Hi,

I currently have a customized solution that I have spent alot of time on and now have the opportunity to sell it.

At my current location we have a filemaker server machine for the filemaker file and everything works great. However here lies the problem. Other locations just want a single computer running the database. Is filemaker reliable enough to stand on its own without server as a product?

Right now I have a main menu and to proceed you must always click a certain button (makes more sense if you saw my application) it will make a backup on an external hard drive(save copy) also it will only create one backup every 6 hours.

Does anyone see any problems with this approach? and what would be better a runtime or a computer running filemaker 9?

Thanks

Jeff England

Edited March 13, 200817 yr by Guest

Of course fm is reliable enough to run on its own. Not only that but one installation of standard fm will serve up to 5 users without using server.

With regard to your backups that is a slightly different matter since standard fm does not have the automated backup routine that server offers.

As to offering a runtime or run fm9, well there are a number of limitations in a runtime such as no sharing whatsoever, no ability to print to a pdf and many others. I suggest that you check out the comprehensive list of limitations of a runtime that you will find in your fm documentation. Only then will you be able to make a decision.

HTH

Phil

FWIW, peer-to-peer sharing is up to 10 now - the host application and 9 other users.

Thanks for the answers,

Im trying to find the best/most reliable way of doing this.

Jeff England