Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How bad is the Windows command line really?

blog.nullspace.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 110 posts

Re: How bad is the Windows command line really?

#101

Post by dingo_bat »

daigoba66 wrote: post #76
dingo_bat wrote: post #22

The cmd.exe on Windows 10 is a significant improvement from older versions. So much so that it has become actually useful now.

I think you're thinking of conhost which is the console window program used to run cmd.exe, PowerShell, et al. That has some new features. But I don't cmd.exe itself saw many, if any changes in Win10.

One of the biggest (maybe silly) change is that cmd is fully resizable. I think Powershell was already able to do this in Win 7. So I think apart from the changes to conhost, cmd itself has been upgraded in some ways.

Re: How bad is the Windows command line really?

#103

Post by tbyehl »

adzm wrote: post #72
bad_user wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> you are now piping real language objects Which is in fact a bad idea, because in order for stdin to accept objects and stdout to output objects, now those commands have to be powered by PowerShell and .NET. In other words you're in a very finite and closed environment that does not interoperate with the outside world. You know, love or hate Unix, but the fact remains that this family of operating systems, including…

Those who don't understand Unix are doomed to repeat it.

Those who haven't read the Monad (Powershell) Manifesto[1] are doomed to keep repeating Unix's failures.

[1] http://www.jsnover.com/blog/2011/10/01/monad-manifesto/

Re: How bad is the Windows command line really?

#104

Post by choosername »

conceit wrote: post #31
EvanAnderson wrote: post #8

I get perverse joy out of using the Windows CMD.EXE shell (and the earlier COMMAND.COM from MS-DOS). Yes, it's tremendously crufty, idiosyncratic, and sometimes seems down-right illogical in its behavior. Arguably, just about anything else is better, but it holds a special place in my heart.

If I could downvote you, I would. That's probably why I'm not allowed to. :)

kill-it-with-fire kind of downvote, not a HN smug just-because-I-can kinda downvote.

Re: How bad is the Windows command line really?

#105

Post by JoBrad »

byuu wrote: post #78
sixothree wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree it's pretty bad. But... > I can't make the window more than 80-characters wide dynamically. Windows 10 fixes this. You can resize the window and it wraps text better than any other terminal out there. > Copy-and-paste as well is just complete garbage that takes forever. Turn on Quick Edit. Now drag to select and right click to copy. > There's no tab-completion. Tab completion for filepaths works quite well fo…

> Windows 10 fixes this. You can resize the window and it wraps text better than any other terminal out there. Don't want to derail with Windows 10 arguments, but for me, that's a total deal breaker at this time. But thanks for pointing it out! Now if I find out Windows 10 can handle LF-formatted text in Notepad, I'll have to check and see if Hell froze over :P > Turn on Quick Edit. Now drag to select and right click…

I use Notepad2 as a Notepad replacement (no tabs, etc), and it handles LF only just fine.

Re: How bad is the Windows command line really?

#106

Post by brudgers »

Roboprog wrote: post #100
brudgers wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the 1980's a 80286 would have been toward the high end of x86 systems. The 80386 started shipping in bulk in 1986 and the Compaq DeskPro 386 and IBM PS/2 Model 80 were well north of $5000 in 1987 and the "prosumer" PS/2 was the Model 60 with a 80286 when the line was released. Even in the late 1980's 8088 based systems were pretty typical and why IBM included the PS/2 25 and 30 in its initial product line.

I remember using (sharing!) an XT (8088? 8086???) at work in 1985. One good thing about the 386 in 1986 was that it made the price of 286 (AT/clone) systems come down. I almost never saw an XT after 1986. We started seeing quite a few more clones (Compaq, etc) about that time, as well. Which is of course a big tangent off of "why/whence command.com & .BAT files" :-) OS/2 and Windows were a big deal in virtualizing me…

I think the 80386SX was also a factor in lower 80286 prices after the 386DX came out. Those systems were really popular.

When I bought the Amiga 500 in 1988, 8088 Turbo machines were still the entry level clone system. My vague recollection of the consumer and small business market was that that obtained for a couple of more years.

Re: How bad is the Windows command line really?

#107

Post by sixothree »

sandworm101 wrote: post #64
sixothree wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree it's pretty bad. But... > I can't make the window more than 80-characters wide dynamically. Windows 10 fixes this. You can resize the window and it wraps text better than any other terminal out there. > Copy-and-paste as well is just complete garbage that takes forever. Turn on Quick Edit. Now drag to select and right click to copy. > There's no tab-completion. Tab completion for filepaths works quite well fo…

> Turn on Quick Edit. Now drag to select and right click to copy. Command line + mouse = GUI, not command line.

Then turn on "Extended text selection keys" and you can use shift with arrows to select and ctl-c to copy.

Re: How bad is the Windows command line really?

#108

Post by sixothree »

mateuszf wrote: post #79
NetStrikeForce wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm curious, how do you copy and paste in Bash without a GUI?

It's not about GUI, but about not using mouse.

You don't need a mouse for the Windows command prompt. You just need to turn on an extra option. I don't see the problem here.

Re: How bad is the Windows command line really?

#109

Post by sixothree »

Programmatic wrote: post #68
sixothree wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree it's pretty bad. But... > I can't make the window more than 80-characters wide dynamically. Windows 10 fixes this. You can resize the window and it wraps text better than any other terminal out there. > Copy-and-paste as well is just complete garbage that takes forever. Turn on Quick Edit. Now drag to select and right click to copy. > There's no tab-completion. Tab completion for filepaths works quite well fo…

The quick edit copy is ridiculous, it inserts newlines between one line of output if it wrapped instead of obligingly copying the content as it was sent to stdout. The selection mechanism makes nearly no sense, why would I want to select text by a rectangle?!

Windows 10 has been out for almost a year now. The selection is no longer a rectangle.

Re: How bad is the Windows command line really?

#110

Post by itaysk »

tremon wrote: post #88
itaysk wrote: post #15

Agree about Windows command prompt being lame compared to bash, but I really find PowerShell amazing, even more so then bash. If you look at all the recent (even not so recent) products from MS, it is clear that PowerShell is the shell for Windows, and not batch. I didn't get the cure for polio analogy that's in the article but I really think anyone that's comparing shells should compare with PowerShell.

Powershell the language is ok, Powershell the interactive shell is still lacking. Here's what I still need: * usable tab-completion: scrolling through all available cmdlets is a poor substitute, and usually increases my keypresses instead of decreasing it. * workable history editing: if I edit a previous command, I must remember to never use tab completion again, because pressing halfway in a command erases everythin…

I use PowerShell ISE 99% of the time I write PS, so I don't experience any of these.. but valid suggestions, should go on the PS \ commandline uservoice.
Post reply on HN