This post will be no different.
Prerequisite
I'm biased to windows. I know this. Mac and Linux users live in a different world to your average .NET developer, and that's always going to influence how I view these products.Git's GUI Offering
Git offers Git for Windows. It's sub-standard, you can't see a branch map, it crashes and falls out of sync with the command window, and you can't do a fraction of the things in the GUI that you can do on the command line. This includes merging and removing branches.I understand that the makers of Git are trying to make their product more palatable to Windows users, but in my humble opinion, if they are going to try and offer a GUI to do this, bin Git for Windows, and make better use of third-party components.
Third-party components
Mercurial actively offers TortoiseHG as a compliment, and its benefits are huge. You're able to create, merge and close branches, push, pull and contort Mercurial to your whim with a few clicks of a mouse. For Git, TortoiseGit is on its way, but it needs to be pushed harder as a package, because public ignorance of it as a product choice is high. Proof of this is the fact that there are still people trying to find ways to allow TortoiseHG to work with Git repositories!Conclusion
I know that lovers of the command line will always prefer a black screen with coloured writing to provide them with text-based representations of their source control. I'm also very well aware of how powerful both products are in their purest CLI-based form. However, in three weeks of using a combination of the Git for Windows GUI and the command line interface (not to mention a LOT of Googling and documentation-reading!), I still couldn't do a fraction of what I learnt to do using TortoiseHG and Mercurial in the space of a week.Productivity must not be made to suffer to be one of the cool kids.
