[erikj]

My ideal modern terminal would be pretty much a reimplementation of Symbolics' Listener: https://youtu.be/o4-YnLpLgtk?t=1m46s

- A presentation-based UI, where every on-screen element is always linked to the data it represents: https://dspace.mit.edu/handle/1721.1/6946

- A powerful autocomplete that knows about possible keywords and arguments, and can list them in a graphical fashion (e.g. a drop-down menu).

- An ability to use any previously displayed data as input to a new command just by clicking on it, with the UI highlighting only the things than can be used as valid input to the current command.

- Embedding of images and arbitrary UI widgets.

- Sensible names for commands and their arguments, i.e. "Delete File" instead of "rm", and ":Output Destination File /home/erikj/log" instead of "> /home/erikj/log". This makes a lot more sense with the enhanced autocompletion facility than the current 70s style cryptic Unix two-letter commands that were employed because of the hardware limitations. It would be easier to learn and less prone to errors.

[jstimpfle]

You are not going to get more than 10% of shell users to type ":Output Destination File /home/erikj/log" instead of just "> home/erikj/log". Learn it once, save typing a lot of characters, many times a day.

The idea that you should type so much more just to be "not cryptic" is as old as COBOL. Which, as most people would agree, was not a good idea.

[erikj]

Why do you think I mentioned the autocompletion facility? Shell users won't have to type any more characters than they do now. Please give Genera a try in the emulator to see how it would work with your own eyes, it's nothing like COBOL.

[baq]

looks like powershell stole at least some of those ideas, which makes sense given what it is.