Why I Don’t Use ZSH

The command line is an undeniably powerful tool, a cornerstone of software development, system administration, and virtually any tech-related field. It offers unparalleled control over your system, allowing you to interact directly with the kernel—the core of your operating system—and execute tasks with precision and efficiency. For those who spend a significant amount of time working in the terminal, the choice of shell can profoundly impact productivity, workflow, and even the joy of using the command line.

As a keyboard enthusiast and someone who spends a considerable amount of time in the terminal, I’ve always been drawn to the simplicity and power of the command line. My journey began with Bash (Bourne Again Shell), the default shell on most Linux distributions, and it has been my trusted companion ever since. Over time, I’ve explored Bash scripting, which feels like the command line on steroids—enabling me to automate repetitive tasks, create shortcuts, and tailor my environment to my exact needs. Bash’s piping capabilities, which allow you to chain commands together, have been particularly transformative, making complex tasks feel effortless.

When I first switched to Linux, I was pleasantly surprised to find that Bash was the default shell on Ubuntu, Debian, Fedora, and many other distributions. This widespread adoption speaks volumes about Bash’s reliability and versatility. My experience with Bash has been akin to diving into the depths of an ocean—every time I explore further, I discover new ways to streamline my workflow, automate tasks, and make my digital life more efficient. Bash has not only improved my command-line skills but also given me the tools to optimize my computing environment, leading to a more productive and enjoyable experience.

However, as I delved deeper into the world of shells, I couldn’t ignore the growing buzz around ZSH (Z Shell). ZSH is often touted as a more powerful and feature-rich alternative to Bash, with advanced capabilities like auto-completion, syntax highlighting, and auto-suggestions. Intrigued by the hype, I decided to give ZSH a try. What followed was a year-long journey of experimentation, customization, and reflection. While ZSH has its merits, I ultimately found myself returning to Bash. In this article, I’ll share my experiences with ZSH, the pros and cons I encountered, and why I ultimately decided to stick with Bash.

The Problem Statement: Why Even Consider Switching Shells?

Before diving into the specifics of Bash and ZSH, it’s important to understand why someone might consider switching shells in the first place. The shell is the interface through which you interact with your operating system, and its features and capabilities can significantly impact your productivity and workflow. Here are some common reasons why people explore alternatives to their default shell:

Productivity: A more advanced shell might offer features like auto-completion, syntax highlighting, and auto-suggestions, which can save time and reduce errors.
Customizability: Some shells allow for extensive customization, enabling users to tailor their terminal environment to their exact preferences.
Compatibility: Certain shells might offer better compatibility with specific tools, workflows, or operating systems.
Learning Curve: For beginners, a more user-friendly shell might make the command line less intimidating and easier to learn.
Community and Ecosystem: A shell with a large and active community might offer more plugins, themes, and resources to enhance the user experience.

For me, the decision to try ZSH was driven by curiosity and the desire to explore new tools that could potentially enhance my productivity. However, as I’ll explain in this article, the reality didn’t quite live up to the hype.

The Allure of ZSH: Why I Gave It a Shot

ZSH is often described as a “Bash on steroids,” and for good reason. It offers a plethora of features designed to enhance productivity and improve the user experience. Some of the most notable features include:

Auto-Completion: ZSH’s auto-completion is incredibly advanced, offering context-aware suggestions that go beyond simple file and directory names. It can complete commands, options, and even arguments, making it easier to navigate complex command-line interfaces.
Syntax Highlighting: This feature color-codes your commands as you type, helping you catch errors before you hit Enter. For example, it can highlight invalid commands in red and valid ones in green, providing immediate visual feedback.
Auto-Suggestions: ZSH can suggest commands based on your history, reducing the need to type out long or complex commands repeatedly. This feature is particularly useful for repetitive tasks.
Customizability: ZSH is highly customizable, especially when paired with frameworks like Oh-My-Zsh, which provides a vast library of plugins and themes. This allows users to tailor their terminal environment to their exact preferences, from aesthetics to functionality.
Bash Compatibility: ZSH is largely compatible with Bash scripts, making it easier for users to transition without rewriting their existing scripts.

Given these features, it’s no wonder that ZSH has gained a loyal following, especially among developers and system administrators. My initial fascination with ZSH was sparked by a coworker who raved about its benefits. Intrigued, I decided to install it and see for myself.

My Journey with Bash: The Foundation of My Command-Line Skills

Before discussing ZSH, it’s important to acknowledge the role that Bash has played in my development as a command-line user. Bash has been my go-to shell for years, and it’s where I built the foundation of my command-line skills. Here’s why Bash has been such an important part of my workflow:

Simplicity and Reliability: Bash is straightforward and reliable. It does what it’s supposed to do without unnecessary complexity or bloat.
Universality: Bash is the default shell on most Linux distributions, making it a practical choice for cross-platform work. Whether I’m working on Ubuntu, Debian, or Fedora, I know that Bash will be available.
Scripting Power: Bash scripting has been a game-changer for me. It allows me to automate repetitive tasks, create shortcuts, and streamline my workflow. The ability to chain commands together using pipes (|) has been particularly transformative.
Resource Efficiency: Bash is lightweight and efficient, making it ideal for low-end machines or resource-constrained environments.
Community and Documentation: Bash has been around for decades, and there’s a wealth of documentation, tutorials, and community support available.

My experience with Bash has been like diving into the depths of an ocean—every time I explore further, I discover new ways to streamline my workflow, automate tasks, and make my digital life more efficient. Bash has not only improved my command-line skills but also given me the tools to optimize my computing environment, leading to a more productive and enjoyable experience.

My Experience with ZSH: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly

The Good: Flexibility and Features

At first, I was impressed by ZSH’s flexibility and the wealth of features it offered. The auto-completion and syntax highlighting were game-changers, making my command-line interactions faster and more intuitive. I spent hours customizing my terminal with Oh-My-Zsh, experimenting with different themes and plugins to create an environment that was both visually appealing and highly functional. ZSH’s advanced features felt like low-hanging fruit—small tweaks that yielded significant productivity gains with minimal effort.

The Bad: Portability and Overhead

However, as I continued to use ZSH, I began to notice some drawbacks. One of the biggest challenges was portability. While ZSH is the default shell on macOS and some Linux distributions like Kali Linux and Parrot OS, it’s not universally available. On systems where ZSH isn’t installed, I found myself missing its features and struggling to adapt to Bash’s more limited functionality. This became particularly problematic when working on remote servers or collaborating with teammates who used Bash.

Another issue was resource usage. ZSH, especially when customized with Oh-My-Zsh, consumes significantly more memory than Bash. On low-end machines, this can lead to sluggish performance, which defeats the purpose of using a shell designed to enhance productivity.

The Ugly: Security and Irresponsible Practices

One of the most concerning issues I encountered with ZSH was related to security. During a Zoom meeting where I was sharing my screen to demonstrate a process involving SSH, ZSH’s auto-suggestion feature inadvertently displayed a previous SSH command that included sensitive information like passwords and ports. This was a major red flag, as it violated basic security protocols and company ethics. While auto-suggestion is a useful feature, it can sometimes lead to unintended disclosures, especially in collaborative or high-stakes environments.

Additionally, I found that ZSH’s advanced features, while convenient, could encourage irresponsible practices. For example, the auto-completion and auto-suggestion features can lead to over-reliance, where users execute commands without fully understanding them. This is particularly dangerous for system administrators or penetration testers, where a single misstep can have serious consequences.

Why I Ultimately Returned to Bash

After a year of using ZSH, I made the decision to return to Bash. Here’s why:

Simplicity and Reliability: Bash is simple, reliable, and universally available. It may not have all the bells and whistles of ZSH, but it gets the job done without unnecessary complexity.
Portability: Bash is the default shell on most Linux distributions, making it a more practical choice for cross-platform work. I no longer have to worry about missing features when working on systems without ZSH.
Resource Efficiency: Bash is lightweight and efficient, making it ideal for low-end machines or resource-constrained environments.
Security: Bash’s lack of advanced auto-suggestion features reduces the risk of inadvertently disclosing sensitive information.
Foundational Knowledge: By sticking with Bash, I’ve deepened my understanding of shell fundamentals, which has made me a more proficient and confident user.

A Balanced Perspective: Should You Switch to ZSH?

While my personal preference leans toward Bash, I recognize that ZSH has its place. For users who value advanced features and are willing to invest time in customization, ZSH can be a powerful tool. However, I believe it’s important to approach ZSH (or any new tool) with a solid foundation in shell fundamentals. Rushing into ZSH without understanding Bash can lead to superficial engagement and missed opportunities for growth.

If you’re considering switching to ZSH, here are a few things to keep in mind:

Learn Bash First: Before diving into ZSH, take the time to master Bash. This foundational knowledge will serve you well, regardless of which shell you ultimately choose.
Weigh the Pros and Cons: Consider your specific needs and workflow. If advanced features like auto-completion and syntax highlighting are essential to your productivity, ZSH might be worth the investment. However, if simplicity and portability are more important, Bash might be the better choice.
Be Mindful of Security: If you decide to use ZSH, be cautious with features like auto-suggestion, especially in collaborative or high-stakes environments. Always double-check commands before executing them.
Customize Thoughtfully: While customization can enhance your experience, it’s easy to go overboard. Focus on customizations that genuinely improve your workflow, rather than those that are merely aesthetically pleasing.

Conclusion: Tools Are Just Tools

At the end of the day, Bash and ZSH are just tools, and the best tool is the one that works for you. I have no qualms with ZSH or its users—it’s a powerful shell with a lot to offer. However, I’ve found that Bash aligns better with my needs, preferences, and workflow.

The tech community is no stranger to debates over tools and preferences, whether it’s ZSH vs. Bash, Vim vs. Emacs, or tabs vs. spaces. These discussions can be valuable, but they can also create unnecessary hype and pressure to adopt the latest and greatest tool. Ultimately, the choice of shell (or any tool) should be guided by your specific needs, not by popularity or peer pressure.

So, whether you’re a die-hard Bash user, a ZSH enthusiast, or somewhere in between, remember to keep it cool and focus on what works best for you. After all, the goal is to enhance your productivity and enjoyment, not to win a popularity contest.

Keep it cool & peace! :-)