circumstances when it is more efficient to use a command line interface rather than a GUI interface?
959426
Writing is quicker than pointing and clicking.\nAlso a command line interface is easier to use from a script.
917977
when you're munchin' through tonnes of data.  Write a script, let it go, make a coffee, read the paper.  Or if you do it with GUI: sit there clicking "OK" and "yes" all day.   Naw.  Blx to that.   Command line wins.
1171303
I think it is IPTables, which is built in iirc \n\nHere's some info on it for you\n\nhttp://www.siliconvalleyccie.com/linux-hn/iptables-intro.htm#_Toc92808862\n\na good front end for it is firestarter\n\n(info link):http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firestarter_(firewall)\n\nbut if you are a command line lover I am pretty sure firestarter is utterly unnecessary.
1578
You have a few options here:\n\n- You can run it from the command line.  Go to Start->Run and type "cmd" and press Enter.  Then, cd to the directory containing the file and run it with options.\n\n- You can right click on the program and select Properties... - I believe there is a field that should let you specify options to use when running it.
384495
I'm not sure what you mean by layout, but for command-line interfaces (CLI), you should look at the man pages of Linux programs.\n\nType: man program (e.g., man grep)\n\nThis will give you an idea of what type of types of flags people are accustomed to (e.g., -r for recursive if your program does directory/file operations).\n\nAs for how this relates to HCI, well it's primarly an ease-of-use issue that you should consider. For command-line programs, the only consideration is to adopt tried-and-true flag-naming etc... because people are used to a certain convention or set of semantics (e.g., outputting to stdout so they can redirect the output to other programs). If you change things like that, it makes the learning curve steeper for intermediate/advanced users.\n\nIf you were just talking about a command-line interface like a console terminal, then definitely things such as: text autocompletion (via Tab), or defining your own autocompletion drop-down box as you type would be very useful for the user -- very much like when you type an address in your browser, it brings up a list of websites you've been to as you type. Again, that's going back to implementing what people are accustomed to and just making the entering of commands less time consuming/tedious.\n\nHope that helps.
598093
There really isn't anything that I know of that u can do in java, but try not having the scripts embedded. It sounds like the computer can't handle so much info.
537545
Decide how the screen will look (interface)\n\nWhat the user sees? (interface, screen)\n\nWhat data to be entered?\n\nHow large windows to be?\n\nWhere to place the command buttons?\n\nAny places to enter text and places to display output?\n\nWhat kind of message boxes to be used?\n\nPlan the properties: write down the properties for each object\n\nDetermine which events the objects will recognise, write instructions (codes) for events/objects\n\nCalculate total amount\n\nCalculate discount\n\nDisplay message\n\nDefine the User Interface\n\nSet the form size\n\nPut the controls (like labels, command buttons), set properties of the controls \n\n\nWrite Codes \n \n\n\nInput and Output \n\n\nProcessing
141068
There are a few things that are better. For instance OWA is much better in 2003 then it is in 2000. Windows 2003 comes with remote server and desktop capabilities built in and is easier to set up then 2000 terminal server. I don't like that I have to explain why I am shutting down the system everytime I need to reboot.
664395
just go control panel->mouse-->pointer---->click use default
32387
If you are confused about choosing which is better then don't get confused it depends totally on your needs...\n\nYour need for speed:\n\nOne of the big differences between the GUI is the relative workload they put on your system. The more a GUI has goodies, features and eye candies, the more it will need power to run properly and the slower it will be.\nKDE and Gnome are two of the most developed, and heavy, GUI available for Linux. Thus, if speed is of prime importance for you (for example, you want the maximum of power to run a task or you have a slow PC), you may be better to use a lightweight GUI, like IceWM, Fluxbox or Afterstep. In other word, the lighter your GUI is, the faster your overall system will be...\n\nWhich applications are you using?\n\nThe fact is that some applications just run better in one GUI than others.\nKDE and Gnome are based on a different set of programming libraries and tools (named GTK for Gnome and Qt for KDE). Thus, it's easy to understand that applications designed and based on the same GTK libraries than Gnome will work better under Gnome than under KDE. And the reverse will be true for applications based on  Qt.\nSo, it may be better to use the GUI that works best with your applications. If don't know the libraries used by your applications, just try them with different GUI and see if it makes any significant difference. For some applications it will, for others it won't. Thus, your favourite applications may help you determine which GUI you should use.\n\nConviviality and ease of use:\nThis point is more a personal choice, some peoples may find that KDE is convivial and easy to use, but others will be overwhelm with the hundreds of features and options... The choice is up to you, each GUI is, more or less, easy to use, you just have to make the best choice for you...\nHowever, if you're familiar with Windows, you may feel more at ease with Gnome or KDE, which are similar, than with a less classic GUI (like Enlightenment for example).\n\nThe default GUI of your distribution:\nAll distribution give preferential support and integration to one or several GUI. If you have Mandrake, both KDE and Gnome are equally supported. But Red Hat never hides their preference for Gnome, and SuSe for KDE...\nAll other things being equal, it may be a good idea to use your distribution's favourite GUI. It will be less hassle since it's the default installation and configuration. Integration and the "polish" will also be better, default settings being usually just fine. It's also easier to get support, since most peoples using this distribution will use the default GUI.\n\nYour need for eye candies:\nAll the GUI have a different look, some are gorgeous with lot of effects, font anti-aliasing, nice icons, and all kind of goodies, others look pale and simple in comparison. The choice between these two extremes is only a matter of personal preferences. Some will prefer a GUI with lot of eye candies, others just want a clean desktop on a simple background. None is better than the other, it's up to you to make your choice...\n\nFinal words:\n\nWith these points in mind, you should now be more able to choose a GUI. However, remember that choosing a GUI doesn't mean that you have to stick with it for the rest of your life! Nothing prevents you to install many GUI on your system. Then you choose the one you want when you log in. You may choose the GUI that's the most appropriate for the task...
858407
Its a way for programmers to sperate the user interface with its code.  The program is OK, but haven't heard a  lot about it.
740470
Most of the flavors of Unix rely heavily on text commands - although this is becoming less and less as time goes by.\n\nSeveral of the operating systems used in OEM products (phones, cars, etc) rely completely on text commands.
34855
You mean a Graphical User Interface, well it enables interaction between the user and machine in a graphical way, supposidly faster and more pleasent
299602
Try and use an IDE if you can. Or switch to linux for programming, you wont have to use getch() or pause :)
1181663
I agree with you about not running 2 at once. I've not done a head to head comparison, but I do use NOD32. I find it less resource intense than some of the their scanners I've used and I'm impressed with how frequently they update the signature file. The interface needs some work though as it's not as intuitive as other programs.
446459
You can use it for executing programs, and giving commands to windows.\n\nIn many ways it replicates clicking on the icons, but there are commands that you can't run any other way. However, these are not the type of commands your average "home user" would be bothered about.
47414
Yes, but only with dos programs that use a gui.