"Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:OV%237Jl8tIHA.2292@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> 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.

Cmd.exe is the Windows XP command processor. Command.com
is a legacy processor that you should only use for 16-bit applications
that won't run properly under cmd.exe. Avoid it if you can!