|No such thing as a small change|
This one does still puzzle me, because: arrows,home/end,pgup/pgdown work the same in most linux terminals as in the windows commands prompt (though I do admit that some may not be set up right by default).
Really? Every *nix console I've ever tried to use generates ansi escape sequences for arrow keys etc. Whilst I did go through the process (with the help of a long-time *nix user) of trying to configure the keyboard to my expectations; we got some of it to work (kind of) and other bits never at all.
The functions keys in the command prompt do not appear to do anything remotely similar to what they do in other apps. (F3 isn't search like it is in most apps, F4 does some delete thing which I've never seen anywhere else)
I agree that F3:search for a character in the current line; and F8:search for a previous command that begins with what you;ve currently typed; are logically transposed, but if you are used to them...
Cut and paste is probably just familiarity; I very much prefer being able to just select with the mouse and right-click to paste over have to explictly click "mark" first.
Go into the command window properties->defaults->options tab and select the "quick-edit mode" and you can do exactly that in every command window thence forth. (I've had it that way for so long I'd forgotten it wasn't then default. :)
The main problem with c&p under nix shells was that they don't (or I never worked out how to make them) inter-operate with other programs. Ie. I couldn't easily copy from a shell and paste into an editor or browser; or vice versa.
Command history seems a lot more powerful in bash; cmd seems limited to a simple up/down arrow? But that might be another simpler-is-better thing for you?
Many people have never discovered the following functions:
UP and DOWN ARROWS recall commands; ESC clears command line; F7 displays command history; ALT+F7 clears command history; F8 searches command history; F9 selects a command by number; ALT+F10 clears macro definitions.
Another factor that many people miss is that cmd.exe uses multiple histories. So text entered to program prompts doesn't get mixed in with commands typed into the shell itself. And if you re-run a command, uparrow recalls text supplied to that program *only*. Run a different program that prompts for input a second time and it will recall only text entered to that program. I believe *nix programs can arrange to have their own separate histories; but if they don't you're stuffed.
But yes, in part, it is the simplicity that I like. I just re-read a guide to bash history facilities and have trouble imagining what use I would put most of them them to -- assuming I could remember them in the first place.
Overall that was a very enlightening answer. I'd been trying to think of functionality that was _missing_ from bash, while it turned out to be not about that at all.
Thanks for asking a good question and avoiding the usual "my god is better than your god" argument :) It is nice to have a civilised discussion.
Indeed, I think most people's reaction is haw could you possibly prefer something so simple minded as cmd.exe; completely missing the 'because it is simple' possibility :)
With the rise and rise of 'Social' network sites: 'Computers are making people easier to use everyday'
Examine what is said, not who speaks -- Silence betokens consent -- Love the truth but pardon error.
"Science is about questioning the status quo. Questioning authority".
In the absence of evidence, opinion is indistinguishable from prejudice.