Talk:Command-line interface

message: :"Those technologists wish the world could share their delight in the sense of power one obtains from controlling the computer with one's ten fleet fingers -- rather than with just two or three mouse buttons, slowed by the time-cost of hauling the mouse-plastic back and forth and up and down over the mouse pad."
Surely there is a more NPOV way of saying this. --Maru  (talk) Contribs 23:03, 29 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[WP:NPOV|NPOV]] 

message: I think the current article explains CLI as an historic perspective, but fails to explain how command line interfaces are being used today.
Today, CLI is considered a way to interact with computer software, not with the computer itself. So, for most programs, it's an advantage to have a CLI, so the job the software do can be automated by scripting.
So, the idea I want to add to the article (but I don't know how) is to discuss CLI not just as the previous incarnation of the GUI, but also as an advanced feature for some software, like: backup software, image manipulation tools, diff tools, and even software development tools.
--FabioBatista 21:44, 19 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I wonder if the claim that CLIs "evolved toward GUIs" can be supported. A windowed environment such as Borland's Turbo Vision can't be viewed as an evolutionary step because it's a GUI that uses a character display, and not a CLI. --Yath 18:34, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I disagree, the commandline on my Amiga still is exactly as it was in 1985.  Likewise the commandline in my Amstrad BASIC interpreter is exactly like it was in 1984.  There is no change today at all.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 157.211.135.202 (talk) 16:37, 25 March 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  CLI as a way to interact with programs, not computers 

message: In general I notice a strong bias in these discussions towards computer systems CLIs such as windows and UNIX. These are popular so should be prominent on the page, but I have on a number of occasions made changes to tweak the article to better suit the broader definition of CLI and these changes are often reverted. By broader definition I mean lesser known CLIs that often appear on embedded devices, but I am sure there are other examples. The latest edit being the 1.5 paragraphs in introduction section talking about specific windows/UNIX CLIs which I moved to a separate section. I'm not saying I'm right and the people who revert edits are wrong, but rather trying to find the best way to ensure the entry is accurate and complete. Would an example CLI section just after the introduction material have been better then having it at the end?
:Yes, I disagree with "A Command Line Interface or CLI is a method of interacting with an operating system". It should read "operating system *or* program". Examples of other programs with CLIs are the MySQL client and the S+/R statistical package. Alex.g 07:59, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Example CLIs

message: The article seams to be written by a bunch of newcomers to computers. The first command line interfaces were operator interfaces (Used by a professional computer operator on a mainframe computer). With the advent of the mini-computer by DIGITAL Equipment Corp we have small relative inexpensive computers being used bu researchers. Operatoring systems running on early mini computers used command line interfaces. TOPS-10 timesharing operating system was by far the most dominant in the 60's. TOPS-10 CLI was part of the operating system. Withe TOPS-10 A program could be stopped and memory examined and changed and then continued. The DEC-10 TOPS-10 CLI was meant to allow a user at a time sharing terminal the same abilities as being at a standalone computer. With the pseudo TTY device a program could interact with the TOPS-10 is if at a terminal. An operator used such a program to control service tasks such as print spoolers etc.
See also:
PDP-10
use
forever
Computer Museum
--Steamerandy (talk) 21:30, 30 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  The History needs work 

message: There's this article called cmd.exe and it leads to a download page due to the nature of it's name/file extension. Is there an actual article for it or is it just a wrongly named link? Songjin 12:38, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It leads to an article for me. What browser are you using? --Yath 14:20, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

text: Well I use Mozilla Firefox and it always leads me to a download page for that specific article. I've tried Internet Explorer too (v6) and it still doesn't work. Maybe the article name should be changed? Or unless I'm just simply using outdated browser versions? Songjin 04:31, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

text: What Firefox?  I have 2.0.0.4 and it is fine.  It might be a Windows thing—using extensions instead of MIME types to determine what the file is.  We might want to move it for compatibility, though. —Dmbrown00 04:39, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

text: Ok I've just updated firefox to the latest version same problem still. Unless this is a just a browser-related problem, could the article be renamed? Songjin 07:48, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

text: I tried it in Fx 2.0.0.4 and IE6 on a WinXP system; it works fine.  What security program are you using?  It might force you to download rather than run "executables."  —Dmbrown00 15:39, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

text: If the real world worked like Windows, your house would burn down every time you got a flyer advertisnig a "Fire Sale". --Wtshymanski (talk) 19:07, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Cmd.exe

message: The image :File:Command prompt on windows vista.png is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here.  In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page.  Please check
:* That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
:* That this article is linked to from the image description page.
This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --16:46, 3 January 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Image copyright problem with File:Command prompt on windows vista.png

message: 'command line interface' is a compound noun that should not be hyphenated. 
This also applies to 'command line interpreter'
I propose removing the hyphens in this page, and would do it myself right now, but then the title of the article wouldn't match.
Here are the grounds:
1) This is a compound noun, similar to 'graphical user interface', which is not hyphenated.
2) 'command line' is not being used as an adjective to modify the noun 'interface.' The noun *is* command line interface.
3) 'command line interface' is the standard. This form is used by Google and Microsoft, and appears in the Microsoft Manual of Style for Technical Publications.
This is my first time proposing any Wikipedia edits, so if I have not managed to follow protocol, please let me know. 
Nanoterra95 (talk) 21:42, 23 September 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with the proposal. - The Aviv (talk) 17:34, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
thread_title: Suggest command line interface (no hyphen) 

message: The Command-line interface is a kind of dialog interface.  That is, one might implement dialogs as commands and vice versa.  When the command-history is maintained, commands can be retrieved and edited to produce similar but different dialogs.
One should note that command-line interfaces replaced earlier menu-interfaces and file-manager interfaces (like MS-DOS Executive in Windows 2.x).  These require no parsing: the user selects the document or program to run, and the program loads it in the default manner.  The interface in tandy 1000, and Windows 1.x, 2.x are of this type.
There are editors and data-bases which make use of the command line.  For example, PC-DOS E editor uses a command line, where the ms-dos 5 editor has a search and replace dialog, E uses s /search/replace/ style command.  E keeps a history of commands, so the searchs and replaces can be recalled over previous calls.  You can run an OS/2 command processor in the E command line, the output going straight to the document window.
The teletype console is the parent to the Unix/DOS/OS2/NT command console.  With piping (redirection, filters), command editing and history (doskey), and a batch language that matches the UI, these are fairly servicable utilities.  It's more the console hacks rather than the UI that makes these quite servicable.  Powershell, on the other hand did not take off because its programming language does not match its UI.
Praxim (a windows 3.1 command shell), produces output into different windows, while keeping the DOS command interface.  A directory command, like 'dir /w', produces a windows with a directory like DOS, but one can open programs and documents by clicking on its name in the UI.  Batches are also supported.
One should note that it is the use of the UI language in batches which makes the batch language easy.  Lotus 1-2-3 for DOS used a slash-menu interface both for use and for its macros.  It is then a matter of copying these, with ~ for enter, that makes it much easier for novices to program, compared to say, Excel, which uses slash-menus for the UI, but VBA for macros.
Wendy.krieger (talk) 11:29, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Command-line styles 

message: The source for that is problematic because it is a primary source.  A knowledgeable third-party source for statements of that type is preferable TEDickey (talk) 14:09, 22 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Good catch - I think there's an ACM article somewhere; I'll try to dig it up. Peter Flass (talk) 14:31, 22 September 2013 (UTC)
replies: text:  Command Lines come from the teletype interface, basically in days of old, one was telexing the computer through ancient teletype machines, and listen to the result.  Much of the command-line interface still refers to teletype stuff.  Online chat relays still use this interface. Wendy.krieger (talk) 11:07, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  introduced the concept (sic) 

message: google on "command-based file manager" got 8 hits.  One was this Wikipedia topic, 3 were cached copies of one newsgroup comment.  Not enough to claim "known as".  Conflating "command-line" and "command-based" appears to be WP:OR (at least WP:FRINGE) TEDickey (talk) 21:36, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  invented terminology 

message: The tagged edit asserts that the distinction between dumb/smart terminals was whether the terminal was cursor-addressable.  The linked topic (which also lacks WP:RS) points to the section mentioning ADM-3A, which was cursor-addressable.  As usual, Wikipedia is not a reliable source TEDickey (talk) 20:51, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I was going to post my own opinion, but here's a nice reference:
Dumb, Smart, and Intelligent Terminals. 
Peter Flass (talk) 23:08, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

text: It's a source, but not one that I would call "nice", since a search for credentials of the author finds nothing worth mentioning.  Just pulp (grist for Wikipedia, if you like, but zero value for my own use).  For a source like that, I'd look to see where the actual information came from, and possibly find some usable sources TEDickey (talk) 23:29, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: A lot more computer stuff seems to be getting published in India these days than in the west. Peter Flass (talk) 02:57, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  distinction between dumb/smart terminals 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Command-line interface. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110810070659/http://www.cisco.com:80/en/US/docs/ios/12_0/configfun/configuration/guide/fcui.html to http://www.cisco.com/en/US/docs/ios/12_0/configfun/configuration/guide/fcui.html#wp7687
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:40, 28 November 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: I found the document in question on Cisco's site, and updated the URL (and used ).  Guy Harris (talk) 18:59, 28 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: The phrase 'There are a number of pre-mouse games', seems more than a little arrogant + ignorant. Text-based adventure games are a perfectly valid game genre in their own right, not exclusively a stop-gap before monkey island. 
Let's change the wikipedia page on 'books' to say that books were something that existed before the invention of moving pictures. It can say that there were a number of books, and give two examples.
...Or we could just fix the idiotic phrase and supplement it with a link to the wikipedia page 'Adventure game' instead.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.24.225.48 (talk) 00:38, 5 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adventure games 

message: What is the option to output the version information of ls? 197.231.179.138 (talk) 09:03, 17 May 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: To quote the banner at the top of this talk page, "This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject."  I.e., it's not the place to ask for help on command-line interfaces.  Try reading the ls man page on your system for help on the ls command. Guy Harris (talk) 18:38, 17 May 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  What is the option to output the version information of ls?