It Seems that the CLI is Spreading

[Tommaso]

You know, many people here are getting upset at microsoft for instating this new CLI into their OS. I know this is a linux forums, and so many people here have grudges against microsoft, but we are always saying the linux is better than microsoft because of this and that.

Well guess what, it seems that microsoft is mimicking linux with this new decision. Perhaps, their devolopers are begining to see the power of a linux OS, and so they are adding similar features. There is no need to get mad at them. Their CLI might not be quite as powerfull as a linux CLI, but it is still a step in the right direction (according to linux users). Not to long ago, it seemed that the microsoft CLI was dieing. It should be considered a good thing that it is being re-instated.

Note: I sence that this post is leaving its original aim, and is turning into a debate about microsoft. I feel that a few more angry posts will lead to a thread locking.

[techieMoe]

Note: I sence that this post is leaving its original aim, and is turning into a debate about microsoft. I feel that a few more angry posts will lead to a thread locking.

You sense correctly, Padawan. I'm keeping an eye on it.

[Cabhan]

In an attempt to return some semblance of order:

Reading through some articles on Monad, I have found a few interesting things:

1) Passing data as objects. I said it before, I'll say it again: this is a very cool feature. Now, I have no problem with passing as text, but this will hopefully allow for more of the "small program does a single task" mindset that we have in Linux to enter into Windows. This allows for more variety, and will hopefully open up people to such development.

2) Commandlets all children of a single class. As a Java programmer, I'm very accustomed to having my programs have relationships. This too should help the meshing of different programs, as each will have certain common methods and parsers that will allow for easy data-passing.

3) Universal scalar types. I don't know how Batch does it currently, but one thing I love about Perl and Bash is that all scalars are simply that: scalars. I think that this inclusion will open people up to alternate programming, which is always good.

4) Built-in support for regular expressions. Not entirely the syntax that I like in my regexes, but still a step in the right direction!


I don't think that this will even begin to touch Bash's power, simply because Linux users are so accustomed to Bash that we really understand its power. However, I do think that Microsoft has made a very good decision in deciding to up its commandline power, and that this is a step in the right direction.

[gtmtnbiker98]

Windows (NT kernel base) itself is very stable... but what bothers me is that they have you pay extra for fancy automatic updating when I can't even tell if they do anything... and they KNOW that they have HUGE security holes and they make stuff like Microsoft Passport to store your credit card number online... which I NEVER want in the hands of MS in the first place... and they KNOW that they have BIG virus and spyware problems that cost people money and it seems like they are just trying to profit off of them by making people pay for new versions of Windows with "better security" even though we don't know what makes it more secure, since they are closed source they could just say it, 95% of the world would believe them, and we would have no way to actually tell if it WAS more secure or not...

I just wanted to see if anybody could shed some light on the Windows isntability as compared to Linux stability issue. In summary, nobody can provide real World, unbiased proof as to one being better than the other.

Don't get me wrong, I'm a strong Linux advocate, but in today's World, Microsoft Windows Server is pure dominant in the workplace. And given previous experience, Windows Server is just as stable as Linux - absent the constant monthly patch cycle.

As for Vista incorporating an enhanced CLI, I agree, Microsoft is feeling some heat from the GNU camp - but rest assured, Linux will not overcome Microsoft in market share anytime soon. Look at corporate America, Linux is deployed as a cheaper alternative to Microsoft for File/Print/HTTP servers. You don't see corporate America replacing their Exchange, SQL Server, and Oracle 9i servers with opensource on a large scale. But at least Oracle and IBM are porting Oracle database and IBM Web Spere to Linux which is a good thing.

The us vs. them debate is dead, both OS's must co-exist and current and future systems administrators had better become fluent in both platforms if they wish to become or remain competitive.

[ThoughtVelocity]

For windows command-line, make mine cygwin...

[CodeRoot]

I just wanted to see if anybody could shed some light on the Windows isntability as compared to Linux stability issue.

Those in search of light should not look for it in dark places (Microsoft FUD has a very shaded quality about it...) - the simple truth is, there is light everywhere - but it is being blocked by the blinders that the big gorilla puts on people while twisting their arms and placing them in handcuffs...

In summary, nobody can provide real World, unbiased proof as to one being better than the other.

Nor does anyone need to - you can have all the biased proof you need -- ask most any serious Linux user, and they will tell you "I like Linux better..." (which makes it better).

...Microsoft Windows Server is pure dominant in the workplace.

This is more a matter of history than anything else - just give it a little time...

As for Vista incorporating an enhanced CLI, I agree, Microsoft is feeling some heat from the GNU camp...

The way I see it, the mere fact that they are even doing it at all is related to something like this...

...both OS's must co-exist and current and future systems administrators had better become fluent in both platforms if they wish to become or remain competitive.

I respectfully disagree...


I am not trying to fan any flames -- I am just trying to make a point -- as with most other things in life, people sometimes have the bad habit of trying to find the answer from a single "point of light" (please forgive the reference). You have to look at the bigger picture. All "OS debates" are "dead" the moment they become centered on a single definition, detail, benchmark, or issue. Yet, often that is the approach people seem to take (because it works - people are often easily "swayed" by strong, singular, pin-point arguments - arguments that leave out 95% of the total picture while focusing on the 5%). You must "keep a certain distance" to see the bigger picture, lest you miss the forest because of a single tree.

To begin with, the only "true" authoritative reference worth considering in any Windows/*NIX "debate" is a person who has sufficient experience with both OS environments. Apples and oranges can only be properly compared by someone who has eaten enough of both. And then, they may compare the texture, taste, color - the seeds - any number of things - as well as the overall experience of eating it.

Those Linux users who also have a history with Windows - and have "migrated" over to Linux - did so for a variety of reasons. Some for texture, some for taste, some for color, some because of the seeds - any number of things - as well as the overall experience... The user who is very big on security and/or stability may not care nearly as much about how user-friendly or "pretty" the OS is. To another user, how "open" the OS is is all that matters. Some only prefer that the OS not do everything for them (outside of their knowledge or beyond their control). Another user may measure the overall experience - with several distinct and different "facets" being equally important.

Notice that I did not mention (in the previous paragraph) those that use both OS's -- in this context, they basically don't exist -- for whatever specific purposes they use Linux instead of Windows, in those things they have "migrated" to Linux -- the person who uses Linux for everything except "gaming" still values Windows for that purpose, but Linux for everything else -- the only possible existence of such is someone who actually uses both OS's equally for the same purpose.

The point is that different people look at it differently -- to imagine that there is a single answer to a single question that solves all is folly.

I would like to suggest that the bigger picture one looks at, the clearer view they will have. Anyone walking through the forest can evaluate any specific individual tree (as well as the forest as a whole). But the one who can see only a single tree (because they refuse to look beyond it) - knows very little or nothing about the forest...

[d38dm8nw81k1ng]

i suppose we should be congratulating MS for putting usefullness into their OS, but like i said before, the windows command line scares hell outta me. they may promise many features, but it's debatable how many will appear. i'd also like them to provide documentation too. GOOD documentation, not the "press this and you can access the internet" crap that is included with XP. i wonder if they are considering making it deliberately bad, to deter more people who are thinking of switching to linux. would be interesting, but i have no evidence to back it up, so if you want to dismiss it as insane ramblings then go ahead.