Fax To E-Mail
M@
Just wondering if anyone knows of and can recommend some UK based Fax to
E-Mail services where I get a number and any faxes sent to it are bounced to
the mail address I specify. Free or non-free are fine as is the type of fax
number, local, premium etc.
Thanks in advance,
Matt
nog
@news01.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com>, newsg...@mkdi.net says...
If you mean forwarded, I think Demon have a service.
NSDesign Ltd
YAC (www.yac.com) used to do a good reliable service (and was free!)....
Only downside was the number was an 0709 number (not quite premium rate, but
expensive none the less)...
Gary
---------------------------------
NSDesign Ltd : Internet Solutions
web: www.nsdesign.co.uk
email: in...@remove.nsdesign.com
Broadband from NSDesign : www.SurfMad.com
24/7 Domain Monitoring: www.NSChecker.com
"M@" <newsg...@mkdi.net> wrote in message
news:z2Cya.253193$kYH....@news01.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com...
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
Gordon Hudson
"M@" <newsg...@mkdi.net> wrote in message
news:z2Cya.253193$kYH....@news01.bloor.is.net.cable.rogers.com...
--
Gordon Hudson || Hostroute.com Ltd
e-mail:ghudson [at] hostroute.net
http://www.hostroute.co.uk/ Web Hosting and Dedicated Servers
http://www.nameroute.co.uk/ Domain Names with free hosting and email £14
Peter Gradwell
www.trinite.co.uk are ok.
peter
--
peter gradwell. gradwell dot com Ltd. http://www.gradwell.com/
engineering & hosting services for email, web and usenet
http://www.jalamex.com/ - email with your name on it.
uk-info
>On Wed, 21 May 2003 03:06:07 GMT, "M@" <newsg...@mkdi.net> wrote:
>>Just wondering if anyone knows of and can recommend some UK based
>>Fax to E-Mail services where I get a number and any faxes sent to
>www.trinite.co.uk are ok.
and charge 20 quid a year... for 0870 you can get a free number for
personal use from www.efax.com and for any use from www.inweb.net.uk
(click control panel and set up a free account). PGM (happy user)
M@
Matt
"uk-info" <no....@unwanted.org.uk> wrote in message
news:c87qcv4uvohpcr506...@news.clara.net...
Blb931
>personal use from www.efax.com and for any use from www.inweb.net.uk
>(click control panel and set up a free account). PGM (happy user)
....................
The original request was for "UK based" services". Efax (which is a brand name
of j2 Global Communications, Inc.) is based in America. For example, its
headquarters and principal place of business are in California. Maybe the
original requestor merely wanted companies doing business un the UK, not
necessarily based in the UK.
Businesses pay j2 to send spam.. The more email addresses j2 sends spam to, the
more money j2 earns. J2 gives away free fax-to-email accounts, then j2 sends
spam to the email addresses supplied by its customers. If you open an account
with j2, you may be unable to close the account, causing you to eternally
receive spam at the emaila ddress you told j2 about.
J2's spam normally include graphics files, and thus j2's spam tends to take up
much space in email directories. J2's spam annoys some people less than others.
Here is some information which may help you find out more about j2.
EMAIL ADDRESSES
affil...@mail.j2.com, inve...@j2.com, invest...@j2.com, jade...@j2.com
(Jeff Adelman at j2 headquarters), pr...@j2.com, r.ka...@socketmedia.com (a j2
media-investor relations contact, employed by Socket Media, Inc.),
ek...@ekms.com (licensing agent for j2's patents), ipa...@j2.com (ip tech)
URLs
* j2.com, mailq.j2.com, relay2.j2.com, relay10.j2.com, smtp.j2.com,
smtp0.j2.com, smtp10.j2.com, smtp14.j2.com, www.j2.com
* jfax.com, ns.jfax.com, ns2.jfax.com
IP ADDRESSES
* J2GLOBALLA-1 (NET-66-52-2-0-1) 66.52.2.0 - 66.52.2.15
* FOCC-J2GLOBAL-LA-1 (NET-216-127-234-80-1) 216.127.234.80 - 216.127.234.95
* FOCC-J2GLOBAL-CHI-1 (NET-216-127-237-160-1) 216.127.237.160 - 216.127.237.191
* ELI-825-20963223160 (NET-209-63-223-160-1) 209.63.223.160 - 209.63.223.175
* ELI-826-20717321664 (NET-207-173-216-64-1) 207.173.216.64 - 207.173.216.71
* PNAP-LAX-JFAX-RM-02 (NET-66-151-61-0-1) 66.151.61.0 - 66.151.61.255
* CW-206-155-36 (NET-206-155-36-0-1) 206.155.36.0 - 206.155.36.255
* SBCIS-101514-101311 (NET-66-120-25-0-1) 66.120.25.0 - 66.120.25.31
* SBC067115013176020130 (NET-67-115-13-176-1) 67.115.13.176 - 67.115.13.183
* MEGANET-SUB-J2COMM01 (NET-209-213-81-144-1) 209.213.81.144 - 209.213.81.159
* INFLOW-20528-5108 (NET-66-45-41-224-1) 66.45.41.224 - 66.45.41.231
* INFLOW-20528-7768 (NET-66-179-42-112-1) 66.179.42.112 - 66.179.42.127
* INFLOW-20528-8212 (NET-216-183-120-128-1) 216.183.120.128 - 216.183.120.143
* INFLOW-20528-7764 (NET-12-25-236-248-1) 12.25.236.248 - 12.25.236.255
* PNAP-LAX-JFAX-RM-01 (NET-63-251-192-0-1) 63.251.192.0 - 63.251.192.255
* ABS-LTRKAR-J2 (NET-64-66-104-48-1) 64.66.104.48 - 64.66.104.63
.
rp
No-one appears to have mentioned that plus.net/force9.co.uk
provide this as part of their standard ISP service.
I know that they've been unable to actually set this up over the
past few weeks but I notice that the account that I don't have
this setup on is now apparently making this service available.
The account that I do have it setup on has been working OK
for the past 14 months without problem.
rp
"M@" <newsg...@mkdi.net> wrote in message
news:balgev$11te9$1...@ID-195759.news.dfncis.de...
uk-info
>I know that they've been unable to actually set this up over the
>past few weeks
s/weeks/months/ :-)
<http://makeashorterlink.com/?I2F3127B4> (last entry, 2003-04-01) is
a repost about there being problems, but I have no knowledge of when
they "ran out" of numbers, and the plusnet.service.customer-feedback
newsgroup has such a short retention, that gives no clue either (can
it be by design :-)
If they'd just be honest on the website in their "product" pages to not
advertise a facility they are unable to provide, I'd shut up about the
matter, but it is more than a little irritating and they invite more
criticism by doing nothing (*). Peter.
(*) I did get an acknowledgement to a suggestion they alter the web
pages to say something like "currently unavailable for new customers"
but that was over a month ago, and having just checked again today,
I see http://www.plus.net/info2/compare/more_info.html#Fax2email
says nothing about there being any problems.
[ other groups added - maybe someone who wanted a number but later
found them to be unavailable can clarify when they ran out ? I'm
happily using other services, but feel the web site is misleading
and won't put links on any of my site to promote PlusNet while it
continues to be so. ]
Tx2
uk-info <no....@unwanted.org.uk> typed:
> If they'd just be honest on the website in their "product" pages to
> not advertise a facility they are unable to provide, I'd shut up
> about the matter, but it is more than a little irritating and they
> invite more criticism by doing nothing (*). Peter.
Now then, when has any ISP in the UK been totally honest?
I personally think it's appalling that Plusnet have continued to advertise a
service they are unable to provide for new customers, however, it seems that
to raise an issue at Plusnet invites a 'torrent' of "go away and be quiet"
responses, accompanied by a "stop trolling" our newsgroups from the head
honcho...my absence from there more recently was fuelled by an
'off-line' argument about a two week delayed email Plusnet were bouncing
around their systems. Their ADSL connectivity is superb ... their back
office 'functions' suck more than a whore on crack, IMVHO obviously
:-)
Peter Galbavy
> Now then, when has any ISP in the UK been totally honest?
About 1994 was the last time I think.
Peter
Peter Gradwell
no... that's the last time Demon was totally honest... some of us have
customers who respect us for our honesty.
Tx2
Peter Gradwell <pe...@gradwell.com> typed:
> no... that's the last time Demon was totally honest... some of us have
> customers who respect us for our honesty.
Well, it wouldn't be the grammar or spelling on your web site that attracted
them?
At least, not at "extremely competive" prices, which aren't even "are" ...
:-)
Mike Mann
It's always difiicult to bring up the matter of good English in a way
that's diplomatic, but there are some sections of the potential
customer base who are receptive to a certain standard of literacy.
Or, to put it another way, some potential customers will be put off by
a casual approach to spelling and grammar but none are likely to be
put off by the use of correct language.
If a commercial organisation has the choice of using good English or
bad English on its Web site, why do so many choose bad?
Mike.
Peter Gradwell
wrote:
>It's always difiicult to bring up the matter of good English in a way
>that's diplomatic, but there are some sections of the potential
>customer base who are receptive to a certain standard of literacy.
>
>Or, to put it another way, some potential customers will be put off by
>a casual approach to spelling and grammar but none are likely to be
>put off by the use of correct language.
>
>If a commercial organisation has the choice of using good English or
>bad English on its Web site, why do so many choose bad?
perhaps they can't tell the difference :-)
in our case, I know we have a grammar problem on the website (we have
lots of problems, e.g. a structure & navigation problem) and finally,
we're on the slow road to fixing them. [1]
cheers
peter
[1] finding the right combination of (a) time and (b) web designers
who understand organisation and (c) proof readers is non-trivial.
Jim Crowther
Gradwell <pe...@gradwell.com> writes
>in our case, I know we have a grammar problem on the website
Interestingly, possibly, the best engineers I've met have all had a
'tad' of dyslexia or dyspraxia. Grammar, spelling and handwriting are
often hot topics, but from a supportive POV.
I hasten to add I wouldn't be considered to be in their company - I
merely know a little about a lot...
--
Jim Crowther "It's MY computer" (tm SMG)
One way to escape spam: <http://popfile.sourceforge.net/>
And another very good one: <http://keir.net/k9.html>
Linz
<pe...@gradwell.com> wrote:
>in our case, I know we have a grammar problem on the website (we have
>lots of problems, e.g. a structure & navigation problem) and finally,
>we're on the slow road to fixing them. [1]
>
>cheers
>peter
>
>[1] finding the right combination of (a) time and (b) web designers
>who understand organisation and (c) proof readers is non-trivial.
Well, I can proof-read, but can't do web design.
--
"Here's song number one. Twenty-five to go after this."
Terry Wogan introduces the Eurovision Song Contest 2003.
Marcus Houlden
wrote the following to uk.misc:
> On Fri, 30 May 2003 23:01:05 +0100, Peter Gradwell
><pe...@gradwell.com> wrote:
>
>>in our case, I know we have a grammar problem on the website (we have
>>lots of problems, e.g. a structure & navigation problem) and finally,
>>we're on the slow road to fixing them. [1]
>>
>>cheers
>>peter
>>
>>[1] finding the right combination of (a) time and (b) web designers
>>who understand organisation and (c) proof readers is non-trivial.
>
> Well, I can proof-read, but can't do web design.
Sounds like you have one skill more than most web designers then.
mh.
--
Sig temporarily unavailable.
Don Aitken
wrote:
The one essential qualification for a proofreader is never to have
seen the document before. Some knowledge of the subject matter is
helpful but less important. Those who write and edit material for
print publication know this very well, but people are still happy to
put stuff on the web which nobody but the writer has ever looked at.
This pretty well guarantees that it will be full of errors.
--
Don Aitken
Mary Pegg
> [1] finding the right combination of (a) time and (b) web designers
> who understand organisation and (c) proof readers is non-trivial.
/waves/
uk-info
>Efax (which is a brand name of j2 Global Communications, Inc.) is based
>in America.
Still, they offer UK 0870 and other numbers (0870 for free, monthly fees if
you want US, German, Italian or other "local" phone numbers).
>J2 gives away free fax-to-email accounts, then j2 sends spam to the email
>addresses supplied by its customers. If you open an account with j2, you
>may be unable to close the account, causing you to eternally receive spam
>at the email address you told j2 about.
I've had nothing out of efax.com except the odd "want a local number" mail,
plus the faxes, of course :-) Peter M.
Dave Gill
Erm... it's eFax.COM that's based in the USA. Efax Ltd (efax.CO.UK) is
based in Harrogate and, AFAIK, has nothing to do with j2 Global
Communications Inc.
--
Spam-trapped email address - use the Reply-To address for email replies!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Be Alert, Your Country Needs More Lerts! ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
uk-info
>> I've had nothing out of efax.com except the odd "want a local number" mail,
>> plus the faxes, of course :-) Peter M.
>Erm... it's eFax.COM that's based in the USA. Efax Ltd (efax.CO.UK) is
>based in Harrogate and, AFAIK, has nothing to do with j2 Global
>Communications Inc.
Yes, it was efax.COM which I had recommended, based on my own usage. They
offer 0870 numbers (as well as many others for Europe and USA) and it was
efax.COM which was mentioned by the critic as being part of j2 Global and
likely to forever send me adverts by e-mail. As I indicated, I've had no
deluge of adverts, but more important, I fail to see any need for a firm
charging me nothing and sending faxes to me by e-mail to be UK-based, a
wish of the original poster.
I saw some post a while ago about efax.CO.UK which explained they were no
longer offering free numbers for users, but charging some setup or monthly
fee. I just checked their prices and you can be sure I wouldn't wish to
spend 29.99 +VAT when I can have something similar for free :-)) Peter
Dave Gill
> Yes, it was efax.COM which I had recommended, based on my own usage. They
> offer 0870 numbers (as well as many others for Europe and USA) and it was
> efax.COM which was mentioned by the critic as being part of j2 Global and
> likely to forever send me adverts by e-mail. As I indicated, I've had no
> deluge of adverts, but more important, I fail to see any need for a firm
> charging me nothing and sending faxes to me by e-mail to be UK-based, a
> wish of the original poster.
>
> I saw some post a while ago about efax.CO.UK which explained they were no
> longer offering free numbers for users, but charging some setup or monthly
> fee. I just checked their prices and you can be sure I wouldn't wish to
> spend 29.99 +VAT when I can have something similar for free :-)) Peter
Sorry, I couldn't see any of the tread previous to your post, but it's
all clear now.
Dave Gill
> Yes, it was efax.COM which I had recommended, based on my own usage. They
> offer 0870 numbers (as well as many others for Europe and USA) and it was
> efax.COM which was mentioned by the critic as being part of j2 Global and
> likely to forever send me adverts by e-mail. As I indicated, I've had no
> deluge of adverts, but more important, I fail to see any need for a firm
> charging me nothing and sending faxes to me by e-mail to be UK-based, a
> wish of the original poster.
>
> I saw some post a while ago about efax.CO.UK which explained they were no
> longer offering free numbers for users, but charging some setup or monthly
> fee. I just checked their prices and you can be sure I wouldn't wish to
> spend 29.99 +VAT when I can have something similar for free :-)) Peter
Sorry, I couldn't see any of the thread previous to your post, but it's
all clear now.
--
Peter Morgan - 0870 432 9631
>> As I indicated, I've had no deluge of adverts, but ...
...
>Sorry, I couldn't see any of the thread previous to your post, but it's
>all clear now.
No problem! As a further note, for anyone concerned that efax.com
may send them lots of junk mail, I did a quick check - the mail
address my efax number sends to is one I check infrequently -
2 to 3 weekly - and see that the items received had a note:
"eFax Free accounts are supported by advertising, as explained in
your Terms of Service. If you wish to opt out of third party
advertising, you may upgrade to an eFax Plus account."
There was mail on 2003/06/19 (Everyone.net), 2003/05/29 (PCPhoto magazine),
2003/05/23 (printer supplies), 2003/05/09 (Efax re paid-for accounts).
I think the number of actual faxes outnumber the adverts, so I'm not
complaining by any means! Peter Morgan