>design the system from the ground up to use a graphical interface>no hidden CLI anywhere, even if the system crashes. a graphical interface means a graphical interface.>in 1984, when every other system was to a great degree CLI-based. (even the Alto, which pioneered the GUI, still made heavy use of a CLI-window.)Why was Apple the only big player to ever take the GUI seriously in its own right? Are there any projects today that operate in the same spirit? Not just hiding the CLI from the end user, but excluding it all together.
androidiOS
devs mistaking their workflow as an end-user's workflow. Jobs being a normie helped.
>>101238909I forget how iOS works, but Android's recovery mode is text based.
>>101238964https://everything2.com/title/MicroBug
>>101238902you're confusing "has a CLI" with "starts at the console, then boots up a GUI"Windows 3.0 had a CLI but also could be booted into after booting into DOSWindows NT was an all-GUI thing, but also had a CLI for the people who wanted itIMNSHO any desktop OS that doesn't have a CLI is either merely old (like Mac OS back in the day) or a toy (or both)
>>101238964recovery is a graphical application. it's not usable from shell. if all you have is an adb connection to recovery you might as well kys actually, there's nothing you can do without physical buttons and a screen. I hate google so much it's unreal
>Apple builds a thing without a feature>has to hack feature into the thing (CLI, file system) for people to actually get work done
Devs are retards who never figured out how to efficiently create a GUI for everything. They act like creating the smallest window just to add a parameter with a basic control type is too hard.
the ONE thing I'll give Apple is their fucking UI designers. because god DAMN. love it as much as i love my current xfce theme.
>>101240526The ones they had in 1984 maybe. Current crop are a bit dim.
>>101238902>ITT: retarded coomer can't use CLI. Proceeds to rant maniacally about shitty old ass OSfuck off faggot
>>101240542weird projectionwhy would your imaginary coomer care that mac OS today is unix under the hood?
technically CLI is a subset of GUI. its API supposed to be simplified, but in reality have to use some abstraction libraryhundreds of programs are designed to take arguments, run and quit, they only report some text as a result.. how do you run those in GUI?
>>101239869Many such cases.
>>101241979>technically CLI is a subset of GUI>is there when there's no GUIhave you really never used a Unix without a GUI?>how do you run those in GUI?>have window for setting parameters>have a button to do the operationIt's really not that hard. But I think the thread is more about settings anyway, not converting a video file. There's no excuse for all the stuff that can only be done through CLI or by editing files not being doable by GUI, mostly when you look at macOS parameter stuff.
>>101238902>Why was Apple the only big player to ever take the GUI seriously in its own right?no. that was commodore's amiga.>ot just hiding the CLI from the end user, but excluding it all together.that's why apple struggled to sell machines and was still being destroyed by commodore and ibm. job was such a genius. then apple fired him and they bought next's OS, which had a cli. apparently jobs thought it was important for next.
>>101241979maybe now. but before.. what gui, faggot? you live in a fucking clown world.>>101242243>have you really never used a Unix without a GUI?most people before the 1990s were forced to use unix without any gui. you were lucky to get a text based gui. nobody could afford $100k+ for a sun workstation or SGI. linux was still utter fucking shit in the 1990s. nobody on this board was using unix before 2000. NONE. these dumb vantablack monkeys on this board thinks linux invented everything and we've always had gay guis with big gay shining buttons that namefags that write utter cancer can drool over.
>can use your eyes to look at cliits a gui
Windows 1.0 was better (surprised=no one)
>>101242801when will someone perfect the aural UI, the smell UI, and the taste UI?
>>101242243> have you really never used a Unix without a GUI?unix OS doesnt exist, i know there is Linux OS or FreeBSD OS. CLI is a subset of GUI, CLI may be implemented in GUI or may be not implemented, like in that ancient OS
>>101242771unix OS doesnt exist. there is Windows OS. it had a conhost that implemented CLI. in earlier versions, it switched video card in text mode, like in 80x25 characters SVGA/EGA/MGPGA etc letters (doesnt matter now), later they implemented it as a window in current pixelated graphic mode. same with *NIX OSes retard
>>101238902>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Programmer%27s_keyThey literally gave you the ability to directly enter machine code instructions. Can your modern PC do that?
>>101243722>>101239107this is what it looked like
>>101238902I don't know but BeOS was focused entirely on the GUI.
>>101238902>Why was Apple the only big player to ever take the GUI seriously in its own right?They weren't. Unfortunately, everyone made GUIs and GUIs remain common today.>Are there any projects today that operate in the same spirit? Not just hiding the CLI from the end user, but excluding it all together.Only mobile does this. Excluding the CLI in general is such a bad idea that nobody does it for anything other than locked down mobile toys. Not even Apple does this with Mac OS, because the CLI is too useful for programming work.
>>101238902and then proceeds to freeze/crash until the mid-to-late 90s because it lacked multiprocessing and a single program would refuse to hand control back over and monopolize system resources.
I was a massive fan of the older apple design too. While nothing is essentially perfect, Xfce hits that sweet spot for me. I don't care about modern design at all.
>>101239869very few Mac end users needed or need a CLI
