I've been using it since early beta builds and it does have some very nice features and great potential. Without it being able to smoothly merge into login scripting and web scripting it still takes a backseat to VBscript, JS, Perl and Python. For now anyway. It is one of the most impressive things to come out of MS in quite some time though.

The humor I see is that when MS does nothing to improve something it is known to lack on, they get bashed by all the ney-sayers. Then when they try to make at least "some" improvement, the same people pick on them again. Talk about a limited mindset. I manage a fairly skilled staff of developers on Windows, UNIX, Linux and even OSX projects. None of them waste time comparing or ridiculing platforms. After all, they're paid to support them, not worship them. If they did, I'd fire them in a minute.

Indeed, this is one of the greatest new developments to come out of Redmond in a *long* time. it's kinda hard to explain PS succinctly but I can say its kinda like an object oriented bash married with perl. UNIX and UNIX-like OSen can only hope to have something as good.

Unfortunately for MS there is still the major shortcoming for in that this great new PS interpreter is still running on top of the cmd.exe environment which is a piss poor excuse for a shell (broken copy/paste buffer, no ANSI support, etc...). Word has it that this too will be replaced with a proper terminal environment for the next major release of PS

Bad Troll...not only do you sound like you are talking out of your rear you sound like a raving fanboy as well...for one it said unix-like didnt say it would replace unix said it would replace the command line in WINDOWS

"slated to replace the command line in Windows"
Is that statement intended to be a joke?

I guess this means it will do more than the impressive ping, ipconfig and fdisk. Impressive indeed.

But UNIX it is not. Let's start with the very basics and bet on when Windows will get even the BASIC functionality of something as fundamental as AIX's LVM (13 years ago ;-)! OK, let's be fair, we can start with betting on when Windows and MS will discover what that level of functionality is.

Rather this announcement is more like DOS2 - a commandline without the fundamental underlying functionality to make it a really useful and powerful tool.

But that won't stop those unfamiliar with other environments from again thinking it is the greatest thing since sliced bread.

Indeed, have fun. Some are very easily entertained.

Sometimes you take what you can get. In the mean time, eat a sausage.

"Some are very easily entertained."

as are you apparently

"But that won't stop those unfamiliar with other environments from again thinking it is the greatest thing since sliced bread."

Funny that, especially when you just admitted to a complete unfamiliarity with PS. Is it up to par with the best unix terminals? Of course not. Is it lightyears ahead of cmd.exe, hell yes.

foxfyre, so many words yet so little context.

for example, have you tried powershell out? or even read some technical info about it? you try to bash it but you have no arguments.

or do you even know what the command prompt in windows are? ping, ipconfig etc are not part of the command prompt, they are programs usually started from there.

im not the biggest MS fanboy myself but i work in a windows enviroment and PS will solve many tasks for me so i am very happy this program gets released. seeing how little microsoft focues on stuff that dont have ultra modern heavy UI's i never thought i would see something like this from MS themselves.

currently i run cygwin on a few boxes, just to run some bash scripts under. i will look into rewriting scripts first day tomorrow.

Awww....

“The idea was to build a Unix-like shell for administrators”

“you try to bash it but you have no arguments.”

I simply laugh at the historical progress-ion!

"for one it said unix-like didnt say it would replace unix said it would replace the command line in WINDOWS"

At least the article employed English. And who thought that this was meant to replace UNIX??? The point is, that dispite the functionality, it still won't even come close!

Now I realize that many here are not old enough to remember this, but historically the Windows folks bragged that they are superior to other OSes BECAUSE they had a moderately functional command line environment in DOS while others do not. (After all, ‘Who needs a GUI!?’) (Despite DOS literally ‘borrowing’ its commands from UNIX , innovating by reversing the slash, while leaving 2/3 of the functionality behind.) Progress indeed!

Then MS becomes enlightened and in effect eliminates a moderately functional command line. Other OSes develop a substantial command line interface.
Where did the Windows fanboys go? I thought that a command line was such an advantage! But as the interface has changed, so have the claims! Oh, but I guess features are only advantages when Windows can lay claim to them. Otherwise they are conveniently ignored.

“or do you even know what the command prompt in windows are? ping, ipconfig etc are not part of the command prompt, they are programs usually started from there.”

Let’s see. What ‘is’ they?!? ;-) And now we are informed that commands such as ping and ipconfig “are not part of the command prompt”! Really?!? They are not a “command prompt”??? Duh! May I suggest you learn what a “command prompt” is!! No one (except possibly for you) has interpreted them as a command prompt.

Of course they are examples of commands calling utilities used to perform functions from within the command line interface! They are not the “interface”, nor are they “prompts”! That is a normal function within a command line interface.

Will it make Windows more useful? I certainly hope so! Just as Perl and several other languages have been used in the absence of a moderately functional command line interface! Unfortunately, the Windows STILL LACKS the functionality of many other more sophisticated OSes. And thus far NO ONE HERE has demonstrated even a basic knowledge of what integrated OS level capabilities Logical Volume Manager provides that is fundamental to OSes such as AIX and HP-UX!

Does Windows allow for real time partitioning and mirroring and detailed atomistic or automatic inter and intra drive policies? NO! Does it provide for the transparent manipulation of physical drives into virtual drives (ie Volume Groups)? NO! Does it allow for real time backups of mounted logical volumes without requiring them to have all users off the system – and while the drives are still mirrored? NO! (check out splitlvcopy) And that is just the beginning of the list!!!

In fact, does Windows allow for the controlling of disk resources by mapping data between a more simple and flexible logical view of storage space and the actual physical disks? Not even close! And that is just a beginning of the differences in the functionality of various enterprise class OSes.

So is it way overdue for Windows to get a functional command line interface allowing low level as well as high level functionality?? Sure! Is it better than having nothing? – Perhaps, as environments such as Perl, etc. already provided that basic functionality.

But does having a scripting capability provide a functionality that even comes close to what has been basic and fundamental to many other OSes? NO!

And yes, "this announcement is more like DOS2 - a commandline without the fundamental underlying functionality to make it a really useful and powerful tool." You get a scripting environment...but Windows lacks the ability to control configuration and control structures that other enterprise OSes take for granted.

So “Welcome Windows” to the world of scripting. It’s just a shame that even the NEW IMPROVED Windows lacks the basic functionality of so many other current OSes. And while that is exactly what the scripting capability is intended to help augment, Windows still has a long way to go to reach the basic underlying functionality of many other enterprise OSes. FACT.

Such a confusing reply.
stop trolling

"And now we are informed that commands such as ping and ipconfig “are not part of the command prompt”! Really?!? They are not a “command prompt”???"

No, they are not. Neither is calc.exe, those are all external programs that can be launched from ANY command line whether it's command.com, cmd, powershell, 4NT, etc. They are not part of the command prompt. Do you know what an internal command is? That's what you are looking for here. When you have the faintest idea what you are trolling about come back and try again, until then just shut up and stop embarrasing yourself.

"No one (except possibly for you) has interpreted them as a command prompt."

Except you... in your very first post.

"And who thought that this was meant to replace UNIX??? The point is, that dispite the functionality, it still won't even come close!"

Way to contradict yourself . So if it's not meant to replace it (and it isn't) then what exactly is the point in comparing them? Oh right...a good troll doesn't need reasons.

You seem to love confusing your utilities. The programs your touting aren't a part of the terminal either, they are seperate utilities run FROM the terminal. Would it make you feel better if MS made a splitlvcopy of their own that runs from the command line? Having it or not having it has nothing to do with the command prompt itself.

I suggest you go see your doctor, you have an awfully large stick up your ass....as usual.

Seldom have I seen so many replies by so many HS kids who fail to understand the relationship and distinctions between a command prompt (amazing that any of you kiddies would even mention a prompt), a commandline interface within a terminal session, and calls to '.exe' command utilities!

And for you who are sooooo confused, I simply quoted asinine comments from the posts that illustrated that so many folks not only do not understand the internals of a terminal session and the command shell, but that you are even less informed regarding the illustrious history of Windows and scripting.

By the way, a command shell is a "separate software program that provides direct communication between the user and the operating system. The non-graphical command shell user interface provides the environment in which you run character-based applications and utilities. The command shell executes programs and displays their output on the screen by using individual characters similar to the MS-DOS command interpreter Command.com. The Windows XP command shell uses the command interpreter Cmd.exe, which loads applications and directs the flow of information between applications, to translate user input into a form that the operating system understands."

So let's see, after 12 years since NT, MS discovers scripting. Can we say "about time"? The irony is that this capability was ably supported already by PERL and number of other environments. Obviously it will be another 12 years for you kiddies to discover what scripting is.

And the accusations that I said it would replace UNIX and that anything mentioned had ANYTHING to do with a command "prompt' and all of your the other asinine comments simply reinforce the fact that you folks need that window in your stomach cleaned so that you can see where you're going with your heads so far up your posteriors.

Find a book and learn something about Windows history kids!

Of course they are not you ditz! That was the purpose of the SARCASM of my reply that you completely missed! Just as the genius before you did!

And just like Heaton in the article, you might want to discover the difference between the command shell and the command prompt! The command shell is not the command "prompt" as he states!: "Think of it as an integrated version of the Windows Command Prompt (cmd.exe)..."

With geniuses like this supporting Windows, it is no wonder they are just discovering scripting.

"Way to contradict yourself . So if it's not meant to replace it (and it isn't) then what exactly is the point in comparing them? Oh right...a good troll doesn't need reasons.

Let's go very slow, as you obviously comprehend things at a rate even slower than your ability to read.

From the article itself:

"The idea was to build a Unix-like shell for administrators that offers advanced scripting capabilities while remaining easy to program.

Originally known by the code-name Monad, PowerShell was initially slated to replace the command line in Windows with an object-oriented shell that rivals shells found on Unix systems."

THEY brought up UNIX!
THEY compared it to UNIX!
So...YOU tell me what is the point of their comparing them and why they bought the subject up, Einstein!

Sit down and re-read the article v e r y s l o w l y !

Apparently my first copy and paste of your own words didn't sink in.

"And who thought that this was meant to replace UNIX??? The point is, that dispite the functionality, it still won't even come close!"

^^ your words not mine you ignorant wretch ^^

I also see you didn't bother to correct your already gross assumptions on what PS does or how it does it, how nice. Bad troll, go back under your bridge.

...oh now it was "sarcasm". Right.
keep back peddling while trying to pull that stick out of your ass.

Oh please, stop trying to save face you've already lost it. Your very first post showed everyone that you couldn't keep your own argument straight and were confusing CLI tools with the CLI. You know NOTHING about PS, thats obvious, yet you spout off as if your word is law, in truth your just a dumb a** with a smart a** mouth.

This is pretty exciting... Time to go play...