lancestraz said:
One of my "friends" claims DOS is better and easier than Terminal. Is that true? Do I have to crawl into a hole and die over this?
Sort of like saying "A hammer is easier to use than a screw driver." It is true if you need to pound nail and untrue if you need turn a screw.
If you are sitting in front of a UNIX machine, like say a Macintosh runnig OSX or Linux or a BSD or Solaris machine then DOS is as irrelivent as a hammer for turning screws
You still can compare the two. UNIX shells pre-date DOS. but back in the days when DOS was written the PC was not able to run an OS as large and complex as UNIX so they created a much simpler and more limited comand shell for DOS They cut it down to the "bare bones" so that it would run on a 4Mhz 8-bit procesor that had no hard drive. (Yes I owned a floppy only DOS based PC with a monochrome CRT and no mouse.) DOS and the DOS command shell had to fit on just one floppy disk and still leave room for an applcation and data and the five inch disk held less then 1MB of data
So yes, DOS was simpler, by far. It had to be if it was to fit in a few kilobytes and run on a 4Mhz 8-bit machine.
From the very first day of it's life UNIX ran on powerful (for it's day) hardware and was designed from the start to allow multiple users to log on at once. The issues involved with running multiple programs and suporting multiple users made UNIX hugly more complex than DOS.
But from a user's point of view thay are very close. In each case you type the name of a program at a prompt, hit return and the program who's name you typed runs. That's it. Simple. Well OK there's more. You can connect to output of one program tothe input of another, use variable andthe shells ofer a simple programming languge. But all the shells are basically the same idea. If you can use one you can quickly learn another.