> I used to think the same until I started using MacOS > X. I'm really > impressed at how much stuff you can do from GUI tools > and how very > little you need to actually bring up a terminal > window. They only times > I use a terminal window on MacOS X is to run shell > scripts I wrote > myself because I haven't drank the AppleScript > coolaid yet.
Without a doubt, the GUIs in OS X can do a lot; and I believe this is possible because the GUI group is tightly integrated or collaborates with the CLI group. I know this first hand, because I have an OS X iBook. The basic problem of a GUI is that it is always playing catch up with the CLI. So let's define two values: a) GUI's effectiveness b) GUI's success these two values are not necessarily related; but they should be. How do we define them? a) is defined by how close a GUI tracks the changes in CLI; if a GUI is always 100% up on CLI functionality, we could consider a) to be satisfied. b) is defined by usability: a GUI is there to make a complex task simple; that's a GUI's only purpose, because the whole paradigm of a graphical user interface is a different approach to doing the same task(s). Therefore, a GUI has to be designed intelligently, it has to be as simple as possible, and, to be widely accepted, it has to look nice; people are visual beings to a large degree. So, generally speaking, we could say that if one manages to design and maintain a GUI that satisfied both a) and b), the problem would be solved. Until it was time to catch up to the new CLI functionality again, which is an inherent problem of GUIs (if they're implemented correctly, that is, as a front end 'glue' to the CLI tool underneath). > I also think that Apple does provide sufficient > control over system > config these days. No longer is it a "don't touch" > but instead they > have sufficient legacy in doing stuff through the GUI > because there was > no CLI that they understand how to arrange a GUI so > it doesn't feel slow > and clunky to experience people. The critical think > I think though is > AppleScript - being able to interact with the GUI > progamatically like > you would with the UNIX shell is great. Unfortunately there has been many a time when I found the OS X networking GUI (the wireless section) inadequate for the task at hand. For example, once you set something up a certain way, it becomes very hard to "teach" OS X to do it differently; that's a flaw. Then there's the VPN. As sophisticated as OS X GUIs are, I can forget configuring Raccoon, that is, IPSec + IKE through a GUI. As far as the OS X himself is concerned, I'm very dissapointed in Apple. They've taken a lot files which have traditionally had ASCII content and made them binary, proprietary stuff. And when I think about what Apple did to FreeBSD (such a fine OS), it makes me just love Solaris even more. This message posted from opensolaris.org _______________________________________________ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
