command.com and cmd.exe have existed in NT since version 3.51, probably in
NTAS (ver 3.1) also.
Command.com runs, well, dog slow. It's 16 bit methinks, uses LOTS of cpu
time and is generally pretty lousy.
Furthermore, it doesn't support the cmd extensions that cmd.exe does.
CMD.EXE is 32 bit, is easier on the cpu and supports extensions. But, just
run any 16 bit app from within cmd.exe and you'll still invoke the ntvdm (or
is that the wowexec?). F'rinstance, run edit in a cmd shell and you'll
invoke wowexec or ntvdm (whichever...I can't remember). Once it's invoked,
it'll stay running until you reboot, but the first time it loads, it can
take a VERY long time depending on your network configuration of all things.
Running command.com will do this, whereas at least if you run cmd.exe and do
some simple stuff like: net start "prime service", you're not invoking the
16 bit command processor.
Whew.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Blosser,
> Jeremy
> Sent: Wednesday, November 03, 1999 11:39 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: Mersenne: Re: Trial-factorers
>
>
> Yeh, W2K has both cmd.exe and command.com. Odd thing is that command.com
> displays my typing REALLY REALLY slowly.
>
> As far as 'Millenium'. I can't imagine there not being a DOS box. But then
> again, I've also heard that it might not ever come out.
>
> Lastly, bash has been ported to windoze already by the Cygnus
> folks... even
> better tho (for NT at least), is 4NT (JPSoft).
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Steinar H. Gunderson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Wednesday, November 03, 1999 8:43 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Mersenne: Re: Trial-factorers
>
>
> On Tue, Nov 02, 1999 at 08:49:01PM -0000, Brian J. Beesley wrote:
> >(Does anyone know for sure whether or not there's a DOS box
> >in "Millenium"? I heard a nasty rumour...)
>
> Don't know for sure. The problem to me, is finding out whether there
> will _be_ a `Millennium' (based on 95/98 `technology'), and in that
> case, if there will be a `Windows 2000' (based on NT) as _well_...
> I've heard that Windows 2000 will have both COMMAND.COM and a CMD.EXE,
> though.
>
> Anybody care to port bash to Windows? (Oh well, it has probably been
> done already...)
>
> /* Steinar */
> --
> Homepage: http://members.xoom.com/sneeze/
> _________________________________________________________________
> Unsubscribe & list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm
> Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
> _________________________________________________________________
> Unsubscribe & list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm
> Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
>
_________________________________________________________________
Unsubscribe & list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm
Mersenne Prime FAQ -- http://www.tasam.com/~lrwiman/FAQ-mers
