Subscribe via e-mail: 
Poll: Command line or GUI administration tools? What do you prefer?
By Michael Pietroforte | 12 Comments | Permalink | Trackback | Previous | NextRecently, I stumbled upon a sentence in a Microsoft blog that made me wonder if there is a paradigmatic change happening in Redmond. Ned Pyle discussed the Windows Server 2003 adminpak tool RepImon (Active Directory Replication Monitor utility) as a replacement for the Windows Server 2008, Repadmin (Replication Diagnostics Tool). Both tools allow you to view the Active Directory replication status and to force synchronization between domain controllers. What is interesting here is that RepImon has a graphical user interface, whereas Repadmin is a command line tool.
To some extent, the article reads as if Repadmin is a new tool, yet both tools have already been introduced in Windows 2000. Therefore, Microsoft dropped a GUI tool in favor of the command line version. This is in contradiction to Microsoft’s official policy, i.e., that command line and graphical admin tools are supported in the same manner. It has occurred to me several times, however, that this is really no longer the case. Ned Pyle indicates why:
Windows administrators are much more comfortable with the command-line, and that’s great…
I am not sure how to interpret this sentence. Perhaps he means that Windows admins are now more comfortable with the command line than they were some years ago, but the “that’s great” comment, as well as the tone in the article, seem to claim that Windows admins currently prefer command line tools.
This sort of praising of command line tools is relatively new for Microsoft, and it all started with the introduction of PowerShell. The idea for PowerShell was born at a time when many believed that Linux was a serious threat to Windows. Linux advocates often argued that Windows’ MS-DOS-based command shell is no match for the UNIX-like shells of the Open Source OS. Microsoft then decided to make up for this shortcoming. It was with the release of PowerShell 2.0 that Microsoft actually surpassed Linux in this field.
This certainly strengthens the Windows platform, but I also see the danger in the possibility that Repadmin won’t be the last tool that will be dropped in favor of a command line tool. Of course, it is much cheaper to develop a command line tool than the corresponding GUI version. Since more and more Microsoft tools are now based on PowerShell, the temptation to offer only a command line version is significant.
In detail, I’ve already outlined my view about the GUI-CLI controversy. I am still very much pro-GUI, and I believe that this renaissance of the command line interface (CLI) is a step backward. I started working as a sys admin at a time before Windows conquered PC networks, and I am also used to managing Linux boxes. In this respect, I feel like I know both worlds.
Anyway, I would like to know if Ned Pyle’s claim is true. I know that my obvious support for the GUI fraction endangers the validity of this poll since it might influence some readers. However, I also recommend reading Ned Pyle’s article as a counterweight. You might also want to read some of the pro CLI comments in my former rant against the CLI.
Before you vote, sit back for a moment, forget everything you have read, close your eyes, and then imagine your daily work as a Windows admin. Then, make your decision.
Doing most of my Admin on Linux I actually find GUI front ends to command line interfaces to be rather good.
Mandriva Linux (in places) makes it possible to see what commands the GUI has just executed, making it possible for you to use the GUI to make one off changes, then switch to the CLI for scripts or tasks you need to do on a lot of PC’s – certainly narrows the learning curve doing it this way.
On Windows it can be rather annoying having to step through annoying wizards for something that would take one line on Linux.
Having been an active linux sysadmin for quite a few years, i still generally like commandline tools.
However, Powershell pretty much sucks as an interactive shell. The line editing capability is atrocious, complete is inaccurate, slow and inflexible. It’s clearly a second class citizen, as you still need to guy for a lot of stuff.
That doesn’t mean Powershell is bad – i welcome it as the first sane scripting language on Windows, but it’s clearly not designed for interactive use.
For example, doing something as simple as enabling remote desktop access from the commandline requires WMI – WMI is okay for scripting, but it sucks for interactive usage.
I don’t see Microsoft’s move to the commandline as bad. It means more effort can be put into making features work than making nice interfaces for them. Especially stuff that’s used once a year it makes more sense to just have a Powershell interface rather than a GUI.
Maybe Microsoft will consider interactive commandline usage at some point in time, but they sure aren’t doing it now.
Kev,I should have mentioned that Linux admins are excluded from this poll.
I usually don’t even install a graphical user interface on Linux servers because it would be useless anyway. I am also not a friend of wizards. However, on Linux sometimes it can be rather annoying having to read countless pages of documentation to find the right parameter for something that would take one click on Windows. 
Lukas, agreed. PowerShell is not really a shell but a scripting language. However, PowerShell geeks usually swear that it also rocks as a CLI. I never understood why, but I guess it takes some time until one learns to like it. I disagree with your last point. GUI tools are better when it comes to tasks that have to be done only every now and then because they are more intuitive to use. It simply costs time if you have to read the documentation again because you forgot the syntax of a tool that use only once a year.
i use both cli and gui tools when administering windows (servers and clients), depending on the task at hand.
i use cli for automation and scripts, and will use the gui for one-off changes or if i’m not comfortable/unfamiliar with the cli tool. i try to use the tool that will take less time, so my decision is usually “use gui first unless it will take less time to script it”, or “use a script if you will do this farily frequently in the future”. usually scripts (batch or powershell) will contain all the settings needed up front at the top to make modifying or changing later easier.
I think the example with repadmin and replmon is very good. Michael hit the nail on the head. Personally, I don’t think it’s about dropping GUI tools – Microsoft simply does not care what the admins need or request. What about NetDiag? This is a great command line tool and it’s been totally dropped in x64 OS versions (windows 2003/2008).
[...] some debate going on at the moment about whether System Admins prefer their administration tools with a User Interface (UI), or [...]
octavio, I think scripting is a different matter. Perhaps I should have made this clear in the article. Scripting is more like writing your own administration tool. Of course, if there is no tool to get the job done, you have no choice than to write a script. However, the question in this poll is about using tools, not about developing them.
Dean, Microsoft cares what admins need. They are paying customers after all. It wouldn’t be wise to ignore them. Sometimes it is just difficult to find out what customers really want.
It depends on the task at hand.
If every time I need to do something, I had to spend 10 minutes typing out OUs instead of 3 clicks on a GUI, I would have an anger coronary.
Give me command-line tools that don’t require 6 hours of typing and reading to deal with all the switches, keep them CONSISTENT across the tools and enable the tools to do something that would suck on a GUI. Then, I’m on-board.
Leonardo, you’re right, in real life it depends on the task. I’ve considered to offer this answer as a fourth option but I didn’t want to make things too complicated. To some extend this is an ideological question. It is a little like the presidential election. You can’t say I want Obama when it comes to foreign policy, but I want McCain for security issues. In this poll you have to chose to which political party you belong. I was generous enough to give you a third option.
You’re a bit of a tool. There’s so much inaccuracy here, I’m tempted not to respond. CITE ANY SOURCE for these points (which are all completely wrong):
1) With the release of PowerShell 2.0 … Microsoft actually surpassed Linux [in the field of command-line automation].
–> PowerShell 2 isn’t out yet, it’s in CTP. It doesn’t come close yet to the full-system automation that Linux shells allow, because on Windows, most apps have transitioned from console to GUI apps, and PowerShell doesn’t support automating “random” GUI apps the way linux/bash support automating random CLI apps.
2) it is much cheaper to develop a command line tool than the corresponding GUI version.
–> you pulled that out of your rear. There’s no difference in difficulty in designing a GOOD command line interface vs a GOOD graphical interface.
3) PowerShell represents a “renaissance of command-line interfaces”
–> what it represents is a renaissance of scriptability. It’s just like how we’re now seeing “web services” and APIs along side web apps. E.g. Twitter/Facebook/Friendfeed/Google Wave/Google … anything …. instead of just web apps. Nobody should be writing PowerShell apps INSTEAD of GUIs, unless they intentionally want to lock out “newbie” users.
Finally! I have been waiting for such a comment. I was already afraid that I chased away all command line geeks and scripting guys with my constant rants. Usually this topic provokes strong emotions. Those people are proud to be geeks and treat newbies with contempt who have to rely on GUIs. If someone tells them that is not really professional to work on the command line, it naturally causes anger. I can understand that very well and I can just say that this is not my intention even though I know that this comment will produce only more anger. I just can help myself to say what’s on my mind. So please forgive me.
As to your arguments:
1) It is possible to manage more and more GUI apps with PowerShell. Actually, most of Microsoft’s new enterprise apps are manageable with PowerShell. The fact that it will be a part of Windows 7 will entice many ISVs to jump on the bandwagon. Besides, I was only talking about Windows and Linux and not about applications. And it is now possible to manage almost all Windows features with PowerShell. But what I really meant is that its modern object-oriented structure is superior to the Linux shells.
2) I think you pulled that out of your rear! I have been programming myself and developing a good GUI application is certainly very time consuming. Most of the time has been passed before you write the first line of code. If an application is successful or not is usually only about its GUI. On the other hand, programming a command line tool usually only means to code the algorithms. Writing the “user interface” of a command line tool is in most cases a piece of cake.
3) Agreed. The renaissance of script ability is certainly more decisive.
It depends on what you are doing. If you are performing a simple task a limited number of times, a GUI is fine. If you are performing a complicated task a significant number of times, you need a CLI to run a script. That is overly simplistic, but you get the idea. It would be nice to have a CLI equivalent for every GUI option and vice versa. The admin should have the option to chose which one they prefer to use.