PD43 wrote:
> "Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>> Has anyone played around with this extensively to know just what DOS
>> applications "command.com" (16 bit shell) will run successfully, that
>> "cmd.exe" (32 bit shell) cannot (under XP)?
>>
>> Note: "cmd.exe" is newer and more "featured", of course (and also
>> handles
>> long filenames), but isn't quite as compatible for running some DOS apps.
>>
>> Just wondering if anyone has any personal experiences they can share on
>> this. I seem to have noticed a few already, but was curious.
>>
>
> Google (it's your friend) "XP command line commands"
>
> First reference listed:
>
> http://www.ss64.com/nt/

Did you READ what I wrote? I have already *read* plenty about it, know
the differences, and have worked with both of them, but I wanted to hear
some case histories (as I WROTE) of what some had found they had incidents
with (i.e., not running well on CMD.EXE, but running well under
COMMAND.COM).

Reading 101.