Not everything actually requires a GUI, obviously. But anything that requires configuration, especially for controlling a hardware device, should have a fully functional GUI. I know Linux is all about being in control, and users should not be afraid to use the command line, but if you have to learn another bespoke command syntax and the location and structure of the related configuration files just to get something basic to work then the developer has frankly half arsed it. Developers need to provide GUI’s so that their software can be used by as many people as possible. GUI’s use a common language that everyone understands (is something on or off, what numeric values are allowed, what do the options mean).
Every 12 to 18 months I make an effort to switch to Linux. Right now I’m using Archlinux, and it has been a successful trip so far, except my audio is screwed, I can’t use my capture card at all, I had issues with my dual displays at the start, and the is no easy way to configure my AMD graphics card for over clocking or well anything basic at all.
I’m not looking for a windows clone, I love that I can choose different desktop environments and theme many of them to death. I even like the fact there are so many distros. Choice is a big part of linux, but there is clearly a desire to get more people moving away from Windows and until that path is 95% seamless most people just won’t. Right now I think Linux is 75% to 85% seamless depending on the use case and distro but adding more GUI front ends would, imho, push that well into the 90% zone.
GUI is not a dirty word, it is what makes using a new OS possible for more people.
EDIT: Good conversation all. This is genuinely not intended to be a troll post, I just feel it is good to share experiences especially on the frustations that arise from move between OSes.
No, the SUSE demo license had expired before he configured it for the first time, so there was no repo access.
He did everything right in yast, but according to the yast log, it was trying and failing to get wpa-supplicant, although this is a VM with no wifi whatsoever. Yast “finished” the configuration with no errors, but failed to place the required entries in resolv.conf and hosts.
It’s just one example of a useless gui trying to make simple things complicated.
Nah, there is also a GUI menu to adjust hosts. i have run it on various machines for 7 years with no issues. Not saying you won’t get quirks but SUSE is solid. SUSE and Redhat are the only two certified disteos for used with our MCAD software, so they pass the rest of being reliable
Yast had the search and nameservers information in, and it even loaded them back when reopening yast (which surprised me, I expected it to read/store from resolv.conf itself). I work with SAP HANA, SUSE is also the supported OS for it (I’ve a SUSE sysadmin certification).
I commented about yast being a gui that failed (silently) doing something simple that shouldn’t need a gui; I didn’t say SUSE isn’t reliable.
It’s only simple for people comfortable in CLI and knowing where to look, onboarding less savvy users should have GUI in mu opinion.
Also should mention if it is VM you may have to go into YastNetwork and add network device if it doesn’t see it
It had all networking up and running. It just didn’t have resolv.conf entries, so no dns.
Strange, I always enter mine in the GUI and it works…just a glitch?
I have used yast to configure the network before (not on this host), and it works.
I quickly looked at the yast log, and there were errors looking for wpa-supplicant. I -think- it’s because my colleague installed this VM months ago, did not configure it, then went on vacation. Now the SUSE “no license” grace period expired, and the host has no access to the repositories.
If that’s the cause, there are two issues: 1. why does it want to install wpa-supplicant if there’s no wifi (maybe it’s a wicked dependency), and 2. why does it fail silently, concluding the config operation as if it ran ok
Good questions :)