我直到最近才开始认真地接触PowerShell。尽管在过去的7年里，我一直在一个几乎完全基于Windows的环境中工作，但我有Unix背景，我发现自己一直在努力将我在Windows上的交互体验“Unix化”。至少可以说，这令人沮丧。

将PowerShell与Bash、tcsh或zsh这样的东西进行比较是公平的，因为grep、sed、awk、find等实用程序严格来说都不是shell的一部分;然而，它们将永远是任何Unix环境的一部分。也就是说，像Select-String这样的PowerShell命令具有与grep非常相似的功能，并且被捆绑为PowerShell的核心模块…所以界限可能有点模糊。

我认为最关键的是文化，而事实上，各自的工具集将体现各自的文化:

Unix is a file-based, (in general, non Unicode) text-based culture. Configuration files are almost exclusively text files. Windows, on the other hand has always been far more structured in respect of configuration formats--configurations are generally kept in proprietary databases (e.g., the Windows registry) which require specialised tools for their management. The Unix administrative (and, for many years, development) interface has traditionally been the command line and the virtual terminal. Windows started off as a GUI and administrative functions have only recently started moving away from being exclusively GUI-based. We can expect the Unix experience on the command line to be a richer, more mature one given the significant lead it has on PowerShell, and my experience matches this. On this, in my experience: The Unix administrative experience is geared towards making things easy to do in a minimal amount of key strokes; this is probably as a result of the historical situation of having to administer a server over a slow 9600 baud dial-up connection. Now PowerShell does have aliases which go a long way to getting around the rather verbose Verb-Noun standard, but getting to know those aliases is a bit of a pain (anyone know of something better than: alias | where {$_.ResolvedCommandName -eq "<command>"}?). An example of the rich way in which history can be manipulated: iptables commands are often long-winded and repeating them with slight differences would be a pain if it weren't for just one of many neat features of history manipulation built into Bash, so inserting an iptables rule like the following: iptables -I camera-1-internet -s 192.168.0.50 -m state --state NEW -j ACCEPT a second time for another camera ("camera-2"), is just a case of issuing: !!:s/-1-/-2-/:s/50/51 which means "perform the previous command, but substitute -1- with -2- and 50 with 51. The Unix experience is optimised for touch-typists; one can pretty much do everything without leaving the "home" position. For example, in Bash, using the Emacs key bindings (yes, Bash also supports vi bindings), cycling through the history is done using Ctrl-P and Ctrl-N whilst moving to the start and end of a line is done using Ctrl-A and Ctrl-E respectively ... and it definitely doesn't end there. Try even the simplest of navigation in the PowerShell console without moving from the home position and you're in trouble. Simple things like versatile paging (a la less) on Unix don't seem to be available out-of-the-box in PowerShell which is a little frustrating, and a rich editor experience doesn't exist either. Of course, one can always download third-party tools that will fill those gaps, but it sure would be nice if these things were just "there" like they are on pretty much any flavour of Unix. The Windows culture, at least in terms of system API's is largely driven by the supporting frameworks, viz., COM and .NET, both of-which are highly structured and object-based. On the other hand, access to Unix APIs has traditionally been through a file interface (/dev and /proc) or (non-object-oriented) C-style library calls. It's no surprise then that the scripting experiences match their respective OS paradigms. PowerShell is by nature structured (everything is an object) and Bash-and-friends file-based. The structured API which is at the disposal of a PowerShell programmer is vast (essentially matching the vastness of the existing set of standard COM and .NET interfaces).

简而言之，尽管PowerShell的脚本功能可以说比Bash更强大(特别是当您考虑到. net BCL的可用性时)，但交互体验明显较弱，特别是如果您从完全由键盘驱动、基于控制台的角度(就像许多unix用户一样)进行交互时。

这里有很多很棒的答案，这是我的看法。PowerShell是准备好了，如果你是…例子:

grep = "Select-String -Pattern"

sort = " sort - object "

uniq = "Get-Unique"

file = "Get-Item"

cat = "Get-Content"

Perl/AWK/Sed不是命令，而是实用程序，因此很难比较，但在PowerShell中几乎可以做所有事情。

我已经使用了一些PowerShell来实现脚本自动化。虽然环境看起来比Unix shell考虑得更周到，但实际上使用对象而不是文本流要笨拙得多，而且过去30年开发的许多Unix设施仍然缺失。

Cygwin仍然是我在Windows主机上选择的脚本环境。在完成任务方面，它肯定胜过其他选择。

您还可以尝试使用BashWin at在Windows上运行Bash脚本 https://github.com/skanga/BashWin。

如果你喜欢shell脚本，你一定会爱上PowerShell!

从微软命令Shell (Ars Technica)的导游之旅开始。

当您将PowerShell与Cygwin/Perl/Shell组合进行比较时，请注意PowerShell仅表示该组合的“Shell”部分。

然而，您可以从PowerShell调用任何命令，就像从cmd.exe或Cygwin中调用一样。它没有重新实现指定的函数，当然也不能与Perl相比。

它“只是”一个外壳，但它使编程变得更容易，为。net世界提供了一个舒适的接口。

还要记住，PowerShell需要Windows XP、Windows Server 2003或更高版本，这可能会造成问题，具体取决于您的IT基础设施。

更新:

我不知道我的回答会引发什么样的哲学辩论。

我在这个问题的背景下发布了我的答案:将PowerShell与Cygwin、Perl和Bash进行比较。

PowerShell是一个shell，因为它在内置命令、命令行、用户函数和外部命令(.exe、.bat、.cmd)之间没有语法上的区别。只有在调用中添加名称空间或对象才能调用。net方法。

它的可编程性来源于。net框架，而不是任何特定于PowerShell“语言”的东西。

我想说，一旦Bugzilla或MediaWiki被实现为运行在web服务器上的PowerShell脚本，我相信PowerShell就是一种“脚本语言”。

在那之前，享受比较吧。