[JeremyNT]

I've never had a problem with ls. What about it doesn't "work fine?"

I could imagine another utility having a different feature set that people find useful, but in my experience gnu ls always does what it claims to do, and is so foundational that it's a de facto standard when working with Linux.

The desire to "replace" such well established utilities seems misguided to me - by all means add on additional utilities that help you out, but I think it would be wise accept the fact that due to its long history "ls" and similar tools are not going to be replaced any time soon.

[eviks]

And I could immediately see issues with its design, from cross-platform support to ease of configuration.

It's not wise to accept broken tools just because they persist, that's just mindless conservatism

[monsieurbanana]

I'm annoyed that ls is not the same depending on the OS

[gilcot]

POSIX options and behaviours are the same, not extra stuffs.