@ryo @Burn @digdeeper @djsumdog @lina Still, it's not about GUIs. The potato computers that we had in the 90s ran GUIs just fine. There were computers in the 70s that ran GUIs more than well enough.

"Plus a TUI has the added benefit of not requiring you to switch between a keyboard and mouse all the time."
Wrong, because GUI programs can support the keyboard just fine (some of them, like Emacs, or even GVim, are programs that work the same way regardless of whether they are running a GUI toolkit or ncurses, and there are GUI programs that are based on older curses programs, but still mostly work the same way).

They just don't most of the time, because they suck, because they are designed to be like Windows. Though even then, you can open menus with alt + a letter and then select options with another letter, it's not that different from bindings that you would find in Emacs, except it's more visual and has better discoverability. The problem with GUI toolkits is mostly with movement. Changing bindings is not very intuitive (not sure if it's even possible in all of them), and there are no default bindings for movement without the arrow keys, and moving between different panes can be extremely clunky.

At the same time, most TUI programs have basically no user interface because again, they are designed like complete shit. And most of them don't support the mouse, and what you said goes both ways. Sometimes you want to use the mouse, and then it's a pain to go back to the keyboard. Both should be supported.

And as far as bindings go, those programs tend to go with either Emacs bindings or Vim bindings. Neither of them are very good. There is no keybinding standard that is actually designed with ergonomics in mind. It doesn't help that keyboard layouts are almost all shit. The only layout with a sane design philosophy is BEAKL ( https://ieants.cc/beakl/beakl.php ), and that's very niche, and there are multiple versions, so it will probably never be in anything by default. Also, I think the Vim way of doing modal editing may be silly. We should have regular keybindings, and then people can set up their systems or keyboard firmwares to make modifier keys be toggled when pressed, and maybe have lights in their bars to display when they are active. That way all programs can be modal, or not, depending on preference.

Anyway, this is all an artificial division coming from the fact that terminal emulators exist, when they shouldn't. You can have a command line that is a real programming language and that has full access to graphics. Look at TempleOS, it has a HolyC command line with multiplexing and with graphics, including 3D models, and displays everything using markup language, that can be used to create links that you can follow. Look at Lisp Machines. Look at the McCLIM toolkit's Listener REPL. Here is an example, a video showing off Listener: https://yewtu.be/watch?v=kfBmRsPRdGg

It's a command line, and it's a REPL for a real programming language, and it has graphics. You can draw images in it, display images, and list files kinda like ls, except they have icons, and they are clickable. Commands can have interactive prompts. Everything is clickable. You can also draw objects and give them return values or make them run functions when clicked. I only don't use it because it's underdeveloped, because no one gives a shit about it. Just the scrolling is enough to know that, it's very slow. But the point is, terminal vs GUI is a retarded distinction that comes from Windows and Unix. From dinosaur computing that unfortunately never went extinct, and all the GUIs are still mostly just what was trendy 40 fucking years ago, and the world hasn't recovered since.

All programs should have graphics, all programs should have menus, all programs should support both the mouse and the keyboard, and all programs should have a command line interface for when you don't want to dig through menus or remember some obscure keybinding.

Basically, everyone is wrong and always will be. Even the debates that people have are based on dumb categories that are artificial and don't work. I think this is the work of ideological thinking. People can't think outside of these boxes, these dumb categories generated by dumb points of reference and senses of normality. The allegory of the cave comes to mind once again.

In a perfect world, this post would not exist.
https://yewtu.be/watch?v=Kl3H4vMqYNo