The Blackbelt Hypothesis

[blackbelt_jones]

This is the Blackbelt Hypothesis, which I have named after me. Based on anecdotal evidence:

Among those attempting to learn Linux from the desktop, occasional use of shell commands and/or the Command Line Interface is a reliable predictor of success.

Technically, you don't need the command line to run Linux any more, but it's really starting to look to me like people who refuse to use the command line will eventually give up, and return to windows. Has anyone else observed anything similar? Anything different?


If it's true, there could be many reasons for this. My feeling is that users who have been brought up on Windows, who have had their expectations shaped by Windows, and who then attempt to use Linux as if it were Windows are not going to be impressed, because if there is anything that Windows is better at, it is being Windows. I came to Linux from a non-technical background, and it was hard. Most of the reasons why it was so much harder were more cultural than technical (I didn't actually know any other Linux users. It's not hard to see why non-technical new users who are not motivated by politics would fail to see a sufficient payoff to learning a bunch of new stuff to do the same old stuff with seemingly less commercial software choices.

I've actually started telling people that they can run Linux without any command line if they want, but they might as well not bother because while you have a choice of GUI, other than that it's not much more than a cheap Windows knock-off.

I really want to encourage people to try Linux, but I don't want to set them up to fail. People who have failed at Linux are starting to band together on the internet and really cause Linux PR problems. I'm not just thinking of the infamous Linux Hater's Blog, although that's what started me thinking. These folks are angry, and they want to blame us for their failure, and if we mislead them into thinking that they didn't need the CLI to suceed, they may have a point.

The command line is woefully minsunderstood. People think its a lot harder to make friends with than it actually is. They don't understand the difference between a terminal window in the desktop that only serves the user, and the bad old konsole that would dictate terms to the user. The ignorance is a challenge, but if we could address this misunderstanding , we would be playing to our strengths.

Linux was founded by developers, and it's natural for developers to address an educational problem with software, but more elaborate guis will only cover over our strength. I'm convinced that with an educational approach to an educational problem, ordinary people could be learning the little bit of command line that will make them powerful in Linux, and enable them to do things that will make Windows look like a cheap knock-off of Linux if they try to do it there.


(Haven't proofread this yet.)

[deathadder]

I've actually started telling people that they can run Linux without any command line if they want, but they might as well not bother because while you have a choice of GUI, other than that it's not much more than a cheap Windows knock-off.
I don't want to start any kind of flame war or anything with you Blackbelt, but I personally find this statement offensive to the hundreds of talented hackers trying to make a better system. I partly include myself in that, I'm not a talented hacker, but I do like to think I'm a good programmer and I'm spending a lot of my time coding on a project at the moment.

People have put in hundreds of hours into making a system work better for their users, and for someone to say all they've managed is a cheap knock-off is well, just wrong. I don't think XFCE developers who went for the CDE approach to GUI's or the *box guys would agree with you too much.

But then again I'm finding I disagree with your fundamental point that to use Linux without reverting back to Windows (or Mac or what ever) you need to learn the command line. I know people who have setup a Ubuntu/Fedora/Suse system and use it daily without the hassel of a command line to be productive.

I will say however, that GUI's don't always offer the same "artist" approach that the command line lets you. But can you imagine how unusable a GUI app would be if it let you have the same level of control as the command line?

I am, and will always be, a huge fan of the command line. It lets me do alot of my work quicker and with more verbose output than many GUI apps do, maybe I'm of that mind because I am technical in nature. However I also have a great believe that if computing is to advance and allow users to do their work then it has to be through GUI development. Maybe that'll mean moving away from our current approach, because lets face it a keyboard and mouse aren't the most human way of working now are they!

[EDIT]
Sorting out my spelling...

[blackbelt_jones]

Please let's not have a flame war, no matter how much we disagree, though it may not be that much.

I know people who have setup a Ubuntu/Fedora/Suse system and use it daily without the hassel of a command line to be productive.

I'm sorry I offended you, but try and understand: By now I've spent a lot of time talking to people who have tried Linux and dislike it, and I'm trying to account for what they're telling me. I'm trying to see things through their eyes.

Obviously, Linux isn't a knockoff of Windows, but it can look like it to someone who tries to use it as if it were windows, with expectations that are shaped by Windows. These people complain about "the work necessary to bring Linux to Windows parity". Or how lInux is "unsuccessful as a windows substitute". It's like Tiger Woods competing against Howard Stern. Tiger could certainly beat Howard at golf, but instead he challenges him to enter into a Howard Stern lookalike contest.

It's worth noting that you know people who have been successful without the CLI, but I'd feel better about your impressions if you weren't so obviously coming at me with a chip on your shoulder. I'm sure there are exceptions to the rule, if there really is such a rule and this isn't just my skewed take on things. But what are your overall impressions? Do you know anyone who went back to Windows, and what did they do?

There's no denying that GUI are valuble, and that GUIs matter. But no GUI can replace the command line, just as no hammer-- <i>not even the best hammer in the world</i>-- can ever take the place of a screwdriver. It's not about one tool being better than another tool; it's about two tools being better than one tool.

I think you know as well as I do that the command line isn't a hassle. Often, it's a powerful time-saver and a lot of fun-- and when it isn't, you don't have to use it. It's also something that, by all reports, Windows can't touch, and yet Linux seems to be embarrassed by it. In recent years, many major distros have taken the terminal window icon off their default desktops completely. I think that's a tragic mistake, because we're denying them a tool that would increase their chances for success, apparently because we want to be liked. What's more, it doesn't seem to be working. (http://www.linuxhaters.blogspot.com)

I avoided learning the CLI for two years, and then stepped over the threshold in a couple of hours, and my perception of Linux completely changed. It just made so much more sense. From that point on, I knew the basic commands to move files around: cp, ls, mkdir mv, and so on, and that allowed me to pick up a little bit at a time over the following four years, and to use scripts and notes to make memorizing large amounts of data unnecessary. I keep archived files in the "notepad" section of my yahoo email account, so I can generally access them from anywhere, and they never get lost when I accidentally reformat the wrong partition, and they make up a searchable database. I never consciously "memorize" anything. I just know how to find things, and how to save things where I can easily find them later. If something is important enough that I have to use it often, I'll remember it soon enough. I don't have to "drill" or "study". That was the moment when two years of frustration ended, and four years of fun and empowerment finally began. I might not have lasted if I had come in today. Six years ago, you were given the impression that it was something you ought to learn.

There's so much about the CLI that I haven't felt I needed to learn to be really empowered. I only know two good uses of the pipe, to funnel the output of a command into less so I can read the whole output from the beginning, and to funnel the output into grep to filter out irrelevant results. Incidentally, that's the only use I know of grep.

And then there's cat. Every tutorial uses cat as an example, but I have no idea what it's used for.

[deathadder]

Don't worry about a flameware from me, I forgot my fireproof clothes today ;)

I full understand what your saying, but the way I read it got me seeing a bit of red. I'm sure I don't need to tell you what that's like. :)

[blackbelt_jones]

Yeah, I could see that. I wasn't offended. I wasn't even surprised. For whatever reason, it was a real struggle to get that out last night. I was exhausted when I was finished, too exhausted to rewrite, and I remember looking at the words "cheap knock-off" and thinking "Oh, that's definitely going to piss someone off!" But I just couldn't deal with it then. Sorry.

Darkbolt, bless him, cured me of any desire to have a flame war ever again. If you can talk about difficult, touchy subjects without reaching for the flame thrower, that's so much cooler.

[saikee]

I can see users who have to do propgramming will be fond of the command Line Interface (CLI, console, or terminal mode) and those who are end users of the software would want to remain in Graphic User Interface (GUI, desktop etc).

Many Linux distros seem to have matured to a state that even a Windows idiot without any knowledge of CLI can survive in them, so that must be a good thing.

Linux users who want the operating system replacing the M$ equivalent may have to wait longer.

The bottom line is with a M$ system a user can do very little in deviating from the proprietary software. With a Linux it is a different story. We can perform magic after knowing a few commands in the CLI.

GUI is for users who just want to use Linux. CLI is for those who want to know how the computer/OS works. The two are not mutually exclusive. Those who hate Linux because of the CLI are people who think computer was invented to play games and not to compute.

[blackbelt_jones]

To put it another way, I believe that learning just a tiny bit of the command line, not too much, would really improve a newbie's chances of having a great experience, and succeeding with Linux. I also believe that in some parts of the community, there's a reluctance to tell them this, because the command line is so horribly misunderstood. People don't initially see that there's a vast difference between today's command line that supplements the Desktop, and the bad old days of the console. They don't understand that there's no need to chose between the commnad line and the desktop. I can't tell you how many times I tried to tell people about the value of the command line, and they responded as if I was telling they needed to give up the desktop GUI. HELL NO! I'm talking about two-handed computing, the ability to choose what interface you want, moment by moment, according to the situation. I've encounterd some people online who work managing servers. They use the console all day, they know how to use the CLI, and even they don't really understand that there's miles and miles between the big bad console and the desktop terminal window.

And it's not hard to learn, but so much of the books that are available are either influenced by the old pre-GUI console, or geared toward servers. We need a book that teaches "just enough" command line for the desktop user to supercharge his worktime.

I remember what it used to be like sorting through my files with Windows Explorer. It was DRUDGERY. The great thing about the CLI, using things like scripts, and wildcards, isn't just the time that it save; it's the fact that the time saved always seems to come out of the most boring, repetetive tasks. It cuts right through the worst part of computing.

[irlandes]

I suppose it's worth looking into, Blackbelt. Personally, I think there are multiple factors in Linux resistance.

My own theory of one factor is this is a subset of Future Shock, the concept presented a long time ago by Alvin Toffler. That when change comes too fast, people just can't keep up.

This is real important to me. Most retirees stay in the same house; doing exactly the same things, except maybe visit grandkids a bit more, and think they are world travelers. They shop in the same stupid stores; go to the same boring church; look at the same ugly neighbors; mow the same disgusting yard; until they can't keep up the place then move into an apartment; then die.

Yuk!!!

I assume they do this because they don't want change in their lives.

When I retired, my plan was to start a complete new life, not just sit around to die like most retirees.

So, here I am, sixty six years old, well established in the Third World part of Mexico, as content as a bug in a rug, and could have affairs with young girls if I chose to do so. I think if I lived back in the old town, I'd probably be wanting to die. :)

Two years after I retired, I started Linux for the same reason. Windows not only is a pain in the chair; it's also boring and predictable. Linux is a change, and it stimulates me. True, I learn something, then three years later, when I need it again, I have to relearn it...

Those same folks who retire to die in the same boring place they lived for forty years simply don't want change. They prefer viruses and trojans and spyware, and the blue screen of death, much more than change, and they want it until they die.

When horseless carriages were developed, a lot of people resisted that, too, for the same exact reason.

[blackbelt_jones]

Many Linux distros seem to have matured to a state that even a Windows idiot without any knowledge of CLI can survive in them, so that must be a good thing.

It's a good thing, but for the "Windows idiot", surviving is not a better thing. Surviving is not much a payoff for the hassles of migrating.


Linux users who want the operating system replacing the M$ equivalent may have to wait longer.

Yeah, and telling them that they may need the CLI to thrive (though not to surivive) is a way of keeping these people away for a while, and not wasting our time or their's.

GUI is for users who just want to use Linux. CLI is for those who want to know how the computer/OS works. The two are not mutually exclusive. Those who hate Linux because of the CLI are people who think computer was invented to play games and not to compute.

I think some people just don't understand. They are hung up on the old GUI vs. CLI mindset. The two are absolute partners now. I use Konqueror to click to a directory (or use a bookmark) and open Konsole with F4, instead of that blind, awkward cd-ing from directory to directory. I use shell commands to customize my menu and keyboard shortcuts in fluxbox.

[blackbelt_jones]

Anyway, can we get back to the very simple question here? Why people don't succeed in learning Linux is a complex question, but I'm asking a very simple question. How do the people you know who succeed and fail at Linux break down around use of the command line? Just to get a feel to see if the question merits further study. If we could find a good indicator of who will succeed and who will fail, it could be very helpful in fashioning education initiatives.

I think Linux needs a little less advocacy, and a little more education. In other words, instead of pushing Linux on our friends, lovers, siblings, spouses, parents, and grandparents, we could devote our energy to making sure that whoever is interested, and likely to succeed is going to get the help they need.

Here's what I think: it's a vicious circle. In order to get more users, Linux needs more users. I didn't have a hard time learning Windows because I was surrounded by Windows users. I could always turn to a co-workeror a family members. ask a question, and get an answer. It was a long time before I met another Linux user face to face. A massive user base is why learning Windows seems so much easier. It's so natural, you don't really think about where the information comes from. It comes from all around you.

[bs_texas]

When I got my Blue Belt in Tae Kwan Do, my instructor told me I knew just enough to get myself really hurt if I ever got into a serious fight.


Hmmmm... some sort of Linux analogy could probably be drawn there. ;)

[blackbelt_jones]

No... No, I don't think so.

[glasdave]

I don't know if Windows users actually know how to use Windows, per se, or just manipulate the bits and pieces they need to get by.....you know doing things by rote, as it were. Hyperterminal, control panel, how to get rid of all those neat shortcuts on the desk top, etc, things I used in windows, draw blank stares for the masses....I still use the c: prompt to get things done. and I'm glad it's there.

[ehawk]

Do you think that many users of OSX, a unix OS, really find it necessary to work at the command line?

Package management in linux can be done through the gui. Most applications allow you to modify their configuration files via pull down menus and clicking boxes.

Part of the difficulty non-cli users may face is that in telling the computer to do something through mouse clicks, the computer provides the various possible actions the computer can take, and allows the user to choose. When faced with a terminal prompt, the user must determine, unprompted by the computer, which action he wishes to invoke. He simply doesn't want to have to learn what options are available, he wishes to be presented with them. Because of this choice presentation, even a person "putzing" around with point and click can figure out how to do many things. Randomly hitting keys on the keyboard and hitting enter will not provide the user with constructive feedback. For them, the computer is a tool meant to do tasks, and should be so intuitive so as not to be a task in itself. Typewriters/word processors are intuitive (input), as are television sets/browers (browse and display) and telephones/email/chatters (communication) and game consoles/software games. This is all most people do with computers, and is readily accomplished through intuitive guis.

Until unix becomes so predominant in the culture, I can't imagine schools introducing students to the command line and requiring it of them in the same way they might do an application like a browser or a word processor.

Perhaps when an AI becomes enmeshed with the OS, this could change...the user enters gibberish, and the computer responds, "Enter some words describing what you want me to do" and continues to refine the person's desire by offering choices and prompting for additional input...by this time, the predominant interaction may be through voice commands and natural language processing.

The gui, like the dark side of the Force comes more easily and quickly, but is not more powerful...once you start down that path (solely), forever more will it control your destiny....lol

[panther3e]

I believe that people who come to Linux from windows are a bit scared of the CLI. In windows Finding the CLI is hard enough as it is hidden. At least it was for me in XP and win2k. In the old days was different with dos and win 3.1 and win95. Once Found, there is not much one can do without knowing specifics. Its actually discouraged in windows. I hated that I could not change much. I would try things, have them not work, ask IT guy at and have him tell me you cant do that.

I was very intimidated by the CLI when I first installed Linux. The CLI was the only to install Linux. There were no or very few gui's to any thing with redhat 5. Slackware 3.5 Was all command line to install and to edit all of the config files.

But the great thing I learned about Linux was that I could change anything I wanted. All I needed to do was do some research, studying, and reading. I could change what ever I wanted, even to the point of breaking my system. I have done that a few times over the years.

I have become comfortable with the CLI over the years and use it very often but use gui's as well. Some things are easier from the CLI.

Now days there is hardly any reason to use the CLI unless you wanted to. Now I use my computer to surf the internet, check email, and chat with friends. I have no need for the CLI but I do use it because I like to.

Kevin

[gamblor01]

I guess I will make a few comments:

Over the summer I reformatted a computer and gave it to a friend of the family. For awhile I wanted to put Ubuntu on it and use her as a bit of a test subject. But a comment in the "average user?" thread caused me to put XP on there. The comment was something along the lines of "Those who come to me and ask about Linux tend to be successful with it because they are willing to learn it. Those who have it pushed on them just complain that it 'doesn't work like Windows' and ultimately don't like it." I think that's very true. (My apologies to the author if I butchered this).

Do you think that many users of OSX, a unix OS, really find it necessary to work at the command line?
I do, but I have the background to do so. I own a Mac Mini and a Macbook Pro. I bought my wife a Macbook. I don't think I have ever seen her once open the terminal on any of the 3 Macs in our house, nor have I seen her open a terminal on Ubuntu.

Until unix becomes so predominant in the culture, I can't imagine schools introducing students to the command line and requiring it of them in the same way they might do an application like a browser or a word processor.
Funny you say that. I'm going to be teaching an intro to Java course at NC State next semester. As a prerequisite for this course the students need to have taken an "intro to computing" course. Part of that class is basic Unix commands! This is a REQUIRED course for the computer science curriculum. However, I'm sure this is NOT the norm for most schools. I know UT offered Linux courses (as well as intro to Perl, Python, etc.) but they were all OPTIONAL.

I only know two good uses of the pipe, to funnel the output of a command into less so I can read the whole output from the beginning, and to funnel the output into grep to filter out irrelevant results. Incidentally, that's the only use I know of grep.
Here's another 2 interesting uses of pipe:

- to cut column(s) from output. Do an ls -l and you'll see the output in columns. Let's say you wanted the 4th column in the output. How about:

ls -l | tr -s ' ' | cut -d ' ' -f 4

If you wanted several columns:

ls -l | tr -s ' ' | cut -d ' ' -f 2-5

- A second use is to pipe into xargs. Let's say you do some really crazy command that does a find, pipes the output into grep to remove some things, then does something else which gives you some strange list of files that you need to remove or copy for some reason. Pipe it into xargs!

<some crazy command here that gives you several lines of output> | xargs rm


Also, you don't have to pipe things into grep. Just run it from the CLI:

grep 'Blackbelt' *.txt

or better yet, do it recursively to grep all files in the current directory and all of the subdirectories:

grep -r 'foo' .

[blackbelt_jones]

I have become comfortable with the CLI over the years and use it very often but use gui's as well. Some things are easier from the CLI.

Now days there is hardly any reason to use the CLI unless you wanted to. Now I use my computer to surf the internet, check email, and chat with friends. I have no need for the CLI but I do use it because I like to.



That's really the point. There's very little that you have to do with the CLI any more, and that's a good thing. For one thing, it makes the command line easier to use, because you don't have to use it for everything. That means you don't have to learn it all at once. In fact, you never have to learn all of it. I never have.

People have crazy ideas about the command line. They think it means giving up the GUI, or that it requires a lot of "rote memorization", which to me means drilling and study, and I don't think that's true at all. They think that requires a lot more typing than it does. A lot of people I talk to maintain servers, work with the command line all day long, and even they don't understand that in the context of the desktop, the command line is a completely different thing from the big black screen that makes you do <i>everything</i> from the CLI

I think I'm going to stop using the expression "the command line", instead of going to use the expression "shell commands"which includes scripting and GUI programming. Everytime I click on my fluxbox menu, or everytime I use a keyboard shortcut, that's a shell command. Because of shell commands, my GUI does much more with much fewer clicks. KDE 4 has a gui that allows users to enter shell commands to create menu items and keyboard shortcuts. Like everything else in KDE 4, I haven't quite figured out how it works, but it's there. XFCE is fully programmable with shell commands. KDE3 and Gnome allow users to create desktop launchers with shell commands. It's all about the GUI.

But that's mostly really really easy stuff. Most of the shell commands are just a desktop application followed by a url or path for that application to open.

firefox www.justlinux.com
konqueror ~/documents/rute.pdf

What I know about the cli has not been hard to learn, and it's completely changed everything for me. It was the threshold between two years of frustration and four years of fun. Every click on my menu is something I put in there. NOTHING is mnore intuitive that the GUI you create yourself.

And there's automating stuff with scripts. The boring repetative stuff I used to hate is handled by the computer while I do something else. How can anybody not like that? Whenever this comes up, someone will assume this condescending tone and explain to me about how "to most people a computer is a tool", as if I'm the stupid one for thinking that to automate a process is something that might have a practical benefit.

This is not your father's command line. You don't have to do everything from it in order to use it, and that makes it so much easier than anyone seems to think, and it's really really beneficial. It's just fear, and misunderstanding.

An innovative educational approach could make it really easy for new users to make a start. That would not only empower users, it would make users see Linux as Linux and not as Windows that you don't have to pay for.

[infiniphunk]

There's no doubt that knowing how to use the CLI will continue to to benefit those who want to use linux, even with distros that have all the bells and whistles built into the GUI.
The problem lies in the fact that so many people nowadays are so lazy. More and more, people want to just hit one button, and have everything just magically land in their lap. Windows users are a good example of this. What Windows users all seem to forget is that at one time they had to learn all the little routines that they now know even with their eyes closed.
Another thing to consider is that people don't want to read anymore. People are lazy. Nobody seems to want to read the instructions on how to do something. I think there is a very definite 'dumbing down' trend in our culture right now. As electronics become easier to use, more intuitive, etc, people have to think less about what they are doing. Oh well.
Regarding the Terminal in OS X - I've found that the vast majority of Mac users I have met have no clue about it. For many people, a Mac is just a nice reliable appliance for using various computer programs on.

[gamblor01]

The problem lies in the fact that so many people nowadays are so lazy. More and more, people want to just hit one button, and have everything just magically land in their lap.
I 100% agree. I think you're right...it seems that as computers get easier to use, people have less and less desire to understand how they work and/or take advantage of the really useful features simply because it would take effort to learn them.

And in my experience, users don't even want to click one button anymore. They just expect everything to be done for them without any interaction. Case in point, this bug report:

http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=1989010&group_id=166631&atid=839779

This guy submits a bug report stating that the feature to save on exit and workspace locking (which coincidentally, I spent my time implementing for someone else who had requested it) was blamed for him losing a week's worth of passwords. Of course, he never bothered to exit the program (gracefully anyway), never bothered to lock the workspace (he disabled the workspace locking when he minimized the program), and never once clicked the save button or hit ctrl+s. Then he wants to blame the programmers for code that doesn't actually work. I'm sorry but clicking the icon to save the database or hitting ctrl+s just really doesn't any amount of effort. Apparently however, this was too much effort for one particular user.

[infiniphunk]

Can you imagine what people's cars would be like if they treated them like computers?
You would have so many people coming home from work and leaving their cars running in the driveway, with the radio and headlights on, and the keys still in the ignition.
People tend to know more about how to deal with an automobile properly, when compared with computers.
I tell people all the time that convenience will be the downfall of civilization. People want everything to be CONVENIENT. A computer that treats users like uneducated idiots is often called convenient. How convenient it is, for instance, that a user doesn't need to know anything about how a computer works. It's just so convenient...until the day that it breaks and you need it fixed!
I strongly believe in DIY culture; I think that being able to do/make something for oneself is truly liberating and empowering.
The bottom line? I don't care how pretty your GUI is, know the terminal and system commands, THAT'S POWER!

[ehawk]

By schools, I meant K-12, not colleges or universities.

[blackbelt_jones]

ore and more, people want to just hit one button, and have everything just magically land in their lap. Windows users are a good example of this. What Windows users all seem to forget is that at one time they had to learn all the little routines that they now know even with their eyes closed.
[/QUOTE]

The problem isn't really laziness; its ignorance. If people knew how much work they could save, and how easy it is to make a start, laziness would be our best ally.

It's not so much that people hate reading. They hate reading computer books, and hell's bells, who can blame them? I never have been able to read a computer book. Instead, I make the computer read the book to me. But think about a man page. Is there anything more compact than a manpage? With a little practice, you don't really have to read a manpage, it's structured so that you can find what you need at a glance. If people understood this, they would loooooove manpages. Ignorance is the problem, not laziness. Once ignorance is dispelled, laziness is our friend.

The thing about hitting one button is that sometimes you have to hit it again and again and again.

[gamblor01]

By schools, I meant K-12, not colleges or universities.
Yeah like I said, I think most places these types of courses are optional, even at the college level. Those that do require it I'm sure are not the norm (and even at NCSU, it's only required for computer science majors).

As far as K-12 goes...you're probably right. Good luck finding these types of courses as required courses. I know many high schools have computer science courses, but only the "nerds" take those right?

[blackbelt_jones]

I wouldn't expect them to be required. I would damn sure expect them to be offered.

You know, a couple of years ago, when I went to my high school reunion (never mind which one) it occurred to me that the one thing that I learned in HS that had been the most useful was... personal typing. By miles and miles, the most useful!

[bwkaz]

Several people have linked to this before, but it bears repeating:

http://linux.oneandoneis2.org/LNW.htm

I especially like the car/motorcycle analogy. ;)

[Calipso]

- to cut column(s) from output. Do an ls -l and you'll see the output in columns. Let's say you wanted the 4th column in the output. How about:

ls -l | tr -s ' ' | cut -d ' ' -f 4


Much cleaner :)

ls -l | awk '{print $4}'

[jamesbandido]

personally i'd love to do things in terminal mode since i want to get a hands-on feeling ... that way i learn much more and understand what the program or app is trying to do ...

[y3kspoo]

The "one key and land in their lap" comment underscores a difference that I have seen. Once I show how to set up a hot key, the kids, and friends go wild with it. That leads to the CLI and BASIC commands... at this point they are pretty much "In".
If there is too much resistance, this is the point at which they fail, and revert to Windows. To answer that question from my limited experience.
I have only been using linux since Mandrake 8.1. Busy on other things and have only read and researched here. Sorry, I just usually have little to lend to a conversation.
With 2 new teenagers in the house (blended family), the big excitement right now is will I have the new FreeBSD box ready in time for school? These two have only been introduced and indoctrinated for 2 years. Started on DSL and let them crash a few other distros along the way...
I hope these thoughts are in some small way helpful. I have gleaned much from the time spent browsing here. Solved problems by searching and have not had to ask a question yet, But I am thankful for the opportunity to post.