Jump to content
  • 0
marlinsinger

So you want to fax from Vista - don't count on it

Question

34 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

  • 0

Dude, so what? It's available in the Business and Ultimate versions.

 

Outside of business users, who should be using one of the aforementioned versions, still faxes things?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Dude, so what? It's available in the Business and Ultimate versions.

 

Outside of business users, who should be using one of the aforementioned versions, still faxes things?

 

Did you ever try to apply for a job with the Gov't. If you don't have a fax, you don't apply. many companies prefer faxes than mail. As far as the business and ultimate versions of Vista, why should I have to pay for those versions for something as simple as Fax. I certainly didn't have to with 95,98, ME or XP.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Did you ever try to apply for a job with the Gov't. If you don't have a fax, you don't apply. many companies prefer faxes than mail. As far as the business and ultimate versions of Vista, why should I have to pay for those versions for something as simple as Fax. I certainly didn't have to with 95,98, ME or XP.

 

You can apply for Gov't jobs online. There's thousands of them. My father used post them when he worked at the pentagon.

 

The reason it doesn't come on home systems when it came on 95-XP is because people used to use Faxes for home use. Nobody does that anymore. What people DO continue to do, however, is whine that Microsoft's software is needlessly bloated with features that nobody uses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Guest ml
What people DO continue to do, however, is whine that Microsoft's software is needlessly bloated with features that nobody uses.

 

And your point is?......Microsoft's Vista isn't needlessly bloated ? Have you seen the hardware requirements to run it?

 

I'm not anti-Microsoft. There are thousands of people employed making new computer hardware to run the new OS, writing software for the OS, writing books to explain the new OS, training people how to use the new OS......etc. etc. etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
There are thousands of people employed making new computer hardware to run the new OS, writing software for the OS, writing books to explain the new OS, training people how to use the new OS......etc. etc. etc.

Yup, it's a whole industry to keep the economy moving and us running in place. Vista? Don't want it. Don't need it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
And your point is?......Microsoft's Vista isn't needlessly bloated ? Have you seen the hardware requirements to run it?

 

I'm not anti-Microsoft. There are thousands of people employed making new computer hardware to run the new OS, writing software for the OS, writing books to explain the new OS, training people how to use the new OS......etc. etc. etc.

 

First of all, my point is that people whine that there are too many features in MS apps, and then, when MS takes out features that few people ever use, people whine about that, too.

 

As for the hardware requirements, when XP came out, most people had Win98 machines with 64megs of RAM. When XP was released, it required 128 bare minimum, and as we all know, it slowed down quite a bit if that's all you have. In my eyes, this type of thing is necessary for the continued growth of the PC experience. It's a growin pain. If software makers refuse to make products that reuire more oomph, we're going to eventually going to run out of new stuff that can be done with the oomph we have. We can either wait for that to happen, and then sit in stagnation, or we can be pre-emptive and push the conventional envelope a little bit.

 

Besides, a Vista PC is still cheaper than a MAC, and upgrading is sure as heck easier and cheaper than doing it for a Mac. Especially an imac!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Besides, a Vista PC is still cheaper than a MAC, and upgrading is sure as heck easier and cheaper than doing it for a Mac. Especially an imac!

 

Actually a Linux PC is a lot cheaper than either (that is if you can BUY a PC with Linux pre-installed). It seems MS has told the main box shifters 'ship with Linux and we pull your Windows block licensing' (unless of course it just happens to be Novell/Suse)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
The reason it doesn't come on home systems when it came on 95-XP is because people used to use Faxes for home use. Nobody does that anymore.
You sound like you work for MS. Who are you to say what HOME users do or not do? There are plenty of home-based business users that fax from their computers and won't pay for the more expensive versions of Vista. Microsoft is only giving users yet another reason not to upgrade to Vista.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
The reason it doesn't come on home systems when it came on 95-XP is because people used to use Faxes for home use. Nobody does that anymore.

You sound like you work for MS.

I've been thinking that myself. I have noticed posts on several boards by newish members who are vocally defending Vista. Very suspicious . . .

Edited by sisterscape

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
You can apply for Gov't jobs online. There's thousands of them. My father used post them when he worked at the pentagon.

 

The reason it doesn't come on home systems when it came on 95-XP is because people used to use Faxes for home use. Nobody does that anymore. What people DO continue to do, however, is whine that Microsoft's software is needlessly bloated with features that nobody uses.

Yes, some jobs you can apply on line, but when I was looking, very few. Plus it is more than just Gov't and jobs. More than once I have had to fax docs to businesses. Comes in very handy.

That being said, if you think it is satisfactory to pay more for something that does less, then I am sure you will be happy with Vista. Personally, I believe in adding features, not taking away. And by features, I don't mean things like Windows security. Something MS should leave to the professionals.

Edited by marlinsinger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Guest ml
...... then I am sure you will be happy with Vista. .

 

In order to do that, I'd have to buy a new computer and plan to spend more time waiting for my video to render in Vista. :(

 

I'm sure I'll end up getting Vista when I eventually get a new computer, but I don't see any pressing need to buy a new computer right now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

I'm a home user. I do use my PC with internal fax modem to send faxes from time to time. For example, I am secretary of a couple of societies some of whose members do not have internet connection and email, but who do have a fax machine. Sending them society info by fax saves time and money on postage, not trivial for shoestring societies. It is only a small app, and IMO it is really silly of MS to have dropped it for basic and premium home user versions of Vista.

Edited by jeanrosenfeld

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

They kept minesweeper, solitaire, freecell - but dropped fax

 

Strange priorities :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
You sound like you work for MS. Who are you to say what HOME users do or not do? There are plenty of home-based business users that fax from their computers and won't pay for the more expensive versions of Vista. Microsoft is only giving users yet another reason not to upgrade to Vista.

 

I'm smeone who talks to to people every day about what they use their computers for. 80% of my clients are home users, and of the hundreds I've talked to over the past three yeras, I don't recall more than a dozen or so that still used faxes, and I've yet to see a single one that faxed via PC. About 15% of my clients are home businesses. More fax machines there, but still, not a single one that faxes using their PC. The remaining 5% are small business. Most of them have fax machines. I've seen ONE that uses Norton Winfax to send faxes. Speaking of Winfax, have you noticed Norton doesn't make that anymore? Ever wonder why?

 

Also, correct me if I'm wrong about this, but doesn't the fax feature require a dial-up modem? Half the machines that ship don't even COME with those by default anymore.

 

All in all, I'm sure Microsoft came to the same conclusing that we did: in the age of e-mail, the fax is becoming extinct, and when you factor in the fact that difference between a printer-scanner-copier and a fax-machine-printer-scanner-coppier is about twenty bucks, there just wasn't much need for fax capabilities in the versions of its OS that they built with your typical home user.

 

I don't work for Microsoft, I just see the logic behind the decision. If your system is business-critical, get a copy of Vista business and claim it as a write off on your taxes.

 

 

I've been thinking that myself. I have noticed posts on several boards by newish members who are vocally defending Vista. Very suspicious . . .

 

I'm defending Vista because I LIKE Vista. I USE Vista, and most of all, because it seems to me like the criticisms of Vista (that started long before it was released, by people who were not even IN the beta), have largely been either petty or ill-informed. It seems to me that it just had bad buzz going into it, because everyone started making assumptions based on previous OS releases, and stuff that they heard from a guy who knows a guy who read on CNet (I remember when that used to be a credible source for info) that Vista would be full of bugs for the first year.

Edited by wraithtdk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Yes, some jobs you can apply on line, but when I was looking, very few.

 

Where are you looking that you're still seeing all these government jobs that require you to fax your application? $20.00 says I can find a hundred in the next hour that don't on Monster alone.

 

Plus it is more than just Gov't and jobs. More than once I have had to fax docs to businesses. Comes in very handy.

That being said, if you think it is satisfactory to pay more for something that does less, then I am sure you will be happy with Vista. Personally, I believe in adding features, not taking away.

 

You don't pay more for something that does less. Home basic does as much as XP home did, and doesn't cost one cent more. True, it doesn't fax. But it does other things that XP didn't, and as I've said, I don't place any value on getting a program that is crammed full of stuff I'm never gonna use. In fact, you talk about what you believe, here's what I believe: I believe that bloat is bad. I believe that a program that can do twenty different things, but only one that I will ever actually USE is no better than a program that just does one thing that I need it to do. I believe that if I need to send faxes for my business, I'd get a pfsc, or buy a copy of Vista that was meant for business. I believe that Microsoft is the big dog, and it is always trendy to trash talk the big dog.

 

And most of all, I beleive that increased stability is a million times more valuable that the ability to fax a digital document.

 

And by features, I don't mean things like Windows security. Something MS should leave to the professionals.

 

Yea, when is Microsoft going to freaking LISTEN to us? Don't they know that people have been DEMANDING that they stop trying to make Windows more secure and just let someone else do it?

 

 

 

In order to do that, I'd have to buy a new computer and plan to spend more time waiting for my video to render in Vista. :(

 

I'm sure I'll end up getting Vista when I eventually get a new computer, but I don't see any pressing need to buy a new computer right now.

 

I suppose that to be fair, I should mention that I'm a Gamer junkie. Vista really doesn't phase my 3GHZ Dual-Core, 2GB of ram Dual-video carded SLI-based rig. It just looks really pretty. :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

In XP those who don't use fax have the option to uninstall it (or indeed not to install it in the first place). It is, however a useful option for those who do want it, even if none of the people you happen to have come across fall into that category. MS could have done the same in Vista basic or premium.

Why should I have to buy Vista business, with all its 'bloatware' features that, as a home user, I don't need, in order to be able to continue using my PC as I am doing now, with XP?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Where are you looking that you're still seeing all these government jobs that require you to fax your application? $20.00 says I can find a hundred in the next hour that don't on Monster alone.

 

http://jobsearch.usajobs.opm.gov/getjob.as...bNum=5&rc=2

 

Some even require by mail or hand deliver.

 

You don't pay more for something that does less. Home basic does as much as XP home did, and doesn't cost one cent more. True, it doesn't fax. But it does other things that XP didn't, and as I've said, I don't place any value on getting a program that is crammed full of stuff I'm never gonna use. In fact, you talk about what you believe, here's what I believe: I believe that bloat is bad. I believe that a program that can do twenty different things, but only one that I will ever actually USE is no better than a program that just does one thing that I need it to do. I believe that if I need to send faxes for my business, I'd get a pfsc, or buy a copy of Vista that was meant for business. I believe that Microsoft is the big dog, and it is always trendy to trash talk the big dog.

 

So what you are saying is when you have a soft copy it is far better to print it to paper, then run it thru a fax machine if it needs faxed. Brilliant use of productivity.

 

And most of all, I beleive that increased stability is a million times more valuable that the ability to fax a digital document.

 

 

 

Yea, when is Microsoft going to freaking LISTEN to us? Don't they know that people have been DEMANDING that they stop trying to make Windows more secure and just let someone else do it?

I suppose that to be fair, I should mention that I'm a Gamer junkie. Vista really doesn't phase my 3GHZ Dual-Core, 2GB of ram Dual-video carded SLI-based rig. It just looks really pretty. :D

 

Yes security of the operating system from hackers, something they seem unable to do and you expect them to do better with virii, trojans, and spyware. Right!

Edited by marlinsinger

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Now let me see the advantages of Vista

 

It has the latest Internet Explorer 7. It's a terrible pity the fogies at the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) have a specification for web compliance that this great program doesn't fit in to.

 

Windows Media Player 11 is fantastic. It will block users from using any material that the RIAA decides they shouldn't be able to copy on their computer.

 

IBM made a terrible mistake in open sourcing the PC specification. Now we're going to correct that and make sure that any hardware you add will fit Microsoft specifications and obey all rules MS set regarding DRM.

 

Best of all - if we don't like you, we can remotely shut down your PC and remove all operability. If you have a government we don't like - watch their whole network die.

 

:lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

As to system stability - I think a lot of that depends on the person using the system.

 

I found Win98 SE quite stable - but I generally only used one thing at time. Sometimes I'll be surfing and callup a spreadsheet, or something like that, but generally, I respect the (400MHz) computer, and have got excellent service from it - the problem came with web pages that just wouldn't load, and I'm now using Win2K.

 

However, the only real threat to stability was the idea implanted in Word97 that it was supposed to go online with a URL, when all I had wanted to do was copy it to paste into a browser. I fianlly told Norton to block access by Word, which ended the BSOD problem. And these days I use mostly WordPad for such things.

 

I detest WinXP (yes, I have a 2.4MHz Celeron computer that came with WinXP; it spends most of its time turned OFF). And from what I hear, Vista is worse in every way I detest WinxP.

 

Lynn

Edited by lynn98109

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

Actually what puzzles me is why someone into gaming would even want an OS that is going to gobble up a large chunk of his system resources just to run the OS - at least with XP, there was a fair amount left over, with Vista, it will slow things down

 

You should see games running in 98 on this machine - they FLY :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Guest ml

So to sum up.....

 

If you want to have the ability to FAX, you need to buy the Vista Business or Ultimate for around $100 or more than the basic upgrade.

 

 

 

That's not removing bloated software.......

 

 

 

That's good marketing...........

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
So to sum up.....

 

If you want to have the ability to FAX, you need to buy the Vista Business or Ultimate for around $100 or more than the basic upgrade.

 

 

 

That's not removing bloated software.......

 

 

 

That's good marketing...........

Good? Or underhanded?jj

 

Marketing for Dummies or Marketing TO Dummies?

 

Lynn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0

It's all on a par with Intel's TV adverts here for their Centrino stuff - how it would make the internet faster - excuse me, but I always thought that was down to the speed your ISP let you use :lol:

 

Keep telling the people a thing long enough and they start to believe it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
So what you are saying is when you have a soft copy it is far better to print it to paper, then run it thru a fax machine if it needs faxed. Brilliant use of productivity.

 

No, I'm saying the vast majority of home users DON'T have soft copy that they need faxed. If they have something on their computer they want to send to someone, they email it. I'm saying that most the people who need to fax things will use a fax machine and yes, print it out first, as they're probably the type the deal a lot with hard copy anyway; or else they're business users who buy Vista business and then just right it off as a business expense come tax time.

 

Yes security of the operating system from hackers, something they seem unable to do and you expect them to do better with virii, trojans, and spyware. Right!

 

Firstly, it's holding up pretty well to hacker so far. It survived black hat unscathed, that's a hell of a lot more any of their previous OS's have done.

 

Secondly, no, I don't expect them to do better with virii, trojans, and spyware. Why would you think that? I deal with Virii and trojans the same way I always have: NOD32. I deal with Spyware the way I always have: Spy Sweeper. And most importantly, I deal with all of them with the most important tool of all:

 

Having the common sense not to punch the monkey, chase the free ipod, click the pop-up window to "repair the umpteen hundred viruses that the random 'security' program found in just under two seconds", open up random e-mail attachments, and actually CHECK the freaking address bar closely enough to realize that http://paypal.accountsecuritycheck.com/omgithinkheboughtit is not ACTUALLY a paypal site.

 

Now let me see the advantages of Vista

 

It has the latest Internet Explorer 7. It's a terrible pity the fogies at the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) have a specification for web compliance that this great program doesn't fit in to.

 

I have yet to have a problem with it on a Vista machine.

 

Windows Media Player 11 is fantastic. It will block users from using any material that the RIAA decides they shouldn't be able to copy on their computer.

 

How so? Again, I've yet to run into any issues.

 

IBM made a terrible mistake in open sourcing the PC specification. Now we're going to correct that and make sure that any hardware you add will fit Microsoft specifications and obey all rules MS set regarding DRM.

 

Hardware...that fits Micro...

 

ahright, now I just have no clue what you're talking about. 'splain please.

 

Best of all - if we don't like you, we can remotely shut down your PC and remove all operability. If you have a government we don't like - watch their whole network die.

 

 

o_O wtf?

 

 

 

As to system stability - I think a lot of that depends on the person using the system.

 

I found Win98 SE quite stable - but I generally only used one thing at time. Sometimes I'll be surfing and callup a spreadsheet, or something like that, but generally, I respect the (400MHz) computer, and have got excellent service from it - the problem came with web pages that just wouldn't load, and I'm now using Win2K.

 

However, the only real threat to stability was the idea implanted in Word97 that it was supposed to go online with a URL, when all I had wanted to do was copy it to paste into a browser. I fianlly told Norton to block access by Word, which ended the BSOD problem. And these days I use mostly WordPad for such things.

 

I detest WinXP (yes, I have a 2.4MHz Celeron computer that came with WinXP; it spends most of its time turned OFF). And from what I hear, Vista is worse in every way I detest WinxP.

 

Lynn

 

 

 

I see.

 

 

 

And when the kids step on your lawn...

 

 

 

How does that make you feel? :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 0
Actually what puzzles me is why someone into gaming would even want an OS that is going to gobble up a large chunk of his system resources just to run the OS - at least with XP, there was a fair amount left over, with Vista, it will slow things down

 

You should see games running in 98 on this machine - they FLY :lol:

 

I want it because it looks awesome, it runs smooth, I've yet to have it crash on me, it's more secure, the game center rocks, and it seems like every time I use it I find some new little thing that that impresses me.

 

Yes, it is a power hog compared to XP. However, when XP came out, and most people were running 98 with 64 megs of RAM, IT was a power hog, too. Besides, as I said, when your machine's base score is 5.2, you really see any slowdown.

 

And yea, games fly on Win98, but only if you can get them to run without crashing. As it is, they fly on my machine, too.

 

 

 

However, to be fair, I should mention that I didn't have to pay for my copy. I just told my boss that he had three choices:

1.He could pay for me to take some classes to learn Vista.

2.He could turn down every call we get from people with new machines who need help with Vista, want to upgrade, etc.

 

or

 

3.He could buy me a copy of Vista Ultimate.

 

 

Now, I know what you're saying "couldn't you have figured out how to fix any problems with Vista already? It's not THAT different from XP!" Well, you're probably right. But, not only would it probably been a bit harder, as I would have had to go into it not knowing exactly where they moved stuff around to, but my boss knows nothing about computers, and hey, free Vista! :lol:

 

 

 

It's all on a par with Intel's TV adverts here for their Centrino stuff - how it would make the internet faster - excuse me, but I always thought that was down to the speed your ISP let you use :lol:

 

Keep telling the people a thing long enough and they start to believe it

 

Is...is that what their claim was? Speed? I saw the hideously dressed people having some kind of standing-seizures and I thought that the message was "we know, you can figure out WHAT the deal is, huh? Just buy it."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×