Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wuarchive!uunet!unisoft!hoptoad!wet!roger
From: roger@wet.UUCP (Roger Niclas)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.modems
Subject: Re: Bitfax S/R ver 3.0 (was: Re: ZOFAX 96/24)
Message-ID: <2389@wet.UUCP>
Date: 2 May 91 01:36:50 GMT
References: <1991Apr28.152714.727@uwasa.fi>
Organization: Wetware Diversions, San Francisco
Lines: 28

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                          *