File Maker Lied to me and I’m mad as hell

[printit]

About a year ago I found out that FM runtime v5 could not be networked without having FileMaker on every computer, I talked to the folks at FileMaker to confirm this and I told them that I was considering dumping FileMaker and rebuilding my program in MS Access, at that time they told me STRIGHT BLANK that MS Access runtimes could not networked without having Access on every computer just like File Maker.

Access Runtime program’s CAN be networked without Access.

If you are considering developing an industrial network able program

DO YOUR HOME WORK

Then when you think you have all the information needed to make a good decision on the program you will be developing in DO SOME MORE, this is the most importing decision you will ever make about your project.

Don’t paint yourself into a corner like the way I did.

Oh and Filemaker thanks for the VERY VERY VERY VERY VERY BAD INFORMATION.

Time to move on with this nightmare with Access or Alpha Five

By the way Alpha Five runtime’s can be networked aswell

[Anatoli]

Good Luck.

FileMaker works beautifully for me on Windoze and Mac, networked with hundred users and yes, users have full version on their computer.

And now tell me, what do you want to tell us?

[LiveOak]

You make a good point. The specifications for any program should be checked with the manufacturer of that program. Third party sources, especially those with an opposing economic interest, should not be depended upon to give correct informaton. Caveat Emptor!

-bd

[SteveB]

That makes sense, but I've been lied to or misled by Filemaker. Before I purchased my first copy (version 4.?), I called tech support to ask them if the interface for writing plugins could deal with VB. They said 'sure, no problem', which we all know is untrue. Did they knowingly lie, or was the techie just poorly trained???

This forum is probably the best place to go for most questions about what the product(s) can do. Unfortunately, new users don't know to come here first.

[printit]

Keep in mind we only have one program that we sell. We do not do custom programming.

What I’m I trying to tell you?

Well let's start by saying that FileMaker is a beautiful program… I'm not beating the program it's self up not at all, just the bunch of bankers over there that make the policy's.

Like many company's we also have a successful program writhen in FileMaker.

When it comes down to the client needing a network-able program and most of them do, let me tell you it's not an easy sell not at all. Although I don't actually sell FileMaker I have to be a sales rep for that company. As a programmer I should not even have to divulge what we wrote the solution in, that should be proprietary information.

The added complexities not to mention the added expense of FileMaker on every computer are enough to make EVERYONE of my customers cringe and they all do.

Prior To Sale

I spend more time convincing potential customers that it's really not that big of deal and that it's worth it in the long run “some buy into this”

After Sales

I spend more time with tech support questions about the networking then I do about our program. And don't get me started on file recovery.

Our competition knows the weakness in FileMaker runtimes and they use this weakness to convince their potential customers to not even consider our product.

Well I could go on an on but I not going to.

[Anatoli]

There is saying: "You paid your money and you pick your choice".

Years ago I was also concern with competition, but during the years I've learned to completely ignore it.

IMHO -- there are two good reasons for that:

1. There is much more competition, than one can watch

2. There is much less competition, then one imagine.

And if someone think, that support people know something, hmm, I guess if they know really something they'll be busy doing that.

[Kurt Knippel]

In Filemaker's defense, I did not know that Access runtimes could be networked, and I would like to know where you found that they can. This may be a new feature in one of the latest version of Access.

Additionally it will cost you more in both development and performance to network Access than it will to buy a site license for Filemaker Pro and Filemaker Server. The price-to-performance ratio of Filemaker is just fantastic.

[kyle]

i guess it is about time for filemaker to make a networkable runtime. even they have to raise the price little bit. yes. many clients complain if they hear they have to buy each license for each machine.

regards,

kyle

[Vaughan]

I guess your clients have never enquired about the cost of an Oracle license! LOL

[Anatoli]

IMHO -- there is a hole in FM product range and that is client without developer features and without the menu stuff. Like kyle named it "networkable runtime".

That way we, developers will have better productivity. If it is only 20% cheaper and FM client as it is now 20% more expensive, FM will gain even more market share. And I guess the revenue will be roughly the same.

VLA is already cheap for single seat, but we have to spend too much time to write around fully open FM client. That is my major complaint.

And obviously, lack of full implementation of 8-bit languages seamlessly in FM -- IWP -- CDML -- XML. That sucks in BIG way.

[jasonwood]

there is a hole in FM product range and that is client without developer features and without the menu stuff

Great idea!

They could call it "FileMaker Client"

[printit]

After spending about 4 hours of web searching and reading through tons of tech articles on Access Runtimes, I did not find one piece of information to confirm whether or not Access Runtimes could not networked without Access. So I called 3 different Access developers and they all confirmed that Access Runtimes could indeed be networked without Access.

I don't want to redevelop this software but I will if I have to. At this point I would be willing to mortgage my house to pay for a developer's edition that has the networking components.

P.S

I try not to use too many clich

[Kurt Knippel]

So even M$ does not say that Access has a networkable runtime?

Honestly you are gonna spend more time redeveloping in a weaker product than you will in simply buying copies of Filemaker Pro and Filemaker Server.

You should also know that M$ is NOT in business to sell Access, it is most often given away for free with Office. They use it to sell you SQL Server and Visual C++/Visual Basic development environments. So I would not expect Access to meet all of your needs in others areas, nor would I expect M$ to continue to add new and exciting features to Access.

[Anatoli]

Jason read that again:

client without developer features and without the menu stuff

[printit]

Deploying Access Solutions

In a typical multiuser or client/server database solution, the data is stored in a database on a network server, and the front-end application for entering and viewing data is deployed to each client workstation. If you build an Access database (.mdb) as the front-end application, you can deploy the database to users who don't have Access on their workstations by distributing it together with the run-time version of Access. The run-time version of Access is a version of Access for which certain features have been disabled, including the ability to create and modify databases.

The run-time version of Access is available in Microsoft Office 2000 Developer. When you purchase Office 2000 Developer, you are licensed to distribute the run-time version of Access to as many workstations as you need to.

To distribute your database with the run-time version of Access, use the Package and Deployment Wizard add-in that's included in Office 2000 Developer to create an installation program for your solution. On the Included Files page of the wizard, select the Include Access Runtime check box to include the run-time version of Access in your installation program.

This blurb came from the MSDN Libray

Just in case you thought I was blowing smoke

[DykstrL]

Although I don't agree with all of this discussion...

It would be nice if FMI would release a networkable runtime - or even a workstation version that would be able to be run in KIOSK mode. It would allow a whole new market in which to develop FileMaker solutions, such as in a POS system, cash register system, or any other database application where you do not want the user to be able to access the OS or exit the FM application.

Maybe at least be able to access a FM server via the internet to import updated data sets, updated files, etc. I am doing this now, but am having to do some real weird workarounds using BATch files, Applescript, and command lines - a real kludge!

I do understand why FMI did what they did to Developer, in that they were afraid that companies would deploy runtime applications and forego buying the workstation licenses or quit using it. Version 3 of Developer was networkable. We also had a site license for Filemaker and several FM servers. We also had a license for Developer 3.0. Part of that license stated that we could only use the runtime for solutions that were distributed outside our agency. When version 4 came out, that license restriction went away - and so did the networkable option.

I hope the folks at FMI are listening - otherwise, I think they are missing out on a large expanded market for FileMaker.

[BobWeaver]

There's no question that removing the networkability (is that a word?) from Filemaker runtimes was purely profit motivated. So, I wouldn't expect to see it coming back any time soon. Not unless they charge a lot more money for either FM developer or FM Server. They have to make their money one way or another. A little competition would help, of course.

[cbsteven]

I know a person who is working on a large solution for car dealerships across the country. He is distributing runtimes to them, and is using XML to simulate a networked solution. I don't know all the details, but I think basically the user clicks an update button when the finish a record and the runtime will send some XML info to a server. Again I haven't seen this in action or talked to him at length about it, but it seems interesting and he says that FMI is very interested to see how the solutions turns out.

[danjacoby]

I seem to recall yelling about runtime solutions' inability to be networked a couple of years ago, and several people (some of whom are on this thread!) said that FMI couldn't afford to let that happen.

My, how times have changed! Once again, I'm ahead of my time. The "Filemaker Client" suggestion is a tremendous compromise solution; perhaps we should all bombard FMI with this idea.

[printit]

I would be VERY interested in this XML stuff.

I worked on a visual basic app using active x to "pump data" in and out of FileMaker but guess what? Runtime's do not support active x go figure or at least version 5 dose not.

Another big issue I'm having with running the app in FileMaker.

I belong to an e-mail list that consists of about 1500 members that are in the industry that I market to; a question posed the other day was "what do you guys use for invoicing...?" Two of company's that responded to the question use my program, and they answered with "we invoice out of FileMaker."

So not only is FileMaker making fat money off my work, they are starting to be giving the credit for MY WORK.

I'm really a very nice guy and very easy to get along with.

But I will not allow my company or myself to be repressed by anyone or any company.

And that my friend is how I feel; pushed down by big money.

Ron