Something that deteriorates the structural integrity of load-bearing frameworks /s.

Being serious, it’s another programming languages that is gaining popularity. Others can expand on why it’s good. I’ve never used it myself so I can’t comment in good faith. I also don’t have any experience with Rust-bros so I can’t comment on their code quality. I’ve mostly just been watching amused as they fight with the Linux development community.

This is kind of erasing the author with your description of the issue. The reason that apps eventually require CLI to complete tasks is because devs think of CLI first and then produce a stop-gap P&CI over top of it. It is explicitly how devs in the Linux environment operate which creates a gap between CLI and P&CI. If apps were developed with P&CI in mind first, with CLI added after, this would not be a problem - and we know this because of every app developed for both Windows and Linux, which lack these gaps in functionality - or lack CLI entirely.

Your stance also de-emphasizes the difficulty of learning CLI for the first time. It’s not the most difficult thing ever, but it can be fairly frustrating. It’s not something you want to deal with when just trying to unwind after work on your PC, or while you’re trying to do your job at work. I think it’s pretty reasonable most people don’t want to have to learn yet another paradigm just to do what they’ve already figured out how to with a P&CI.

Being realistic, of course, this paradigm shift is not going to happen. Linux will continue to be only a small portion of total computers used by end users because of this, and various other reasons it’s found unpalatable.

I’ve heard that KDE and GNOME, however, are both at a level now where P&CIs are all you really need. I have not tried them myself, though.

Obviously I’m talking about the DE packages, not the kernel or CLI base. We are talking about windows users switching to linux-based DEs, which are directly trying to compete with Windows and iOS.

This is not me having issue with CLIs. I’ve been on Linux for decades. I am pointing out the perspective of those that are frustrated with Linux DEs being blatantly unready for mass-adoption, specifically because they expect layman users to learn CLI. See my previous comment and this comment for more details.

I was specifically trying to not sound conspiratorial. I’m pointing out that it’s a matter of having learned a paradigm vs having to learn a new paradigm.

Devs have already gotten used to CLI and very rarely make full P&CI suites because of it. Even if the original Dev only did CLI for the app and someone came back and made a P&CI for that app, those P&CI interfaces are still fairly barebones. This is both a mix of devs knowing how good CLI can be and because it’s all open source volunteer work.

Layman users of P&CI-focused DEs actively avoid CLI so they don’t have to learn it. This means that using most Linux apps are something to be avoided for most Windows users, making the OS base mostly unusable for them.

To be clear, when I am talking about P&CI-focused DEs, like windows and iOS, I mean that if you cannot perform an action with the P&CI, then that action essentially does not exist for the average user. Contrast that with Linux DEs, where it’s quite common to have to directly edit configs or use the CLI to perform various actions.

As a veteran user, CLI does not bother me. I do understand the frustration of those who want some Linux DEs to become as default as Windows and iOS, because lack of P&CI does damage that effort.

This is not every app in Linux obvi, but the ones that are best at making sure the P&CI is full-flddged, are the apps that develop for windows and iOS as well as Linux - Blender, LibreOffice, Logseq, Godot, etc. The most common offenders are the utility apps, such as those that handle drivers, sound systems, DE functions, etc.

Correct, point and click interface

It’s not that they are mad others use CLI, it’s that they’re mad that Linux devs regularly stop creating P&CI features, instead opting for CLI with no P&CI equivalent action.

It’s kind of obvious why - CLI is already very flexible right out of the box, and it takes much less work to add functionality within CLI rather than creating it for the P&CI.

At the same time, I understand the P&CI folk’s frustration, since one of biggest obstacles to getting more people on Linux is the lack of P&CI solutions, and the fact that many actions on Linux are explained solely via CLI.

CLI folks have invested the time to use terminals effectively and view overuse of the P&CI as beneath them, and P&CI folks have no interest in dumping time into learning CLI to do something they could do on Windows with P&CI.