windows on top of dos
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 15

Thread: windows on top of dos

  1. #1
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Posts
    95

    windows on top of dos

    Now I know that windows 9x runs on top of dos. and 3.1 does too right? well the thing with windows xp not letting you boot straight to dos (pressing f8) , is that becuase xp doenst run on top of dos?

    And I'll put two questions in one post. Is there a disk defragmenter that i can run in dos so that it doesnt take so friggin long?

  2. #2
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Posts
    16
    I don't think this is the appropriate place to ask this question, but I'll give it an answer anyway.

    Yes, Windows 3.1 and 9x run "on top of" DOS. Windows 2000, XP, and NT, however, do not. They still have DOS functionality (go to Start -> Run -> cmd or command). You can't boot straight into DOS on 2000, XP, or NT, but you can still use a 9x boot disk and what not.

    I don't believe there is a built-in defrag program in DOS, or the DOS shell, but you could probably find something online and run it in DOS or in the shell.

    Hope this helps,

    D'elTarra

  3. #3
    Senior Member tampabay420's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Posts
    953
    actually, i think only win 3.x runs ontop of dos...
    while anything 95 and after emulates dos...
    -----------------------------------------------------------
    dos comes with a defrag.exe
    it's not any faster than the win version...
    the length (in time) of a defrag is due to the size of the harde drive, and how much data is stored on it...
    yeah, I\'m gonna need that by friday...

  4. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Posts
    95
    well the thing is that windows kept writing to the hard drive and the defragger had to restart and thats why the damn thing took so frigging long. I didnt have any apps running, only windows, but i guess it was writing to the swap file er something? i dunno but it kept restarting the defragger. it was really annoying. so thats why i wanted to run it in dos becuase dos only runs one program at a time. How do you run the dos defragger?

  5. #5
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Posts
    16
    To my knowledge, only later OS's actually emulate DOS (XP, 2000). The rest of the still have DOS as the base level of the OS, and then a GUI built on top of it.

  6. #6
    Senior Member tampabay420's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Posts
    953
    sorry DelTarra, only windows 3.x runs ontop of dos...
    windows 95 emulates dos...

    /edit

    maybe there is some confusion about booting into dos...
    when (in win95) you choose to shut down and boot into dos mode,
    windows95 does not run ontop of the 16-bit dos!
    yeah, I\'m gonna need that by friday...

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    748
    That was actually one of the touted "new features" of Win95. The fact that once it was loaded it was running without dos. Meaning that it is a standalone OS, not just a graphical interface to DOS.

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    central il
    Posts
    1,779
    Windows 95a ran ontop of dos...MS lied and told every one it was stand alone...but if you tell a windows 95a box to shut down you will get the screen telling you its now safe to turn off your computer...at that point type the clear screen string (clr I think sorry dont remember) and hit enter, this will give you a DOS propmpt for DOS 7. Note that this dosnt work in 95b because they have the keyboard turned off after you shut down windows, win 98 was the first MS opperating system that dos was nolonger needed for.

  9. #9
    Top Gun Maverick811's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    852
    Originally posted here by Krimlin
    well the thing is that windows kept writing to the hard drive and the defragger had to restart and thats why the damn thing took so frigging long. I didnt have any apps running, only windows, but i guess it was writing to the swap file er something? i dunno but it kept restarting the defragger. it was really annoying. so thats why i wanted to run it in dos becuase dos only runs one program at a time. How do you run the dos defragger?

    I've run into that several times before - what I do is first ensure that everything is closed (antivirus programs, firewalls, etc.) as you have done. Then I took it further and completely disabled screen savers and any kind of power saving functionality. That has always done the trick for me to get around the defrag constantly wanting to restart...

  10. #10
    Senior Member problemchild's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    551
    Guys, anybody who thinks Windows9x isn't a GUI for DOS should try deleting command.com out of the root directory and let us know what happens.

    This is an old debate, and the truth is obfuscated by the fact that Microsoft has *shamelessly* lied about this to the point that certain well-known certifications are now towing the Microsoft PR line. The fact is Windows 9x and Me use 16-bit DOS as a bootstrap to launch into the 32-bit Windows. DOS boots first, then starts Windows. It's a slightly different mechanism, but it's just like adding win to your autoexec.bat file back in the day. Don't believe me? Check this out:

    There is a file in your root directory called MSDOS.SYS. It's a text file. Get rid of the hidden, system, and read-only file attributes, and open it in a text editor. Change the line BootGUI=1 to BootGUI=0, and add a line LOGO=0. When you reboot, you come up in DOS. Want to start windows? Type win. Change the Windir and WinBootDir paths and you can install multiple versions of Windows. DOS 7 is just like DOS 6 except that it's been hacked to add VFAT long filename support. Look in C:\Windows\command and there's your DOS commands.
    Do what you want with the girl, but leave me alone!

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •