regular user never needs to use the terminal. Knowing how to use the terminal is, currently, a required skill for using Linux.
Now, don’t take this to mean that I think someone’s grandmother needs to be a terminal user. By “regular user” I mean “average person who has chosen to use Linux” and not “random person off the streets”, that person should probably use Windows still because Linux isn’t ready for everyone.
my friend, I want to impart something on you. I write this with the sincere hope it changes your mind.
The average user of a computer does not want to even think about the operating system it uses.
Most people, myself included, want to work on our computer, not work on our computer (which is why I use Mint). An operating system should be the software version of a motherboard – an invisible plinth upon which all the other things you actually care about, sit. In a hardware context the things you care about are all the components plugged into the motherboard – your GPU, CPU, RAM, storage devices, and so on. In a software context, this is email, web browsing, video games, and office software, the programs the average user actually gives a shit about. Notice: Nowhere in that list does it say getting up into the systems guts via terminal or command prompt or whatever flavor of blinking cursor you prefer. Most users just want their programs to run and to never think about the underlying system, and that is okay. Not everyone needs to be technical, and shouldn’t have to be to use a computer and reap the full benefits of using one. I choose to be because I’m a fucking spaz, but that doesn’t mean someone who doesn’t want to be should instead be condemned to inferior offerings from the likes of Microsoft and Apple. If Linux were, indeed, the best – as Microsoft seems determined to prove via Windows enshittification – then it should be, ideally, just as easy for nontechnical people to pick up as Windows. If it isn’t, that’s a problem with Linux that is yet to be solved, not a problem with people.
Fortunately, my experience using Mint for the past year has been largely exactly that. It’s very close to that ideal, if not already there – I’ve had a few very minor issues, but, nothing I was unable to fix via a quick internet search.
I say all this in the hope you’ll understand, if you want Linux to take off, it needs to be accessible to the average idiot. It must be, because I don’t know if you’ve seen the news, but we are not cumulatively getting smarter.
That is certainly true.
You seem to be misinterpreting what I am saying.
I am not here as a Linux evangelical, trying to spread the
Source CodeWord of Linus. It’s admirable that you want that, you should contribute to the many open source projects that are bringing that closer to reality.I’m here as a user of Linux trying to read Linux memes in c/linuxmemes and so I focus my attention on the present state of being a user in Linux, not some hypothetical reality that, though desirable, doesn’t yet exist.
In the current state of things, Linux is not for everyone. It is a good operating system, but not everyone has the time to use it. I will certainly tell people of the advantages that it has over Windows and, for those capable, I will recommend it.
For the people that choose to use Linux today, the 1st of April in the Year of our Lord 2025: you will have to use the Terminal. It isn’t optional. Nor, despite the griping of newbies, is it a difficult thing to learn and you should become comfortable with it if you want to be a successful user of Linux. Artificially limiting yourself to GUI applications is going to make the operating system seem less capable than it actually is and you will be frustrated by a much larger set of problems.
Until that glorious day in The Future when the universal GUI DE comes out, learn to use the terminal.
This is the kind of mindset that prevents mass adoption of Linux. Sure the terminal should be available but there still should be distros catering to less tech-savvy people if we want the year of the Linux desktop to arrive at all. Some governments are looking to replace Windows with Linux, and you cannot expect the average desk worker to know or even care about doing stuff in a terminal.
Year of the Linux desktop but it’s chrome os? :-)
Noooo go away and take that monkey’s paw with you :(
You don’t need to do everything on the terminal – even today, you don’t have to. But you should not fear the terminal, the same way you should not fear a piano because you play a violin. Windows also has a terminal, there’s stuff that tells you to go there to enable some Powershel things, and no one complains.
You really don’t understand who you’re talking to here. The average person hasn’t heard about browser extensions. I’m serious. The amount of even engineers that work with me who are incredibly good at one specific thing, like autocad design, but don’t really know or care about general computer things is pretty high, let alone non technical personnel. I’ve had people ask me to explain extensions and how to use ad blocking software. People just want a computer that works and does the thing they want it to without fancy things.
People don’t fear the terminal, they just don’t understand it and they don’t care to memorize things to learn it. If Linux wants to be an end user desktop, you need to do everything by the GUI. What is intuitive, interesting and easy to you is a nightmare for other people. I’m assuming vice versa if the accountant gives you a 10 dimension excel spreadsheet or something. It might just be me projecting my fear of accounting excel spreadsheets.
Great comparison, because playing either piano or violin is beyond 99% of all people who just want to listen to music. Common users and office workers have never even heard of Powershell.
You should not have to learn for years before being comfortable using a computer. If everyone has to do that it’s not something that will be adopted widely, as we can obviously see with Linux on Desktop. It’s both a Software problem (either lack thereof or bad design) as well as a culture problem; the latter is what I criticize, because it’s so utterly unnecessary and alienates common people.
And the Windows Shell really isn’t comparable, it’s 100% optional.
Learn for years? Dude you just search on the internet if you need to find out how to do something in the terminal that you don’t know how to do. This isn’t the 90s where you had to have a bookshelf of technical manuals to install and run your favorite distro.
Then you have the security issue that comes from teaching users they should just trust whatever random people tell them to do when facing an issue with their computer.
That would be an issue with a GUI too though.
You can’t do as much damage with a GUI that tells you what you’re doing in regular language vs commands.
sudo rm -rf /* means nothing to a newbie
“Reset to factory settings” is pretty freaking clear
To be fair, that is an issue with the implementation of the given commands, rather than the concept of the command line.
You could create a program that operates like so:
remove-file --dont-ask-for-confirmation house.pngLol okay, just enter a command from the internet you don’t understand. What can possibly go wrong? The learning isn’t about being able to enter something, but to know what not to copy and paste. Just executing commands from the internet is the fastest way to fuck up your computer, to use the CLI regularly you have to understand what happens. And to do so is something that grows over years; years of broken systems, at least if you wildly enter stuff from the internet.
This is not good enough if we ever want Linux to be mass adopted. And expecting it is even worse if this is to ever change; In my many years being into Linux I read outright warnings for e.g. Linux Mint users to not ever look for help outside of Mint forums because of this culture. Which is ridiculous, it shouldn’t be this way.
Now you’re just lying. I’m literally a non-programmer & it took me 1 month to properly learn the basics of CLI.
The lengths you terminal-haters will go to, oh man
You don’t need years for a terminal, at least not for the stuff a normal user would have to expect to do with it (so eg.: not browsing files, that has good UIs already). But you should expect to have to learn something. We require people to learn and even certify their learning when they are to drive a car for example, and for computers we are not even askng 1/6th of that, even tho the last few decades show we maybe should.
Why? A computer is not a car. You should have to learn to use certain programs, sure. Can’t expect people to master spreadsheet or video editing programs by default. And maybe you should learn about the dangers of the Internet. But, at least in my opinion, the operating system should require as little attention as possible. It should be as intuitive as possible for anyone touching it for the first time. CLI is useful, sure. But it’s definitely not intuitive and thus inaccessible for many users.
The moment you need a secondary resource to be able to use your system, that system has failed for the vast majority of users. And it’s near impossible to learn how to use the terminal without a secondary resource. A good GUI you can figure out pretty quickly.
Terminal usage is a tool just like GUI tools, I don’t think it’s helpful either to preload people with the belief that it’s some arcane tool that takes years before you can start using it, like anything you pick it up by doing.
Can’t really say it’s 100% optional as a blanket case either, heavily depends on a user, my work I’ve depended on having a terminal for years, and that was even before I moved into SWE, I’ve seen lots of business developed processes put together as an amalgam of batch files, VBA/VBS, and python because they needed to put something together with what they had rights to.
Be honest that I don’t see the terminal as a barrier to Linux anyhow, for the use case of “I browse the internet and use office programs”, you absolutely do not need to drop to the CLI, at least not for Debian or Mint, can handle installs and updates through their graphical package managers. Most people probably aren’t setting up services or the like on their machines, and if they are they already require terminal usage on any operating system.
That just isn’t how novice users interact with a computer, though. Most mainstream OSes have GUI for anything you’d need to do as a novice.
And how is Linux any different?
I’ve literally had a non-technical person who used Linux for less than a week fix an issue through the xfce gui while I was googling a solution.
You just need to choose a correct distro and DE for the job.
Everything but ffmpeg. ffmpeg was what made me accept (with silent contempt) the Terninal on Windows, fish made me love it on linux
Touching virtual buttons on a multitouch screen wasn’t how novice users interacted with a computer until it was.
To me this feels like recommending Android to someone and then people on social media saying that I’m elitist for expecting someone to use a computer with only a touchscreen when everyone knows that you interact with computers with a mouse and keyboard.
I’m not speaking hypothetically, this was the exact argument people were using when smartphones were still nerd toys and not a standard part of human experience. “Nobody will ever use them”, “they’re too confusing”, “typing on a screen is too clunky at least my flip phone has buttons”.
People can learn. As soon as the iPhone came out suddenly everyone was capable of using a touchscreen interface and learning a new OS.
Linux isn’t for everyone. But if you’re going to choose make the leap to Linux, you will be using the terminal occasionally. You don’t have to be a terminal-only user, most people use a GUI for daily tasks.
As long as you’re okay learning how to do some basic terminal tasks you’ll be fine. But if you come into with the mindset that the terminal shouldn’t be needed and get upset at people for telling you otherwise, you’re going to have a bad time.
The difference is that the touch screen stuff was a more dumbed down experience, not an increase in difficulty and options.
Thing is, terminal came first, then came a gui tool make things easier, more intuitive and then came touch to make things even easier.
Saying users should just get used to using the terminal feels to me more like someone designing a smartphone in 2025, that requires you to use a trackball and physical keyboard and then complaining about people wanting touchscreens, when they clearly could just get used to the trackball.
Of course they could, but why should they want to?
Using the terminal is not the next evolution, it’s technically two steps back. That doesn’t mean it’s bad or doesn’t have it’s place. It can be incredibly efficient for power users. But most users aren’t power users. They want the operating system to get out of their way so they can focus on what they actually want to do. And that’s not learning how to update their system via the CLI.
We’re not talking about most users, Linux isn’t for everyone.
Every time this argument comes up people always point at someone like their grandmother and her inability to learn the terminal as if that is the target audience for Linux. It isn’t, Linux isn’t for everyone. It’s an operating system built by and for enthusiasts.
There has been a lot of improvements to Linux so that ‘enthusiasts’ need to do less work but even the most user friendly distro requires you to use the terminal for some tasks.
But why shouldn’t it be for everyone? Why do grandmothers have to use Windows or macOS?
I mean, yes, for now, Linux isn’t a everyman‘s OS. But why shouldn’t the community strive to make it so? Isn’t the idea behind FOSS „by the people for the people“ not „by enthusiasts for enthusiasts“?
And I’m not saying that every distro should be idiot proof. The Arches and Gentoos do have their rightful place. I just think, the mindset should be more „how can we make Linux as a whole more accessible and inviting for everyone, so FOSS can become the dominant type of software one day“ and less (and I’m exaggerating here) „how dare regular people want to benefit from the same freedom as me, this should be for enthusiasts only“.
Because at the moment, only valve is really doing something to make Linux more mainstream and do you really want that movement in the hand of a company instead of the people?
I’d take it a step further that by “by enthusiasts, for enthusiasts”, they’re really meaning “it’s for the elites”. They like that it’s hard, they had to work to learn it and they’ll be damned if anyone should get it easier, and also it’s a way to flex on people.
I may be overstating this person’s take on it and reading more into it than is there, but that’s my general view of this enthusiast (elitist) mindset, and really, it isn’t doing anyone any favors.
Regular joes can’t really hurt the direction of this ecosystem; corpos are limited in the influence they have over it, and anyone can exclude their contributions (even systemd can be left out still). But more people using it means more resources available to improve things and more interest in that happening. It also means more direct support for mainstream programs rather than just a hodge podge of companies throwing out minimally usable versions as a proof of concept and not bothering to go further with the work of Wine, Valve through Proton and Steam Deck, and CodeWeavers, to pick up the slack and try to get things to mostly work right.
Anyway, tl;dr, I agree with you… The Gentoos and Arches aren’t going away just because there’s more mainstream interest, if anything they’ll get more enthusiasts to join because they got the itch from the easier distros, much like a gateway drug.
You’re going to always have a negative view of people that disagree with you if you simply create an strawman position and declare it as their beliefs rather than listening to what they’re saying.
I’ve never been against GUIs, as I’ve said in my previous comments. But, like the user I was replying to, treating terminal use like a failure of UI design instead of the core reason that Linux was developed is just ignorant of the history of the operating system.
If some people want to make a fully graphical UI for the everyman, that’s perfectly fine but that is only one small use case for Linux and since, as of today, such a UI doesn’t exist then everyone using Linux will need to learn to use the terminal because some tasks will require it. That’s the reality of Linux today.
Absolutely! Honestly I feel like human apathy towards leaning new things has increased exponentially over the years. People are thinking less and less, especially with Ai enabling people to put their brain in a jar and forgo critical thinking themselves.
normie users should not have to use the terminal
some linux users dream of having their grandma run linux so they never have to look at windows or macos ever again
Nah, that’s wrong.
I am very proficient with the terminal. But there are many use cases when I want a OS that does not need the terminal at all. For instances media dedicated pcs.
I have a pc that I only use from the couch, for playing games a viewing media, and using the terminal from my remote size keyboard is a bore, I would prefer a 100% gui solution for that usage.
For gaming and media consumption, you can run Steam Big Picture Mode or Plex/Jellyfin which are designed for controller use.
But you’re not doing system administration with a TV remote on any operating system. By having a system that you can fully control from the terminal, you can just ssh into it to fix any issues without wasting system resources on a GUI that you will rarely use.
I’ve gone back and forth on this topic over the years, but I’ve finally just come to the conclusion that the year of the Linux Desktop just…shouldn’t come, and I hate when I see this argument that people shouldn’t have to learn to use the terminal.
The terminal is about as difficult to learn as a Word Processor or a Spreadsheet Application.
Sure, it can get complicated sometimes, but most of the time you just become familiar with your daily habits in it and when something weird comes up that’s what a search engine is for.
A lot of the time when I hear “Computer users shouldn’t have to learn how to use the terminal,” what I hear is “Computer users shouldn’t have to learn how to use the Computer.”
f you want to play basketball but don’t want to pick up a ball or learn how to dribble, then you don’t want to play basketball. Maybe you just like to watch basketball?
But using a computer is not a spectator sport, you’re typing and clicking and touching, etc. You’re interacting with the computer, and thusly you have to speak it’s language, at least a little, to get stuff done.
Additionally, most Linux Distros these days have made things incredibly user friendly, just not as braindead easy as Windows or MacOS.
Beginner friendly distros (Ubuntu, Mint) generally require you to open up a terminal to update your system and install/uninstall new software, and that’s usually all you have to do. That is a couple commands to remember and one password.
If most people can’t manage that then, yeah, I’m sorry, Linux will never be for you, and distros shouldn’t inherently have to create an autoupdate fix all errors back end for you just for the sake of getting every idiot under the sun using Linux.
You don’t want to learn how to use the terminal? Then you don’t want to use Linux. You just hate Windows, and hating Windows does not mean you love Linux.
Saucy rant over.
But why not make Linux idiot proof? What would you lose from the existence of a distro that has an easy gui tool for everything an average computer user would ever do?
The terminal wouldn’t go away or lose it’s functionality, if that’s how you prefer doing things but it would open up the benefits of Linux to a way bigger audience.
Because knowing how to use a terminal is not the same as knowing how to use a computer. Windows doesn’t need you to use the cmd for anything most people would ever do. Neither does macOS, Android, iOS, even ChromeOS. Only Linux can’t get rid of that stigma and I just don’t get why.
Why is it better to force users to run updates via the terminal than having a menu for that in the settings or the „AppStore“ (graphical package manager) or a „Update“ app?
Why don’t you want Linux to become easy enough to use that my grandma could handle it?
Because the use of the terminal is as intuitive as using a Word Processor. Learning to use the terminal is as important as learning how to type. Without this knowledge, I’d argue you’re not using your computer, you’re spectating. Which is fine if you’re paying for support, but with Linux you are doing no such thing unless you use Redhat.
As soon as computers hit the general public, there should have been a mass effort to teach people that the terminal is the main interface through which everything happens on a computer, just like there were a ton of men suddenly learning to type in the early 70s when computing suddenly became important to everyday work. Prior to that typing was considered the sole domain of female secretaries. But this never happened for use of the terminal for better or worse.
Ultimately I get that people don’t have time to learn everything, but, again, the terminal is as ubiquitous as the Word Processor and ten thousand times more powerful. The fact it is not a staple in the arsenal of anyone who has ever sat in front of a Computer screen is a sad state of affairs.
The argument I’m making is that we have multiple generations of people where the majority of them simply don’t speak the language of computers while the majority of them have to use them everyday. It’s no wonder they all get so frustrated. If only someone had taught them how to use it in the first place rather than gave them a bandaid solution that hides the majority of what’s happening behind the scenes.
While frustrating to learn at first, that is all learning, it is always hard to learn something new. Picking up a Word Processor is hard, learning to use Graphics Manipulation Program is hard, etc. But people rarely argue you shouldn’t learn to use those tools, even though the terminal is just as essential to modern computer use as those tools. Again, we have multiple generations who generally lack the knowledge on how to use something as essential as the Word Processor, and that is a damn shame.
The CLI is very much an enthusiast/professional tool. It isn‘t and it shouldn’t be the default in this day and age. Saying everyone should know how to use the CLI is like saying everyone should know how to use a DSLR camera instead of just relying on their phone’s or everyone should know how to drive a manual transmission car. Those are all great skills to have but most people just want a snapshot or a car that gets them from A to B safely. They don’t want to think about it. And most people just want a computer that gets out of their way. And why shouldn’t they have it?
And I’m not saying the terminal shouldn’t exist and that people shouldn’t be encouraged to learn about how it functions. But there should always be the option to completely avoid it. Because of you want mainstream adoption, you need to face the sad reality, that the Mainstream doesn’t want to look under the hood. And if you don’t want mainstream adoption, why?
I do want mainstream adoption … of the terminal. The terminal is not just a professional tool. In fact, whenever anything goes wrong with your computer silently, I can almost guarantee there’s some helpful output that you’d see had you been invoking that program from the terminal. So what ends up happening? You go to a “professional” who looks at that output, search engines the output, and uses the online documentation to attempt a fix.
The analogy to the car is somewhat apt. I’d argue we’d all be better off if we knew how to at least do some basic mechanic work. This is the same thing. I’m not saying we all need to live in the terminal…I’m saying we all should know the very basics around it. Update our system, read and search error problems should they arise, and know when and where to reach out to others for help when we can’t solve it. I don’t think it’s unreasonable to suggest everybody learn a tool, especially when, again, that tool becomes ubiquitous amongst anyone who does any troubleshooting with computers on a regular basis (i.e. everyone who ever encountered an error ever).
I don’t care about mainstream Linux adoption. I care about mainstream curiosity into how things we use everyday work and attaining a basic knowledge of it.
Many attempts have been made at graphical package updaters, and honestly they always end up just outputting an error message when something goes wrong. The reason it frustrates new users so much is that they aren’t used to having to troubleshoot their own systems. If they don’t wish to do so, that’s fine, but then they should pay for support since that requires other people’s time, efforts, and skills to do so.
Arguing that everything should just work on Linux, a free OS, without having to troubleshoot things on your own (which, again, 99% of the time, involves the terminal regardless of what OS you’re using), is simply a case of wanting to have your cake and eat it too. If you want to run Linux, and you refuse to pay for it, then complain that it should be more “user friendly”, which is just another way of saying “I want tech support but don’t want to pay for it”, then it shows you probably shouldn’t be using that OS, and maybe you don’t understand even the basics of how a computer works?
If you’re just not willing to do even the bare minimum to open up a terminal, attempt to run the program, read the output, and then research said output, then you should be on a platform that will provide the support you need should anything go wrong. In other words, you should be on Windows or MacOS.
If you all want the year of the Linux Desktop, and you all seem to be proclaiming it can’t happen until it can operate without the use of the terminal, then you should pay a group of developers to develop it and provide support for it. Until then, you are the maintainer of your own computer, and you should probably just do the work and open the terminal up and do the bare minimum, or shutup and go back to Windows/MacOS.
Edit: wording/grammar.
The terminal will never reach mainstream adoption because it already had in the 80s and 90s and people progressed away from CLI and towards GUI. It’s archaic. It’s a fallback. It’s useful, sure. I use it regularly. But not because I‘d not just prefer having a graphical front end. It’s only more useful because the respective front end is lacking.
Also, the „shut up and go use Windows/macOS“ attitude seems very elitist to me. You‘d rather have the non techies suffer high prices, privacy violations, etc., have them suffer microsoft/Apple instead of making the system more inviting for them? And you‘d rather have another company (like valve is doing right now btw) swoop in and offer what you refuse to entertain because you want everyone to do things the way you like to do things.