Dmian

“Make more money, faster, at any cost” seems to be the motto of a lot of companies these days… Stockholders are there, waiting for their returns, like hungry hatchlings. And CEOs will do anything to try to keep them happy. This system is shit.

Exactly.

By the year, I think this was before there was even an App Store (first generation iPhone was launched at the end of June, 2007). Jobs really believed in web apps, but the original iPhone had no power to handle them correctly, and a lot of the APIs that we have now were unthinkable at the time. I was just trying to be funny, really. :P

Steve Jobs in 2007:

The full Safari engine is inside of iPhone. And so, you can write amazing Web 2.0 and Ajax apps that look exactly and behave exactly like apps on the iPhone. And these apps can integrate perfectly with iPhone services. They can make a call, they can send an email, they can look up a location on Google Maps.

And guess what? There’s no SDK that you need! You’ve got everything you need if you know how to write apps using the most modern web standards to write amazing apps for the iPhone today. So developers, we think we’ve got a very sweet story for you. You can begin building your iPhone apps today.

Admit it, the man was a visionary… XDDDDD

Just in case: /s

You really can’t imagine doing that with a GUI? Here you have something to give you an idea (sorry it’s in Spanish, but I guess you can get an idea of how it may work):

Here I’m selecting a specific type of files (PDFs, but I can select several different types, as I’m organising by file type), after which I did a right click, and selected a contextual action that shows a popup to do a following action. In this case it’s renaming, but it could easily be a “Move to…” that could include a check option of “Create a folder for each file”. I mean, it was actually pretty fast too. It’s not that difficult.

I just looked at a mobile plan in Movistar (Spain). The page is in Spanish, but I guess you can understand the part I marked in red.

Seeing at how bad Japanese car manufacturers are at producing good electric cars, and how they may be replaced by Chinese companies, maybe they mean they’ll be bankrupt by 2050… :P

But I’m not talking about programming languages, I’m talking about CLI programs, or system commands.

And I’m not telling a GUI would be better, or more efficient, I’m just saying that it can be done (something you are saying too about programming languages).

That’s the point: a GUI can replace a CLI. Is it better? Sometimes it is, sometimes it isn’t. Is it possible? Absolutely.

Some people have problems remembering commands, for example. And it’s easier for them if they can see it.

Yes, you can teach a kid to program (with some effort), but there’s a reason why Scratch presents logic units with shapes and colors and a GUI.

There are many reasons why a visual representation may be easier to grasp than just resorting to memory and remembering abstract concepts.

I mean, do you remember everything that you write? You’ve never had to visit Stack Overflow to remember how to do something, because you forgot the exact syntax of an operation? Now, how about if I put things visually in front of you? What would be easier?

Agreed. But that’s not my point. My point is that it can be done.

And in some cases, even if it’s less than ideal, and is way more cumbersome than using a CLI, you are helping non-tech-savvy people do things they couldn’t do any other way.

Oh! I’m in no way discussing the viability or economy of it. Of course in a lot of cases, creating a batch process, for example, may be the better choice. And I would also say that in some cases, using a CLI may be way more efficient that creating a GUI for something.

My statement is just that it can be done. Nothing more.

And in some cases, it’s not even that hard, it’s just that maybe people are used to do things using terminal. Or there may be other reasons. Who knows? But I would like for programmers to, at least, consider the option in some cases. You may be surprised at the things that can be achieved with a good GUI, and how it helps less tech-savvy users.

Are you talking about sending the output of one process to the input of another?

I think the shaders I’ve mentioned are a great example of that: you do something in a block, then send the result to the input of another block.

Sorry if it’s not what you mean, but my point is that, with some effort, you can create a visual representation of even the most abstract concepts. Physicists do this constantly. If we can make a visual representations of 4D, for example, what prevents us from doing the same for programming logic? Or for commands?

That’s your opinion, and I disagree with it. It takes a lot of abstract thinking to synthesize an action in a visual way, like an icon.

Designers are good at lateral thinking, and founding visual ways of representing abstract concepts (and you can’t represent something visually if you don’t understand it first).

Well, seeing the progression of 3D programs and how a lot of complex operations are nowadays done in a visual way, I guess we won’t agree on this one, I guess.

But I affirm in my conviction that anything can be made with a GUI. It may be difficult to reach a suitable GUI, with a lot of back and forth, and probably a lot of user feedback, but with a good methodology and a good understanding of UX, it can be done.

Sad we can’t agree. Cheers.

Disagree. Anything that can be done with terminal can be done with a GUI, you just need to be good at UX. Most programmers I know are pretty bad at UX, and program for themselves, not the user.

Edit, just to clarify (because I know some of you will feel personally attacked): I’m not saying a GUI may be better, or more efficient than a CLI, I’m just saying that it can be done. And as an example, see 3D shaders in modern programs, that need no code at all and are purely visual. That was unthinkable some years ago.

Really? Why is that? Why you can’t compare two instant messaging apps? What is so hilarious?

Btw, WhatsApp was made by a different company, and then bought by Meta, when it was already the most used instant messaging app in the EU. And it has a lot of really nice features. There’s a reason so many people use it.

But it’s not “most”, it’s more like half of Americans use iMessage (that’s not an app, it’s a service, the app is called Messages), and the other half uses SMS with different apps.

The factor that moved people away from SMS in the EU was telecom companies charging for it. SMS is virtually free for telecom companies, but European companies got greedy, and people moved to WhatsApp. They tried to block it, but accepted defeat after a while.

In the US, SMS is free with your phone plan, and it became popular with young people until iMessage appeared. Since iPhones are still subsidized by US telcos (afaik, correct me if I’m wrong), a lot of young people have iPhones and use iMessage, that’s far superior to SMS.

Guess you’re right. I’m not justifying them, but trying to put a bit of light into why a lot of people don’t care. I’m not the kind of person to express such a moot opinion, but I guess some people get tired of seeing a conversation that only affects only a portion of people and feel the need to express their feelings. Again, I’m the kind to remain silent, but there are all kinds of people out there.

It’s interesting: in all my ignorance, my perception is that it’s the Germans the ones that feel more and more like the Americans (other than the British). But it may be just a wrong perception on my part. I honestly don’t know for certain.

Edit: a small note: you still gave the Greens and the Pirate Party to the EU Parliament, that are the best thing to ever happen to it. :D

…and an old fart, hahaha!