Texarado

Thank you for your help. This should make sense of what I'm trying to do. Table "B" will contain records for each employee. Fields for each employee with indicate if he or she is choosing coverage for one of four possibilities: Employee-Only, Employee & Spouse, Employee & Children or Full Family. Summary fields for Table "B" will count the number of people choosing each of these classifications. For example: Number of employees choosing EE coverage Number of employees choosing ES coverage Number of employees choosing EC coverage Number of employees choosing Family coverage Table "A" will contain records for various insurance plans. Fields within each of these records will contain the rates for each of the coverage options. Rate EE Rate ES Rate EC Rate Family To caclulate the total cost, these rates must be multiplied by the number of people in each corresponding classification (in Table "A".) For example: Cost EE = Rate EE * Number of employees choosing EE coverage Cost ES = Rate ES * Number of employees choosing ES coverage Cost EC = Rate EC * Number of employees choosing EC coverage Cost Family = Rate Family * Number of employees choosing Family coverage Total Cost = Cost EE + Cost ES + Cost EC + Cost Family This is why I want to be able to use the summary results from Table "B" in my calculations Table "A". If it's not possible to use summary results in table relationships, might there be another approach? Thanks!

My file summarizes health insurance proposals for presentation to clients. It has two tables: one contains policy descriptions and rates (Table "A") and another showing the client's employee census (Table "B"). The census (Table "B") has fields for employee name, employee age, employee sex and coverage: Employee-Only / Employee & Spouse / Employee & Children / Family (from a drop-down list.) Table "B" also has summary fields that calculate the number of employees in each of these coverage classifications. Table "A" has rates for each policy that will be multiplied by the number of people in each coverage classification (from the summary fields in Table "B".) However, when I try to create the relationship between the tables, the summary fields in Table "B" are dimmed. Is there a way to create this relationship? Thanks! Don

Thank you! I use FMPro 8.5 Advanced at my office, but I'm using 8.5 Standard here at home. Is that a feature unique to Advanced?

My flat file could be improved greatly by converting it to relational. It contains about 300 fields that I would like to move from the main table to a new table. Is there a way to migrate fields from one table to another? Recreating all 300 fields in the second table would be very time consuming. Thanks!

Thanks for the helpful suggestions. (Regarding my Excel comparison, I made it work perfectly in Excel. I'd simply rather have this project in database form rather than in a spreadsheet.) I know how to create a relational database from scrath, but is there a way to migrate fileds from one table to another when changing a flat file to a relational file? That would be preferable to recreating the files in the second table.

Same table. The purpose of this database is so simple that I saw no need to use a related table. Essentially, this database will function much like an Excel spreadsheet. Each record (like a separate 'page' in Excel) applies to a unique department. I created fields for 50 employees in each department: 1.) Employeee Name 2.) Employee Title (management, administration, sales), entered via a drop-down menu What I'm trying to create are three counting fields, one to show the number of management employees in that department, one to show the number of administrators in that department and one to show the number of salespersons for that department. I'd like to find a way for three fields to look at all 50 "Employee Title" fields for each record to tell me how many managers, administrators and salerspersons there are in that department. As I mentioned originally, I could create additional fields for each employee: if(Employee Title = Management, 1, 0) if(Employee Title = Administration, 1, 0) if(Employee Title = Sales, 1, 0) Then, I could create three fields that add up the values of these fields to show the results I'm looking for. This method seems cumbersome because it adds 150 fields for each record. I'm looking for a more simple way to do this. Thanks for your help!

Each record of my database represents a department of our company. Fields within each record (department) list employee names and titles. For each department, I need a field that calculates the number of managers, another field that calculates the number of salespersons, and another that calculates the number of administrators. I need the results to appear within each record, not in a summary field in a report. I can create numeric 'if' fields for each employee field, then a calculation field that adds the results. For example: if(Employee 01 = "Manager", 1,0) if(Employee 02 = "Manager", 1,0) Another field would add all of these fields to give me the number of managers. I would repeat this process for sales persons and administrators. This seems like a cumbersome way to do what I want. Might there be a simple calculation to evaluate multiple fields within each record? Thanks!

My file has container fields for simple graphics I created in FreeHand. In FMPro-6, they printed perfectly. In FMPro-7, they look terrible (curves are jagged.) My fonts are printing fine. Version: v7.x Platform: Mac OS X Panther

Thank you! It worked! Is that a new feature? ("File Options" > Text > "Use Roman language line-breaking"). And must I activate it for each file I create? Doesn't look like an application-level preference. Thanks! Version: v7.x Platform: Mac OS X Panther

Not only has font appearance changed (in some cases for the much worse), text fields in some (not all) files converted from FMP-6 behave strangely. (Words are split at the end of a text line instead of going to the next line intact.) See the sample file that is attached to this post. These problems, coupled with much slower searches within a DB, made us revert to FMP-6. "Upgrading" to FMP-7 was a huge mistake. I'm sorry we wasted the money . Version: v7.x Platform: Mac OS X Panther Sample_File_6_to_7.pdf

Not only has font appearance changed (in some cases for the much worse), text fields in some (not all) files converted from FMP-6 behave strangely. (Words are split at the end of a text line instead of going to the next line intact.) See the sample file that is attached to this post. These problems, coupled with much slower searches within a DB, made us revert to FMP-6. "Upgrading" to FMP-7 was a huge mistake. I'm sorry we wasted the money . Sample_File_6_to_7.pdf

My fonts in FMPro 7 using Mac Panther look terrible on screen. And in layout mode, I am having difficulty positioning my cursor in text I created in FMPro 6. If you're designing layouts needing any level of precise text placement/arrangement, stay with FMPro 6.

My fonts in FMPro 7 using Mac Panther look terrible on screen. And in layout mode, I am having difficulty positioning my cursor in text I created in FMPro 6. I will return to FMPro 6, as these problems trump any new features in FMPro 7. Version: v7.x Platform: Mac OS X Panther

I have created FMPro calculation fields that produce text results, but when I use spaces or dashes to position the text, their widths expand. This would be used as a simple chart in a summary part. Here is an example: Case(Total Bonds % <= .020,"X", Case(Total Bonds % <= 0.40,"_X", Case(Total Bonds % <= 0.60,"__X", Case(Total Bonds % <= 0.80,"___X", Case(Total Bonds % <= 1.00,"____X",""))))) The calculated result changes the width of the spaces (or dashes) to be wider than the "X" character. As a result, my fields must be much wider than I want. If I type these same text characters in layout mode, their spacing is perfect. Only when they are the result of a calculation do they change dimensions. At first, I thought it was because I was using an "art" font like Digbats or Nelco Symbols. But when I tried a plain font like Arial, I got the same problem. Has anyone else figured out how to overcome this problem? Thanks!

I, too, am having this problem. FM Pro 5.5 on a G4 using OS-X 10.1.5. Ditto on my G3 using the same system and software. I can open the file on my G3 Powerbook, which is running OS-9. No problem there. I had to export the data from the OS-9 system, then import it into a backup file in OS-X. This seems to be a serious problem, yet there is not mention of it on the FM website.