it can be font choice (better default fonts, or an easier way to change the font), tab support or something else. If it's not that then it's some kind of specific feature. the defaults change over time and some people prefer to stick with what they had. In part that depends on what the default is because on linux you get a variety of choices. Well, just look at what everyone here is writing about their choice. I like a bit of colour but not much more.īasically you are asking what kind of advantages do these alternative terminal emulators have over the default. I like my shells to be unimaginative but reliable and my consoles to be pretty staid too. It doesn't really and simply slows it down. I've tried funky extras that fiddled with git n that and changed the prompt and made my console life more productive. It's just something to run commands and get stuff done. zsh, ksh etc are not bash but they are well supported so adherents are well served and we are all happy. I know that other shells exist and they have adherents (often quite vocal!) I've tried FISH and loved it but it isn't BASH which is available nearly everywhere. Now is my terminal a good one? Well we might have to consider the shell too because that is a major part of the text based console experience. It does conform to some sort of standards but is it really an emulator? Emulating something implies a second rate experience and I don't think that applies here. I can hit CTRL-Fx and get a console, a terminal if you like. When I boot my laptop or PC I get a graphical login (sddm) and a whizzy environment on login - KDE n that.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |