"Bill in Co." <not_really_here@earthlink.net> wrote:

>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.

Bite me you fool. Back into the boob bin you go.
>