Or is that more of a stereotype, and there are some (maybe more?) out there using some form of graphical interfaces/web dashboards/etc.?
It’s struck me as interesting how when you look up info about managing servers that they primarily go through command-line interfaces/terminals/etc. It’s made me wonder how much of that’s preference and how much of it’s an absence of graphical interfaces.
GUIs are very limiting. You’re only able to do what the designer wants you to be able to. By using the terminal it’s much simpler to do more complicated tasks (once you’ve gotten past the learning curve).
Also since so many servers are headless (no display outputs) they’ll be remotely logged into, meaning there’s only a terminal to interface with the machine.
This can be true. Part of the reason I ask is that as more data is visual in nature, it seems like it might make it more difficult to manage strictly via CLI, especially since metadata is likely to be lacking in description and even with a descriptive filename and details, it’s a picture/video for a reason.
I’m sure there are existing arrangements to handle that though, like web GUIs for any visual media review as needed.
Can you give me an example? Sure graphs are quick to spot spikes and such, but outside a webui like you mentioned servers also usually have warning triggers, you know what’s better than staring at a graph looking for a spike? Getting paged once a spike happens with information on possible causes and the state of the server. That’s very difficult to setup using GUIs, but almost trivial to do if your okay with CLIs.
It’s more on the hobbyist end of things, but as an example I was thinking like if you had a server you’re using to back up or store photos on, trying to parse it strictly via CLI doesn’t seem like it’d be terribly useful.
You’d also want to view the images directly, I’d think, but I’m guessing in that situation you’d just use whatever web UI the software you’re using might provide.
I have a server I use among other things to backup my photos, I don’t understand what you mean by “parse”, but I administer my photos through my file explorer as if they were on my computer, because I configured the server to expose a samba share on the folder that I have the pictures.
You got the gist enough despite the term I used & answered what I was wondering about (as did the other person replying), so I appreciate it! Parse was just another way of trying to say see the file in full, filename, additional metadata, & content. With visual media I’d think you’d have to do like you (& they) said, configure it to be opened via something else for a comprehensive review.
I tend to work with visual media more, so for me a CLI feels like more of a backwards approach to navigation & data management.
Yeah, makes sense, however to setup good structure for being able to do that you’ll need CLI, e.g. if you want programs that administer photos and allow you to create albums and set tags, I personally don’t need that level of organisation, but if this is your main use you might want to invest the time to setup something like Lychee or piwigo, which are easily setup through docker (which if you’re into self hosting you should learn).
Viewing the images directly sounds to me like a different context. Browsing the images is more akin to end user activity, i.e. using the server for its intended purpose. Managing the server is more like making sure it’s running, that there is enough space allocated, security holes are plugged, software is up-to-date, etc. Administrative tasks. When wearing the admin hat, there wouldn’t usually be much of a need to actually look at the photos - you’d be more concerned with file names and metadata, not contents. In that context, the GUI becomes less important. And if you ever do need to see them, you can always fire up the GUI software for that occasional situation.