[comp.dcom.modems] Bitfax S/R ver 3.0

roger@wet.UUCP (Roger Niclas) (04/27/91)

gallo@dtrc.dt.navy.mil (Gallo) writes:
> <Previous posts about ZOFAX 96/24; respondent says he can't
> <use Bitfax under Deskview
> 
> The Bitfax 3.0 revision is DV aware.

Is anyone else having trouble getting Bitfax to format correctly?  I can't seem
to get it to produce a single page fax from even a 25-line ASCII file, unless
I use the Letter Gothic (rather than the Bitstream Courier) typeface.

It also seems not to be able to handle a WP5.1 document particularly well,
despite its claims to the contrary.  It screws up columns, is unable to deal
with underlines or boldface, etc.  

Anyone know ways around these difficulties, or know of fax software that can
*truly* handle WP 5.1?


-- 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*  Email: roger@wet.UUCP    |                                                  *
*    alt: rogerd@well       |  witty remark designed to exhibit intellect goes *
* CompuServe: 72730,1010    |                    here                          *

hv@uwasa.fi (Harri Valkama) (04/28/91)

In article <2354@wet.UUCP> roger@wet.UUCP (Roger Niclas) writes:
>gallo@dtrc.dt.navy.mil (Gallo) writes:
>> <Previous posts about ZOFAX 96/24; respondent says he can't
>> <use Bitfax under Deskview
>> 
>> The Bitfax 3.0 revision is DV aware.

What other features are new in v3.0?

>Is anyone else having trouble getting Bitfax to format correctly?  I can't see
>to get it to produce a single page fax from even a 25-line ASCII file, unless
>I use the Letter Gothic (rather than the Bitstream Courier) typeface.
>
>It also seems not to be able to handle a WP5.1 document particularly well,
>despite its claims to the contrary.  It screws up columns, is unable to deal
>with underlines or boldface, etc.  
>
>Anyone know ways around these difficulties, or know of fax software that can
>*truly* handle WP 5.1?

I have not had any troubles sending with BitFax S/R but I am now using
WinFax that is great. But I guess it has no help for you WP users...

-- 
== Harri Valkama, University of Vaasa, Finland ============================
 P.O. Box 700, 65101 VAASA, Finland (tel:+358 61 248426 fax:+358 61 248465)
 Anon ftp garbo.uwasa.fi (128.214.12.37) & nic.funet.fi (128.214.6.100)
 hv@uwasa.fi hv@finfiles.bitnet /s=hv/o=uwasa/prdm=inet/amdm=fumail/c=fi

roger@wet.UUCP (Roger Niclas) (05/02/91)

hv@uwasa.fi (Harri Valkama) writes:
> In article <2354@wet.UUCP> roger@wet.UUCP (Roger Niclas) writes:
> >gallo@dtrc.dt.navy.mil (Gallo) writes:

> >> The Bitfax 3.0 revision is DV aware.
> 
> What other features are new in v3.0?

Since I haven't any experience with earlier versions, I can't really say
what's new in 3.0, with the exception of the addition of a number of Bitstream
fonts bundled with the package (the docs state that this is new).


> >Is anyone else having trouble getting Bitfax to format correctly?  I can't see

> I have not had any troubles sending with BitFax S/R but I am now using
> WinFax that is great. But I guess it has no help for you WP users...
> 
How well does WinFax handle Ami files, do you know?  (I may have to abandon
my resistance to Windows and if I do, Ami Pro seems like a nice word
processor.)  But 'faxibilty' has to be a consideration in any wp choice I 
make from here on in.

-- 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
*  Email: roger@wet.UUCP    |                                                  *
*    alt: rogerd@well       |  witty remark designed to exhibit intellect goes *
* CompuServe: 72730,1010    |                    here                          *

hv@uwasa.fi (Harri Valkama) (05/03/91)

In article <2389@wet.UUCP> roger@wet.UUCP (Roger Niclas) writes:
>hv@uwasa.fi (Harri Valkama) writes:
>
>> I have not had any troubles sending with BitFax S/R but I am now using
>> WinFax that is great. But I guess it has no help for you WP users...
>> 
>How well does WinFax handle Ami files, do you know?  (I may have to abandon
>my resistance to Windows and if I do, Ami Pro seems like a nice word
>processor.)  But 'faxibilty' has to be a consideration in any wp choice I 
>make from here on in.

No I have  not  Ami, I use  WfW and at least  it works great. And also
they  claim that  whatever  you can  print  from Windows  goes through
WinFax as well. And it helps (a lot) if you have ATM...

-- 
== Harri Valkama, University of Vaasa, Finland ============================
 P.O. Box 700, 65101 VAASA, Finland (tel:+358 61 248426 fax:+358 61 248465)
 Anon ftp garbo.uwasa.fi (128.214.12.37) & nic.funet.fi (128.214.6.100)
 hv@uwasa.fi hv@finfiles.bitnet /s=hv/o=uwasa/prdm=inet/amdm=fumail/c=fi