peter@ficc.ferranti.com (Peter da Silva) (05/09/91)
What I don't understand about all these cheap FAXes is why nobody has put a $5 serial port in one and sold it as a combination FAX/MODEM/SCANNER/ PRINTER? It's got all the parts, and the software on the computer side couldn't be that big a deal. It'd be a killer product: you could sell it for well under $1000 and make a bundle. I could see Brother or one of those companies that sells weird almost-computers doing this. have they just never thought of it? -- Peter da Silva; Ferranti International Controls Corporation; +1 713 274 5180; Sugar Land, TX 77487-5012; `-_-' "Have you hugged your wolf, today?"
roger@wet.UUCP (Roger Niclas) (05/13/91)
peter@ficc.ferranti.com (Peter da Silva) writes: > What I don't understand about all these cheap FAXes is why nobody has put > a $5 serial port in one and sold it as a combination FAX/MODEM/SCANNER/ > PRINTER? It's got all the parts, and the software on the computer side > couldn't be that big a deal. It'd be a killer product: you could sell it Maybe because it'd be a third-rate printer, a crummy scanner, and an incompatible modem? It would, however, be a good fax, maybe even a fair telephone. And it wouldn't even require the use of a precious serial port on the computer side -- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- * Email: roger@wet.UUCP | * * alt: rogerd@well | witty remark designed to exhibit intellect goes * * CompuServe: 72730,1010 | here *
peter@ficc.ferranti.com (Peter da Silva) (05/18/91)
In article <2451@wet.UUCP> roger@wet.UUCP (Roger Niclas) writes: > peter@ficc.ferranti.com (Peter da Silva) writes: > > What I don't understand about all these cheap FAXes is why nobody has put > > a $5 serial port in one and sold it as a combination FAX/MODEM/SCANNER/ > > PRINTER? It's got all the parts, and the software on the computer side > > couldn't be that big a deal. It'd be a killer product: you could sell it > Maybe because it'd be a third-rate printer, a crummy scanner, and an > incompatible modem? It wouldn't be compatible with Hayes or Telebit high speed modems, but doesn't Group 3 FAX use regular 2400 baud protocols? And it'd be as good a printer as any of the standard dot-matrix ones out there. And as good a scanner as any other monochrome one. > And it wouldn't even require the use of a precious serial port on the > computer side On the contrary, it'd save one. Or you could put an even cheaper parallel port and give me a use for the stupid parallel port on my computer. -- Peter da Silva; Ferranti International Controls Corporation; +1 713 274 5180; Sugar Land, TX 77487-5012; `-_-' "Have you hugged your wolf, today?"
bill@camco.Celestial.COM (Bill Campbell) (05/18/91)
In <NBDBDP8@xds13.ferranti.com> peter@ficc.ferranti.com (Peter da Silva) writes: >On the contrary, it'd save one. Or you could put an even cheaper parallel >port and give me a use for the stupid parallel port on my computer. >-- >Peter da Silva; Ferranti International Controls Corporation; +1 713 274 5180; >Sugar Land, TX 77487-5012; `-_-' "Have you hugged your wolf, today?" This brings up a point I've discovered here. I'm running Stuart Lynne's Unix fax software (nee Unifax) and printing incoming faxes on my HP compatible laser printer. I ran into a problem when printing faxes via the parallel port. The system would slow down significantly while printing the graphics files, and occassionally the VGA monitor would get sent into some wierd state that required a system reboot. I remembered something I had read about problems with parallel printing under Xenix (I'm running Xenix 2.3.3GT on an Intel 303 33MHZ Caching 386). There have been several patches to fix slow printing problems under SCO Xenix since I started using it in 1988. I decided to move the printer to a serial port thinking that the Specialix drivers were probably more robust than the parallel printer. The results were great. Now I experience no slowdown while printing faxes, the VGA is fine, and printing isn't any slower (I'm transferring to the printer at 38,400 through an Intellicom 16K serial -> parallel buffer, converter). I'm seriously considering yanking/disabling all parallel ports from the system to free IRQ 5 and 7 for devices that cannot use the higher IRQs (Mice...). The other big benefit is that I have an external fax modem, printers, Trailblazer, and several terminals on a single slot in the system. Bill. -- INTERNET: bill@Celestial.COM Bill Campbell; Celestial Software UUCP: ...!thebes!camco!bill 6641 East Mercer Way uunet!camco!bill Mercer Island, WA 98040; (206) 947-5591
akk@trantor.informatik.uni-erlangen.de (Andy Klingler) (05/19/91)
In article <NBDBDP8@xds13.ferranti.com>, Peter da Silva writes: > In article <2451@wet.UUCP> roger@wet.UUCP (Roger Niclas) writes: > > peter@ficc.ferranti.com (Peter da Silva) writes: > > > What I don't understand about all these cheap FAXes is why nobody has put > > > a $5 serial port in one and sold it as a combination FAX/MODEM/SCANNER/ > > > PRINTER? It's got all the parts, and the software on the computer side > > > couldn't be that big a deal. It'd be a killer product: you could sell it > Ok, Peter. If you want to buy such a thing call GUIS America, Inc. Tel (741) 590-0801 Fax (714) 590-1931 (Oh well, one of these area codes is wrong. I don't know which. They are in California) and ask for the ETFax-7. I don't know how much you pay in the US, since I got mine directly from Taiwan. You can get it with software for MS-DOS, but the protocol is fairly simple, so it should be no problem to hook it up to a real computer. > It wouldn't be compatible with Hayes or Telebit high speed modems, but > doesn't Group 3 FAX use regular 2400 baud protocols? And it'd be as good > a printer as any of the standard dot-matrix ones out there. And as good > a scanner as any other monochrome one. As for the ETFax, it can't be used as a modem because it understands only fax commands. However, the modem processor in it supports V.29, V.29 ter T.30 V.21, T.4. And if it would't print on termal-paper it would be much better than many dot-matrix printers. The printout is very sharp and has always the same darkening. One other advantage is you can switch off your computer and still receive faxes, it then just works as a standalone fax. BTW: The ETFax-7 is also sold as a standalone faxmachine without computer interface. > > And it wouldn't even require the use of a precious serial port on the > > computer side Well, how many ports do you need for a scanner, a printer and a fax? I need only one. :) (And if serial ports are precious for you you might have the wrong computer. (I have an Amiga and currently 3 serial ports)). --- Andreas Klingler akk@trantor.informatik.uni-erlangen.de Hey hacker! Leave those newsgroups alone!
francis@ircam.fr (Joseph Francis) (05/19/91)
In article <2451@wet.UUCP> roger@wet.UUCP (Roger Niclas) writes: >peter@ficc.ferranti.com (Peter da Silva) writes: >> What I don't understand about all these cheap FAXes is why nobody has put >> a $5 serial port in one and sold it as a combination FAX/MODEM/SCANNER/ ... >Maybe because it'd be a third-rate printer, a crummy scanner, and an >incompatible modem? It would, however, be a good fax, maybe even a fair >telephone. > That's silly; one can up from 1728 (or whatever) pixels/line to 300-400dpi, add grayscale, allow 200-400-800 whatever resolution horizontally, and it suddenly is not a bad scanner(1); The fax part is intrinsic (2); The modem - well, is 2400 baud that crummy? Then add a 9600+ MNP option(3); and as for printing, just make sure it is a normal laserjet-type printer; perhaps with Postscript or PCL on top of everything (4). i.e., take a scanner/copy/printer type machine (which ARE on the market) and add a fax card/modem, and appropriate software. A Good fax, hp-type nifty printer; excellent scanner; and excellent modem; I'm sure several companies have these, and are just waiting until the market is saturated with faxes, so they can introduce a new one for people to buy again. The personal Copier thing has been going for some time too... -- | Le Jojo: Fresh 'n' Clean, speaking out to the way you want to live | today; American - All American; doing, a bit so, and even more so.