Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!mit-eddie!bu-cs!xylogics!loverso
From: loverso@Xylogics.COM (John Robert LoVerso)
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip
Subject: Re: Networks considered harmful
Keywords: email fax
Message-ID: <8034@xenna.Xylogics.COM>
Date: 20 Dec 89 06:24:44 GMT
References: <8912190403.AA05387@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU> <1250@toro.UUCP> <6042@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> <5803@umd5.umd.edu>
Reply-To: loverso@Xylogics.COM (John Robert LoVerso)
Organization: Xylogics, Inc., Burlington MA
Lines: 24

In article <5803@umd5.umd.edu> oleary@umd5.umd.edu (dave o'leary) writes:
> In article <6042@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> dls@mentor.cc.purdue.edu (David L Stevens) writes:
> >	Well, one point that I haven't seen here yet is that Fax can send
> >arbitrary information where electronic mail, in its current state, is pretty
> >much limited to text.
> 
> The problem with FAX is that it is by definition, a facsimile of a document.

But, that's why its such a hit!

An analogy I'm reminded of is with the original Xerox copier.  It was
originally touted as a replacement for carbon paper - simply type a single
copy and duplicate it.  Sales floundered until it was retargetted to 
the duplicating of pre-existing documents; this started the copier
revolution and an industry.

I see `email' (I dislike that term) being the copier-replacing-carbon-paper;
the FAX has come along and started a revolution.  There's just no (current)
easy way to get a signed document from here to there using email, without
extra hardware (over any "standard" PC) and a better user interfaces, etc.

Personally, I find FAXing a pain and couldn't live without mail.

John