Jump to content

Jarvis

Members
  • Content Count

    656
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Jarvis last won the day on April 15

Jarvis had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

About Jarvis

  • Rank
    wannabee

Profile Information

  • Industry
    cabinetmaking
  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Location
    seattle

FileMaker Experience

  • Skill Level
    Novice
  • FM Application
    14 Advanced

Platform Environment

  • OS Platform
    Mac
  • OS Version
    10.10.5

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. I use Filemaker Pro 14 to communicate with my cabinet shop. I host my databases on a remote server that costs me $55 per month. The total ecosystem consists of three iMacs, three iPads and an i-Phone. The iPads & iPhone are, of course, hooked to the database with FM GO. I am usually fairly slow to adopt new software and new operating systems for several reasons. For many years I was first in line for every hardware and software upgrade. Over time I accumulated a lot of software and a lot of machines. The machines were always smarter than me and the software plenty competent enough. None of the new features were compelling enough to jump ship from what I was working with. Usually an upgrade on a piece of software required an upgrade to OSX. I couldn't simply upgrade one piece of software without upgrading all of the software and sometimes this meant I needed new work stations as well. I would be happy with Filemaker 14 for the rest of my life. My CAD software is out of date but I can play it like a piano. I prefer desktop applications over cloud based solutions. I am also getting a little fatigued by everybody having their hand in my pocket for $70 a month. (The software companies seem to have concluded where price elasticity kicks in) Enough of my rant: MY QUESTION is: Is it possible to add (FM14 compatible) Filemaker Go to to additional iPads if they are accessing FM14 based solutions?
  2. Thank you to everybody for your help here. I really appreciate it. I would be curious to learn more about the results of Tony's retesting of "Hide Object When". My comprehension of the "Conditional Visibility" section of the article BCooney pointed to seems to corroborate what Fitch reported. CONDITIONAL VISIBILITY If you use the new feature to hide objects when a formula is true (Conditional Visibility), be aware that it follows the exact same rules as Conditional Formatting. It immediately reevaluates as referenced data changes and as the window is redrawn. No commit or refresh is necessary. Like Conditional Formatting, this is nice, but it can lead to a significant performance impact if there are a lot of conditionally hidden objects on the layout.
  3. I have been watching and re-watching a web seminar by Mark Richman called "Eight ways to make Filemaker databases run even faster. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yNRNMgs--T4&spfreload=10 The basic goal is to minimize the packets of information that need to come down from and go back up to the server. He makes the statement that "if you can see it or touch it, it invokes the data" . To this end he advocates for using more layouts with fewer objects per layout. My question has to do with how visibility factors into this. A database I am creating for my cabinet shop has a lot of graphics that are grouped together with fields. These combined objects are stacked on top of each other then made visible based on the results of a calculated field. The attached jpeg shows a couple of typical objects. Only one of these objects is visible at a time. The entire stack would probably comprise a dozen or so of these objects. If only one of the objects is visible at a time do the non-visible objects contribute overhead weight to the layout? Would my database refresh faster if each of these cross-section objects was on it's own layout?
  4. I am not sure if this question belongs in the Calculation Engine forum or the Relationship forum. This extends a question I posted earlier this week. It involves multiplying summary fields X summary fields.scope of work.fmp12scope of work.fmp12 I am developing a database for producing bid-cost estimates for my cabinet shop. I have a table that produces a graphical synopsis of the cabinets that we need to bid on. This SYNOPSIS table tracks how many doors, drawer boxes, faceframes etc are contained in each cabinet and keeps a running total of how many items are required for all the cabinets. A second table tracks labor costs for building various components. There will eventually be several tables like this for the various components we need to build. The LABOR DOOR table tracks batch size and total minutes. We use this to calculate minutes per item. One of the goals for these labor tables will be to determine what is the optimum batch size for any particular component. I would like to be able to link the data from the labor tables to the synopsis tables. I have been unable, however, to accurately calculate how much time all the doors we have sold will take. This should be a simple multiplication of Door Quantity X Average Door Minutes. The yellow field in SYNOPSIS table should read 12 Doors X 22 minutes per door = 264 minutes instead of 45. I am not sure if this is owing to a bad relationship or that I cannot somehow use Summary Fields in such an equation.
  5. Here is a comparison of the way I was scripting this before being edified by Comment. This database posts all the math for six possible drawer box combinations. When everything is posted it will get exported as a CSV file to a standalone application that optimizes the most efficient way to cut plywood. I have no control about how that software imports the CSV. I just have to make my data show up in the right columns. If you compare the two upload methods you will see that Comment's recommendation seems to take about half as long. This is on a desktop computer. I imagine the difference would be much greater if you had to move all those packets of data back and forth using Filemaker GO on an iPad. I don't know enough about fetching data with a lookup to know if this would be viable for me. The panel optimizing software needs all the data to show up in one place but the cabinet information derives from many locations. To simplify testing I have included yellow buttons to populate cabinet data fields. If you are interested in testing the "search & destroy" button it is best to change the (yellow) cabinet ID number at left. The reason for this button is that information is always changing in cabinet land. We need the ability to seek out any instance of cabinet math and delete it from the cutlists when the information changes. I just thought I would put this up to show how much better Comment's approach is than mine was. Since drawer boxes are just a tiny portion of the entire conundrum I can only imagine how much better it will run for this change in appproach. Box Math Copy 1.fmp12
  6. Comment, I just entered the code as you described and it works just like you said it would. Very inspiring. Thank you so much.
  7. Thanks Comment. That is just what I needed. FWIW: I am a much better cabinet maker than FM programmer.
  8. I am commencing a massive re-write of the database we use to run our cabinet shop. This database involves a lot of fields and a lot of scripts. Much of the database is managed on a desktop computer but lots of the information is passed to an iPad through Filemaker Go. I want to make the scripts as efficient as possible. Many of them now require too many round trips to the server. I am hoping to do this with a SET FIELD script. I am trying to develop a script that collects data from the current record of one table and posts it into a new record on another table. This works fine if I move back and forth between layouts using copy & paste. When I try to do this with SET FIELD it always returns the values from the first record and ignores the values in the current record. Can SET FIELD pass this kind of data or am I just doing something wrong? I have attached a sample file of what I am trying to accomplish: The protocol is as follows: 1) We import cabinets from the cabinet library 2) We develop cost estimates on a synopsis sheet to predict labor 3) If we get the job we go back to each cabinet on the library page and corroborate the dimensions. When they have been audited we then post the record to the MasterLIST. It is this last step I am having trouble with. setfield example Copy.fmp12
  9. Thanks Comment. Was exactly what I asked for. (Now I just have to reverse engineer the example that you posted)
  10. Hi Comment, This table would have maybe 12 to 20 records. It could be thinned down if necessary. We build: DOORS - DRAWER BOXES - FACEFRAMES - ROLLOUTS etc. All the things you would see in a set of kitchen cabinets. I am not sure if "variance" was the right word. What I am trying to compare is estimated labor with actual labor. Other useful comparisons might be how a individual's work performance compares with the company average, or maybe compare how long things take for them to produce today vs how long they took when they first were learning. I have a really great group of millennial kids working with me right now. They are really engaged with what they do and they like to see success. There is a lot of gratification in scoring performance. Numbers are precise but bar charts are comprehensible.
  11. I would like to create a database for my cabinet shop that contains three fields: I want to use this to better understand and explain how we are performing at certain labor activities. In the movie in my head it kind of looks like attached jpeg. The fields are: ITEM ESTIMATED TIME ACTUAL TIME Is this possible to produce a chart like this in Filemaker?
  12. Thanks Comment! That was exactly the code I needed. (How do you know all this stuff???)
  13. I watch a lot of training videos on Youtube. Whenever a topic interests me I add the URL into a simple two field database that contains a DESCRIPTION FIELD and a URL FIELD. The database lives on Dropbox so I can find it wherever I am. Some of the videos last for 20-30 minutes but I am only interested in small sections that last for one minute. I would like to find a way to find those particular sections without scrubbing through the video. Is there a way to script opening the video and then go directly to that sequence of the video? For example: the part of the video I want to watch lives at 3:38/19:58. Could I add a third field called CHAPTER that would open the URL field and take me to 3:38 in the movie?
  14. I have a database that assigns task to workers in my cabinet shop. The field "Worker" is populated from a drop-down value list. If you want to find all of the tasks assigned to a particular worker you select their name in the "Worker" field then click a (FIND WORKER) button that drives a FIND script. The FIND script reads as follows: 1 - Set Error Capture [On] 2 - Copy [Select Entire Contents] 3 - Enter Find Mode [ ] 4 - Paste [ Select ] 5 - Perform Find [ ] All of this works fine when run on a desktop computer but does not work at all when run in FilemakerGO on an iPad. Is there something I need to do different or is this script not compatible with FilemakerGo?
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.