Faxing Having DSL vs No Dial Tone

[Ingit]

I had the same issue, sort of. It had to be this way for my wife's
simplicity, (LOL) Don't know if this will help you or not, but it might
shed some light on what you gotta do to get yours working. My phone company
provides me with 3 telephone numbers. 1 for DSL, which I don't really
control and 2 analog lines. 1 analog for my phone and 1 for my fax machine.

1. Computer to DSL modem
2. Fax machine connected to analog phone line
3. Computer modem connected to fax machine.

The company she works for requires an original fax to be sent.
Here's what happens.
The fax machine is set to ignore incoming phone calls, thereby allowing
windows to answer the call. I am using winfax to manage incoming faxes.
they can then be viewed with software or printed using fax machine. whenever
a fax needs to be sent, just send it normally through the fax machine.

hope this helps.

 

[Earl F. Parrish]

Hey Bob, I recently switched to DSL as well and ran into the same
problem. I found the solution to be going into Device manager and
uninstalling the modem. Shutdown and unplug the internal modem
card and start the system up again. Once this is accomplished,
shut down the machine and reinstall the internal modem. Connect
your wall phone to the internal modem phone line, use a second
line from the modem jack and run it to the filter jack that your
DSL provider should have provided you with, and start your system.
Win-XP will recognize the new device and start his device install
dance. If you have installed Win-xp simple fax service you should
be able to fax a document after the reinstall of the fax device. .
.Good luck Tom J.

Windows still see the modem. The problem is that he no longer has a
telephone line connected to the internal modem. That's why he gets a
No Dialtone error rather than a No Modem error. If the DSL was
provided by the local telephone company, DSL is piggybacked on the
voice line. One would simply have to do as Russ suggested about
using the filters to cut out the DSL signal for the voice line. If
DSL does not piggyback on the voice line, then he would have to run
the telephone cord from the internal modem to a jack connected to
his voice line.

 

[Guest]

Bob,

1. I have replied since I am appalled at the lack of good information that
you have received to date.

2. You can still use the built in faxing features of Windows XP. You will
have to connect your phone line to your built in fax modem card. I would
recommend using a line that goes to a phone, then to your computer, so that
the computer won't be the first device to see the incoming signal, and answer
the phone if the modem is configured to do so. (see below ascii diagram)

Standard PSTN Existing Existing
Phone Line in to <-----------> Telephone <------------> Fax Modem
Home Handset on
'puter

3. You can send faxes over the internet for free. There is a website where
you can download a small application, and send faxes to the majority of the
country, and world, for free. The website is http://www.tpc.int/ and while
the client may seem a bit odd, it does work. I also am a paying member of
the EFAX service, however, I do check to see if I can send my faxes by TPC
first, and only send via EFAX if TPC cannot connect.

I hope that this clarifies your options, and I wish you the best of luck.

Please send any questions to my hotmail address...

Regards,

Jim Noble.

 

[Russ Valentine [MVP Outlook]]

Thank goodness you rescued us. What part of your post did you not find
in previous replies?

 

[Guest]

Russ,

In response to your obvious insecurity, as seen by your sarcasm in the first
sentence below;

Thank goodness you rescued us. What part of your post did you not find
in previous replies?

You ask, “What part of your post did you not find in previous replies?â€

Well, for one, clarity. There was no single post that showed this end user
all of his options, nor was any post a simple link to the destination of the
information referenced.

There were several links, with buried information, that did not directly
answer the end-user's question, but instead, barraged them with superfluous
information, that may or may not have answered this user’s question. I have
always maintained that on message boards, bulletin boards, user relationship
panels, and in teaching, that helping someone is about teaching them, and
providing simple, clear answers out of their questions.

It seems that this particular thread had gone down the path of “throwing a
book at the user and shouting “RTFMâ€.

It was just simply a number of people who desired to help, but did not
follow through.

I am not out to seek a flame war, nor will I reply to any responses on this
topic, I simply hope that you and the others here, take a position to assist
some of these people with a “pinch of empathyâ€. Not everyone can absorb the
technical solutions as quickly and easily as you can, and it helps them for
you to think about their struggle when replying.

Just my 2¢, YMMV.

GoodNub.

 

[Russ Valentine [MVP-Outlook]]

It was hardly insecurity. It was curiosity. You were the one who started off
with a strong indictment of the help provided in this thread to date. Why,
you were "appalled" at how bad it was. Since I try my best to be helpful
when I post, I went back to see what I and the others had done so badly. I
just couldn't find any information that had been left out or that was even
all that unclear.
You'd never get a flame war from me. Heck, I am most grateful for any other
helpful posts that are made in this group and hope you keep doing so. We
need all the help we can get. I most certainly welcome any clarifications to
my posts because it's hard to know at what technical level the original
poster might be. Most posters are likely above mine, actually, since I don't
work in this field at all. It might go over better, however, if you did so
without insulting everyone who posted before you.