It's possible to sort of do this. Our fax machine will send a "FAX" in email
format to an email address. It's a lot cheaper than sending an analog line
fax to a long distance number.
It's always been amusing to me that fax support in windows has deteriorated
in the later 32bit versions. It seems that a major change occurred when
winsock was included tather than an optional part of windows. The 16 bit
third party (at least later versions) allowed faxing via a lan to operate
correctly. Later versions of windows shipped with an MS winsock that killed
all the earlier lan capable fax programs. It's my understanding that XP has
had the "raw socket supported added that was required to get the older lan
capable fax programs to operate. So many other changes have been made that I
would not expect such programe to work today with current windows versions
anyway.
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
My whole point here is that when you try to combine
functions or attempt to get things to do what they weren't
intended to do, you're going to have to give something up.
I have no direct experience with all-in-one devices in this
sense, but common sense tells me that there is inevitably
some compromise that must be made in functionality, quality
or both. I feel your pain with regard to space constraints,
but it could be a sign that you need to give yourself more
room to do what you have to do, rather than trying to
pu 10 pounds of sh*t into a 5-pound bag. You should also
keep the question of reliability in mind; if you use a
consumer all-in-one device for important business purposes,
if the scanning function goes out, you've lost both your
scanning and faxing ability, and you'll have to replace the
whole unit, or lose access to all of its functions while
it's being fixed.
