Archived from groups: microsoft.public.windowsxp.print_fax (
More info?)
"Wislu Plethora" <anonymous@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message
news:68bc01c4756f$1c731420$a501280a@phx.gbl...
>-----Original Message-----
>
>"Parley" <pdkennellynot@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:uD9DdOKdEHA.3528@TK2MSFTNGP12.phx.gbl...
>>
>> "Wislu Plethora" <anonymous@discussions.microsoft.com>
wrote in message
>> news:59f301c4749f$0b1368e0$a601280a@phx.gbl...
>>
>> >-----Original Message-----
>> >Ok, here's a loaded question.
>> >
>> >Is there a free fax client for WinXP that is worth
>> checking out?
>> >
>> >Also, which of the commercial packages is best?
>> >
>> >Is there an internal modem that has distinctive ring
>> capabilities built-in.
>> >I've looked at ring separators, but they're almost as
>> much as a stand alone
>> >fax.
>> >
>> >TIA
>> >Parley
>> >
>> >
>> >--
>> >Southern California Realtor®
>> >
>>
>> Everyone wants to go to heaven but no one wants to die.
>> You were told in a previous post that XP doesn't support
>> distinctive ring. There are no magic modems that can
>> overcome this obstacle. You were also given the same
>> external hardware alternatives that you were given last
>> time. These days a standalone fax machine can be had for
>> less than $100--are you destittute or just outrageously
>> cheap?
>
>Seems silly to spend even $100 if it is possible to make
hardware
>you already have work to do what you need to do.
>
>>
>>
>> I suppose I'm just a glutton for punishment. It isn't
the money
>> necessarily. I'm just a minimalist. I would prefer to
receive my faxes
>on
>> my computer instead of in hardcopy. And if I can do
that without adding
>> extra cables, exterior components, or monthly charges
then that is what I
>am
>> looking for.
>>
>> The other response may have answered my question,
citing two possible
>> software solutions to WinXP's distinctive ring
inabilities.
>>
>> Thanks Anyway,
>> Parley
>>
>>
>Found this :
http://www.modemsite.com/56k/dringxp.asp
>
>when googling(?) "distinctive ring" xp
>
>Dick Kistler
>
The majority of fax-related posts here come from people
who are either trying to do the impossible (send faxes
over broadband connections, e.g.) or trying to do something
the XP fax application wasn't designed or intended to do.
Note that the OP's signature indicates that he is a
realtor, which means that he probably does a fair amount of
faxing. The XP fax service was not intended for heavy-
duty use. It's fine for occasional use, but it's inherently
clumsy and slow. Time is money in business, and it
appears that the OP is being penny wise and pound foolish
by not choosing the most efficient and cost-effective
method for sending faxes. The OP uses the euphemism
"minimalist" for "foolishly cheap."
Just for the record: When I said "minimalist" I wasn't referring to cost.
I was referring to clutter on my desk. Fewer cables, fewer machines. And I
like to keep a digital backup of an entire transaction. Using my computer
as my fax machine would simplify things a great deal.
I understand that when I have to fax a 20 page report that it would be
cumbersome to scan each page individually, then combine them into one file
and then fax them. I'm working on that.
Maybe I just need to get a multifunction device that has an auto document
feeder. Maybe this would solve both problems at once. Fewer devices - more
functionality.
What do you think?
TIA