Future Filemaker releases

[Mark Appleby]

Has anyone got any insight into what the future holds for filemaker? I am now getting to a point with it where I would prefer not to have to change to another product and start the learning curve again. But Alpha five is putting up a good argument at this stage.

I would love to see a straightforward way of implementing the likes of SQL, of being able to store images wtihin the database in their original format. Having Pop-up calendars and calculators. Being able to bind ones databases together, being able to run a macro when exiting fields or at specific times. Having the ability to create backups quickly. Being able to create a runtime version of a file for use over a network would be a real bonus.

Are we going to get these facilities or are we always going to have to buy the plug-in for most of these tasks? I know that the ability to use plug-ins is wonderful but should we need to buy them for basic tasks?

Mark

[IdealData]

I was recently contacted by FMI (UK) to be advised about the upgrade costs and consequences of not upgrading - I'm quite happy with FMP 5.0 and FMS 5.0 as my upgrade costs will be significant.

I recently relinquished my FSA membership because I didn't feel I was getting value for money and they wanted me to re-submit all the original info again - I refused on principle. But consider this as an option to keep ahead of the crowd.

As for "basic tasks" - what is a "basic task". How about turning on your computer - hey Apple sorted that with scheduled start/stop, but then lost it in OS X. :-)

[LiveOak]

At the last FileMaker DevCon there was a presentation on the future of FM. While I can't say what was presented due to non-disclosure, the technical plan for FM's future was very impressive. I don't tend to be a universal fan of everything from FMI (like less marketing opportunities and higher fees for FSA members), but the plan presented kind of blew me away with its technical insight. If I was Oracle, I'd worry in 10 years.

-bd

[Mark Appleby]

I am sorry not to get back sooner. But are we about to have a major new release in Filemaker? Does anyone know wheather there will be extra capability within the system. And does anyone know wheather they are going to fix those annoying problems?

[Lee Smith]

Hi Mark,

This question comes up every year and on every lists that I belong to (5). Anyone that knows the answer is bound by agreement not to tell, and anyone else answering is only guessing.

I can say that whatever new release (upgrade of full) is usually timed with Devcon or MacWorld events.

Lee

[Anatoli]

IMHO -- the FM 7 will be complete or major rewrite. I will not upgrade my customers to it for 1-2 years. After the significant problems with Mac OSX support I don't trust them much. I was completely happy with v. 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5. It looks now like any other major software company. New versions get reasonably OK just before next version is released.

[BobWeaver]

If I was Oracle, I'd worry in 10 years.

Brent, was this some subtle form of sarcasm?

[Anatoli]

If I was Oracle, I'd worry in 10 years.

I've found the Apple PR stuff strange and lying through the teeth. It is not targeted much outside from Apple audience. It is usually assuring existing users, that their choice of Personal Computer was the best. Someone like myself is usually LOL on Apple description of Windows world. Apple is comparing experience with 10 year old Windows, pre NT kernel with their latest software, video etc.

15 - 10 years ago Apple was the best Personal Computer far exceeding anything from Bill's kitchen. Now Apple is according to opinion of majority people just in the same league or Apple was even surpassed by Windows.

FM Inc. as true Apple culture is instead of making their product more suitable for us developers just assuring current users of their excellent choice. It is also laying about capabilities of FM products more and more.

One click in their fantastic FM software and everything is on web. That is again going against us, developers.

Example: if potential customer doesn't know much about databases and I picked FM as solution, I am not wrong and he/she is happy with my project and with price. Then the same customer is asking for extension of that solution to web, which will obviously cost less, than 1% of previous development cost. They carefully studied the FM box in their company. FMI told them "no problem" just switch that magic web database publishing on.

Then I look for them like crook, when I am presenting my development plan, timetable *and* real cost.

FMI has 5 to 10 years time to make everything OK and really working as they do claim is working now. That will not affect Oracle single bit. In that "If I was Oracle, I'd worry in 10 years" is missing one important point: what will Oracle do during that 10 years? Going backwards? I don't think so.

In any case, new customers are reasonably happy with FM. Existing customers are finding big limitation in FM and some of them are already converting parts of their business to MySQL and in one case to complete Oracle rewrite.

I myself will not dump FM right now. But I am learning Lasso, php and SQL in my spare time. In 10 years I might be still with FM and with some SQL. Or I might be only in SQL camp.

[danjacoby]

As an Apple owner, and FMP solution developer:

Anatoli is absolutely right about the truth behind web-based FMP; it's not nearly as easy or inexpensive as they like to let on.

On the other hand, the Mac is actually gaining in usability when compared with Windows-based machines. In the last two years, two low-end clients have switched from Windows to Mac, and one high-end user I know (I occasionally to multimedia programming for him) who used to say that Windows was actually just as good (and used it almost exclusively because his clients were all Windows-based), now uses Macs almost exclusively instead.

I don't know anyone switching from Mac to Windows, but several people have switched the other way. Could there be a reason?

[Anatoli]

Not in my case I know more than 50 people which switched from Macs to Windows.

Also, "machine for the rest of us" and Unix? I hate all command line interfaces. That was main reason for using Mac and not DOS. Mac is getting far away from original concept, which I was in love with. Not 100%, because the concept of shortcuts stinks in all MacOS. IMHO, for me Windows are closer to that concept today, than Macs. I don't want to learn Unix and I don't want to pay the most expensive Unix experts. With Mac OS or Windows I can get help for next to nothing.

And I am not talking about the FM and MacX problems, which are all over here. That will be sorted out in next versions. It will be OK and robust as NT4 in year or two. But I am already happy with NT4 and W2000 for many many years.

If there is better tool or the same and cheaper, I am going for it.