3 ms·
> you should have to provide an alternative that doesn't compromise workflows, interoperability, or standards. The thing is that it's absolutely trivial to set
by wolrah 6y ago
> you should have to provide an alternative that doesn't compromise workflows, interoperability, or standards.
The thing is that it's absolutely trivial to set up a workflow that from a user standpoint operates identically to fax, but it still doesn't happen because of institutional inertia.
Standalone fax machines almost don't exist anymore. You can still find one if you look for it, but the majority of them these days are multifunction print/scan/copy/fax devices. Almost all of these devices can be given credentials to an email account and configured to automatically print messages and supported attachments received in that account. Likewise, they can almost always have a "speed dial" button configured to scan a document and email it to someone as an attachment in some standard format.
Put those two things together and as far as the users on each end are concerned the icon on their speed dial button might have changed but everything else appears to operate the same. One end sets a document on a machine and presses a button, the document feeds in, and a short time later it spits out at the other end. It's more reliable, higher quality, and potentially even faster if it's a large document.
It's equal or better in every single way, but if you actually try to implement this you'll almost always get pushback from one end or the other, if not both.
I say if an organization requires fax for anything in 2020, not just as an option but as the only way to do a specific thing, that organization should be considered unfixable and just thrown away to be replaced wholesale. Even if they default to fax for anything, that should be a huge red flag that things need to change.
Fax is evil and should have been dead a decade ago.
- microcolonel 6y ago> that organization should be considered unfixable and just thrown away to be replaced wholesale what? > Fax is evil and should have been dead a decade ago. why? Paper document facsimile is a useful facility basically as long as people fill or sign things out by hand or with stamps, and with Japanese even just coding people's names correctly into a computer is a task that requires both specialized skills and tools. These sweeping statements just strike me as ignorant and devoid of empathy.
- wolrah 6y ago> what? You're skipping the key part: "I say if an organization requires fax for anything in 2020, not just as an option but as the only way to do a specific thing," If they haven't bothered to provide a non-fax option for submitting data by now what would make you believe they ever will unless forced? If you don't understand how that's a problem then we don't exist in the same universe. I can't explain it to you. > Paper document facsimile is a useful facility basically as long as people fill or sign things out by hand or with stamps, and with Japanese even just coding people's names correctly into a computer is a task that requires both specialized skills and tools. That's what scanners are for. Scanning documents to store or email is perfectly fine. I'm talking about the specific act of using facsimile technology to transmit said document at low resolution in pseudo-realtime (but not really in most modern implementations) over telephone lines. There is no situation where there's not a better answer unless one party refuses to use more modern technology. > These sweeping statements just strike me as ignorant and devoid of empathy. As someone who has to support fax users, yea, I'm devoid of empathy for them. Entirely. Faxes have all kinds of problems that are a pain in the ass to prove to the user that it's just the horrible ancient tech they insist on using.