eFAX Messenger version 4.4.1.528 software

[notinthi...@company.org]

For being a freebie it works for me as I only get a couple FAXes a
month. Have had the same # for years.

Prob, the eFAX Messenger software is on my "old" VISTA based laptop
which is going the way of the dodo birds. Got a new one but for the
life of me, how can I "reinstall" this software? I looked on there
site & they promote the paid one.

Not a problem, they gotta make money but I can still receive free
FAXes if I can just reinstall the 4.4.1.528. Anybody in this group
know where I can get it so I can READ the FAXes they send?

Thanks.

[Mike Easter]

eFax hides their free services and free downloads from the front page/s.

Download eFax messenger: http://en.efax.com/en/intl/efax/page/download

The .exe is named msgrplus.exe but that doesn't mean that it is for
eFaxPlus (or Pro) only.

The eFax free signup is also 'obscured' from the front pages:

https://en.efax.com/en/intl/efax/signupFree?rqcp=1 Signup for eFax Free

--
Mike Easter

[Bubba]

Wouldn't the old built-in Windows "Fax and Scan" work for you?

It does seem odd that anyone, including Microsoft, would still be
using FAX technology. Why not beat leather drums or waft a series
of smoke signals across the valley?

--
Bub

[Mike Easter]

Bubba wrote:

> It does seem odd that anyone, including Microsoft, would still be
> using FAX technology. Why not beat leather drums or waft a series
> of smoke signals across the valley?

Some office stations have access to a telephone as well as fax sending
and receiving equipment which don't have access to computers or email,
nor envelopes or stamps.

They cannot email you something nor send you a photocopy of it, but they
can fax you a copy. They can also accept your signed return fax as a
competent signature to a document.

They also don't know anything about digital signatures, being as how
they don't do computers.

So you talk to each other on the 'phone and y'all fax things back and
forth to each other; that is, unless *you* don't have fax capabilities,
in which case you can't communicate/correspond with such a
station/office effectively.


--
Mike Easter

[Bubba]

That's interesting to learn. I had heard that some obsolete technologies
were still in use, but I never understood why. I suppose it's like the
old saying goes, "if it ain't broke don't fix it."

But I honestly don't know so I'll ask. What is an "office station?"

--
Bub

[Mike Easter]

Bubba wrote:
> Mike Easter

>> Some office stations have access to a telephone as well as fax sending
>> and receiving equipment which don't have access to computers or email,
>> nor envelopes or stamps.

> But I honestly don't know so I'll ask. What is an "office station?"

That's a term I used for a business or office or other 'entity' which
has a telephone number and instrument and a fax number and one or more
sentient beings who actually answer that phone or call you.

In this case that entity's person/s isn't/aren't allowed to have stamps
or envelopes (snail mailing privileges and resources) nor do they have a
computer at their station/location/desk. They do have fax sending and
receiving capabilities nearby.

Imagine a 'station' is a desk where someone sits which has a telephone
and some other office equipment but which is not a computer station.
That also makes it without printer or scanner.

You are presumably sitting at a computer station but perhaps not a fax
sending or receiving station.

In the day, a lot of businesses were equipped with free standing fax
machines and a lot of documentation was on paper instead of digital. So
the person at point B needs a copy of something paper at point A. so
person at A faxes B a copy. Neither of them have computers or scanners
(other than the fax process) and the faxed document was and is not digital.

Nowadays more things are digital instead of paper and emailing such an
item from one person with a computer to another person with a computer
is far easier than and superior to faxing it.

Computer station to computer station as opposed to fax station to fax
station.


--
Mike Easter

[Ron May]

On Wed, 23 May 2012 22:39:19 -0700, Mike Easter <Mi...@ster.invalid> wrote:

> In the day, a lot of businesses were equipped with free standing fax
> machines and a lot of documentation was on paper instead of digital. So
> the person at point B needs a copy of something paper at point A. so
> person at A faxes B a copy. Neither of them have computers or scanners
> (other than the fax process) and the faxed document was and is not digital.

Many government agencies, including the one I work for, have restrictions
on sending Personally Identifiable Information (PII) by email except via
encrypted internal servers to other agency employees. The theory is that
FAX to FAX over the phone lines is more secure than email through public
servers, any of which could record and retain a copy of the traffic.

A more sensible approach IMHO would allow the recipient to make the risk
assessment, but those policy decisions are made way above my pay grade.

--
Ron May - may...@hotmail.com - Ubuntu/Vista Dual Boot
Registered Linux User #511161 - Ubuntu User #33236 (12.04 LTS)
ACF "Silver Lining": http://dl.dropbox.com/u/7365303/ACF/SL.html

[p-0^0-h the cat]

On Thu, 24 May 2012 06:50:20 -0500, Ron May <may...@hotmail.com> wrote:

>
>Many government agencies, including the one I work for, have restrictions
>on sending Personally Identifiable Information (PII) by email except via
>encrypted internal servers to other agency employees. The theory is that
>FAX to FAX over the phone lines is more secure than email through public
>servers, any of which could record and retain a copy of the traffic.
>
>A more sensible approach IMHO would allow the recipient to make the risk
>assessment, but those policy decisions are made way above my pay grade.

The 'recipient'. You can't be serious. Bloody moron.

--
p-0^0-h the cat
Internet Terrorist, Mass sock puppeteer, Agent provocateur, Gutter rat,
Devil incarnate, Linux user#666, BaStarD hacker

[Howard Schwartz]

Ron May <may...@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:6j6sr795qu7goln8b...@4ax.com:

> On Wed, 23 May 2012 22:39:19 -0700, Mike Easter <Mi...@ster.invalid>
> wrote:
>
>> In the day, a lot of businesses were equipped with free standing fax
>> machines and a lot of documentation was on paper instead of digital.
>> So the person at point B needs a copy of something paper at point A.
>> so person at A faxes B a copy. Neither of them have computers or
>> scanners (other than the fax process) and the faxed document was and
>> is not digital.
>
> Many government agencies, including the one I work for, have
> restrictions on sending Personally Identifiable Information (PII) by
> email except via encrypted internal servers to other agency employees.

Actually, include Medical Offices and Stations as places where using fax
is important, even necessary. For instance, I belong to the Kaiser HOMO
system. Kaiser created Web pages for patient, where they could send and
receive short messages to doctors. But there is a restriction on work
counts. Kaiser also, eliminated direct phones or voicemail from patients
to doctors and their nurses.

If you want to send you Kaiser doctor any message that is not extremely
terse -- your only option is to Fax it. These offices still have faxes,
and will accept faxes of several pages. This is not a widely know
workaround in this system.

[notinthi...@company.org]

Thanks for that. Something to keep on record "in case" I need to
download it again. I EMailed the folks who make eFAX Messenger
explaining my problem and they did send me the link to download the
version 4.4 again.

BTW, its FREE so I am curious why some people are complaining. I
guess it gives them something to do.

And to reply to another post, I have people who FAX me so the
technology is NOT dead. Nowhere did I say, I use eFAX for sending. I
do have a FAX m/c which is turned off most of the time.

Many in biz & gov still use FAX machiine. It is not obsolete
technology.

On Wed, 23 May 2012 17:25:44 -0700, Mike Easter <Mi...@ster.invalid>
wrote: