win2k has command.com as well as cmd.exe. what's the difference between the two?

Don't know for sure but I'd guess that command.com is the regular Windows 2000 command processor and cmd.exe is the DOS compatibility mode program.

Here's the deal: CMD.EXE is the "regular" Windows 2000 command processor and COMMAND.COM is the DOS compatibility mode shell. CMD.EXE is the native Windows NT/2000/XP shell. That is, CMD.exe is the more portable command processor. (Type SET and press inside a CMD.exe console and you'll see that CMD.exe exposes more environment variables.) Also, CMD.exe does not call AUTOEXEC or CONFIG and it's fully 32-bit. COMMAND.COM is geared more toward DOS compatibility. It calls AUTOEXEC.NT and CONFIG.NT. COMMAND.COM is the shell you're using when running old DOS programs (using NTVDM). Spot: Good guess--you just got it backward.

Just to add something. Since you using Win98,Win2000, etc you should use cmd.exe. More then likely youv'e created a directory or two with long/broken filename. Windows already has with "Program Files". command.com has a bad time with these, cmd.exe does not. There're other troubles with command.com in Win 98+ as well. Best bet is to use cmd.exe

command does have problems with LFN. that is a fact. this has an advantage to it in some cases. see below. dir: c:\my old junk in lfn: cd "my old junk" no lfn: cd myoldj~1 the 'advantage' is not typing all the chr's. however lfn allows more english like names, but can be a hassle when extracting a lfn enabled zip in 'old-dos' sometimes!

An added bonus to using cmd.exe over command.com is that during the cmd.exe session, you get the built-in advantage of doskey.exe. Anyone remember that little goodie?

cmd.com is the OS/2 command line processor (i.e. 32 bit) that survived through OS/2 -> WinNT -> Win2000