Thanks for taking your time to write this.
I think the main point I’m trying to figure out here is whether this is a communications issue, i.e. how I describe it is not optimal or whether this is a fundamental project issue. Because I think I have a clear vision and target audience, I am part of that audience myself. The thing is, there isn’t one standout feature. The value comes from the combination and integrations of multiple features that work together and allow for a smooth use experience. I can say it has support for SSH, docker, kubernetes, hypervisors, and more but all of that on an individual layer isn’t that unique, it’s the combination that you can use all of them together. But this is difficult to put into words, trying it out for yourself for a few minute usually yields better results.
About the shell commands, that is one of the standout features about it, so it’s on purpose. I know this approach is more difficult and error prone than doing some kind of native library stuff, but it also allows me to run the same commands in remote shells on remote systems.
Alright, I see your points.
Now that you have spent a lot of time discussing it, even looking at the code, one thing that would be valuable for me would be how accurate your expectations are based on what you read here compared to the actual app. If it is pretty much as expected, then I guess at least my summaries are accurate. If it’s not, then I can still do a better job at that part. Fundamentally changing the project itself is a little bit too late, but at least the communication can be changed on why people could use it. And I’m not trying to gain a new user here as it’s probably not for you, but still would be interesting to me. You can give it five minutes and use the .tar.gz or the .appimage if you don’t want to install anything.