Well, if you take his comment literally then yes, but it would not be a very interesting question because it's quite easy to install bash on windows and use its nice features. And there's powershell which fits better in the Windows ecosystem.
I read it as the question that has a much more interesting answer: Why doesn't Windows have a good terminal? And the answer is, it's no use making one because the Windows console subsystem, the one that is the de facto standard, is so badly designed that it's near impossible to write a good terminal for it.
> [Windows doesn't have a good terminal because the Console Subsystem] is so badly designed that it's near impossible to write a good terminal for it.
Errm, Windows has a couple of decent terminals. PowerShell and Cygwin bash come to mind.
The following I say with all the love in my heart, so please read it in that spirit:
Saying that there aren't any good terminals for Windows because of the suckitude of the Console Subsystem is like saying "There aren't any good houses built on the ocean because a good, solid concrete foundation just sinks to the bottom!". There are plenty of fine ocean-going houses, they're just made out of steel, exotic or mundane fibers, or wood.
Can you resize Cygwin bash to be wider than 80 characters? Last time, admittedly a while ago, that I tried using unixy things on Windows, I ended up exceptionally frustrated by the fixed width.
I suspect that's the "Console Subsystem" being referred to here.
It seems that with a modern Cygwin (installed within the last six months) you can. Moreover, if you perform (say) an ls, resize the terminal to a really small width, perform another ls, then resize the terminal to its previous width, the text from the first ls is restored to the screen. (I also remember this behaviour from when I regularly used Cygwin four or five years ago.)
It's been a while, so don't hold me to this, but I think there's a batch file that you get a shortcut to on your desktop and start menu. If you don't use that, you'll get the stupid unresizeable window. (Because, yanno, all of the Cygwin stuff was designed to work alongside CMD.exe, too.)
I read it as the question that has a much more interesting answer: Why doesn't Windows have a good terminal? And the answer is, it's no use making one because the Windows console subsystem, the one that is the de facto standard, is so badly designed that it's near impossible to write a good terminal for it.