> Monitors capable of displaying over 33 million square area pixels? Naw, no pixels to spare for borders or shading.
There’s nothing quite like trying to hit the narrow grab handle of a borderless window with a white title bar on top of a window full of white content. There’s no way Microsoft’s designers are actually using the stuff they’re making IMO.
As always, it depends. I like DBeaver when I'm poking around a database and the relevant CLI when I'm running migrations. CLIs are so powerful when you get them, but confusing when you don't. There are certain ones I always have to read the man page for. I like a tree style file browser over ls but prefer cd and mkdir and touch for moving around. I wish more applications were like AutoCAD (that is they have the combined GUI and command palete), although it's been a minute since I used it.
It feels to me that the more advanced graphics and display technologies become, the less GUIs make use of them.
32-bit colors with panels rendering billions of beautiful colors? Naw, black and white only.
Monitors capable of displaying over 33 million square area pixels? Naw, no pixels to spare for borders or shading.
Panels refreshing at 360Hz and faster powered by GPUs costing a few grand and CPUs with two dozen cores? Naw, response times are so last century.
Enough RAM to fit the entirety of Unicode including emoticons for love hotels and smiling poo? Naw, obscure hieroglyphs baby.
There's a part of me wondering if those command line warriors with their luscious neckbeards were right about GUIs being the inferior interface.