Re: TI-H: I know I'm going to regret this...
[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: TI-H: I know I'm going to regret this...
I guess it depends on how they call it. for maximum compability I have placed a
4dos.com copy named command.com in c:\ and c:\windows\ too..
//Olle
J D wrote:
>
> I remember that command....it was in the autoexec of my old XT :) I thought
> it might be for something like that. But do programs look for whatever's in
> the SHELL variable or command.com itself? I could see that creating
> problems, unless 4Dos's shell is named command.com.
>
> ----Original Message Follows----
> eeh.. yes.. shell=c:\4dos\4dos.com in config.sys...
> or shell=whatt\ever\you\want.com ...
>
> //Olle
>
> J D wrote:
> >
> > You can DO that?!?!! I mean get rid of command.com and use 4Dos's
> shell?!!
> >
> > ----Original Message Follows----
> > 4dos is just a shell. I guess FreeDOS is a whole os?
> > Isn't it then a problem to run it with win95?
> > When I run win95, I dont like the shell command.com provides so I use
> 4dos
> > instead.
> > Where can I get FreeDOS so I can try it out?
> >
> > //Olle
> >
> > Grant Stockly wrote:
> > >
> > > >J D wrote:
> > > >> HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! THAT I find to be quite pathetic but
> > unfortunately
> > > >> not too unlikely. In the GUI age of modern computing, no one needs
> > the poor
> > > >> little command-line anymore....::sniffle::
> > > >>
> > > >> C:\> type thismsg.txt | more
> > > >
> > > >yes.. it's too bad.. But the command.com shell for DOS sucks real
> > bad..
> > > >I use
> > > >4dos.. a little better (coloring, tab-completion, stuff like that)
> But
> > > >its not
> > > >even close to the good shells for unix/linux..
> > >
> > > FreeDOS is better than MSDOS and more compatible.
> >
> > _______________________________________________________________
> > Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com
>
> _______________________________________________________________
> Get Free Email and Do More On The Web. Visit http://www.msn.com
Follow-Ups:
References: