Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!samsung!brutus.cs.uiuc.edu!apple!bbn!drilex!dricejb
From: dricejb@drilex.UUCP (Craig Jackson drilex1)
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip
Subject: Re: Networks considered harmful
Message-ID: <7161@drilex.UUCP>
Date: 2 Jan 90 03:44:08 GMT
References: <8912251753.AA25082@venera.isi.edu> <[A.ISI.EDU]31-Dec-89.18:36:10.CERF>
Organization: DRI/McGraw-Hill, Lexington, MA
Lines: 25

There's one other point about this Email vs FAX discussion which I haven't
seen mentioned:

    You don't have to have a FAX machine on your desk to send or receive a FAX.

FAX machines are easily leveraged: our company has no more than one FAX
machine for every 40 staff members.  This works because a "FAX address"
typically consists of not only a telephone number, but also a human-readable
name on the cover sheet.

Another point which makes this possible is that you don't have to be at the
FAX machine to compose a FAX.  In fact, you don't need any fancier technology
than pencil and paper to compose a FAX.

These are important points for this discussion: I know that FAX has slowed
the use of Email in our division, for reasons including these.  (As well
as the other various reasons which have been mentioned.)  I say slowed
because Email is still in use, and possibly is increasing.  In this
environment, Email is used for works-in-progress ("Groupware") and
store-and-forward file transfer.  It's also used for conventional
conversation, but rarely among non-techies.
-- 
Craig Jackson
dricejb@drilex.dri.mgh.com
{bbn,axiom,redsox,atexnet,ka3ovk}!drilex!{dricej,dricejb}