• Unable to remove "Windows Fax and Scan" from Windows 10 Pro

    From John C.@21:1/5 to All on Tue Jan 21 05:42:00 2025
    I did a repair reinstall a few days ago and noticed that now I have
    "Windows Fax and Scan" listed on my Start Menu. And when I click on the shortcut, it actually runs. It has created a subfolder in my Documents
    folder which is simply named "Fax". I don't want that folder and also
    want to completely remove "Windows Fax and Scan" (which henceforth I
    will refer to as "WFAS") from my computer.

    Yes, my copy of Windows 10 Pro is fully updated as I write this.

    The only method I've found available for getting rid of WFAS is the
    following:

    1. Open Settings
    2. Click on System
    3. Click on Optional features
    4. Click on the "Windows Fax and Scan" listing
    5. Click on Uninstall

    I did all this, but although WFAS disappeared from the Optional features
    list, it did nothing to remove the "app" or whatever the hell it's
    called. The shortcut is still there in my Start Menu and clicking on it
    opens WFAS. The Fax subfolder is still present in my Dcuements folder.

    By the way, before attempting to use this method, I saw that WFAS is no
    longer listed here:
    1. Open "Programs and Features"
    2. Click on "Turn Windows features on or off"
    3. Click on the plug sign next to "Print and Document Services"

    WFAS used to be listed here, but it isn't now. I read somewhere on the
    internet that it was removed by an update.

    Like most people these days, I don't have a land line so having WFAS
    installed is bullshit. And I don't want it taking over my scanner's
    ability to scan, which I've read that somebody experienced as a problem.

    --
    John C.
    Take back Microsoft from India.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From VanguardLH@21:1/5 to John C. on Tue Jan 21 09:19:47 2025
    "John C." <r9jmg0@yahoo.com> wrote:

    I did a repair reinstall a few days ago and noticed that now I have
    "Windows Fax and Scan" listed on my Start Menu. And when I click on the shortcut, it actually runs. It has created a subfolder in my Documents
    folder which is simply named "Fax". I don't want that folder and also
    want to completely remove "Windows Fax and Scan" (which henceforth I
    will refer to as "WFAS") from my computer.

    Yes, my copy of Windows 10 Pro is fully updated as I write this.

    The only method I've found available for getting rid of WFAS is the following:

    1. Open Settings
    2. Click on System
    3. Click on Optional features
    4. Click on the "Windows Fax and Scan" listing
    5. Click on Uninstall

    I did all this, but although WFAS disappeared from the Optional features list, it did nothing to remove the "app" or whatever the hell it's
    called. The shortcut is still there in my Start Menu and clicking on it
    opens WFAS. The Fax subfolder is still present in my Dcuements folder.

    By the way, before attempting to use this method, I saw that WFAS is no longer listed here:
    1. Open "Programs and Features"
    2. Click on "Turn Windows features on or off"
    3. Click on the plug sign next to "Print and Document Services"

    WFAS used to be listed here, but it isn't now. I read somewhere on the internet that it was removed by an update.

    Like most people these days, I don't have a land line so having WFAS installed is bullshit. And I don't want it taking over my scanner's
    ability to scan, which I've read that somebody experienced as a problem.

    Microsoft decided to move hence hide where to uninstall/install the
    Windows Fax & Scan service. Used to be you went to appwiz.cpl, and
    could select/deselect the fax service. Some folks report to look under Settings -> Apps -> Apps & Features to find an "Optional features" link.
    Nope, not there anymore. Now it's been moved to Settings -> System ->
    Optional Features, and you'll find the fax service there (that's where I
    find it for Win10 22H2). That's where you reported finding it. If
    installed, clicking on it presents a Remove button.

    If you show the Start Menu, and enter "fax", it is listed with the
    optional jump list. One of the entries in the jump list is Uninstall.

    Alas, I've had to deal with government agencies that won't accept
    e-mails, and demand you send them a fax. I don't have a telco/POTS
    landline anymore, either, but I do have VOIP service and digital phone
    service. VOIP is over the Internet whereas digital phone is with my ISP (Comcast who reserves 2 channels in the cable modem just for voice
    service). So, I could send a fax using those comm methods.

    You can use an online faxing service. However, you lose privacy in that whatever you send them they can see. Yet when you send a fax, often it
    goes to a shared fax machine that anyone walking by can view your fax,
    not just the intended recipient, but then you might be sending to a
    department rather than a particular person. Unless you have an
    encrypting fax machine, and so does the recipient, faxes are never
    secure, but then neither is the vast majority of e-mail since little of
    it is encrypted using x.509 or PGP certificates. In addition to lack of privacy with online faxing services, the free service tiers often limit
    how many faxes you can send per day, and how many pages for each fax,
    and some will plaster a cover sheet onto your fax advertising the faxing service you used. Some, like Fax.Plus, provide a desktop app, but
    that's just a web-centric app (instead of using their web app) that
    still uses their online service to do the faxing.

    You might think you will never send a fax, but sometimes it is not your
    choice. You want some transaction to transpire, have to supply
    information, and the recipient demands a fax. I've had that happen with
    the gov't, and with contracting companies where I had to send them a
    copy of my driver license.

    In the Start Menu, I went to "Windows Accessories -> Windows Fax and
    Scan" entry, right-clicked on it, and selected More -> File location.
    It is a shortcut under the following folder:

    C:\ProgramData\Microsoft\Windows\Start Menu\Programs\Accessories

    The shortcut's target field points to:

    %windir%\system32\WFS.exe

    I don't know what DLLs, or other support files on which wfs.exe is
    dependent. However, if after the uninstall the wfs.exe file still
    exists, you could rename it to, say, wfs-ORIGINAL.exe (and remove the
    shortcut from the Accessories folder, and from the Start Menu). I
    wouldn't delete the wfs.exe file since updates, sfc.exe, or dism might
    replace it, yet renaming it could result in you having both wfs.exe and wfs-ORIGINAL.exe at some point.

    Windows Fax and Scan is considered deprecated, not removed by updates. Deprecated means no longer supported. With the intense decline of fax machines, or fax modems, the need to send/receive faxes is rare. Plus, attachments to e-mail work just as well, and only the intended recipient
    sees the fax, not everyone walking by a fax machine.

    I left Windows Fax & Scan installed. The ancilliary software that came
    with my Canon printer does not include faxing, so I don't have a problem
    with WFAS usurping the fax function as other users have noted. However,
    since you never want to fax, why would you have other fax software
    installed to be concerned if WSAS usurped the fax function?

    I have both WFAS still installed, and the ancilliary software that came
    with a Canon printer which includes a scanner. When I run the Canon
    scanner tool, there is no usurping of the scan function by WSAS. The
    Canon scanner works just fine. You read that some folks noted WSAS
    usurped the scan function, but did they actually report an intercept of
    the scan function, or an intercept of the fax function (assuming the
    printer's ancilliary software included a fax function)? If you never
    will fax, why would you be intigating some fax function in
    printer-supplied software?

    Do you have other fax software installed to be concerned if WFS will
    usurp its faxing function? Did you test the scanning software that came
    with your printer to actually determine if WFS was usurping its scan
    function?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Paul@21:1/5 to John C. on Tue Jan 21 11:12:39 2025
    On Tue, 1/21/2025 8:42 AM, John C. wrote:
    I did a repair reinstall a few days ago and noticed that now I have
    "Windows Fax and Scan" listed on my Start Menu. And when I click on the shortcut, it actually runs. It has created a subfolder in my Documents
    folder which is simply named "Fax". I don't want that folder and also
    want to completely remove "Windows Fax and Scan" (which henceforth I
    will refer to as "WFAS") from my computer.

    Yes, my copy of Windows 10 Pro is fully updated as I write this.

    The only method I've found available for getting rid of WFAS is the following:

    1. Open Settings
    2. Click on System
    3. Click on Optional features
    4. Click on the "Windows Fax and Scan" listing
    5. Click on Uninstall

    I did all this, but although WFAS disappeared from the Optional features list, it did nothing to remove the "app" or whatever the hell it's
    called. The shortcut is still there in my Start Menu and clicking on it
    opens WFAS. The Fax subfolder is still present in my Dcuements folder.

    By the way, before attempting to use this method, I saw that WFAS is no longer listed here:
    1. Open "Programs and Features"
    2. Click on "Turn Windows features on or off"
    3. Click on the plug sign next to "Print and Document Services"

    WFAS used to be listed here, but it isn't now. I read somewhere on the internet that it was removed by an update.

    Like most people these days, I don't have a land line so having WFAS installed is bullshit. And I don't want it taking over my scanner's
    ability to scan, which I've read that somebody experienced as a problem.


    You can send FAX over VOIP, but only at 9600 baud, not at 14400 baud "Fine".

    This is what makes the spool dialog for the FAX server. It's not listed
    in Apps, nor in Programs and Features. By removing the tick box, they
    removed the ability to remove it !

    Microsoft Windows Fax Client WFS.exe

    The *only* removal method was

    Programs and Features :
    Windows features :
    Print and Document services :
    Windows FAX and Scan <=== This is "gone" so "cannot be UNTICKED" :-/

    Google and see if you can find a recipe.

    It is somehow related to windows fax-and-scan-client-applications
    but the path is shortened
    so I'm only guessing at the name.

    When you find WFS.exe in WinSxS, that will give you the path name to consider.

    Note that file pointers exist in two places. WinSxS would have a "master copy" while System32 has a hardlink to that. If you are thinking of deleting it,
    the various materials are in two places.

    I do not see an installer material, for Programs and Features to use to install and uninstall it, as otherwise I'd tell you to do it manually. There must be one... somewhere in there.

    Paul

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Frank Slootweg@21:1/5 to John C. on Tue Jan 21 16:25:48 2025
    John C. <r9jmg0@yahoo.com> wrote:
    [...]

    Like most people these days, I don't have a land line so having WFAS installed is bullshit. And I don't want it taking over my scanner's
    ability to scan, which I've read that somebody experienced as a problem.

    If that is your main reason to want to remove 'Windows Fax and Scan',
    then 1) the 'interfering' software was 'Windows Scan', i.e. *different* software. which is an app (not normal program) which is installed from
    the Microsoft Store and 2) without the 'Windows Scan' app, the 'problem'
    does not occur. So no need to worry.

    FYI, on my Windows *11* system, the 'Windows Fax and Scan' component
    is present and listed under Settings -> System -> Optional features, but
    is *not* listed in the 'Start' menu [1]. So you do not see it, unless
    you specifically search for it.

    [1] You can *get* to it from the 'Start' menu, by selecting 'Windows
    Tools' and then you will get a File Explorer windows listing all kinds
    of Windows Tools. But 'Windows Fax and Scan' is *not* listed in the main 'Start' menu,

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Carlos E.R.@21:1/5 to VanguardLH on Tue Jan 21 20:07:59 2025
    On 2025-01-21 16:19, VanguardLH wrote:
    "John C." <r9jmg0@yahoo.com> wrote:

    ...

    Like most people these days, I don't have a land line so having WFAS
    installed is bullshit. And I don't want it taking over my scanner's
    ability to scan, which I've read that somebody experienced as a problem.

    Microsoft decided to move hence hide where to uninstall/install the
    Windows Fax & Scan service. Used to be you went to appwiz.cpl, and
    could select/deselect the fax service. Some folks report to look under Settings -> Apps -> Apps & Features to find an "Optional features" link. Nope, not there anymore. Now it's been moved to Settings -> System -> Optional Features, and you'll find the fax service there (that's where I
    find it for Win10 22H2). That's where you reported finding it. If installed, clicking on it presents a Remove button.

    If you show the Start Menu, and enter "fax", it is listed with the
    optional jump list. One of the entries in the jump list is Uninstall.

    You also need capable hardware. An old fax machine will probably work
    badly with a modern phone that is VoIP behind your back, because VoIP
    waveform is not guaranteed to be in sync with the original(1), contrary
    to what happens with a public switched telephone network (PSTN). There
    is a relatively new fax protocol specific for VoIP lines, meaning you
    need modern machines with that capability on both ends.

    (1) On internet, packets can arrive out of time, even in reverse order.



    Alas, I've had to deal with government agencies that won't accept
    e-mails, and demand you send them a fax. I don't have a telco/POTS
    landline anymore, either, but I do have VOIP service and digital phone service. VOIP is over the Internet whereas digital phone is with my ISP (Comcast who reserves 2 channels in the cable modem just for voice
    service). So, I could send a fax using those comm methods.

    You must live in a third world country :-p

    (SCNR)

    ...

    --
    Cheers, Carlos.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From VanguardLH@21:1/5 to Carlos E.R. on Tue Jan 21 13:52:45 2025
    "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:

    On 2025-01-21 16:19, VanguardLH wrote:
    "John C." <r9jmg0@yahoo.com> wrote:

    ...

    Like most people these days, I don't have a land line so having WFAS
    installed is bullshit. And I don't want it taking over my scanner's
    ability to scan, which I've read that somebody experienced as a problem.

    Microsoft decided to move hence hide where to uninstall/install the
    Windows Fax & Scan service. Used to be you went to appwiz.cpl, and
    could select/deselect the fax service. Some folks report to look under
    Settings -> Apps -> Apps & Features to find an "Optional features" link.
    Nope, not there anymore. Now it's been moved to Settings -> System ->
    Optional Features, and you'll find the fax service there (that's where I
    find it for Win10 22H2). That's where you reported finding it. If
    installed, clicking on it presents a Remove button.

    If you show the Start Menu, and enter "fax", it is listed with the
    optional jump list. One of the entries in the jump list is Uninstall.

    You also need capable hardware. An old fax machine will probably work
    badly with a modern phone that is VoIP behind your back, because VoIP waveform is not guaranteed to be in sync with the original(1), contrary
    to what happens with a public switched telephone network (PSTN). There
    is a relatively new fax protocol specific for VoIP lines, meaning you
    need modern machines with that capability on both ends.

    (1) On internet, packets can arrive out of time, even in reverse order.

    That's why I mention that I have digital phone service with my ISP.
    That is *not* VOIP: no Internet involved, no packetization. However, I
    have before been able to fax over VOIP.

    Alas, I've had to deal with government agencies that won't accept
    e-mails, and demand you send them a fax.

    You must live in a third world country :-p

    There are assholes in every gov't, especially since the gov't seems the repository for the technically ignorant. Even in the citizen sector,
    there are service folk that don't take credit card, only cash or check.
    Not everyone everywhere is using latest tech, and doubt it is different
    in your country.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Char Jackson@21:1/5 to VanguardLH on Tue Jan 21 20:46:19 2025
    On Tue, 21 Jan 2025 13:52:45 -0600, VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> wrote:

    "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:

    On 2025-01-21 16:19, VanguardLH wrote:
    "John C." <r9jmg0@yahoo.com> wrote:

    ...

    Like most people these days, I don't have a land line so having WFAS
    installed is bullshit. And I don't want it taking over my scanner's
    ability to scan, which I've read that somebody experienced as a problem. >>>
    Microsoft decided to move hence hide where to uninstall/install the
    Windows Fax & Scan service. Used to be you went to appwiz.cpl, and
    could select/deselect the fax service. Some folks report to look under
    Settings -> Apps -> Apps & Features to find an "Optional features" link. >>> Nope, not there anymore. Now it's been moved to Settings -> System ->
    Optional Features, and you'll find the fax service there (that's where I >>> find it for Win10 22H2). That's where you reported finding it. If
    installed, clicking on it presents a Remove button.

    If you show the Start Menu, and enter "fax", it is listed with the
    optional jump list. One of the entries in the jump list is Uninstall.

    You also need capable hardware. An old fax machine will probably work
    badly with a modern phone that is VoIP behind your back, because VoIP
    waveform is not guaranteed to be in sync with the original(1), contrary
    to what happens with a public switched telephone network (PSTN). There
    is a relatively new fax protocol specific for VoIP lines, meaning you
    need modern machines with that capability on both ends.

    (1) On internet, packets can arrive out of time, even in reverse order.

    That's why I mention that I have digital phone service with my ISP.
    That is *not* VOIP: no Internet involved, no packetization. However, I
    have before been able to fax over VOIP.

    When I hear 'digital phone service' I think of SIP and RTP, as example protocols, but both of those are usually UDP and involve packetization
    and the Internet. I must be wrong. Can you steer me in the right
    direction?

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From VanguardLH@21:1/5 to Char Jackson on Wed Jan 22 00:29:52 2025
    Char Jackson <none@none.invalid> wrote:

    VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> wrote:

    That's why I mention that I have digital phone service with my ISP.
    That is *not* VOIP: no Internet involved, no packetization.
    However, I have before been able to fax over VOIP.

    When I hear 'digital phone service' I think of SIP and RTP, as example protocols, but both of those are usually UDP and involve packetization
    and the Internet. I must be wrong. Can you steer me in the right
    direction?

    Correction: Comcast does use IP, but only over their privately managed
    network which connects to a POS (Point of Service - where VOIP calls
    interface to a telco network). Their voice traffic does not travel the
    public Internet. 2 channels in the cable modem are dedicated to digital
    voice, and those go to Comcast only, not elsewhere on the Internet.
    This differs from VOIP providers with their best-effort services
    delivering voice traffic across the Internet. I consider VOIP to be a
    comm service over the Internet and subject to the irregular traffic
    delivery thereof. Digital voice that uses a private network to connect
    to a telecomm network is not what users generally refer to as
    traditional VOIP.

    IP does not have guaranteed order of delivery. Neither does UDP in its
    basic implementation. TCP does have reliable in-order packet delivery,
    but TCP is slower due to the overhead. UDP has low latency which
    equates to smooter voice quality. Considering how cell phone users have
    become accustomed to the crappy quality of cell-based calls, digital
    voice is far superior. Losing a packet for voice traffic is
    insignificant. It's voice, not data.

    UDP does not guarantee in-order packet sequencing, or that your packets
    arrive at all. Out of order packets result in dropped packets. UDP is
    used for VOIP. Digital voice also uses UDP, but can modified, and far
    less a problem over a small LAN, or between the voice-capable modem to Comcast's privately managed network. For example, each packet can
    contain a header describing the number of the packet (from a larger
    packet sliced into pieces) along with another header indicating the
    packet was part of a larger overall packet, like the total size for the
    overall packet. On delivery, the packets gets dropped in the correct
    position in a buffer quickly created via malloc() that can hold the
    total byte count, and on arrival each packet's size deducted from the
    total size letting the receiving end know when all packets arrived.
    This is an example of a custom protocol overlay on UDP similar to the
    sliding window protocol used by TCP. For UDP, I believe only the header packet(s) must be received first which says how many packets are
    supposed to arrive, so UDP packets thereafter can arrive in any order.
    UDP doesn't guarantee order on delivery, but that does not prevent
    ordering the packets on delivery. It's the lost packets that are
    worrisome, but that is when your traffic is over the Internet, not
    within a privately managed network where packet loss is very difficult.

    With Comcast digital, only their managed network is involved. With VOIP
    as it is typically understood, your voice traffic hops around in the
    Internet to perhaps iffy nodes in the route. With Google Voice, the
    Internet is used between user and a Google POS where thereafter it
    traverses over whatever telco Google used at the POS. The same is/was
    true of how magicJack worked. When I make calls using Google Voice, I
    can see I am connecting to some POS: today it was in the 504 area code
    (New Orleans, Lousianna), but I've seen it connect to POSes in Alabama
    and Virginia, and the call then traverses through whomever telcom is
    used at the POS to complete the call. With Skype, you have to pay extra
    for Skype-Out minutes to get access to a POS to let you call landline
    and cell phones; else, it's just a chat client between other Skype
    users. Just because I have an assigned phone number for Google Voice,
    or other VOIP providers, doesn't mean that is the area code through
    which the call is completed. I'm not making chats over the Internet
    between the clients. I'm making calls that are to landlines, mobile
    phones, and VOIP users assigned phone numbers.

    You cannot use a SIP phone with Comcast's digital voice service, but you
    can use a SIP phone with Comcast's Internet service. SIP phones are
    Internet phones hence VOIP. You can use a Comcast SIP phone to use
    Internet traffic to connect to Comcast's dedicated network. SIP trunks
    can also handle a variety of media (voice, video, data). VOIP is just
    the voice traffic. SIP can setup and take down VOIP calls. SIP works
    with VOIP.

    I use Google Voice, and that is VOIP to a free POS to connect to
    landlines and cell phones. I've used magicJack which is a similar
    setup, but wasn't free, and why I switched to Google Voice. I'm looking
    at replacing Google Voice with Ooma, or similar VOIP service, but those
    aren't free as is Google Voice. I still have to traverse the Internet
    to get to those VOIP providers instead of using a local dedicated
    network for digital phone service. I've not felt compelled to bother
    with SIP phones since, for calls, those are just VOIP services, and I
    don't care about videoconferencing, media, or other non-voice traffic.

    So, to me, a digital voice line is one that uses a dedicated network to
    make the call. VOIP is over the public Internet. Whether UDP or TCP is
    used in the dedicated network for digital voice really isn't important
    since packet order can still be guaranteed with UDP, plus losing a
    packet isn't critical for voice communications, especially when compared
    to the crappy call quality users are accustomed with cell phones. I
    didn't give up my old POTS line for many years, because cell phones
    sucked on call quality. I kept the POTS line for a couple years while I trialed digital voice, and decided digital voice was nearly equal to
    POTS (with the exception that POTS would still work even if there was an
    outage at my ISP, a downed cable, broken modem, but now my cell phone
    provides that backup).

    Remember that even ancient telco POTS services were also chopped up (multiplexed). The age of a dedicated line per call is long long gone.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Carlos E.R.@21:1/5 to Char Jackson on Wed Jan 22 13:42:09 2025
    On 2025-01-22 03:46, Char Jackson wrote:
    On Tue, 21 Jan 2025 13:52:45 -0600, VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> wrote:

    "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:

    On 2025-01-21 16:19, VanguardLH wrote:
    "John C." <r9jmg0@yahoo.com> wrote:

    ...

    Like most people these days, I don't have a land line so having WFAS >>>>> installed is bullshit. And I don't want it taking over my scanner's
    ability to scan, which I've read that somebody experienced as a problem. >>>>
    Microsoft decided to move hence hide where to uninstall/install the
    Windows Fax & Scan service. Used to be you went to appwiz.cpl, and
    could select/deselect the fax service. Some folks report to look under >>>> Settings -> Apps -> Apps & Features to find an "Optional features" link. >>>> Nope, not there anymore. Now it's been moved to Settings -> System -> >>>> Optional Features, and you'll find the fax service there (that's where I >>>> find it for Win10 22H2). That's where you reported finding it. If
    installed, clicking on it presents a Remove button.

    If you show the Start Menu, and enter "fax", it is listed with the
    optional jump list. One of the entries in the jump list is Uninstall.

    You also need capable hardware. An old fax machine will probably work
    badly with a modern phone that is VoIP behind your back, because VoIP
    waveform is not guaranteed to be in sync with the original(1), contrary
    to what happens with a public switched telephone network (PSTN). There
    is a relatively new fax protocol specific for VoIP lines, meaning you
    need modern machines with that capability on both ends.

    (1) On internet, packets can arrive out of time, even in reverse order.

    That's why I mention that I have digital phone service with my ISP.
    That is *not* VOIP: no Internet involved, no packetization. However, I
    have before been able to fax over VOIP.

    When I hear 'digital phone service' I think of SIP and RTP, as example protocols, but both of those are usually UDP and involve packetization
    and the Internet. I must be wrong. Can you steer me in the right
    direction?

    Well, even traditional phone service, POTS, was digital in any advanced country. Only the copper line from exchange to the home was analog,
    unless you hired ISDN. But it used dedicated digital virtual channels
    per conversation, constant time delay end to end, no loses.

    My ISP uses VoIP internally, sharing the pipe with the rest of the
    internet traffic generated by their clients (so, not saturated). How
    they interconnect with other ISPs, is anybody's guess, though.

    Mobile phones are using GSM, as far I know, so PSTN at least to the
    exchanges.


    --
    Cheers, Carlos.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From John C.@21:1/5 to VanguardLH on Wed Jan 22 08:14:20 2025
    VanguardLH wrote:
    "John C." <r9jmg0@yahoo.com> wrote:

    I did a repair reinstall a few days ago and noticed that now I have
    "Windows Fax and Scan" listed on my Start Menu. And when I click on the
    shortcut, it actually runs. It has created a subfolder in my Documents
    folder which is simply named "Fax". I don't want that folder and also
    want to completely remove "Windows Fax and Scan" (which henceforth I
    will refer to as "WFAS") from my computer.

    Yes, my copy of Windows 10 Pro is fully updated as I write this.

    The only method I've found available for getting rid of WFAS is the
    following:

    1. Open Settings
    2. Click on System
    3. Click on Optional features
    4. Click on the "Windows Fax and Scan" listing
    5. Click on Uninstall

    I did all this, but although WFAS disappeared from the Optional features
    list, it did nothing to remove the "app" or whatever the hell it's
    called. The shortcut is still there in my Start Menu and clicking on it
    opens WFAS. The Fax subfolder is still present in my Dcuements folder.

    By the way, before attempting to use this method, I saw that WFAS is no
    longer listed here:
    1. Open "Programs and Features"
    2. Click on "Turn Windows features on or off"
    3. Click on the plug sign next to "Print and Document Services"

    WFAS used to be listed here, but it isn't now. I read somewhere on the
    internet that it was removed by an update.

    Like most people these days, I don't have a land line so having WFAS
    installed is bullshit. And I don't want it taking over my scanner's
    ability to scan, which I've read that somebody experienced as a problem.

    Microsoft decided to move hence hide where to uninstall/install the
    Windows Fax & Scan service. Used to be you went to appwiz.cpl, and
    could select/deselect the fax service. Some folks report to look under Settings -> Apps -> Apps & Features to find an "Optional features" link. Nope, not there anymore. Now it's been moved to Settings -> System -> Optional Features, and you'll find the fax service there (that's where I
    find it for Win10 22H2). That's where you reported finding it. If installed, clicking on it presents a Remove button.

    If you show the Start Menu, and enter "fax", it is listed with the
    optional jump list. One of the entries in the jump list is Uninstall.

    Alas, I've had to deal with government agencies that won't accept
    e-mails, and demand you send them a fax. I don't have a telco/POTS
    landline anymore, either, but I do have VOIP service and digital phone service. VOIP is over the Internet whereas digital phone is with my ISP (Comcast who reserves 2 channels in the cable modem just for voice
    service). So, I could send a fax using those comm methods.

    You can use an online faxing service. However, you lose privacy in that whatever you send them they can see. Yet when you send a fax, often it
    goes to a shared fax machine that anyone walking by can view your fax,
    not just the intended recipient, but then you might be sending to a department rather than a particular person. Unless you have an
    encrypting fax machine, and so does the recipient, faxes are never
    secure, but then neither is the vast majority of e-mail since little of
    it is encrypted using x.509 or PGP certificates. In addition to lack of privacy with online faxing services, the free service tiers often limit
    how many faxes you can send per day, and how many pages for each fax,
    and some will plaster a cover sheet onto your fax advertising the faxing service you used. Some, like Fax.Plus, provide a desktop app, but
    that's just a web-centric app (instead of using their web app) that
    still uses their online service to do the faxing.

    You might think you will never send a fax, but sometimes it is not your choice. You want some transaction to transpire, have to supply
    information, and the recipient demands a fax. I've had that happen with
    the gov't, and with contracting companies where I had to send them a
    copy of my driver license.

    In the Start Menu, I went to "Windows Accessories -> Windows Fax and
    Scan" entry, right-clicked on it, and selected More -> File location.
    It is a shortcut under the following folder:

    C:\ProgramData\Microsoft\Windows\Start Menu\Programs\Accessories

    The shortcut's target field points to:

    %windir%\system32\WFS.exe

    I don't know what DLLs, or other support files on which wfs.exe is
    dependent. However, if after the uninstall the wfs.exe file still
    exists, you could rename it to, say, wfs-ORIGINAL.exe (and remove the shortcut from the Accessories folder, and from the Start Menu). I
    wouldn't delete the wfs.exe file since updates, sfc.exe, or dism might replace it, yet renaming it could result in you having both wfs.exe and wfs-ORIGINAL.exe at some point.

    Windows Fax and Scan is considered deprecated, not removed by updates. Deprecated means no longer supported. With the intense decline of fax machines, or fax modems, the need to send/receive faxes is rare. Plus, attachments to e-mail work just as well, and only the intended recipient
    sees the fax, not everyone walking by a fax machine.

    I left Windows Fax & Scan installed. The ancilliary software that came
    with my Canon printer does not include faxing, so I don't have a problem
    with WFAS usurping the fax function as other users have noted. However, since you never want to fax, why would you have other fax software
    installed to be concerned if WSAS usurped the fax function?

    I have both WFAS still installed, and the ancilliary software that came
    with a Canon printer which includes a scanner. When I run the Canon
    scanner tool, there is no usurping of the scan function by WSAS. The
    Canon scanner works just fine. You read that some folks noted WSAS
    usurped the scan function, but did they actually report an intercept of
    the scan function, or an intercept of the fax function (assuming the printer's ancilliary software included a fax function)? If you never
    will fax, why would you be intigating some fax function in
    printer-supplied software?

    Do you have other fax software installed to be concerned if WFS will
    usurp its faxing function? Did you test the scanning software that came
    with your printer to actually determine if WFS was usurping its scan function?

    Just checked and it seems the problem resolved itself after I rebooted a
    couple of times.

    --
    John C.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Frank Slootweg@21:1/5 to VanguardLH on Wed Jan 22 16:38:15 2025
    VanguardLH <V@nguard.lh> wrote:
    Char Jackson <none@none.invalid> wrote:

    VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> wrote:

    That's why I mention that I have digital phone service with my ISP.
    That is *not* VOIP: no Internet involved, no packetization.
    However, I have before been able to fax over VOIP.

    When I hear 'digital phone service' I think of SIP and RTP, as example protocols, but both of those are usually UDP and involve packetization
    and the Internet. I must be wrong. Can you steer me in the right
    direction?

    Correction: Comcast does use IP, but only over their privately managed network which connects to a POS (Point of Service - where VOIP calls interface to a telco network). Their voice traffic does not travel the public Internet. 2 channels in the cable modem are dedicated to digital voice, and those go to Comcast only, not elsewhere on the Internet.
    This differs from VOIP providers with their best-effort services
    delivering voice traffic across the Internet. I consider VOIP to be a
    comm service over the Internet and subject to the irregular traffic
    delivery thereof. Digital voice that uses a private network to connect
    to a telecomm network is not what users generally refer to as
    traditional VOIP.

    AFAIK, your definitions/interpretations are incorrect.

    VoIP is not only over the (public) Internet. As the name (Voice over
    Internet Protocol) indicates, VoIP uses the Internet Protocol (IP). IP
    is part of the Internet protocol suite and is not limited to the public Internet, but can and is used on any Internet, also (semi) private ones.
    So your use of Comcast *is* VoIP.

    'Voice over IP'
    <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voice_over_IP>

    'Internet Protocol'
    <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Protocol>

    And, as Carlos indicates, your use of "digital phone service"/"digital
    voice" is ambiguous, because it's not limited to your narrow definition.

    [Networking 'lectures' deleted.]

    Are you aware to whom you are responding?

    [...]

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Mark Lloyd@21:1/5 to All on Wed Jan 22 17:51:42 2025
    [snip]

    Alas, I've had to deal with government agencies that won't accept
    e-mails, and demand you send them a fax. I don't have a telco/POTS
    landline anymore, either, but I do have VOIP service and digital phone service. VOIP is over the Internet whereas digital phone is with my ISP (Comcast who reserves 2 channels in the cable modem just for voice
    service). So, I could send a fax using those comm methods.

    The last time I had to send a fax was when I quit AOL (late nineties).

    [snip]

    --
    Mark Lloyd
    http://notstupid.us/

    "Inspired? The Bible is not even intelligent. It is not even good craftsmanship, but is full of absurdities and contradictions." -- E. Haldeman-Julius, The Meaning Of Atheism

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Char Jackson@21:1/5 to VanguardLH on Wed Jan 22 23:46:46 2025
    On Wed, 22 Jan 2025 00:29:52 -0600, VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> wrote:

    Char Jackson <none@none.invalid> wrote:

    VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> wrote:

    That's why I mention that I have digital phone service with my ISP.
    That is *not* VOIP: no Internet involved, no packetization.
    However, I have before been able to fax over VOIP.

    When I hear 'digital phone service' I think of SIP and RTP, as example
    protocols, but both of those are usually UDP and involve packetization
    and the Internet. I must be wrong. Can you steer me in the right
    direction?

    Correction: Comcast does use IP, but only over their privately managed >network which connects to a POS (Point of Service - where VOIP calls >interface to a telco network).

    It's been 14 years since I finished my 10-year tenure as a data network
    design engineer for a major US telco, so I'm probably behind the times
    by now, which is why I'm asking.

    Above, does IP mean Internet Protocol? If so, that's a big family. Can
    we narrow it down? Is it UDP (I'd assume so) or TCP? UDP has much lower overhead, so it's much better suited to this. Then, once we know the
    transport protocol, we can start to figure out the application layer protocol(s). I was thinking SIP for setup and RTP for the actual call,
    but that could be outdated.

    Their voice traffic does not travel the public Internet.

    Are you referring to the equivalent of the Comcast local loop or the
    entire end to end call? If the former, that's only a tiny piece of the
    picture, and if the latter, then I'd say it definitely travels over the
    public Internet. Aren't we long past the time when telcos used
    non-Internet lines for call transport?

    2 channels in the cable modem are dedicated to digital
    voice, and those go to Comcast only, not elsewhere on the Internet.

    OK, but most calls probably don't terminate there, so they have to get
    dumped onto the Internet to complete the journey, right?

    This differs from VOIP providers with their best-effort services
    delivering voice traffic across the Internet. I consider VOIP to be a
    comm service over the Internet and subject to the irregular traffic
    delivery thereof. Digital voice that uses a private network to connect
    to a telecomm network is not what users generally refer to as
    traditional VOIP.

    I'm not entirely sure I can agree with that. What is the telecom network
    to which you refer? Where I worked, we decommissioned that in favor of
    the Internet, and that was a very long time ago. I'd assume that every
    telco has done the same by now. If so, there probably isn't much of a traditional telecom network still remaining. Telcos like to dump their
    traffic onto the Internet at the first opportunity.

    <snip>

    So, to me, a digital voice line is one that uses a dedicated network to
    make the call. VOIP is over the public Internet.

    That seems to be a distinction without much of a difference, doesn't it?
    I don't see a performance difference either way.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Char Jackson@21:1/5 to robin_listas@es.invalid on Wed Jan 22 23:49:14 2025
    On Wed, 22 Jan 2025 13:42:09 +0100, "Carlos E.R."
    <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:

    On 2025-01-22 03:46, Char Jackson wrote:
    On Tue, 21 Jan 2025 13:52:45 -0600, VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> wrote:

    "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:

    On 2025-01-21 16:19, VanguardLH wrote:
    "John C." <r9jmg0@yahoo.com> wrote:

    ...

    Like most people these days, I don't have a land line so having WFAS >>>>>> installed is bullshit. And I don't want it taking over my scanner's >>>>>> ability to scan, which I've read that somebody experienced as a problem. >>>>>
    Microsoft decided to move hence hide where to uninstall/install the
    Windows Fax & Scan service. Used to be you went to appwiz.cpl, and
    could select/deselect the fax service. Some folks report to look under >>>>> Settings -> Apps -> Apps & Features to find an "Optional features" link. >>>>> Nope, not there anymore. Now it's been moved to Settings -> System -> >>>>> Optional Features, and you'll find the fax service there (that's where I >>>>> find it for Win10 22H2). That's where you reported finding it. If
    installed, clicking on it presents a Remove button.

    If you show the Start Menu, and enter "fax", it is listed with the
    optional jump list. One of the entries in the jump list is Uninstall. >>>>
    You also need capable hardware. An old fax machine will probably work
    badly with a modern phone that is VoIP behind your back, because VoIP
    waveform is not guaranteed to be in sync with the original(1), contrary >>>> to what happens with a public switched telephone network (PSTN). There >>>> is a relatively new fax protocol specific for VoIP lines, meaning you
    need modern machines with that capability on both ends.

    (1) On internet, packets can arrive out of time, even in reverse order. >>>
    That's why I mention that I have digital phone service with my ISP.
    That is *not* VOIP: no Internet involved, no packetization. However, I
    have before been able to fax over VOIP.

    When I hear 'digital phone service' I think of SIP and RTP, as example
    protocols, but both of those are usually UDP and involve packetization
    and the Internet. I must be wrong. Can you steer me in the right
    direction?

    Well, even traditional phone service, POTS, was digital in any advanced >country. Only the copper line from exchange to the home was analog,
    unless you hired ISDN. But it used dedicated digital virtual channels
    per conversation, constant time delay end to end, no loses.

    Agreed.

    My ISP uses VoIP internally, sharing the pipe with the rest of the
    internet traffic generated by their clients (so, not saturated). How
    they interconnect with other ISPs, is anybody's guess, though.

    Mobile phones are using GSM, as far I know, so PSTN at least to the >exchanges.

    Lots of LTE on this side of the pond.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Carlos E.R.@21:1/5 to Char Jackson on Thu Jan 23 10:44:38 2025
    On 2025-01-23 06:49, Char Jackson wrote:
    On Wed, 22 Jan 2025 13:42:09 +0100, "Carlos E.R."
    <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:

    On 2025-01-22 03:46, Char Jackson wrote:
    On Tue, 21 Jan 2025 13:52:45 -0600, VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> wrote:

    "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:

    On 2025-01-21 16:19, VanguardLH wrote:
    "John C." <r9jmg0@yahoo.com> wrote:

    ...

    Like most people these days, I don't have a land line so having WFAS >>>>>>> installed is bullshit. And I don't want it taking over my scanner's >>>>>>> ability to scan, which I've read that somebody experienced as a problem.

    Microsoft decided to move hence hide where to uninstall/install the >>>>>> Windows Fax & Scan service. Used to be you went to appwiz.cpl, and >>>>>> could select/deselect the fax service. Some folks report to look under >>>>>> Settings -> Apps -> Apps & Features to find an "Optional features" link. >>>>>> Nope, not there anymore. Now it's been moved to Settings -> System -> >>>>>> Optional Features, and you'll find the fax service there (that's where I >>>>>> find it for Win10 22H2). That's where you reported finding it. If >>>>>> installed, clicking on it presents a Remove button.

    If you show the Start Menu, and enter "fax", it is listed with the >>>>>> optional jump list. One of the entries in the jump list is Uninstall. >>>>>
    You also need capable hardware. An old fax machine will probably work >>>>> badly with a modern phone that is VoIP behind your back, because VoIP >>>>> waveform is not guaranteed to be in sync with the original(1), contrary >>>>> to what happens with a public switched telephone network (PSTN). There >>>>> is a relatively new fax protocol specific for VoIP lines, meaning you >>>>> need modern machines with that capability on both ends.

    (1) On internet, packets can arrive out of time, even in reverse order. >>>>
    That's why I mention that I have digital phone service with my ISP.
    That is *not* VOIP: no Internet involved, no packetization. However, I >>>> have before been able to fax over VOIP.

    When I hear 'digital phone service' I think of SIP and RTP, as example
    protocols, but both of those are usually UDP and involve packetization
    and the Internet. I must be wrong. Can you steer me in the right
    direction?

    Well, even traditional phone service, POTS, was digital in any advanced
    country. Only the copper line from exchange to the home was analog,
    unless you hired ISDN. But it used dedicated digital virtual channels
    per conversation, constant time delay end to end, no loses.

    Agreed.

    My ISP uses VoIP internally, sharing the pipe with the rest of the
    internet traffic generated by their clients (so, not saturated). How
    they interconnect with other ISPs, is anybody's guess, though.

    Mobile phones are using GSM, as far I know, so PSTN at least to the
    exchanges.

    Lots of LTE on this side of the pond.

    Ah.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LTE_(telecommunication)

    In telecommunications, long-term evolution (LTE) is a standard for
    wireless broadband communication for mobile devices and data terminals
    based on the GSM/EDGE and UMTS/HSPA standards. It improves on those
    standards' capacity and speed by using a different radio interface and
    core network improvements.[1][2] LTE is the upgrade path for carriers
    with both GSM/UMTS networks and CDMA2000 networks. Because LTE
    frequencies and bands differ from country to country, only multi-band
    phones can use LTE in all countries where it is supported.

    ...

    Overview

    LTE stands for Long-Term Evolution[7] and is a registered trademark
    owned by ETSI (European Telecommunications Standards Institute) for the wireless data communications technology and a development of the
    GSM/UMTS standards. However, other nations and companies do play an
    active role in the LTE project. The goal of LTE was to increase the
    capacity and speed of wireless data networks using new DSP (digital
    signal processing) techniques and modulations that were developed around
    the turn of the millennium. A further goal was the redesign and
    simplification of the network architecture to an IP-based system with significantly reduced transfer latency compared with the 3G
    architecture. The LTE wireless interface is incompatible with 2G and 3G networks, so that it must be operated on a separate radio spectrum.


    So it it is IP based.

    ...

    Voice calls

    The LTE standard supports only packet switching with its all-IP network.
    Voice calls in GSM, UMTS and CDMA2000 are circuit switched, so with the adoption of LTE, carriers will have to re-engineer their voice call network.[106] Four different approaches sprang up:

    Voice over LTE (VoLTE)
    Circuit-switched fallback (CSFB)
    Simultaneous voice and LTE (SVLTE)
    Single Radio Voice Call Continuity (SRVCC)




    I have not read it all, so I don't know how they interconnect with the
    landline network that supposedly has migrated or is migrating from PSTN
    to VoIP. I don't know if this is explained in the article or another
    article.



    --
    Cheers, Carlos.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Char Jackson@21:1/5 to robin_listas@es.invalid on Thu Jan 23 14:21:36 2025
    On Thu, 23 Jan 2025 10:44:38 +0100, "Carlos E.R."
    <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:

    On 2025-01-23 06:49, Char Jackson wrote:
    On Wed, 22 Jan 2025 13:42:09 +0100, "Carlos E.R."
    <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:

    On 2025-01-22 03:46, Char Jackson wrote:
    On Tue, 21 Jan 2025 13:52:45 -0600, VanguardLH <V@nguard.LH> wrote:

    "Carlos E.R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> wrote:

    On 2025-01-21 16:19, VanguardLH wrote:
    "John C." <r9jmg0@yahoo.com> wrote:

    ...

    Like most people these days, I don't have a land line so having WFAS >>>>>>>> installed is bullshit. And I don't want it taking over my scanner's >>>>>>>> ability to scan, which I've read that somebody experienced as a problem.

    Microsoft decided to move hence hide where to uninstall/install the >>>>>>> Windows Fax & Scan service. Used to be you went to appwiz.cpl, and >>>>>>> could select/deselect the fax service. Some folks report to look under >>>>>>> Settings -> Apps -> Apps & Features to find an "Optional features" link.
    Nope, not there anymore. Now it's been moved to Settings -> System -> >>>>>>> Optional Features, and you'll find the fax service there (that's where I
    find it for Win10 22H2). That's where you reported finding it. If >>>>>>> installed, clicking on it presents a Remove button.

    If you show the Start Menu, and enter "fax", it is listed with the >>>>>>> optional jump list. One of the entries in the jump list is Uninstall. >>>>>>
    You also need capable hardware. An old fax machine will probably work >>>>>> badly with a modern phone that is VoIP behind your back, because VoIP >>>>>> waveform is not guaranteed to be in sync with the original(1), contrary >>>>>> to what happens with a public switched telephone network (PSTN). There >>>>>> is a relatively new fax protocol specific for VoIP lines, meaning you >>>>>> need modern machines with that capability on both ends.

    (1) On internet, packets can arrive out of time, even in reverse order. >>>>>
    That's why I mention that I have digital phone service with my ISP.
    That is *not* VOIP: no Internet involved, no packetization. However, I >>>>> have before been able to fax over VOIP.

    When I hear 'digital phone service' I think of SIP and RTP, as example >>>> protocols, but both of those are usually UDP and involve packetization >>>> and the Internet. I must be wrong. Can you steer me in the right
    direction?

    Well, even traditional phone service, POTS, was digital in any advanced
    country. Only the copper line from exchange to the home was analog,
    unless you hired ISDN. But it used dedicated digital virtual channels
    per conversation, constant time delay end to end, no loses.

    Agreed.

    My ISP uses VoIP internally, sharing the pipe with the rest of the
    internet traffic generated by their clients (so, not saturated). How
    they interconnect with other ISPs, is anybody's guess, though.

    Mobile phones are using GSM, as far I know, so PSTN at least to the
    exchanges.

    Lots of LTE on this side of the pond.

    Ah.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LTE_(telecommunication)

    In telecommunications, long-term evolution (LTE) is a standard for
    wireless broadband communication for mobile devices and data terminals
    based on the GSM/EDGE and UMTS/HSPA standards. It improves on those >standards' capacity and speed by using a different radio interface and
    core network improvements.[1][2] LTE is the upgrade path for carriers
    with both GSM/UMTS networks and CDMA2000 networks. Because LTE
    frequencies and bands differ from country to country, only multi-band
    phones can use LTE in all countries where it is supported.

    ...

    Overview

    LTE stands for Long-Term Evolution[7] and is a registered trademark
    owned by ETSI (European Telecommunications Standards Institute) for the >wireless data communications technology and a development of the
    GSM/UMTS standards. However, other nations and companies do play an
    active role in the LTE project. The goal of LTE was to increase the
    capacity and speed of wireless data networks using new DSP (digital
    signal processing) techniques and modulations that were developed around
    the turn of the millennium. A further goal was the redesign and >simplification of the network architecture to an IP-based system with >significantly reduced transfer latency compared with the 3G
    architecture. The LTE wireless interface is incompatible with 2G and 3G >networks, so that it must be operated on a separate radio spectrum.


    So it it is IP based.

    ...

    Voice calls

    The LTE standard supports only packet switching with its all-IP network. >Voice calls in GSM, UMTS and CDMA2000 are circuit switched, so with the >adoption of LTE, carriers will have to re-engineer their voice call >network.[106] Four different approaches sprang up:

    Voice over LTE (VoLTE)
    Circuit-switched fallback (CSFB)
    Simultaneous voice and LTE (SVLTE)
    Single Radio Voice Call Continuity (SRVCC)




    I have not read it all, so I don't know how they interconnect with the >landline network that supposedly has migrated or is migrating from PSTN
    to VoIP. I don't know if this is explained in the article or another
    article.

    In addition, I like this paragraph from the Wikipedia article on PSTN:

    Originally a network of fixed-line analog telephone systems, the PSTN is
    now predominantly digital in its core network and includes terrestrial cellular, satellite, and landline systems. These interconnected networks
    enable global communication, allowing calls to be made to and from
    nearly any telephone worldwide.[1] Many of these networks are
    progressively transitioning to Internet Protocol to carry their
    telephony traffic.

    "the PSTN is now predominantly digital in its core network"

    "Many of these networks are progressively transitioning to Internet
    Protocol to carry their telephony traffic."

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_switched_telephone_network

    When I worked at a telco, I was friends with the folks on the Capacity Management team. They were thrilled every time a chunk of the
    infrastructure was upgraded from circuit-switched to packet-switched
    because it dumped a whole lot of freed up capacity on their laps.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From John C.@21:1/5 to Frank Slootweg on Fri Jan 24 03:29:42 2025
    Frank Slootweg wrote:
    John C. wrote:
    [...]

    Like most people these days, I don't have a land line so having WFAS
    installed is bullshit. And I don't want it taking over my scanner's
    ability to scan, which I've read that somebody experienced as a problem.

    If that is your main reason to want to remove 'Windows Fax and Scan',
    then 1) the 'interfering' software was 'Windows Scan', i.e. *different* software. which is an app (not normal program) which is installed from
    the Microsoft Store and 2) without the 'Windows Scan' app, the 'problem'
    does not occur. So no need to worry.

    In another post, I mentioned that rebooting my system seems to have
    finally removed WFAS.

    FYI, on my Windows *11* system, the 'Windows Fax and Scan' component
    is present and listed under Settings -> System -> Optional features, but
    is *not* listed in the 'Start' menu [1]. So you do not see it, unless
    you specifically search for it.

    [1] You can *get* to it from the 'Start' menu, by selecting 'Windows
    Tools' and then you will get a File Explorer windows listing all kinds
    of Windows Tools. But 'Windows Fax and Scan' is *not* listed in the main 'Start' menu,

    Thanks Frank, but I intend to delay having to use the hated Windows 11
    as long as possible. In fact, I'm going to set up another computer and
    put a Linux distro on it, then start moving over to it.

    Microsoft is a clusterfuck ever since India took it over.

    --
    John C.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)