• @rebelflesh@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    87 days ago

    I don’t think so, but I do criticize not having an option, that is why I stopped using Cisco personally and professionally, some things are fast using the cli, some things just need an Ui, you need both.

        • Jerkface (any/all)
          link
          fedilink
          English
          8
          edit-2
          7 days ago

          See, in my mind, a CLI is a line buffer-based interface, whereas a TUI is an interactive character-based interface. sed or bash is CLI and vi or rogue is TUI.

          • @jackalope@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            27 days ago

            I think of tui as “text user interface” and use it as a broad category but mostly for more advanced clis that have a graphical quality to them despite being text based, such as ranger or slack-term. Some tuis even have mouse controls!

    • @jj4211@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      37 days ago

      Like I get and appreciate the CLI and for networking, that’s pretty much all I’m using anyway, but I am shocked that enterprise networking doesn’t even bother to do any GUI. Once upon a time Mellanox Onyx bothered to do a GUI and I could see some people light up, finally an enterprise switch that would let them do some stuff from a GUI. Then nVidia bought them and Cumulus and ditched their GUI.

      There’s this kind of weird “turn in your geek card” culture about rejecting GUIs, but there’s a good amount of the market that want at least the option, even if they frankly are a bit ashamed to admit it. You definitely have to move beyond GUI if you want your tasks to scale, but not every engagement witih the technology needs to scale.