Where is DOS prompt in XP?

Ok maybe I'm missing something, but how do I get to DOS prompt in XP? I hope this feature wasn't removed.

Thanks,

 

No, renamed or something to that effect

Start > All Programs > Accessories > Command Prompt

 

Start>Run> type cmd

Ski

 

As old Man BillyBob says " DOS ain't dead. "

Microsoft just wants us to think it is. That is why a good many newer users do not know how to use it. Or the power that is has.

One downside of DOS is the fact that it does not have a Recycle Bin. Once you delete a file it is GONE. Most likely never to be salvaged.

MS DOS 7.0 ( or what ever is in SE ) bailed my sorry butt out a jam caused by Ol' Mama Nature yesterday. and kept me from having to do a re-install of SE.

Hard Drives are prepared by and in DOS before Windows can be put on them.

At least once a Month I use programs from DOS to check my HDs.This is more reliable because NOTHING from the HD is loaded and running.

Now when I mention DOS in the above lines, I do not mean DOS that is booted into FROM WITHIN Windows. I do not mean the command prompt only from the F8 Menu available at boot up. I mean good clean DOS from either a floppy or a bootable CD.

I do not know about XP yet. But in 95 thru ME if scandisk has to run due to a bad shutdown it is run in DOS. The Reg backups are made/restored in DOS.

In 95- ME there are four ways to get to DOS. I think I am right but may not be about ME as I dumped it four days after loading it.

1--Command Prompt via the F8 menu.
2--DOS Prompt
3--And the MS DOS Mode availabe by restarting Windows into it.
4--A floppy disk

#1 Has full capabilities.
#2 Is limited somewhat. Full Windows is running.
#3 If set up correctly it will run most DOS programs. Part of Windows is running. That is why EXIT is needed to get out of it and back to Windows. A machine reboot here can ( and has ) cause(d) problems.
#4 Is the truest DOS. Nothing from the HD is loaded.

DOS is not DEAD. But it can be dangerous if we do not have a good knowledge of its workings.

I think this is why there is quite a difference between the newer and olders users. I myself grew up on DOS. And the newer users buying newer machines have no Idea about DOS being still quite usefull.

The menu that came up ( before things went haywire ) giving me a choice of SE or XP is in DOS.

OK. Off the soap box and get 2nd cup of coffee.

BillyBob

 

Thanks guys. cmd did it nicely for me.

 

DOS, Command prompt, it is all in the semantics!

In the days of the Steve Wozniak inventor of todays modern HD this meant (D)isk (O)perating (S)ystem. It was meant to do just that and did for some time. Write to and from the HD. Then it grew a step when it began to handle video and general I/O like printers etc it became at that point an OS and not just a Disk operating system. But was and is still refered to as DOS.

A true and pure OS should handle only hardware I/O.

Everything else is an application program. Windows is a GUI to the OS and therefore technically an application program although most don't think of it this way!

An OS/Command prompt is a step down into the engine room from a GUI! And not just Windows(GUI) have them, but all even the Super Computers have an "OS" command prompt! A place where you can do 2 basic things 1. curcumvent the GUI and do things the GUI will not let you do, or 2. Do something more effeciently or quicker than the loops presented by the GUI!

Mike

 

before You noticed that the #1 and #3 aren´t available in that OS!

Good morning Christer

You are quite correct My Firend. They are out in XP and if I remember correctly in ME also.

Config.sys and Autoexec.bat are out of ME and XP also. This is why some DOS programs do not run well in ME and XP because they may require things in the Config or Autoexec.bat

But that was not my main point.

My main point was that DOS is NOT DEAD

A very good point. With fat32 we can use DOS to bail our butts out. NTFS we can't.

By you yourself saying " Would I know what to do ? " ( referring to the Startup disk ) just re-inforces one of my points of Younger and newer users that are buying OEM machines may or may not know how to use DOS properly. And therefore may be believing Microsoft.

Mike

I hope I am undertanding you correctly.

I believe you are saying basicly that we can take a step down into ( in this case ) DOS and do things that Windows ( the GUI ) will not lets us do. Such as delete a corrupted set of TIF files. Or a bunch of files in the TEMP folder. Or even a messed up swap file.

If so, then in Win95 thru 98 SE this was quite easy.

With Me and XP it may not be so easy as they contain a waterdown version of DOS. And have done away with the command prompt at boot up.

From my other post

I just thought of this.

I may be wrong but when we install Windows ( any version ) I believe that up untill the first re-start of the install the machine is n DOS.

Fdisk is DOS. Format is done in DOS. Partion Magic is run in DOS even though it can be started from within windows.

And unless I am way to far wong, any version up to and including XP the machine boots up in DOS first. And if anything is wrong there it can stop Windows from loading or running properly. That is exactly what happened to me the DOS BOOT side got messed up.

If the power had gone completely out I may have been OK. But it did not go down far enough to shut the machine down. And I was too far away to catch it.

And before I even tried installing XP ALL partitions were checked out from a Floppy boot to DOS and Norton Disk Doctor. It did pick up a couple of errors that running same from within Windows did not find. And by it finding errors the first time I ran a complete check the 2nd time. If I had not found and fixed those errors I may not have been able to copy the old HD to the new.

Lesson learned from a previous disk to disk copy try/

So. My bottom line.

DOS is far from dead and is still a VERY USEFUL tool if we know how to use it.

BillyBob

 

Well I am 25 years older but started with my own PC at about the same time. My ONE AND ONLY OEM was a Pack Bell Which was a DOS machine. So that more than likely is why I * MAY * understand DOS better and how useful it can be.

I still have an ORIGINAL DOS 5 Manual which I STILL refer to on occasion when my aging memory fails me.

I still have an original Windows 95 Secrets book which I also refer to on occasion. ( same reason ) Especially if I wish to make changes to the MSDOS.SYS. Those pages in the book are well marked and quite worn.

I have 4 BOAC machines. And three of them contain mostly items that others have called useless. Or are from a machine that I myself upgraded. Oh BTW. One person would like to have their Video card back.

One of them is limited when it comes to newer stuff. The old Cyrix 686/150 just won't handle the newer stuff. But it is fine for the kids ( 4 to 15 ) to mess with.

And although they all wind up doing the same job they are setup and must be handled differently.

And as far as XP goes I have yet to learn what it will do that 98 SE won't. At least not anything that I need. But by now having my old HD intact so I can just but it back in service if needed and a new HD installed I will be having a go at XP. If for no other reason than messing with something new.

But then I may just put the old 40gig back in and mess with it. therby leaving this new 80gig intact as it is a complete Clone of the 40gig other than size. Same number of partitions and all. Thanks to Western Digital Disk to Disk copy. That was a NEW 5 1/2 hour venture for me but it paid off quite well.

BillyBob

 

Christer, if you ever want to get some quick context/switches help with a dos command [5.25 and later], just add the /?, and you will get some context/switches help.
dir /?
I used to have the old thick dos and Win3.1 books that came with the old systems, but they seemed to have disappeared during my numerous moving around and being "helped" when doing so.

 

This should either clarify or confuse matters.

MS-DOS does not exist with any of the NT systems.

To expand a little on what mflynn said, MS-DOS is an operating system. It deals with the hardware.

Windows 3.x thru ME are large applications but they cannot run without an operating system loaded and active. Thus you have some version of MS-DOS with them and they run as a large "overseer" graphics application that can run smaller applications. But the MS-DOS & Windows are blended so that windows looks to the user like the operating system.

NT (NT3.x thru XP) is an operating systems. It controls the hardware and provides the GUI we deal with. But it DOES NOT need, have, use MS-DOS.

Windows comes with an application that looks like MS-DOS but as noted by many on here already, is an application and not an operating system.

With 2K & XP it is even more confusing since they have two applications that mimic MS-DOS. There is a version of command.com (the 9X dos emulator) that is purely 16bit, very stupid, and only in there for the occasions when an old program can't deal with the newer 32bit version. The one most should be using when they need a command prompt is cmd.exe. So be careful since start~run~command on an NT system will start command.com and you'll be missing many of the features you expect. start~run~cmd will give you a much better command line application.

And for the really hard core DOS fans like BillyBob (and me too if the truth be told), the recovery console offers a version of NT that is command line only. From there if you are an administrator on the system you can do many of the sort of tweaks that you do in MS-DOS on the 9X systems and that won't work from the cmd application. That being said, cmd in NT is able to do more things with the system than command in 9X.

And a short climb onto my soapbox. NT systems are very different in may ways than 9X but most of the differences add to stability. And each version has been more user configurable than the preceeding one. While you don't do the exact same things to set up XP as you want it that you would with 98, I have found it is more able to be set to exactly suit me than 98 was. Just a matter of finding out how to do what you want to do. For folks who jump from 9X to XP, very steep learning curve. For any who went from NT3.x to NT4 to 2K to XP, lots easier since the bad part of the learning thing happened a few versions ago.

 

For starters lets leave NT out of this ( for me anyway ) because I know nothing of it other than it is different than Windows.

What in the world are you talking about ? Please expand on that a little.

Yes DOS is an old time OS. No disagreement there.

But it does one heck of a lot more than just hardware. I have several card games that are DOS which are SOFTWARE. And if I wanted to do a little work they would more than likely run without Windows.

I built a couple of programs with QBasic which is software. And they ran fine in 95 and 98 until I wiped them out.

One thing about good old DOS though. Once you did get hardware set up and working IT STAYED there. It did not change just because it thought it knew better.

I do not agree. It is still ( if we wished to use it ) a standalone OS. It does not need Windows to run. It will do everything that DOS 6.2 would. I could still rebuilt my QBasic program and run it without Windows. NAW !! Too much work. Easier to use MS Works spreadsheets. Or lotus 123.

Up until Windows ME there is a FULL BLOWN DOS OS Available. The 95, 98, 98SE C:\Windows\Command folder is almost identical to a DOS 6.2 folder. And anything you could do with DOS 6.2 you can do with them.

And if we have a DUAL booting system the dual boot part is actually done in DOS. The proper files are either renamed or references are changed to point to certain files so the the desired version of Windows is started.

Also the menu that comes up where we choose the OS we want is DOS.

I am not completely sure how the newer dual boot work as it has been awhile since I used one. But I know that in a Win95/DOS Win3.1 dual boot it was just a matter of renaming 5 or six files. And GOD forbid anything go wrong it can ( and did ) kill both OS.

In Win95, 98, 98SE if we boot into the MSDOS Mode it is actaully a DUAL boot. Or can be if we choose to use a Specific set of config.sys and autoexec.bat files. And again all that is done is certain files ( just the two I believe ) in the Root folder get renamed. And to get out of the MSDOS Mode it requires EXIT as part of Windows is running. ( about 4-5k ( Command I think )). A Cntrl-Atl-Del here may cause problems if different sets of files are used as it will not allow the files to get renamed properly.

Getting out of the Command Prompt from the F8 menu will execpt without problems a Cntrl-Alt-Del or reset as Windows is not running.

This is one thing that ticks me off about ME and XP. If I want to something in DOS I gotta boot to my floppy or my Bootable CD Win98 Startup disk. More reliable that way anyway.

And to do a good solid more reliable HD check it is better to run the software in DOS. My DOS NDD found problems that running it from Windows did not. Of course I have all Fat32 also.

Yes, I will agree that ME and XP on the DOS side are different and may be more limited.

Hey Newt

I have gotten my new HD set up and running fine. But I also still have the old one intact so that if I get my butt into too much trouble I can just put it back in, cool off a day or two then but this one back in and start messing around again.

Just gotta make sure the other machine is OK so that If I really mess up I can get here and scold you guys for talking me into XP

I ran the upgrade check tonight and there are somethings Like my scanner Which will be re-installed and SYMANTEC products which have already left the scene.

Oh BTW. I just rememberd a question that I was going to ask.

If DOS is so far out of the picture then WHY does 95, 98, Me AND XP strongly urge us to make DOS floppys.

Do you just supposed that is so we can get our butts out of a jam that window ( or the operator of same ) got us into ?

Does anybody remember OS2. That dumb thing would run Windows ( or Windows programs ) better than Windows. If I recall correctly it had MUCH better Audio. More solid Video. And ran DOS programs like a charm.

Well, I guess I should get down off of my soap box and go get some sleep so that I can get in here and GO FOR BROKE. Be it right wrong or whatever I am going to have a go at putting XP over SE.

If it works fine. If it don't OH well. I know how to start over. I have already removed some software and will remove the Nvidia drivers before starting the Install. I also have the XP capable MB and Video Drivers handy.

Yes. I am fully prepared for things to go either way. It could go quite well or it could go the other way. I sure am not going in blind. And don't bother with the pros and cons as I got enough of my own.

BillyBob

 

Well, well I am back here using Windows CP Pro.

Dumped it in on top of SE and all seems to be quite well.

Had to re-install AVG and Kerio but I gues that was expected.

Other than that just about everytyhing is as it was. Most everything works as it did.

Have not as yet tried the heavy duty stuff like LS Links 2003 but will shortly.

It even set up the LAN so that it even works. At least it appears to.

BillyBob

 

BB - couple of things for clarification.

XP is NT5.1, 2000 is NT5.0. So NT as a generic term for all the OS versions built on the NT core is just a quick way of speaking of any or all of them.

And when I said 9x had an application that looked like DOS I was speaking of command.com which gives you the command line window that looks like MS-DOS but is for sure not.

And I wasn't real clear when I said MS-DOS deals with hardware. I didn't mean that was all it does but didn't say it very well. Certainly it allows you to run programs like any good OS has to. But it also does the hardware control when you run 9X unless an app makes direct hardware calls.

NT systems do their own. And as an aside, they have a protection scheme that prevents any apps from making direct hardware calls. The NT HAL can usually trap the call, interpert it, and make the same call if it is considered safe. But not always. Which is why some of the older games won't run - programmers had neat routines to force the system to do things it normally couldn't but the NT HAL either doesn't understand them or doesn't allow them.

 

Thank you very much. That clears it up nicely.

command.com which gives you the command line window that looks like MS-DOS but is for sure not.

I AGREE with that for sure

I just feel that when we mention DOS in connection with Windows I think we do need to be as clear as possible as to which one of the 3 DOS areas we are referring to. As they are all different.

Also now we need to also make sure ( more than ever ) which version of Windows we are dealing with.

Thanks again
BillyBob

 

Again I say semantics. It is all in the wording.

More accurate to say OS command prompt especially when referring to NT class operating systems like nt, 2k, xp since they do not have DOS in the context of MSDOS 6 or 7 etc. But they still have a command prompt.

Mike

 

MFLYNN sez:

This statement doesn't agree with the history of IBM and Seagate.

MFLYNN sez:

Do you have a source for this information? I'll cut to the chase. I like this definition better: An integrated collection of routines that service the sequencing and processing of programs by a computer. An operating system may provide many services, such as (but not limited to) resource allocation, scheduling, input / output control, memory management and data management. Although operating systems are predominantly software, partial or complete hardware implementations may be made in the form of firmware.

 

Mike - I agree you sorta goofed the HD thing. Woz did do an early one for the AppleII but a couple of companies beat him by a bit. Take a look Here for a pretty good history of the things.