To 7 or not to 7 ......that is the question!

[Inky Phil]

Hello everyone

After 18 very enjoyable(well usually!) months I have a working solution installed in my business.

It comprises of 18 files, umpteen relationships and runs in kiosk mode from FM server to approx 6 users throughout our business. It handles everything from initial enquiry & calculating an estimate, conversion to order, job tracking throughout the works through to final invoice, management reports and filing. All this along with a professional looking GUI means that I take great pleasure in seeing people using it every day and I would like to take this opportunity to thank everyone who has helped me along the way.

Because I started as a complete novice and was learning as I went along I now realise that I could have done things in a much better/safer/structured way. I therefore have decided to start again and get it right this time !!

My quandry is this: Do I start again in 7 or just upgrade to 6?

I know this would be an obvious time to go to 7 but:

1/ The extra features it brings are really not necessary to my solution. 6 would give me everything I need (and then some)

2/ If I have to begin re-learning how to do things( in 7) will I be back where I started when I began in 5

3/ People seem to grumble a bit about things that are not quite right in 7(slow pop up lists, font issues etc.) whereas 6 seems well sorted

I keep going round in circles.

I feel a bit wimpish for not grabbing the bull by the horns and going to 7 but I find the 6 route really quite attractive.

Any opinions that might help me with my decision would be really appreciated

TIA

Phil

[RalphL]

6 is a dead end, 7 is the future. You have a working system so there is no need to rush. Take your time, learn 7, and then do your rewrite.

[Inky Phil]

Thanks Ralph,

That is not what I wanted to hear but I know deep down that 7 is the way to go

Oh well.......better get the sleeves rolled up

Thanks again

Phil

[Søren Dyhr]

You might consider that other tasks in the organization, as more urgent - such as the creation of a positive cashflow, and hardly wishes to wear the propellar hat more than on very special occations ...an understandable disposition!

I think you should read these case studies:

http://www.newmillennium.com/index.php?s...on_Case_Studies

--sd

[CobaltSky]

Hi Phil,

I have to agree with Ralph on this. FileMaker 7 may have a few things to tweak and a few issues to wrestle, but believe me v6 has more.

Once you get the feel of v7, you will begin to realize that v6 is a development environment built on multitudinous layers of redundancy. You will find that half a dozen scripts that you required in each file in your v6 solution (that's over 100 scripts across your 18 file solution) can be condensed into a single script in one of your v7 files. You will find this not once, but over and over again, right throughout the program (applying not just to scripts!).

Now think about what happens when you realize that you need something to work a little differently. Do you want to change 1 script or >100?

Whereas v7 is built on a new and flexible architecture which is designed to move forward into the future (and will enable you to take advantage of upgrade paths along the way), v6 is now aging technology stretched to its limits and will not age gracefully.

IMHO, you have a lot more to gain by taking the plunge.

[Ted S]

One word; Security. Version 7 is 100x better.

[Inky Phil]

Thanks everybody for your valuable opinions.

7 it is

Regards

Phil

[Jhestler]

Hi All,

Considering the jump from 6 to 7, but I'm wondering...

The new multi-table single file architecture gives me a hard-on, looking at it, but is it cumbersome in performance when you're talking 20+ tables vs. a solution with 20+ databases? Or does it actually work better this way? Almost too good to be true, lol...

Thanks,

J

[David McQueen]

Hi All,

Considering the jump from 6 to 7, but I'm wondering...

The new multi-table single file architecture gives me a hard-on, looking at it, but is it cumbersome in performance when you're talking 20+ tables vs. a solution with 20+ databases? Or does it actually work better this way? Almost too good to be true, lol...

Thanks,

J

It pretty much works as advertised. There have been some issues with value lists being slow.

Where it really shines is in a networked environment. Much more of the heavy lifting is now done at the server end which speeds things up immensely.

IWP in FMP7 is actually usable and eerie in the way it draws layouts.

Others above have noted the improved architecture and scripting.

The multi table single file model is just one thing. The program does not have to be built that way. There are times when multi file models are the way to go. This is still an option. So you have increased flexibility.

The data capability is also vastly improved. In FMP 5-6, you have a 2 Gig. per file limit. I ended up testing this and found in real terms with what I was doing 300,000 records was about it. After that point as soon as you started doing various operations, it became unstable. FMP7 is 8 Terrabytes per file. The limit is effectively you hard drive.

Security has been redone and is now in keeping with OS X and XP authentifications.

The only down side I can see is that it does not support legacy operating systems ... Pre Windows 2000 and Pre OS X 2.8. So, I have clients who have not migrated and I cannot at this point focus exclusively on FMP7

So, it pretty much is all you are asking about ... and more.

HTH

Dave McQueen

[Jhestler]

Wow, unbelieveable. Thanks, Dave!!!

J