What is the functional difference between W2K's Command.com and CMD.exe? They appear to be the same to me, except that since upgrading from Win98, I've had to tweak some of my old batch files to get them working okay in W2K. My only observation is that when using CMD.exe the files run reliably, but when using command.com, they are erratic, working okay sometime, but making the Dos window "hang" on other occasions. So, of course I use cmd.exe! But what exactly are the differences? And why does MS supply the two? Lastly, while I've got your attention, I knew one thing I would have to give up when I upgraded from Win98, was that I would lose all my pretty Dos-window colours because ansi.sys doesn't work in W2K. No sweat, but I've spent a week or so searching the web and chasing various utilities that are meant to enable ansi.sys commands in NT, W2K and XP. I guess I've been unlucky, cos the only utils I've found either don't work at all, or work in a very limited way. Anyone know of a ANSI.SYS emulator that actually works? Thanks O

Command is a shortcut to cmd with a dos pif file to control the launch. Other than that not much diff, just run cmd, it works better since its just a plain command line interface without the dos pif filter over it.

well, what i think wat it is, "cdm" uses the 256 character signing, and the "command" uses the 8.3 character signing. (I hope is spell it ok).