Tendo City

I just got a mailing from stamps.com...
So I faxed the letter back to them with an attached note saying, "No one uses the post office any more, STUPID!"

Is it supposed to be ironic? It seems ironic.

EdenMaster Wrote:Is it supposed to be ironic? It seems ironic.

No, it isn't that's why I faxed it back to them, instead of mailing it.

I get that, it just seems ironic to use an even more obsolete method of communication to mock another.

I use the post office for mailing packages. That's about it. Communication? Bah! That's why we have email and text messaging!

EdenMaster Wrote:I get that, it just seems ironic to use an even more obsolete method of communication to mock another.

Fax is obsolete?

You still need it to electronically scan and send paper documents.

You do?

Because, I'm pretty sure scanning a document with a computer scanner and sending the image via e-mail accomplishes the same task more efficiently.

For that matter, high-end scanners with character recognition capabilities can scan paper documents and convert them into computer text, which is even more useful.

Fax machines are totally obsolete. The postal service, however, isn't quite so obsolete yet. Not until it is possible to convert matter into data and reassemble it in a remote location.

Weltall Wrote:You do?

Because, I'm pretty sure scanning a document with a computer scanner and sending the image via e-mail accomplishes the same task more efficiently.

For that matter, high-end scanners with character recognition capabilities can scan paper documents and convert them into computer text, which is even more useful.

Fax machines are totally obsolete. The postal service, however, isn't quite so obsolete yet. Not until it is possible to convert matter into data and reassemble it in a remote location.

Like startrek

Yeah, the mail absolutely still has a purpose... fax, no, but mail, definitely.

Weltall Wrote:You do?

Because, I'm pretty sure scanning a document with a computer scanner and sending the image via e-mail accomplishes the same task more efficiently.

For that matter, high-end scanners with character recognition capabilities can scan paper documents and convert them into computer text, which is even more useful.

Fax machines are totally obsolete. The postal service, however, isn't quite so obsolete yet. Not until it is possible to convert matter into data and reassemble it in a remote location.

I think the postal service has been obsoleted by fedEx or UPS, for packages that's what I mean. As for letters, I would prefer any form of electronic medium, to snail mail, fax and email included.

I used to use UPS to mail packages until I realized that the post office is a lot cheaper and UPS couldn't find the person's house half the time. Since USPS visits each house on a regular basis anyway, there's no excuse for them not to be able to drop off a package at the correct location on their normal mail route.

Etoven, how is mail obsoleted by the existance of market competitors that are EXACTLY the same service? The argument was that mail was still useful, not that USPS, a specific provider of mail, was the best way to go. They are all the same service, sending material packages from one place to another.

As it stands, right now the majority of the mail I get is junk mail. Of USEFUL stuff I get, it's all packages. I manage everything else electronically.

Faxing is utterly and completely obsolete. The only reason companies keep them is because companies keep them. Every single company feels the need to maintain a fax line because they want to make sure they are able to recieve faxes from other companies. It's a catch 22 of idiotic proportions, maintained only by fear of losing contact. However, as Weltall pointed out, every thing a fax machine can do, e-mail and a scanner can do better, faster, cheaper. Heck there are programs you can set up to automatically print every e-mail a specific e-mail account recieves, if you feel the need to have everything "on paper". Hah! On paper, most documents don't NEED to be on paper any more. The excuse I hear all the time is "for security", but how is being on a single flamable piece of paper locked away in a single building, lost in a maze of boxes of other papers, a better solution? You can back up any digital copy of that same document a billion times nearly instantly and remotely to a dozen locations, and these redunancies combined with modern data security to make sure it hasn't been tampered with are a million times more effective than anything paper can provide. Paper provides only one thing, mobility, that is, you can walk around outside and have someone sign a thing.

The iPad will remove this last weakness forever. Then we'll be using those tablets everyone in Star Trek has been using, except our's will be better because we won't have half a dozen and the files will just be transferred wirelessly to a single "tablet".

Paper is good for quick notations when you don't have access to anything else, and it'll still be good "in a pinch" in the future, but it's being replaced by stuff that's just plain better.

Personally, I'm just glad e-mail replaced snail mail. I remember as a kid when phone calls were considered "not as personal" as sending a letter to someone. I really expected people to complain about me sending e-mails instead of paper mail, and for it to have a tough time penetrating the cultural "moral superiority" of the "old ways". Fortunatly, it hasn't.

For some reason, paper "cards" are still considered better than e-mail versions thoughl. Never really "got" "cards". I mean, it's just a letter except you fold it in half. It's a folded piece of paper! How the hell did Hallmark get away with making that a cherished proof of endearment that people are EXPECTED to get for each other every now and then or they don't love ya?

Weltall Wrote:You do?

Because, I'm pretty sure scanning a document with a computer scanner and sending the image via e-mail accomplishes the same task more efficiently.

Really? Scanning the document requires first opening the scanner, scanning the document itself, saving the image, possibly having to edit/rotate it, logging into e-mail, attaching it do a new message (which can take time depending on the size of the document), having the person on the other end receive it, download the image, and go through the process of printing it out.

For a fax, you just put the document in the machine, dial the number, and it's automatically printed out on the other end. Faxes are far more efficient in that regard.

Fittisize Wrote:Really? Scanning the document requires first opening the scanner, scanning the document itself, saving the image, possibly having to edit/rotate it, logging into e-mail, attaching it do a new message (which can take time depending on the size of the document), having the person on the other end receive it, download the image, and go through the process of printing it out.

For a fax, you just put the document in the machine, dial the number, and it's automatically printed out on the other end. Faxes are far more efficient in that regard.

A good, professional-level scanner and software can be set to take almost all of those manual steps out of the process, you know.

Weltall Wrote:A good, professional-level scanner and software can be set to take almost all of those manual steps out of the process, you know.

Sure, but how many people have access to such a machine? For some, it may not even be a feasible or realistic goal to have one. Everybody still has fax machines, and they're crucial for many small businesses. Just because better (or should I say different or newer) technology exists doesn't mean that other technology is obsolete.

Fittisize Wrote:Sure, but how many people have access to such a machine? For some, it may not even be a feasible or realistic goal to have one. Everybody still has fax machines, and they're crucial for many small businesses. Just because better (or should I say different or newer) technology exists doesn't mean that other technology is obsolete.

Everybody who has access to a computer scanner has access to the technology. There are many free optical character recognition programs that will handle basic text documents, and the most advanced OCR options (which can handle more advanced conversions, from things like handwritten documents) I've seen are around US $500--hardly a tremendous investment for an individual who really wants it, and beans for any small business.

Compare that to the expense of operating a fax machine, including the need to pay for a phone line, and the limited number of recipients (as they also require a machine), and the fact that faxing is basically good only for communication, whereas a scanner can be used for other purposes, and I can't imagine anyone consciously choosing fax over scanning for any reason other than unfamiliarity with scanning technology.

Weltall Wrote:Everybody who has access to a computer scanner has access to the technology. There are many free optical character recognition programs that will handle basic text documents, and the most advanced OCR options (which can handle more advanced conversions, from things like handwritten documents) I've seen are around US $500--hardly a tremendous investment for an individual who really wants it, and beans for any small business.

Compare that to the expense of operating a fax machine, including the need to pay for a phone line, and the limited number of recipients (as they also require a machine), and the fact that faxing is basically good only for communication, whereas a scanner can be used for other purposes, and I can't imagine anyone consciously choosing fax over scanning for any reason other than unfamiliarity with scanning technology.

I have a $300 office jet that can do all the crap you speak of including conversion to PDF, emailing, and scanning with it's built in document feeder.

That being said, Fittisize is correct, faxing is still faster and easier. Faxing is 2 steps, insert the document, and dial the number. Emailing a PDF is a minimum of at least 5 steps.

Also, my fax machine FAX's over the internet, so no I don't pay the phone company for another phone line. Plus new faxes have a host of modern features over your grandmothers, old brother fax. For example, my fax, faxes in color, over Ethernet, and also can store and forward faxes to another office, and receive delivery conversation reports that include a image of the fax that the user received, sent back to me.

And all that means what, when you consider how few individuals own a fax machine? You're the only person I know who owns one.

How many office fax machines can RECIEVE over ethernet though? I've never even seen one that does that myself, the few people I know who own one use a phone line for it, and thus would be unreachable by your method.

Oh, and you don't even need a professional super expensive scanner to do it. All you need is the software. Install scanner, install the right software, and you can literally do the same two steps to send "faxes" via e-mail. On the other end, they can set up software to instantly print, OR, they could just store it digitally, it's up to them.

There's no point in dedicated fax technology. It's nice that there's some pseudo fax machines that use the internet, but those are completely incompatible with the fax machines the majority of people out there are using, which use phone lines.

If some businesses "require" faxes, it's only because they set their businesses up in an inefficient way, or are forced to have one to stay compatible with other businesses that still use outdated technology.

My dad rigged his phone up to his scanner/printer/copier so that it could function as a fax machine. He almost never uses the feature though. :)

Using a typewriter to create a document is faster, arguably easier and definitely cheaper than using a PC.

EDIT etoven: Opps, sorry.. Didn't mean to edit your post, meant to quote.

Weltall Wrote:Using a typewriter to create a document is faster, arguably easier and definitely cheaper than using a PC. Yet, typewriters are still totally obsolete, and they're practically never used for anything serious these days.

Writers still need to have a paper version of their script or novel and a lot of agents who work with writers specifically ask for oldskool typed content because it lasts longer in a physical form than printer ink.

lazyfatbum Wrote:Writers still need to have a paper version of their script or novel and a lot of agents who work with writers specifically ask for oldskool typed content because it lasts longer in a physical form than printer ink.

I'm not sure where you heard that, but five years of deep involvement and research into the literary publishing process has never revealed to me any such biases on the part of agents, editors or publishers. It wouldn't make sense, anyway: Your initial script is never used in the actual publishing process. It's read, critiqued, and sent back with a list of requested changes, assuming they want anything to do with it. And, once it sees publishing, there's no need for the original. At that point, it becomes a posterity piece. The publishers will have all the templates they need for reprinting and archival.

Besides, it would be a silly requirement, because of the great difficulty involved in fulfilling it. Typewriters are rare nowadays. Supplies for them can only be found through special-order dealers, and usually then, only for the most popular models.

Weltall Wrote:And all that means what, when you consider how few individuals own a fax machine? You're the only person I know who owns one.

I think you've been sadly misinformed. Almost every business today has a fax machine. I know first hand, because I do a lot of business by fax to allot of clients and service providers, and all the business, I do business with have a fax machine.

Also, to answer your question, Dark Jaguar..
IP faxes communicate to normal faxes via a VoIp gateway. This enables my IP fax to send FAX to both IP faxes and traditional phone faxes.

Weltall Wrote:Using a typewriter to create a document is faster, arguably easier and definitely cheaper than using a PC.

Where you high when you typed that?

Seriously, have you every tried to use a typewriter? They are slow, bulky, stupid machines, no formatting features and no spell check, to speak off. And god help you if you make a mistake. They use thousands of dollars in crappy ribbon plus eraser tape, the paper jams allot, and they often break down.

Word processors with a screen are a little bit better, but they still use huge amounts of ribbon, and the screen is often extremely tiny and unusable, they are no where near as easy and fast as word for example.

Quote:Seriously, have you every tried to use a typewriter?

I got one for my sixth birthday, which was completely manual and of an ugly blue color, and later, an Brother word processor. I learned how to use them, and if you become proficient, it's not very difficult at all. I wrote stories, and typed written assignments and reports whenever typing was permitted. I learned how to set a manual format, and a kid who annually won spelling bees rarely had trouble spelling words corecktlee.

And, the cost of a PC, especially fifteen years ago, could get you a typewriter and a nearly-limitless supply of ribbon.

That's not to say I'd ever go back if given the choice. PC word processing software is far more convenient and capable, but that was the whole point of the analogy.

Faxes, simply aren't the outdated antiques, people take them for. The problem here is that many of you have not seen a modern fax. Faxes, and the faxing protocol have evolved right along with email and pop3. However, most people haven't been exposed to modern faxing. People still equate faxes to 20 year old brother faxes, that tie up the phone line, and use messy, rolls of ink on film. \

Today's modern faxes just like email take full advantage of the Internets coolness. Only unlike email the entire faxes process has a "font end" based in hardware. Insert the page, dial the number, and the receiving fax confirms delivery. Anyone, who knows me well, knows I would never support a idea unless it was cool and high tech!

The 2 steps required to fax, for me is far easier than scanning a document, waiting for the computer to receive the document, waiting for pdf conversion, opening up outlook, composing an email, sending the email, waiting for the email to send, waiting for a delivery conformation, and either sitting and praying that the email wasn't gobbled up by a spam filter. Finally, to confirm delivery the end user has to call the business, wait on hold... did you get my email... hold on let me check... 5 minutes of fucking with the computer later... yea I got it.

You people tell me which is easier?? :)

Faxing, it sounds like. As long as the other person has a fax machine that is... :)

I agree, having to do all that stuff with scanned pages to get them right is a pain.