X-Apparently-From: <pmoran22 AT yahoo DOT com>
Message-ID: <003201c086ec$026214c0$88a63bc6@dbcooper>
From: "Patrick Moran" <pmoran22 AT yahoo DOT com>
To: <opendos AT delorie DOT com>
References: <3 DOT 0 DOT 16 DOT 19910124211135 DOT 119727ca AT tellus DOT swip DOT net>
Subject: Re: DOS and WIN/98
Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2001 09:21:39 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.3018.1300
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.3018.1300
Reply-To: opendos AT delorie DOT com

I may be mistaken, but as I recall when I had ME on this system for a
short time, there was no COMMAND directory and I don't believe there is
a COMMAND.COM with ME. According to what people have said in usenet, ME
dos not have any DOS Mode and I don't recall a any DOS window being
included with it. Maybe it's there somepalce and they just hid it real
well.

I know that 2000 does not have ANY DOS capability.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Bernie" <bernie AT mbox302 DOT swipnet DOT se>
To: <opendos AT delorie DOT com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2001 11:48 PM
Subject: Re: DOS and WIN/98


> Patrick wrote:
> >Sooner or later you will have to do this anyway, because they will
> >probably update to ME or 2000 and neither of those have any DOS in
them.
> >MS completely stripped DOS out of these. SO you will have to have a
> >separate DOS installed with those anyway.
>
> Ahem...
> Windows NT 3.51, 4, 5 (aka. "Windows 2000") don't run on top of DOS.
> Windows 95, OSR2, OSR2.5, 98, 98SE and ME (I don't know if there's a
MESE
> yet) run on top of DOS.
>
> So Microsoft never hid DOS in NT, they just didn't implement it
together
> with IBM in OS/2 (or NT if you prefer the Microsoft OS/2 version <G>).
> But AFAIK they did there best to hide it in WinME.
> file://Bernie


_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com