[llampx]

Will this replace Command Prompt or Powershell? Or is this more the back-end for these apps? I believe that we are heading for console overload (in a good way?!) with Command Prompt and Powershell installed on every computer and Debian/Ubuntu available on the MS store.

[zadjii]

First off: command prompt (cmd.exe) and powershell are commandline client applications. They are shells just the same as bash is.

All commandline clients run attached to a console server, and that server is conhost.exe. Conhost is responsible not only for being the console server, but drawing the actual terminal window these apps run in. So when you alunch cmd or powershell, what you're seeing is conhost.exe "hosting" these console applications.

What we're exposing here is the "master side" of conhost, which will the other applications act as Terminals, like how there is gnome-terminal, xterm, terminator, etc on linux.

[paulie_a]

Is there any chance cmd and powershell will improve from a user interface perspective? And perhaps become usable? Cmd has been garbage since it's inception.

[zadjii]

cmd is parked for pretty much everything except for major issues. It's a scary codebase that has a LOT of code that's dependent on it, and we can't really add any new features there without the possibility of breaking someone.

This feature is mostly focused on the other end of the communication, on being able to create new Terminal windows to run shells inside of them.

[elFarto]

Any chance that you could just fork it? Create cmd2.exe, hell you could even open-source it.

[oblio]

Is the pay-off big enough? Who knows what garbage code they might want to hide in there, for both technical reasons (including security) or even legal ones.

[llampx]

Isn't that basically Powershell?

[paulie_a]

Is there a chance this will be connected to a functional shell interface. I get your point that cmd cannot be upgraded because of legacy issues and that is understandable and unfortunate, but windows needs a proper shell. This is obviously a great start for one side of the equation. But until there is a decent terminal app, windows will continue to be a nonstarter.

[zadjii]

It sounds like you're asking for two different things here:

cmd.exe is a shell, and that's the guy that's parked.

conhost.exe is a terminal, and that's under active development, though it's slower than something like VsCode, because we can't just go adding features as we see fit, we have a LOT of back compat we still need to support.

Fortunately, conpty will allow for the creation of new terminal applications on Windows. If you're looking for a better shell experience on windows, I can point you to powershell or even [yori](http://www.malsmith.net/yori/), which looks pretty cool

[cryptonector]

I think u/paulie_a is just asking for a better shell. If cmd can't be made better, then make a new one.

[AnIdiotOnTheNet]

Windows has a proper shell, it's called PowerShell and it is by far the most discoverable and consistent shell that exists.

[wtallis]

It's also the most absurdly verbose shell that exists, which means it sucks as a shell even if it's a half-decent scripting language.

[paulie_a]

I've attempted to use powershell numerous times, it's a piece of shit compared to zsh.

[tokyodude]

some other HN thread recommended cmder. I haven't touched cmd since

http://cmder.net/

[zadjii]

Ah but see, now you're conflating two different things:

cmd.exe is a shell

conhost and cmder are terminals.

I believe cmder can come with git bash as well, which is also a shell.

The confusion comes from when you launch cmd, the window that appears by default is conhost, with cmd running attached to it. When you launch cmder, it's also running attached to cmd.

[nailer]

The back end. Basically people like ConEmu and Hyper and Terminus have been having to use various unreliable hacks for ages because there was no real console API. Now there is one.