top | item 43907368

(no title)

tw600040 | 9 months ago

Not related to this post, but why in the world is anyone using TUI. Either go with GUI or go with commandline. This no man's land in the middle is the worst of both worlds..

discuss

order

wormius|9 months ago

TUIs are often more responsive in general. Some of us like the terminal and want to minimize as much mouse usage as possible (yes hotkeys exist in good GUI apps, but they're still primarily built around the WIMP model).

Command line often requires a lot of switch memorization. Command Line doesn't offer the full interactive/graphical power in this sort of situation. Command line is great for scripts and long running apps, or super simple interfaces.

Different apps have different requirements. Not everything needs a TUI, not everything needs a GUI, and if you want something similar to a GUI while staying in the terminal. Perhaps you don't have access to a windowing environment for some reason; perhaps you want to keep your requirements low in general.

Finally, why do you care? Some people like it others don't. Nobody comes in and shits on any programs that are GUI if they don't like it, they just don't use it. So, to quote The Dude: "That's just, like, your opinion man". Sorry for the snark, but... It really is, and you're free to have it. But it seems an irrelevant point, and there may be better forums/posts (maybe an "Ask HN" question would be a good option) to discuss this question in depth beyond snark.

yjftsjthsd-h|9 months ago

IMHO TUIs are the best of both worlds. Generally light and responsive [0], transparent over SSH, neatly falls into a tab/pane/window in screen/tmux/zellij, offer essentially everything I wanted from a GUI except graphics [1] which isn't usually a problem, and delightfully free of the latest charming "innovations" in UI reinvention (GNOME, I am looking directly at you).

[0] It is if course possible to make a light GUI and a slow+bloated TUI, but both are less common than the alternative.

[1] Sixel et al. exist but IME they rarely work well. Sadly.

Linux-Fan|9 months ago

I wrote about it extensively here: <https://masysma.net/37/why_terminal.xhtml>.

Short summary: No animations, No symbols, No touch optimization, no responsive design and I do most of the other stuff in the Terminal anyways so TUI is better "integration" YMMV :)

badsectoracula|9 months ago

> No animations, No symbols, No touch optimization, no responsive design

You don't have to make a GUI with any of those.

al13n|9 months ago

In this post's case, I went with TUI over GUI to make it work over SSH, which is how I use it most of the time.

KerrAvon|9 months ago

One common use case is remote debugging over serial or ssh.

edit: and a reason you would do this locally using ssh is debugging the UI layer itself. if you have to step through the window server, you can't be using the window server at the same time. Remote lldb/gdb debugging is often just flaky. I don't know why they're so unreliable, but they are.

justinrubek|9 months ago

I have many beloved TUI tools at this point, and I am considering investing further in TUI for some further projects I am building that I would want some kind of interface for beyond a command line. I'm not convinced by this argument. Would you mind elaborating on any specifics?

JCattheATM|9 months ago

Sometimes it's really nice having a terminal tool with a minimal interface without needing switches.

Other times it's just a contrarian thing.

fsckboy|9 months ago

are you considering emacs a tui? vi/vim? if you want to edit without a tui, i gotta recommend teco over ed/ex