Bandwhich VS bottom

For the CLI, I recently found bandwich: https://github.com/imsnif/bandwhich

The cargo install is currently borked but the prebuilt bin works fine.

found a new one: bandwhich (https://github.com/imsnif/bandwhich)

bandwhich: A terminal bandwidth utilization tool. This CLI utility displays current network utilization by process, connection and remote IP/hostname.

You can use a tool like https://github.com/imsnif/bandwhich while playing to see if something is running in the background like apt, fwupd, etc. See if something on your system is eating network resources while playing. If you see nothing you're welcome to message me and I can give you a couple of other things to try.

Bandwhich?

bottom

I'd suggest Bottom as a TUI alternative to the in-built task managers - https://github.com/ClementTsang/bottom

It works on Windows also.

If anyone is looking for a "top" like, written in Rust, might have a look at https://github.com/ClementTsang/bottom

Looks like bottom with another theme

bottom - A cross-platform graphical process/system monitor with a customizable interface and a multitude of features.

As a macOS user, it boils my brain whenever I've to type in something like ~/Library/Application Support/org.rust-lang.Cargo/config.toml. macOS users have been begging CLI tools to support XDG variables on macOS too. Setting defaults is a strong indication to the community what should be the "preferred" locations. The defaults defined in your article will invariably lead to some authors saying that if that path is good enough for cargo, then it is good enough for their tool. Even the latest draft RFC acknowledges that macOS should use XDG variables too. I've written more about this here.