Now I'm talking to the users that use, userfriendly operating systems like Mac OS and Windows. Now Mac OS while built ontop of Unix is very userfriendly and the terminal kind of just get's hidden after each release but still will always be available. Now MS killed DOS in 2001, what your Command Line is now is nothing more than the MSDOS emulator and it's kinda limited... Powershell or Powerbash is what many Windows users use to get that terminal like experience back but it still fails.

Now Linux is gaining ground, but not the distros that are meant for the geeks who know how to use a terminal or know the their hardware but distros that are userfriendly like Ubuntu. If MS ever faded out or just lost a bit of share Ubuntu is what would be put onto business PCs unless it was either Red Hat, SUSE but not to be confused with OPENSuse, or CentOS if they wanted a free version of red hat linux. Red hat is free but the support will cost you an arm and a leg, I don't have this need as I know RHEL.

Today kids just want to play games, pop in a disk and install and off you go into a great adventure but are computers teaching kids to be complete idiots with computers? Or are they helping them learn about what the computer is really about, what it's meant to do and how to actually use it IE no gui.

Show a terminal to a PCGamer and his reactions would be, you still use that? Get with with the 21st century man.. of course he has no idea what he's talking about, and terminals are used to manage servers and high load workstations something he just does not understand.

Show that to a geek and he'll probably go ape shit over it.

So, are computers making the users dumber with them or are users becoming more knowledgeable about the computer?

I can see where you are coming from, though I don't particularly see a problem with people being dumb on computers (it gives many people much-needed work, lol).
On the other hand, when those people are your friends/family... you want to educate the crap out of them!
Yes, yes, I know... I'm not supposed to get irritated at the "ID-10-T" people, especially when you know them well... but... yeah. XD

Anyway... !
So long as people know what to use the wheel for, there's no need for them to know how the wheel was originally created or what physics make the wheel work...
Whilst I get what you mean, I also don't believe that people need to waste their time learning the particulars about something that is not their "career" or hobby.
Knowing why it exists, and knowing how to use it, is enough. =]

Well, I definitely wouln't say computer users are getting stupid. It's just computers generally being more accessible to people other than programers, etc. Like myself, all I need a computer for is writing, playing games and catching up with friends over the internet. I know next to nothing when it comes to how computers work, etc. If you gave me a computer that ran on DOS, I would be absolutely clueless on how to use it. I wouldn't say I'm dumb, it's just that my knowledge covers various other areas.

One thing I will say about computers though, is that with each upgrade, they are getting more pointless. Take Windows for example, since XP, all they seem to be doing is just adding in pointless "cosmetic" features that only serve to use up precious RAM. Unless I'm missing something else entirely here, I honestly don't see the point in getting any Windows OS that came after XP.

I am going to disagree with the OP.
You talk big about the linux "terminal mode" but that too is a user interface.

One is txt based, the other is graphic based.
Why is it any better typing a command into a black box to defrag your hard drive, than to right click an icon?

You are still an end user, entirely reliant on the pre-programmed bios that came with your board. and the pre programmed OS that you decided to put on it. Unless you are actually coding the stuff, you are no better, smarter or more sophisticated for using a txt based UI than a GUI one.

I'm not saying this out of ignorance either. I used to go on BBS's that you access via telnet

I just don't see how a txt-UI lets you do things you can't on a GUI.
GUI does not require you to remember command strings, Is more accessible, and in many respects much better.

For example, all of my (completely legal) films and tv programs I have on my cpu - they are all listed by category (action comedy etc)
and each one sits in it's own folder. The folder Icon has been set to giant, and the icon replaced with a poster of the film.
This gives me a much better user experience than typing
"dir c:\videos\films\action"
and being presented with a long list of txt

hey, you could say the same thing about everything. You're right, but is it necessary for people to be terminal savvy?
Like Licentia said, it's still an interface.

You could easily say that houses are making people ignorant of how to survive in the wild, or build things for themselves, and when something breaks, they call someone else! They just want the graphics sides of the house, they have no idea how all the hidden piping and electrics actually work.

The fact is, if everyone learnt more than they needed to, they couldn't learn the stuff they need to.
An office worker by no means needs terminal knowledge. Neither does a builder who just wants to send an email to his kids once in a while.

And if anyone ever does need to know, the internet can tell them everything they need. Sure, it'll be slow and heavy handed, but it'll be quicker than learning the skills and then putting them to use.
I've used terminal plenty of times, but I have very little knowledge of how it works (i've done it on linux, windows, and apple.) It's just not necessary to know unless you use it frequently.
I mean, you don't need to know how to code Java or C++ or Action Script to be able to enjoy something made using it.

I have an old Kaypro II sitting near my desk. I occasionally plug it in and hp on it to mess around a bit, but you know how old it is? It has a 9" green phosphor screen and only supports 24x80 text characters. No graphics whatsoever. It has this neat little paper thingy that fits around the keyboard and lists every command it has. Every program for it comes with one of these things with all the commands, so you know what you're doing. Also beside my desk is an old HP SFF(Small Form Factor) desktop, with Debian, as well as a WinXP partition. I use it on occasion if I require Unix, or for the occasional program that won't work(or work correctly) on Windows 7.

So what's my point? I don't have trouble using graphic or text based UIs. But not everyone is me. Nor does everyone need to know how to use both. As has been mentioned before, some people may or may not need that knowledge based on their profession and hobbies. As for which one is more convenient, that all depends on the person. Computers have advanced quite a bit since then.


Personally, I enjoy having a GUI, but I -still- resort to text commands. Even in Windows, I'm prone to opening the run window rather than clicking an icon, because it's faster for me, but there's no reason anyone should be forced to use consoles and command lines. Computers today are generally meant to simplify our lives and perform complex tasks much more efficiently than we could.

So tell me, why should the average PC users, who only desires to install programs and go on magical adventures or check their email, deny themselves the advantages of a simple, user-friendly interface? Why should they choose to learn the ins and outs of their OS to use a console to perform things they can already do with a couple clicks? Consoles are not the way to "actually use" a modern day computer. People who choose to stick to a standard GUI aren't doing anything wrong. The people who learn and use consoles have their own reasons. The people who stick to their GUIs also have reasons.

Likewise, in a modern-day business environment, not everyone is that tech-savvy. Requiring everyone to learn command lines so they can use the company system takes more time, effort and money than the company is willing to expend. Unless they require a console-based system, a company will often go with the most efficient and user friendly OS available.

The terminal is a program just like windows cmd, however I don't use GUIs on my servers. The point was that computers are getting easier to learn where mom and dad can use but they don't know what the computer is actually doing on the backend but can see it on the front end with little indication what is happening.

I use Gentoo and FreeBSD and even Pure UNIX on my servers and desktops, the desktops do have a desktop environment, some were setup as web test servers before I go spend $400/mo for a dedicated server. Some were setup as home servers which I use FreeBSD and ZFS.

The Terminal is a graphical front end of what the OS really is, remove the desktop environment say Unity from Ubuntu and than reboot all you see is Username@ubox $. That my friend is not a graphical front end. Don't assume every Linux or Unix user uses a graphical desktop to get the job done and writing out your commands is faster than clicking through nested menus.

I have however made a conscious decision to run Windows Server 2012 as 1 it's rock stable, and 2 REFS which will be proven within 6 months to a year. Just cause I'm using windows don't assume I installed the graphical interface, it gives you option, interface or command line. I will always choose a command line over a graphical interface any day of the week and also performance is far superior to that of a gui as a desktop is just an application for the frontend of the OS it's not needed.

I'm using server 2012 to run my website but I wouldn't use it for storing TBs of data.

Yeah, but even with that said, you're STILL just looking at the easily understandable front section.
Underneath that you have the code that makes the terminal work.
Underneath that you have the circuitry which makes that code work.
Underneath that you have the component parts which make that circuitry work.
Underneath that you have the raw science, electrons, charged plates, and moving currents which make those component parts function.

Must I count electrons to check my email?

I can understand the advantages of using a terminal for server running.
Just like I can understand manually designing component parts if you're an experimental physicist at CERN.
But I would ask the former to behave like the latter, because it's an unnecessary step.
And I wouldn't ask the average user to use a terminal.

It just strikes me as somewhat smug to call computer users stupid for not using terminal.
Equally as smug as the hardcore computer users who build their own PCs from scratch and look down on others for not doing the same.
Not everyone has the time to learn how, or sees the point in it. Its something you learn either because it's necessary for your work, or because you get some sense of accomplishment out of it.

And that's the gist of why most people don't know how to use a terminal, why most people don't know how to take apart a computer, or how to build a car, or how to set up the plumbing in a house, or how to develop their own film, or how to count up to 1,023 using just their hands (you use binary), and a lot of other things too.