The difference between “pretty much it” and “it” is the problem here. Because I can place my document and dial the number without anything meaningful happening - and have, lots of times.
And as others have pointed out, a failed fax means repeated trips down the hall to try again. An email that doesn’t get through (again, never had this happen) can be re-sent from my desk.
And frankly, it’s easier to scan and email. When I scan a document, it’s unquestionably scanned. I spend less time at the scanner than at the fax machine. The scan arrives at my desk as an email attachment. I open it, verify that it’s all there, and forward it.
True, but it’s all too easy to erase what’s in memory without recognizing that there was a stored fax. I have found lights blinking on mine when a fax came in when I wasn’t around and I didn’t expect it. Perhaps paper ran out or jammed. If you press “cancel”, a likely response to a blinking trouble light, you lose the entire fax without further warning.
My fax will also happily “print” without any warning even if the cartridge is out of ink.
Scanners are anywhere that has a relatively-new copier.
Often, you don’t even need to scan; every time I’ve been asked to fax something in the last 10 years, the document had originated in my computer. So, in order to email it, I only needed to email it.
Faxes are not everywhere. I know the location of exactly one fax machine and it’s in the office so if I needed to fax something for personal reasons, I’d have to hunt one down or figure out how to use an online fax service.
Some other contributors to this thread have complained about fax machines not working properly, or have described old, worn-out, jam-prone units. This has nothing whatsoever to do with the alleged obsolescence of fax technology; it simply means that some of you (or your employers) need to buy new damn fax machines. If you owned a rusted-out 1985 Ford Escort that never worked right, would you cite that as “proof” that cars were obsolete?
When you fax something, it’s a lot more difficult for the recipient to pretend that the message must have been lost in transmission. Which he can do pretty easily with e-mail and regular mail.
Of course there is Fedex and Certified Mail RRR, but those options are a lot more time-consuming and expensive than faxing.
I’ll agree that honest-to-goodness fax machines are archaic, but it’s really semantics discussing the difference between a fax machine and a scan-and-email machine, no? It’s not like the internet changed from dial-up to broadband to fiberoptics. Just steps forward along the same path.
That’s actually a pretty good point. Faxing over VOIP can be difficult. There are webpages full of arcane configuration tweaks to make VOIP faxing work, which suggests how problematic it can be.
Businesses that rely on faxing probably have landlines anyway, but if the landline infrastructure eventually goes away it might take faxing with it.
Haven’t had a land-phone in years, so when I find myself forced to fax (by the usual suspects mentioned upthread) only once every year or two, it’s easy enough to use Kinko’s overpriced service. Easy, but aggravating as hell just on principle.
No, there’s just a silly added wrinkle or two that you need to know, that I always forget between one year and the next.
If the only cars in my employer’s vehicle fleet were rusted-out 1985 Ford Escorts that you needed to know exactly how to jiggle the key in the ignition in order to get it to start (to make the analogy more accurate), I’d conclude that my employer had almost no need for a company-owned car, but kept this aged car around for that once in a blue moon when someone needed it.
Which would suggest that cars were largely obsolete to my employer. And that’s pretty much the message that I get about fax machines here.
And since it’s a pretty big place, it strikes me as a nontrivial data point with respect to the obsolescence of fax technology. The fact that you can make a more high-tech buggy whip doesn’t mean they’re not obsolete. What makes them obsolete is when people stop using them.
That article treats a fax machine as the only way graphics, like handwritten notes, can be transmitted. Guess they never heard of scanning to an email.
Physical immediateness? Of walking into the supply room one day to replenish your staples before realizing there’s some paper tangled in the cobwebs burying your fax machine?
[/QUOTE]
In our office, the fax is part of the photocopier, and we get faxes regularly every day.
at which point I would take you to an overpass on say the San Diego freeway at rush hour and let you learn that you experience with obsolesce is not shared by the rest of the world.
That’s the difference between faxes and cars, isn’t it?
Near where I live, we still have Amish folk getting around in their horses and buggies, so the obsolescence of this technology isn’t recognized by all - but still, the ‘horse-drawn buggies are obsolescent’ sense is shared by all but a few pockets of people here and there.
Right now, faxes are somewhere in between cars and horse-drawn buggies. But they’re more like horse-drawn buggies in that their regular use seems to be confined to certain pockets of our world, like health care and the legal system. They’re much larger pockets than the Amish, but they’re still pockets.
Looks like another one for my “Only on the SDMB” file - fax hatred.
Almost every single job I’ve had in Australia (including my current one) has used faxes, and when I worked in electronics retail until fairly recently I sold a lot of fax machines; probably an average of 2 or 3 a week.
They’re very helpful working the media, too. Recently I needed a response to an enquiry I’d sent to a government minister and for some reason work’s network spam filter wouldn’t let their e-mailed response through, but when I rang their office and said “Have you got a fax machine?” the (now urgently required) response to my enquiry was printing out of our office fax almost as soon as I hung up the phone.
As others have mentioned, sending a fax is easiser (IME) if you’ve got an original or physical document you need to send to someone - feed it into the fax machine, dial the number and hit the “Go” equivalent. To do the same with e-mail requires firing up the scanner, scanning the document, finding the document wherever the scanner has decided to save it on the network (sure, you might have selected "Save to Martini’s Scanned Documents " but that’s no guarantee it hasn’t ended up on the Waikikamukau office’s server in a folder labelled “Beware of the Leopard” for some unfathomable reason), open your e-mail program, attach the .pdf (it did save as a .pdf, right?) and then e-mail it to the other person.
Who may or may not get it, especially if the spam filter is being difficult or they’re not near their PC or the server is down.
Or they may get it and not have a .pdf reader or something odd like that.
In theory, I get how e-mailing stuff is easier, and usually it is - but fax machines have a place in the modern world and I truly am astounded for the hate towards them evidenced in this thread.
