OSDev.org

would TUI seem better to spend time working on, would it be a better choice than cli? im thinking of adding tui, would it be worth it

IMO a TUI (Text User-Interface) is a CLI as they are both text-based user interfaces.

I'm currently contemplating using a menu-based TUI (with forced number selections) over the standard shell-based TUI (CLI). I'm not sure exactly what you mean by a TUI, so it's hard to tell you if it would be better to have than a CLI.

Maybe list some pros/cons and some design features for us?

I'll name a few things off:

TUI menu:

• Simpler to navigate and use
• Could have some kind of scripting language implemented for scripting menu commands
• Better for users used to GUI's

CLI shell:

• Ultimate control over what to do for an action
• "batch" shell scripting can be done
• Standard fall-back shell for most OSes (Linux, Windows, Mac OS X , BSD's with X, etc.
• Easier to code and change the structure of

I could probably list more but these are the important ones.

Troy Martin wrote:Better for users used to GUI's

I disagree. I find that if something is only fairly similar to something else, I'd rather have it completely different. For instance, when using a TUI, I almost always try to use the mouse to click on things: exactly as if you were using a GUI. About half the time a cursor appears and does what I want, half the time it doesn't. A CLI doesn't have that problem. It's pretty much completely different to a GUI.

My OS is going to have a GUI (in fact, I'm getting ready to write one right now).

However, if I decided to go with text, instead (which I might), I will use a combination of a CLI and a TUI. The command line will be there, but will be more advanced towards other uses. I haven' thought much about a CLI/TUI, but if I were to do one there would be more functions that a plain CLI, but would be more like a TUI with a command line.

-JL

I made a simple window-based tui - like a tui window manager. Trouble was, I didnt have a mouse driver, and after I showed it to my friends, they were very frustrated that they couldn't use the mouse. They still keep nagging me to make a mouse driver, but at the moment I'm busy rewriting my OS. I've attached some screenshots of it - they were borderless, and the less video ram you had, the longer it took to scroll - yeah, I have to rewrite it one day.

In the end, unless you have a good resolution, I have to suggest you go for a CLI, but that may scare some people off (don't ask why - it just seems to do so).

Sour: what display mode is that? Looks like 120x90 or something!

well i mea something like a tui interface windows made with tui, but in cli its like
C:\_ with text chars
thats what i mean. i think i should when i get the fat16 and fat done, i have a rm os

Troy Martin wrote:Sour: what display mode is that? Looks like 120x90 or something!

Isn't it just 90x60?


JAL

Hmm, must be. Pretty nifty though!

piranha wrote:My OS is going to have a GUI (in fact, I'm getting ready to write one right now).

However, if I decided to go with text, instead (which I might), I will use a combination of a CLI and a TUI. The command line will be there, but will be more advanced towards other uses. I haven' thought much about a CLI/TUI, but if I were to do one there would be more functions that a plain CLI, but would be more like a TUI with a command line.

-JL

Hmm... this reminds me of good ol' Norton Commander

Love4: Well that takes me back...

Me wrote:Ooooh, well this isn't good. Anyone got a Commander floppy around? I'll take Gnuparted if you shove it into the drive and tape the holes shut!

yes i have norton commander, but i have to find it on my cpu i just got it from a cite a couple weks ago

Troy Martin wrote:Hmm, must be. Pretty nifty though!

Not really, 90x60 is failry standard, as it uses the maximum resolution of standard VGA (720x480, with a 8x8 character set).


JAL

Is there an 80x60? Cause having a 640x480 text mode for TBOS would be real nice!