André wrote:
No, i do not want to create graphics via CLI or write them in the shape of an XML file.)
a) It is/was easier to create RIP graphics using a text editor, than any of the supplied graphical editors. b) Try doing something that should be simple, like changing the background colour from grey to black using a graphical editor. Then do the same thing with a tool that has a CLI.
- A GUI is easily discoverable, a CLI is not.
"easilly discoverable" depends upon * What the images are of, if there is no menu; * Menu layout, if there is a menu; * What tools will interact with either the menu, or images; Try this * Throw away your mouse; * Throw away your keyboard; * Throw away your monitor; Use _any_ program that has a GU. Now explain the "easilly discoverable" part of a GUI.
- A GUI is attractive (if done right), a CLI is not. Attractiveness
"Attractiveness" counts for nothing when it detracts from functionality. Benjamin wrote:
memorize everything as is needed to run a command line program for
everything...without taking months of solid training for each one. a) Appropriate names for the functions; b) Batch files/shell scripts/whatever they are called on your OS; c) Part of using software efficiently requires learning, and memorizing every function within the program. d) That because of the inherent user hostility of GUIs, for even tolerable use, there are groups of people that have to spend 1,6000 hours tolearn the basic interface ---knowing that they will never be able to be anything more than a novice-intermediate user, because the GUI is designed to maximize inefficient, unproductive performance. Ian wrote:
a GUI will for the most part slow you down. If you are a 20
wpm typist and don't know the commands you have a massive barrier to A GUI also slows down the 20 word per minute typist. xan jonathon
