| Forum Home | ||||
| Press F1 | ||||
| Thread ID: 76936 | 2007-02-21 05:06:00 | DOS Command Prompt | Strommer (42) | Press F1 |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 526719 | 2007-02-22 04:32:00 | Er..... XP does in fact run command.com The command.com that is included with XP is the version from Win ME, it is in C:\windows\system32. A shortcut can be made to that if you want, it will start an MS-DOS prompt rather than a 'command line' prompt using cmd.exe Command.com can be used for (the somewhat rare) situations when you want to run a 16 bit MS-DOS program. I know. But its only a command line, its not really DOS nor emulating DOS. If it was emulating you'd be able to use all DOS commands, you can't just the few provided with XP. Might seem picky but if I want rela DOS, I boot into it. |
pctek (84) | ||
| 526720 | 2007-02-22 06:23:00 | Unlike Win95 and 98, Windows ME and XP does not first load an MS-DOS operating system Er, I may have this wrong, but since when did win ME stop loading MS-DOS first? I always thought (I could be wrong here) that ME was just an "upgraded" win98, with microsoft merely HIDING the fact that DOS was loaded before windows...:confused: |
Sherman (9181) | ||
| 526721 | 2007-02-22 06:32:00 | Er, I may have this wrong, but since when did win ME stop loading MS-DOS first? I always thought (I could be wrong here) that ME was just an "upgraded" win98, with microsoft merely HIDING the fact that DOS was loaded before windows...:confused: Right, that article quoted by bevy121 is wrong on at least 2 counts, I mentioned the one that said XP would not run command.com, indeed they seem unaware that XP does have command.com there. |
Terry Porritt (14) | ||
| 526722 | 2007-02-22 06:53:00 | Right, that article quoted by bevy121 is wrong on at least 2 counts, I mentioned the one that said XP would not run command.com, indeed they seem unaware that XP does have command.com there. Thank you! Thank you! You have restored my faith in my memory... and the knowledge I have gathered over the years about the various MS operating system. After reading that article, I began to wonder......... |
Sherman (9181) | ||
| 526723 | 2007-02-22 10:39:00 | yes I certainly picked the wrong site to browse thru for info with that article! :o Once again proving that you should confirm any information aquired on the net by at least a half a dozen different source sites first! Something I obviously did not do on this occasion... :waughh: At least I now know the real facts on this thanks guys :thumbs: |
bevy121 (117) | ||
| 526724 | 2007-02-23 08:46:00 | I am not really sure what is meant by "... hiding the fact that DOS is loaded before WIndows..."? In true DOS, the kernel is msdos.sys. When WIndows 95 came along, msdos.sys turned into a plain text configuration file and the kernel was part of Windows. Also the DOS drivers were mainly replaced by 32 bit WIndows drivers. So ... DOS was still there but I don't think you can say that DOS was loaded first once you hit Win95. It was true for Windows 3.11 though. |
johnd (85) | ||
| 526725 | 2007-02-23 09:14:00 | Well. for some reason Microsoft seemed intent on trying to pretend that DOS didn't really exist, even more so with ME :) Io.sys is DOS in win9x, this hidden file in the root directory is the one that starts the cpu in real mode, starts himem.sys, and sets up DOS before Windows starts. So the cpu is set to real mode and runs DOS which then starts Windows. So it is in fact true to say DOS has to be loaded and run before windows 9X can start. Io.sys reads Msdos.sys, then Config.sys and then Autoexec.bat, unless Msdos.sys says not to, all this before Windows can start. |
Terry Porritt (14) | ||
| 526726 | 2007-02-23 09:19:00 | I can see what you are saying - however DOS is (was) and operating system. An OS must include the kernel - so really only parts of DOS are loaded before Windows since the kernel is in Windows from 95 onwards. | johnd (85) | ||
| 526727 | 2007-02-24 02:59:00 | DOS is a collection of programmes. Any OS is a collection of programmes. The essential part of an OS is the file system which is part of the general I/O code, part of which has been kept in ROM on the motherboard, with calls to that code in the boot sector of a bootable disk. So you could say that every MS OS (including Vista) has to load "DOS" before it can start. :D Without that code, the programmes required to start the other OS could not be read from the disk. IO.SYS is probably the "kernel" code. ... But its only a command line, its not really DOS nor emulating DOS. If it was emulating you'd be able to use all DOS commands, you can't just the few provided with XP. The part of DOS which the original poster wanted to use is the programme COMMAND which is the command interpreter. It is not "just a command line" It is a command line interpreter, which is a very powerful programme becuase it is extendible. That programme contains code for many of the basic DOS commands, e.g. CD, COPY, DEL, etc. (Some less frequently used, or "larger" commands are programmes themselves (e.g. LABEL, ATTRIBUTES, etc). This is why a user programme is invoked in exactly the same way as a DOS command: with its name, followed by any arguments or options. When the command interpreter sees a command line, it looks to see if the command (the verb) is one of its own. If it is, it does that thing. If not, it looks on the current default disk for any "executable" file with that name. So any .COM, .EXE or .BAT file can be a "DOS command". IF useful things aren't included in XP, that's a deficiency in XP. :D |
Graham L (2) | ||
| 526728 | 2007-02-24 03:45:00 | Right, class, did you get all that? :p :D | FoxyMX (5) | ||
| 1 2 3 | |||||