It may be a surprise to you, but there was nothing in your post that I didn't knew. I know all that. Just like I know the rationale behind Blender's Right-Click-select.

The terminal as a tool is shaped by its history, but that doesn't mean we have to carry that history with us forever, especially not at all cost. And I say that as someone who values history and has a self-designed physical terminal bell next to my desk. Does your terminal emulator strike a physical bell when you send BEL? If it does not than your terminal has moved on in time for one reason or another.

My point comes from the observation that the terminal is an extremely valuable tool to learn purely from an practical standpoint. Much more of that value comes from what it allows you to do, than from understanding how it works. Just like with Blender, where I as a former feelancer in VFX had no issue at all with right-click select, but occasional users would shake their fist at the heavens and complain about how bad Blender UI was with all its clever concepts. To them the historical understanding of the intricacies of the Blender UI and why "they are holding it wrong" would be utterly meaningless, what counts to them is that they can use the tool. And I agree.

Would I be happy with just any redesign of the terminal? No. But would I be okay if a good redisgn stopped it from working with physical type writers hooked up to main frames or from talking telnet to my oscilloscope? Yeah. I am okay with that. If I really need that there is probably software that still support that and I install that. I know that this is not a simple change, but it is 2025 and we can think about how things should be instead of staying with how they always have been without reason, especially if we are just talking about the defaults.

> It may be a surprise to you, but there was nothing in your post that I didn't knew. I know all that.

Well, it is a surprise to me. You claimed terminals were "just text". You said you taught this to beginners.

It is not surprising to me that those beginners would have difficulties understanding what was going on when terminals started demonstrating that they were indeed more complex than pure text.

> But would I be okay if a good redisgn stopped it from working with physical type writers hooked up to main frames or from talking telnet to my oscilloscope?

If we did that, they wouldn't be terminals anymore. They'd become some new, incompatible system that exists alongside the old school terminals.

I'm not even opposed to it. I love the idea of reimagining and reinventing everything. We just gotta recognize that we're building new systems. The old ones should probably be left alone.

Modern terminal emulators like kitty are working miracles out of this legacy stuff but they are still working within the confines of the system.

> I know that this is not a simple change, but it is 2025 and we can think about how things should be instead of staying with how they always have been without reason, especially if we are just talking about the defaults.

The legacy of terminals is useful even today. Embedded debugging interfaces use them. I wear a modern open source watch which supports a shell through the terminal system. There's just no getting rid of it.

Even swapping Ctrl-C and Shift-Ctrl-C seems like we're just moving the inconsistencies around. Sure, copy paste is now consistent with modern interfaces but now the inputs no longer correspond directly to ASCII. Maybe we could have a vim-like modal interface where in GUI mode all the key combinations would do what we expect from modern systems while in terminal mode they would act like ASCII inputs. This fixes both inconsistencies... At the cost of being an error-prone modal interface.