howard schwartz wrote: >[...] > Perhaps my goal can be accomplished by using other shells than > command.com, that can execute dos functions. NT had cmd, norton had > its version of command.com, etc. Perhaps I can run one of these dos > compatible shells, and it will run dos commands, as I wish.
Let me make sure I understand: Is the memory of loading a 2nd copy you object to? Or the load time? Or the idea of loading 2 copies that you don't like? > The advantage is adding lots of favorite dos programs to the windows > repitiore, without the extra time, memory, and overhead of an extra > shell. But you still load a 2nd program (shell) so until you open another (two command prompts under DOS), you haven't gained THAT much, have you? Not that it's a bad idea per se, but I honestly don't see the payoff. If DOS or load times are the issue, some of the Win9x optimization tricks might yield as much/ more benefit, and improve performance for ALL programs. The was a QEMM for Win95 as well... but no idea if it'd work at all for Win98. - Bob
