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.
The guy is really demanding something from volunteers devs? Not everyone is thinking “We need to make something easy to use so people can migrate from Windows to Linux”, people just build stuff to use and share it so maybe someone could find it useful.
You can always create a GUI yourself, if you think it’s so simple. It would be greatly appreciated and giving back to the community would be nice.
- chooses Arch
- complains there’s no GUI
I guess you learned something
Yeah Arch is not worse than the other distros. That is just a reputation it has. Other past than the initial install and into KDE I don’t feel like it is any more command line driving than Mint or Fedora.
Then why are you using it? It’s such a braindead take, and you’re still committing to it.
Having read the rest of your comments in this thread, the two takeaways are
- Arch isn’t for you
- Linux in general isn’t for you
https://gitlab.com/corectrl/corectrl
CoreCtrl is a Free and Open Source GNU/Linux application that allows you to control with ease your computer hardware using application profiles. It aims to be flexible, comfortable and accessible to regular users.
This is next on my list of things to check out. I need to fix my audio issues first.
I agree that having better GUI is a generally good thing and that most of us would benefit from it. However it’s false to state or believe that Linux in its totality is bereft of this. Distros like openSUSE, MX Linux and Garuda Linux have put in considerable effort into offering tools that enable one to config a lot of stuff through a GUI. However, it doesn’t make a lot of sense to complain about the lack of GUIs if you (or whosoever for that matter) don’t use one of these distros. Arch has minimalism as one of its design goals, so you either have to find the binaries/apps/packages (or whatsoever) that allow you to config through a GUI or you’re out of luck.
I was worried Arch would have me at the command line more than Mint or Fedora, but it hasn’t felt like that. I’m using KDE plasma so I’ve got all the same tools (or can install them if needed). The GUI elements missing in Arch are missing in Mint and Ubuntu, Fedora, PopOS, all of them. I happen to be struggling through an audio issue right now. Can you find an OS that lets you change the Audio sample and bit rates without messing with config files ? This is basic function, and the PulseAudio and Pipewire have been around long enough for a GUI to have been created, but no, it doesn’t exist.
The GUI elements missing in Arch are missing in Mint and Ubuntu, Fedora, PopOS, all of them.
I would agree that they’re roughly in the same ballpark as long as you had picked KDE Plasma on Arch. Though I would argue that Mint and PopOS have a noticeable lead, though I don’t think that point deserves more discussion. However, none of them come close to something like openSUSE’s YaST or MX’ Tools. That’s why I deliberately mentioned them. Perhaps worth a watch for those wondering how Windows compares to different Linux distros GUI-wise.
I happen to be struggling through an audio issue right now. Can you find an OS that lets you change the Audio sample and bit rates without messing with config files ? This is basic function, and the PulseAudio and Pipewire have been around long enough for a GUI to have been created, but no, it doesn’t exist.
I’m unfortunately unaware of any solution for that. Wish you good luck!
So… You are complaining about there not being enough GUIs while using the distro that specifically requires setting up through a terminal… If ya want a GUI for everything (which isn’t a bad thing, I understand that) you shouldn’t use Arch. Use something like fedora or Ubuntu. I’ve genuinely opened the terminal in fedora maybe 4 times in the few months that I’ve been using it. Also, sometimes a GUI just doesn’t make sense, especially for programs that are not designed to be used in a GUI… Making a native GUI is hard, both gtk an qt are eldritch horrors beyond imagination to me.
What does GTFO mean in this context exactly?
“you gtfo - this is my house”
It is a flipant remark to suggest that devs should build a GUI or not bother develope at all.
Designing a GUI, especially a good one, can be a lot of work, so lot’s of people just don’t feel like doing so. Especially if the GUI app is literally just generating a config file, the benefit is negligible.
A lot of GUI stuff is reall “just” a frontend for things that others developed, made by guys and gals who are good with GUIs and decide that something they like deserves one. And I appreciate this as much as I don’t take it for granted.
The funny thing is, there is a GUI tool for overclocking AMD GPUs lol
yeah I’ll admit the AMD thing I had not finsihed digging into be I posted. I’ll not edit my post and wear my shame on that one.
Your issue seems less the command line and that things aren’t “working”, or the tools you want aren’t pre-packaged.
Using Arch Linux was not the best idea if you want something that “just works”, as it works on a philosophy where you install the minimum amount required and then add things, such as drivers or packages, as you need them. In other words, it’s a distribution where you know what you need for your system. It is also a command-line centric distribution, so it’s strange that “GUI” is your bug bear when you picked one that deliberately forces command line.
Regarding overclocking and GPU configuration, you just get CoreCtrl, which even has a GUI.
Now don’t get me wrong, I absolutely agree that everything should have a user interface as much as possible, but the whole “Linux means you have to use command line all the time!!” is simply just not true anymore, and I feel this issue comes from people recalling memories from 10 years ago or using distributions where command line is necessary, rather than something like Ubuntu or Linux Mint where it mostly isn’t.
This year I’ve tried the other usual suspects (Mint, Fedora, etc) and thought I’d give Arch a go, just to see how much more work it is. So far, other than the initial installer, it hasn’t been much more work than the other distros, and it has actually been smoother. The AUR is very helpful, and Pamac helps a lot as well. The “just works” experience has been better on Arch than the other distros to be honest. I had the same hardware issues with Audio and dual displays on Minit and Fedora.
Linux has come such a long way, the requirement to use the comand line is much reduced, but there are still some obvious basic gaps that need fixing. Obviosuly this is just my oppinion, and I keep trying so I’m obviosuly not turned off completely.
Linux is not a company fighting for profits and market share, with software developers paid to work according to the company’s strategy.
You want something in Linux that nobody cares to develop? Decelop it yourself or gtfo.
A few hours ago I was helping a GUI-oriented colleague to get network working in a SUSE test installation. He had configured it in yast (a GUI admin interface), but he couldn’t get to the internets.
I logged in, got me a command line:
ip a s (it had an inteface with an IP, and it was up).
ip r s (it had a default route to the world)
ping 8.8.8.8 (it worked)
host google.com (didn’t work, it’s always dns)
vi /etc/resolv.conf (added search and nameservers, there were none).
problem fixed (also suggested him to check his /etc/host, as domainame wasn’t set either).
Why on earth do I want a gui to make simple things complicated - and silently fail while trying to do it? (yast couldn’t find wpa-supplicant, although this is a VM with no wifi).
IMO, administering Linux through GUI tools is dangerous, because you probably don’t know, or don’t want to know, exactly what the tool is doing. It makes Linux as “inexplicable” as Windows.
It’s like europe with no signs in English. You’re not wanted there
