But why?

You easily have 4k pixels, why use a tiny subset of those in a very inefficient way? We have proper hardware to make a bunch of these computations actually fast, and yet we should stuck with drawing relatively expensive text everywhere?

If you only care about the UX of TUIs, that I can stand behind (though mostly as a guideline, it doesn't fit every workflow), but you can do that with a proper GUI just as well.

▲

cfiggers 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> If you only care about the UX of TUIs, that I can stand behind

This is a confusing concession. Of course we love TUIs because of the UX, what other reason is there?

Constraint breeds consistency and consistency breeds coherence.

Take 1,000 random TUI designers and 1,000 random GUI designers and plot the variations between them (use any method you like)—the TUI designers will be more tightly clustered together because the TUI interface constrains what's reasonable.

Yes of course you CAN recreate TUI-like UX in a GUI, that's not the issue. People don't. In a TUI they must. I like that UX and like that if I seek out a TUI for whatever thing I want to do, I'm highly likely to find a UX that I enjoy. Whereas with GUIs it's a crapshoot. That's it.

▲

Someone 2 hours ago | parent [-]

> the TUI designers will be more tightly clustered together because the TUI interface constrains what's reasonable.

It constrains what’s possible, not what’s reasonable. For example, one could typically fit more text on a screen by compressing it, but most of the time, that’s not the reasonable thing to do.

I’m saying most of the time because of the existence of English Braille (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_Braille#System) which uses a compression scheme to compress frequently used words and character sequences such as ‘and’ and ‘ing’ shows that, if there is enough pressure to keep texts short, humans are willing to learn fairly idiosyncratic text compression schemes.

colorforth (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ColorForth) is another, way less popular example. It uses color to shorten program source code.

One could also argue Unix, which uses a widely inconsistent ad-hoc compression scheme, writing “move” as “mv”, “copy” as “cp” or “cpy” (as in “strcpy”), etc. also shows that, but I think that would be a weaker argument.

	▲	cfiggers 34 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		> It constrains what’s possible, not what’s reasonable. Why do you say "constrains what’s possible, not what’s reasonable", as though it's one and not the other? Does possibility conflict with reasonability? I would think it's not an either/or, it's a both/and. The set of reasonable things is bounded by the set of possible things. So if the constraints of TUI design make certain things impossible, surely they make those same things unreasonable at the same time.

▲

pwinnski 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

You could double or quadruple the number of pixels, and it wouldn't make any difference in how much information humans comprehend easily. You would be using more computing power and more memory to deliver the same amount of useful information less efficiently.

A "proper GUI" is rarely better than a well-designed TUI for communicating textual information, IMO. And the TUI constraints keep the failure-states for badly-designed UI tightly bound, unlike GUI constraints.

▲

zahlman 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

The UX is the point.

When you are "drawing text everywhere", you end up not having to draw all that much text. 3d models have more and more polygons as graphics cards improve, but the 80x24 standard persists for terminals (and UX is better for it). And I'm not even that convinced of "relatively expensive". Grokking UTF-8 and finding grapheme cluster boundaries has a lot of business logic, but it isn't really that hard. And unless you're dealing with Indic or Arabic scripts that defy a reasonable monospace presentation, you can just cache the composed glyphs.

▲

citrin_ru 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

One of TUI advantages over GUIs (including modern web sites) - all text can be selected/copied (you may need to use modifies in some TUI). It's a bit frustrating when GUI shows text but I cannot select and copy it.

	▲	cfiggers 28 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		That's a very good point. I hadn't thought about that aspect before.

▲

krautsauer 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I'm curious: Do you have a nice set of GUI applications that come with the UX you'd expect of TUIs?

(I'm not actually sure what the UX of TUIs is I love so much. Relative simplicity / focus on core features? Uff, notepad wins this one on vim. Fast startup times? I use gomuks, that takes a minute for the initial sync. No mouse? Moving around in TUI text editors with hjkl is slow. I either jump where I want to go with search or use the mouse. Lightness over SSH/network is the only thing I can't come up with a counterexample for.)