What Are You Doing Right Now
-
@Obsolesce said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@Obsolesce said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
I asked for a real example, you gave SSH
No, I gave Uptime
Via SSH. Which is the same when done through PowerShell.
No, not through SSH. You missed the entire point to the point that you tested bash twice and never PowerShell. You've missed all of it. We aren't on the same subject. I'm discussing absolutely nothing but how slow PS is, nothing else. Not SSH speed, not at all.
-
Simple example... no Linux, just PS vs CMD. Same command...
[scott@lax-lnx-jump ~]$ time ssh strongbad@strongbad "@powershell ls"
....real 0m1.772s
user 0m0.044s
sys 0m0.015s
[scott@lax-lnx-jump ~]$ time ssh strongbad@strongbad dir
.....real 0m0.845s
user 0m0.043s
sys 0m0.011sSame command, same box, PowerShell took twice as long as CMD.
-
I'm using SSH only to give me a simple way to time the transaction. Because I have no idea how to get this time from inside Windows.
-
I'm playing devil's advocate here because this PowerShell vs BASH thing isn't a solid apples to apples comparison. It just isn't, no matter how you swing it. What if I took a typical PowerShell and Windows example such as getting a list of AD users of a certain group, grabbing their email aliases (proxyaddress), and outputting it to a CSV...
That would look very different from BASH, and isn't typically a thing you would do with BASH. That isn't apples to apples.
-
@Obsolesce said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
It just isn't,
Except it is. In both cases, I want to use a simple shell to run a simple command. PS is slow at its core task and BASH is fast at its core task. Apples to apples.
-
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@Obsolesce said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@EddieJennings said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@Obsolesce said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@EddieJennings said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@Obsolesce said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@black3dynamite yeah, PowerShell is still stuck in like 1982 here.
No, I think all of you are stuck in 1982 while PowerShell has moved on...
Unless there's a bleeding-edge version of Powershell out now that has that cmdlet, it doesn't seem to be native for 5.1.
I know there's a module out there that does what your picture shows, but it would be nice if that was just baked-in.
No, nothing new or fancy... just plain old PS6:
That's promising then. Maybe in 5 years we'll have version 6 on everything where I work
. It is telling that it took 6 versions to get that functionality.PowerShell 7 is on its way with some sweet (and much needed) functionality.
that's cool
Not particularly. because they don't force it out to systems.
My fully updated Windows 10 systems still use PS 5.1
-
@Obsolesce said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
That would look very different from BASH, and isn't typically a thing you would do with BASH. That isn't apples to apples.
Sure, but no need to do that since we have apples to apples SHELL comparisons, not comparing tasks called by the shells.
-
@JaredBusch yeah, I looked it up and MS said it wasn't the update to 5.1 but was a separate product. Out and available, but not in the upgrade path.
-
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@Obsolesce said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
That would look very different from BASH, and isn't typically a thing you would do with BASH. That isn't apples to apples.
Sure, but no need to do that since we have apples to apples SHELL comparisons, not comparing tasks called by the shells.
I don't agree. They are two differen't tools built for different tasks.
-
@Obsolesce said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
I don't agree. They are two differen't tools built for different tasks.
That makes no sense. If that is true, then you are saying that PowerShell is a abject failure because the only reasonable task of assuming it was for system management is not what it is for. Why does it exist then if not to be the "bash" everyone has wanted for decades on Windows?
Of course they are apples to apples, they serve identical functions in every way.
-
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@JaredBusch yeah, I looked it up and MS said it wasn't the update to 5.1 but was a separate product. Out and available, but not in the upgrade path.
Fully updated Hyper-V Server 2012 R2
-
@Obsolesce said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@Obsolesce said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
That would look very different from BASH, and isn't typically a thing you would do with BASH. That isn't apples to apples.
Sure, but no need to do that since we have apples to apples SHELL comparisons, not comparing tasks called by the shells.
I don't agree. They are two differen't tools built for different tasks.
I know they CAN do many things that produce similar results and outputs, but they are different tools designed to deal with different things in different ways.
-
@JaredBusch and Fully updated Hyper-V Server 2016
-
@JaredBusch said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@JaredBusch yeah, I looked it up and MS said it wasn't the update to 5.1 but was a separate product. Out and available, but not in the upgrade path.
Fully updated Hyper-V Server 2012 R2
PS7 will be based on a newer .NET, and because of the different paths, it may not be so soon that PS7 ships with Windows, but it will.
It will be PowerShell 7. No powershell 7 and powershell 7 core. The "core" will only exist in technical specs.
-
@Obsolesce said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@Obsolesce said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@Obsolesce said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
That would look very different from BASH, and isn't typically a thing you would do with BASH. That isn't apples to apples.
Sure, but no need to do that since we have apples to apples SHELL comparisons, not comparing tasks called by the shells.
I don't agree. They are two differen't tools built for different tasks.
I know they CAN do many things that produce similar results and outputs, but they are different tools designed to deal with different things in different ways.
That's just a misleading way to say that they have the same job and one is designed well and one is designed poorly. They are both for identical tasks. One just shines and one obviously pales. Yes, they DO things differently, but their ends are meant to be the same - systems management. That their means differ is the only reason that they are worth comparing. If their means didn't differ, they'd both be bash.
-
@scottalanmiller said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
@Obsolesce said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
I don't agree. They are two differen't tools built for different tasks.
That makes no sense. If that is true, then you are saying that PowerShell is a abject failure because the only reasonable task of assuming it was for system management is not what it is for. Why does it exist then if not to be the "bash" everyone has wanted for decades on Windows?
Of course they are apples to apples, they serve identical functions in every way.
How do you get a .NET object or create a Windows form with BASH? Different worlds.
-
-
@Obsolesce said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
How do you get a .NET object or create a Windows form with BASH? Different worlds.
Means. This is why this discussion isn't making sense. You are confusing what the goals of teh two products are with how they do them. You are showing that PowerShell is so bad that you are no longer thinking of it as a function tool, but rather are so caught up in the "means" that it uses that you are seeing the means themselves as an end.
If that is true, you've defined PowerShell has pointless and worthless. It exists only to exist and not to serve any function.
-
@Obsolesce said in What Are You Doing Right Now:
It will be PowerShell 7. No powershell 7 and powershell 7 core. The "core" will only exist in technical specs.
But if PS truly has no purpose for existing....
-
I contend that PS has a clear purpose, and is just not well made. That's a million times better than having no purpose at all.
