On 01/04/2012 1:39 PM, Loony wrote:
> Hello Experts :-)
>
> I have been looking for a paperless fax machine, to replace the garbage
> like ImpactColor something or other.
>
[...]
> Comments please :-)
>
> TIA
Paperless fax machine? What's that? Isn't the whole point of faxing that
you get a piece of paper into your eager hands?
Loony wrote:
> Hello Experts :-)
>
> I have been looking for a paperless fax machine, to replace the garbage
> like ImpactColor something or other.
>
> The prices seem to be dropping quickly.
> Here are recent links :
> Free shipping New Arrival Vason mini usb digital fax FX1000 by EMS
> http://www.aliexpress.com/product-fm...olesalers.html
> Price: US $106.00 / piece (1 - 5 pieces)
> and
> Paperless Portable USB 2.0 Digital Fax Machine SKU: A18470000A
> http://www.dinodirect.com/digital-fa...s.html?cur=EUR
> with a price of Price: €46.09
>
> Comments please :-)
> TIA
Loony wrote:
> Hello Experts :-)
>
> I have been looking for a paperless fax machine, to replace the garbage
> like ImpactColor something or other.
>
> The prices seem to be dropping quickly.
>
> Here are recent links :
>
> Free shipping New Arrival Vason mini usb digital fax FX1000 by EMS
>
> http://www.aliexpress.com/product-fm...olesalers.html
>
>
> Price:
> US $106.00 / piece (1 - 5 pieces)
>
> and
>
> Paperless Portable USB 2.0 Digital Fax Machine
> SKU: A18470000A
>
> http://www.dinodirect.com/digital-fa...s.html?cur=EUR
>
> with a price of Price: €46.09
>
>
> Comments please :-)
>
> TIA
Direct ship from China, with absolutely no tech support!
Perfect for a guy like you, with money to waste...
Try again.
I don't buy unless there is:
1) Website with drivers, application software, *USER MANUAL*
2) Reviews from Newegg or Amazon or even Ebay for that matter. Someone
else has to buy one, before I will. And that person has to
demonstrate actual product knowledge (to avoid shill postings).
The thing is, hardware is useless without software. No matter how
pretty that box looks, it's a hood ornament without software. And
if the software sucks, you'll be screwed out of your $106.00 USD.
On 4/1/2012 1:39 PM, Loony wrote:
> Hello Experts :-)
>
> I have been looking for a paperless fax machine, to replace the garbage
> like ImpactColor something or other.
>
> The prices seem to be dropping quickly.
>
snip...
On 4/1/2012 2:49 PM, John McGaw wrote:
> On 4/1/2012 1:39 PM, Loony wrote:
>> Hello Experts :-)
>>
>> I have been looking for a paperless fax machine, to replace the garbage
>> like ImpactColor something or other.
>>
>> The prices seem to be dropping quickly.
>>
> snip...
>
> Somebody still uses fax?
What is a "paperless fax"; unless it might describe image file transmission?
On 01/04/2012 19:33, Paul wrote:
> Loony wrote:
>> Hello Experts :-)
>>
>> I have been looking for a paperless fax machine, to replace the garbage
>> like ImpactColor something or other.
>>
>> The prices seem to be dropping quickly.
>>
>> Here are recent links :
>>
>> Free shipping New Arrival Vason mini usb digital fax FX1000 by EMS
>>
>> http://www.aliexpress.com/product-fm...olesalers.html
>>
>>
>> Price:
>> US $106.00 / piece (1 - 5 pieces)
>>
>> and
>>
>> Paperless Portable USB 2.0 Digital Fax Machine
>> SKU: A18470000A
>>
>> http://www.dinodirect.com/digital-fa...s.html?cur=EUR
>>
>> with a price of Price: €46.09
>>
>>
>> Comments please :-)
>>
>> TIA
>
> Direct ship from China, with absolutely no tech support!
>
> Perfect for a guy like you, with money to waste...
>
> Try again.
>
> I don't buy unless there is:
>
> 1) Website with drivers, application software, *USER MANUAL*
>
> 2) Reviews from Newegg or Amazon or even Ebay for that matter. Someone
> else has to buy one, before I will. And that person has to
> demonstrate actual product knowledge (to avoid shill postings).
>
> The thing is, hardware is useless without software. No matter how
> pretty that box looks, it's a hood ornament without software. And
> if the software sucks, you'll be screwed out of your $106.00 USD.
>
> Paul
Thank you Paul.
As usual you are always on the ball :-)
About a year ago I bought a Zoom modem with a CD and both came directly
from China via some other group outside China. It is working very well.
I know that there can be lots of rackets and we can't be too careful.
However my fax systems are a total pain in the rump and I hate having to
muck around with them every time I try to use them. I am looking for
something in the calibre of Symantec WinFax Pro. It was a dream to use.
On 2012-04-01 2:59 PM, James Silverton wrote:
> On 4/1/2012 2:49 PM, John McGaw wrote:
>> On 4/1/2012 1:39 PM, Loony wrote:
>>> Hello Experts :-)
>>>
>>> I have been looking for a paperless fax machine, to replace the garbage
>>> like ImpactColor something or other.
>>>
>>> The prices seem to be dropping quickly.
>>>
>> snip...
>>
>> Somebody still uses fax?
>
> What is a "paperless fax"; unless it might describe image file
> transmission?
>
Thinking of efax.com for doing faxes through email.
On 4/1/2012 2:59 PM, James Silverton wrote:
> On 4/1/2012 2:49 PM, John McGaw wrote:
>> On 4/1/2012 1:39 PM, Loony wrote:
>>> Hello Experts :-)
>>>
>>> I have been looking for a paperless fax machine, to replace the garbage
>>> like ImpactColor something or other.
>>>
>>> The prices seem to be dropping quickly.
>>>
>> snip...
>>
>> Somebody still uses fax?
>
> What is a "paperless fax"; unless it might describe image file
> transmission?
>
May I add that my HP Scanjet, using the HP Solution Center software,
will scan a document and automatically send it as a file attached to an
e-mail. I suspect this must be as reliable as a fax.
On 04/01/12 13:39, Loony wrote:
> Hello Experts :-)
>
> I have been looking for a paperless fax machine, to replace the garbage
> like ImpactColor something or other.
>
> Comments please :-)
Had been around for a long time, it's called E-Mail, and the best ones
are FREE !!!!!!
On 4/1/2012 3:09 PM, Robert Sudbury wrote:
> On 2012-04-01 2:59 PM, James Silverton wrote:
>> On 4/1/2012 2:49 PM, John McGaw wrote:
>>> On 4/1/2012 1:39 PM, Loony wrote:
>>>> Hello Experts :-)
>>>>
>>>> I have been looking for a paperless fax machine, to replace the garbage
>>>> like ImpactColor something or other.
>>>>
>>>> The prices seem to be dropping quickly.
>>>>
>>> snip...
>>>
>>> Somebody still uses fax?
>>
>> What is a "paperless fax"; unless it might describe image file
>> transmission?
>>
>
> Thinking of efax.com for doing faxes through email.
>
The method employed by efax was available to me more than 20 years ago
but in those days my employer (the US Government) paid for the faxes. I
know that some physician's offices and banks still seen enamored of fax
machines but what's wrong with an attached file, especially since unlike
efax, there is no cost involved? If security is a problem the e-mail
could be digitally signed.
James Silverton wrote:
> On 4/1/2012 2:59 PM, James Silverton wrote:
>> On 4/1/2012 2:49 PM, John McGaw wrote:
>>> On 4/1/2012 1:39 PM, Loony wrote:
>>>> Hello Experts :-)
>>>>
>>>> I have been looking for a paperless fax machine, to replace the garbage
>>>> like ImpactColor something or other.
>>>>
>>>> The prices seem to be dropping quickly.
>>>>
>>> snip...
>>>
>>> Somebody still uses fax?
>>
>> What is a "paperless fax"; unless it might describe image file
>> transmission?
>>
> May I add that my HP Scanjet, using the HP Solution Center software,
> will scan a document and automatically send it as a file attached to an
> e-mail. I suspect this must be as reliable as a fax.
>
The little box is effectively a fax server, but for one computer.
It has a USB interface, and enough memory inside the box for 2000 fax
pages.
You'd leave the box running at night, with computer off, to receive
faxes (or send faxes) from memory. When the user eventually logs into
the box (via USB) the next day, they use the bundled software to
skim through the faxes received that night, to see if anything is worth
printing off or keeping as a TIFF image. That sort of thing.
The Mopier machines (print, scan, copy, fax) come with a memory function
as well, and can perform the same fax server function. The difference would
be, the Mopier uses the "razor blade sales model", meaning the machine
is sold below cost, and relies on inkjet cartridge sales to make
a profit. It is in the Mopier machine's best interest, to print
every fax it receives. So when they provide a memory function
in the Mopier, it's to hold faxes until you load paper in the
tray. With some effort, you can probably preview the faxes
stored in memory, before printing them. But it isn't in the
Mopier manufacturer's best interest to make that easy to do.
They want you to forget, and run off a tray of paper instead
by accident.
Inkjet manufacturers all have scams. Like the inkjet that
frequently cleans the heads if you leave it powered, until
it runs the tank dry :-) The manufacturer explains, that's
to keep the head clean :-)
Whereas the small dedicated box, isn't sold on the razor blade model.
It doesn't have scan, copy, or print. And the remaining function,
of handling faxes via it's memory, is the only function it's got.
So from a user perspective, not as potentially wasteful.
Just had my nephew ask me about these. He wondered WHY specs showed that it
needed a direct internet connection. I replied and will post here as an FYI:
With an e-printer you can be in a coffee shop and print the file to your
home printer. So it acts like a server - to get that file to print it needs
to have a direct internet connection. It's not 'wireless in the house
printer acting as a slave printer off a pc'. Theoretically, you could have
no pc in the house and the printer would print.
The printer itself gets an email address assigned to it when you register
with HP.
To print, you email the document to that email address - from anywhere. If
powered off, when the printer turns on - it fetches its email - just like
your pc works with your email.
Kinda like a fax machine using email rather than telephone system - no cost
to user to use it AND you only get printouts/email (theoretically) from
people that know you - no faxes received from robodialers.
Not worth paying extra for at home but HP might be bundling in its new
printers and charging a few bucks extra. ( Like making CD players standard
in all cars and adding $30 to price of all cars rather than a $175 option
for some.)
I'm not sure if there is/will be a charge to use it. In a few years, I can't
imagine HP assigning 100 million emails address, the disk space to store the
files, the responsibility of backing up the disks etc - for free.
============
John McGaw <Nobody@Nowh.ere> wrote in news:qr1er.116534$xU2.114617@en-
nntp-08.dc1.easynews.com:
> On 4/1/2012 1:39 PM, Loony wrote:
>> Hello Experts :-)
>>
>> I have been looking for a paperless fax machine, to replace the
garbage
>> like ImpactColor something or other.
>>
>> The prices seem to be dropping quickly.
>>
> snip...
>
> Somebody still uses fax?
My neighbour has a gas station, and gets the daily fuel price list
by fax.
He could use his computer/modem to recieve them, but he prefers paper.
Also some legal correspondence needs a paper trail.
Email is fine, but too easely forged.
In the last episode of
<XnsA0291EC35A419sjoukeburrysoesterbe@213.75.12.10 >, Sjouke Burry <s@b>
said:
>Email is fine, but too easely forged.
So is paper. It's a heck of a lot easier to forge paper than email
stored on a third party's mail server (especially in terms of rewriting
history since you can't re-write logs)
The difference is that email can include digital signatures and other
electronic audit trails that can be made to be difficult to forge (or
would at least require a third party's participation to forge)
On Mon, 02 Apr 2012 11:36:49 -0700, DevilsPGD
<boogabooga@crazyhat.net> wrote:
>In the last episode of
><XnsA0291EC35A419sjoukeburrysoesterbe@213.75.12.1 0>, Sjouke Burry <s@b>
>said:
>
>>Email is fine, but too easely forged.
>
>So is paper. It's a heck of a lot easier to forge paper than email
>stored on a third party's mail server (especially in terms of rewriting
>history since you can't re-write logs)
>
>The difference is that email can include digital signatures and other
>electronic audit trails that can be made to be difficult to forge (or
>would at least require a third party's participation to forge)
There are protections on paper mail as well. Watermarked paper,
seals, etc.
Surprisingly I found myself sending two last year. In both cases it was
less work than sending out paper mail. No idea if these people would've
accepted scanned pdfs via email, might be too radical.
On 03/04/2012 9:56 PM, Anssi Saari wrote:
> John McGaw<Nobody@Nowh.ere> writes:
>
>> Somebody still uses fax?
>
> Surprisingly I found myself sending two last year. In both cases it was
> less work than sending out paper mail. No idea if these people would've
> accepted scanned pdfs via email, might be too radical.
A fax is identified as to source, may contain a signature,
and can be immediately stored away as paper, whatever the
dubiousness of its source, in the files of the recipient
with no intermediate steps subject to any interference.
Like things you shouldn't have said, and pictures you
shouldn't have posted, it's forever there, assuming the
recipient has secure storage procedures.
In the last episode of <WsWdndp6S9HtDOHSnZ2dnUVZ_h-dnZ2d@giganews.com>,
Anthony Buckland <anthonybucklandnospam@telus.net> said:
>On 03/04/2012 9:56 PM, Anssi Saari wrote:
>> John McGaw<Nobody@Nowh.ere> writes:
>>
>>> Somebody still uses fax?
>>
>> Surprisingly I found myself sending two last year. In both cases it was
>> less work than sending out paper mail. No idea if these people would've
>> accepted scanned pdfs via email, might be too radical.
>
>A fax is identified as to source, may contain a signature,
>and can be immediately stored away as paper, whatever the
>dubiousness of its source, in the files of the recipient
>with no intermediate steps subject to any interference.
>Like things you shouldn't have said, and pictures you
>shouldn't have posted, it's forever there, assuming the
>recipient has secure storage procedures.
On Wed, 04 Apr 2012 11:22:55 -0700, Anthony Buckland
<anthonybucklandnospam@telus.net> wrote:
>On 03/04/2012 9:56 PM, Anssi Saari wrote:
>> John McGaw<Nobody@Nowh.ere> writes:
>>
>>> Somebody still uses fax?
>>
>> Surprisingly I found myself sending two last year. In both cases it was
>> less work than sending out paper mail. No idea if these people would've
>> accepted scanned pdfs via email, might be too radical.
>
>A fax is identified as to source,
Easily spoofed.
>may contain a signature,
Easily forged/faked.
>and can be immediately stored away as paper,
Only because the fax machine automatically printed it. Many email
clients can be configured to automatically print emails that meet
specific criteria, thus erasing that difference, as well.
Bottom line, fax should be a historical footnote by now, but a few
segments of the economy stubbornly hang onto it, such as the financial
segment, the legal segment, and certain parts of the government
segment.
Paperless faxing - prices dropping? 
Linear Mode
