From: 0003991080@mcimail.com (Proctor & Associates)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Sending Faxes Overseas
Date: 13 Apr 92 17:57:00 GMT
Article-I.D.: eecs.telecom12.322.2
Organization: TELECOM Digest
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 12, Issue 322, Message 2 of 10

rees@pisa.citi.umich.edu (Jim Rees) writes:
 
> This message I'm writing now is 13336 bits.  I can send it that way,
> or I can print it on paper, digitize the image, modulate that onto an
> analog carrier, digitize that, and reverse the whole process at the
> other end.  The efficient way, it's a few thousand bits.  The FAX way,
> it's probably 3 million bits (one minute at 56 kbps).  That's an
> efficiency of half a percent.  No wonder it cost you $50 to fax that
> document to Mexico!
 
No, the reason it cost so much to send the fax was 1) the customer has
a fax machine, not a modem and software for converting Postscript
files, 2) their machine stepped down to 1/4 speed, and 3) our data
sheets have graphics with these blue backgrounds behind detailed
pretty pictures.  The machine spends forever trying to "read" the blue
background.  That is why I said we probably need to come up with some
fax-friendly data sheets.
 
peter@taronga.com (Peter da Silva) writes:
 
> Let's see. Three full pages. I'll assume it's all text, at about 8
> point (which is typical). That's 9 lines per inch, about 14 cpi. 11K
> per page of text At 230 CPS (typical 2400 baud modem transfer) that's
> 51 seconds per page. You'd have gotten off for under $6 using email
> instead of FAX.
 
You missed some important points in my original post.
 
I was not sending to my own office, I was sending to some anonymous
potential customer in Mexico who asked me to send a data sheet to his
fax machine.  He did not have a modem or email.  I cannot force my
potential overseas customers to abandon their fax machines.
 
I was not sending text.  The part that was text was a lot smaller than
8 point!  You may recall that I said that if it were text, I could
have saved money using MCI Mail fax service, which will not charge me
extra for attempts, cutoffs, or machines that step down to 2400 bps.
 
Part of the reason it was so expensive was the nature of the graphics
in our data sheets, which is why I mentioned that "that we really need
some brief 'fax friendly' product data sheets that use bolder graphics
with no background".  By background, I mean the pretty shading and
borders that accompanies our detailed graphics.
  
> Wake up, folks, FAX is a massive botch. Work for better email services
> instead of screwing around with broken-as-designed technology.
 
That's why we list our email address on all of our product data sheets
and catalogs.  But we never get email from customers, unless they see
a post with our address on TELECOM Digest.
 
But email doesn't help us send product data sheets to overseas
customers with fax machines.
 
Robert.Lindh@eos.ericsson.se writes:
 
> I think this could be a service sold by a email-system. (To receive
> email and send it as a FAX to given telephone number.)  Could
> telemarketers be a bigger problem compared with today, if this service
> exist and is made available (mostly a US-internal problem?) ?
 
This is what MCI Mail fax service does, which I mentioned in my
original post as a nice alternative for overseas text-only faxes sent
to locations where the lines are bad, or they don't have separate
phone numbers dedicated to fax machines.
 
 
Paul Cook                         206-881-7000
Proctor & Associates         MCI Mail 399-1080
15050 NE 36th St.            fax: 206-885-3282
Redmond, WA  98052-5317    3991080@mcimail.com