Then you should stop doing that. Even if you are running modern Windows, there’s no DOS in it to be seen, even though command interpreter (cmd.exe) is very close to what was typically used in DOS (MS-DOS, PC-DOS, DR-DOS, etc.) - COMMAND.COM. You are probably aware that the built-in commands there are actually very similar or the same as in MS-DOS. That’s because Microsoft didn’t want to make them different, probably mostly for compatibility reasons. There’s of course also PowerShell and Bash (and other Linux shells) if you run WSL (Windows Subsystem for Linux).
And these command interpreters are always (on NT Windows at least) opened in a terminal application, typically the older Console Host or the newer Windows Terminal.
The fact you called it DOS feels like you are just rage-bait trolling… lol
No, I call any command-line interface that runs from an internal drive “DOS”. I do mean the term somewhat generically as a Disk Operating System.
I think “CLI” would be a better word choice. DOS is a more specific term.
You are also able to install Linux distros that are primarily GUI based, or even install individual GUI interfaces for things you need.
Then you should stop doing that. Even if you are running modern Windows, there’s no DOS in it to be seen, even though command interpreter (
cmd.exe) is very close to what was typically used in DOS (MS-DOS, PC-DOS, DR-DOS, etc.) -COMMAND.COM. You are probably aware that the built-in commands there are actually very similar or the same as in MS-DOS. That’s because Microsoft didn’t want to make them different, probably mostly for compatibility reasons. There’s of course also PowerShell and Bash (and other Linux shells) if you run WSL (Windows Subsystem for Linux).And these command interpreters are always (on NT Windows at least) opened in a terminal application, typically the older Console Host or the newer Windows Terminal.