As my professor says "a book-keeping system" for lines. It's just the operations that confuse me a lot.
Hmmm... well it's tough to go from the first bit to the second, yes.
While vectors can be used as a book-keeping system for lines, I'm not sure that's a terribly helpful way to think about them. i.e. how would the dot and cross product of two lines work? (They can do...)
Probably better to go back to them being a way of describing arrows.
Without the direction part you just have a line segment ... which is what a normal number is at heart: a quantity without a direction. The standard operations on normal numbers are multiplication and addition.
When you have to take account of a direction, these operations become less straight forward.
It is usually more helpful to go from the meaning to the operation rather than the other way ...
i.e. you walk a distance a in one direction and another distance b in another direction and you want to know how far away c you'll be from the start... then that is vector addition, and you write that as ##\vec c = \vec a + \vec b##.
That takes care of addition - what of multiplication?
The dot and cross product are two different ways that the concept of multiplication could apply to something with vectors.
i.e. you want to find the area of something you multiply two lengths together. The approach works if the lengths are in different directions: so here you have the idea of a length and a direction so vectors should be useful here. This is where the cross product comes from ... however, there are other effects of taking the cross-product. i.e. it also includes the concept of being perpendicular. The cross product of two vectors is another vector that is perpendicular to both of them.
The operations are useful because they provide a shorthand for a bunch of related ideas.
The way math is usually taught, you start with the definitions and then get to do a lot of exercises putting the definitions to use. As a result, the whole thing looks unmotivated. Why not have one operation for "find the area" and a different one for "find the perpendicular vector" etc.? The reason is that it is actually simpler this way. The trick is to relate the uses to the operations.
At this point I cannot help clear your confusion about them further without some examples of where you get confused.