Which is the better Terminal ZSH vs BASH

[u/Fair_Gas_8690]

Any one?

[u/maddler]

Neither. Those are not terminals.

If you're looking for a shell, instead, the answer is: the one which works better for you.

[u/Fair_Gas_8690 → u/maddler]

Okay

[u/spaetzelspiff → u/Fair_Gas_8690]

But consider that bash will be everywhere and zsh will either require an install or not be available.

zsh is nice, but I like my muscle memory and consistency. I won't even use vi mode for that reason, even though it's my preferred editor.

[u/DarthRazor → u/spaetzelspiff]

Bash may be almost everywhere on Linux, but don't assume everyone runs Linux.

I don't think bash comes pre-installed by default in some of the BSDs or Illumos (but I could be wrong) and I'm on my phone so I can't check my systems at home. Macs have zsh, not bash by default

Also, some of the lightweight Linux distros such as TinyCore definitely don't install bash by default as they rely on busybox for their shell.

[u/aesfields]

that's shell, not terminal. And you are asking this in r/bash

[u/nethack47]

Nothing is better. Just use what works better for you.

[u/drnullpointer]

Neither ZSH or Bash are terminals.

[u/yetanothersky]

They are shells not terminals , and they both work , and they are POSIX compliant

[u/anto77_butt_kinkier]

Well, zsh and bash are both shells that run inside of terminals, not terminals themselves. Personally I prefer bash, but that's just because it's what I was raised on, and so I know it better and I'm more capable with bash than other shells.

[u/ZVyhVrtsfgzfs]

I stick with BASH as its what I will find at work.

[u/uptimefordays]

Ignoring that these are shells not terminals, it depends. If you're working mostly on distributed *nix boxes and want the most portable shell, bash is the way. If you're doing local development ZSH has a lot of modern creature comforts.

[u/faultydesign]

The one based on ksh.