Next version

[mr_vodka]

No. :

This is much too entertaining.

Edited July 22, 2008 by Guest

[LaRetta]

"Now, for my next trick ... I'll set myself on fire."

[color:gray]Scott Breedlove talking to his father after his crash in the salt flats when setting a land-speed record.

For some reason, that quote always sticks in my mind in moments like this - I don't know why!!

[Colin Keefe]

"Now, for my next trick ... I'll set myself on fire."

[color:gray]Scott Breedlove talking to his father after his crash in the salt flats when setting a land-speed record.

For some reason, that quote always sticks in my mind in moments like this - I don't know why!!

I think the next trick is to keep this thread going for days or weeks after the OP drops out of the conversation.

Game?

[LaRetta]

Hey Colin, I'm always game; or gamey; not sure which. I've done it before! Oh, I mean, I've been involved in keeping threads going long after they truly died, not that I've been gamey before (although I have). But I like it when threads (like this) slowly die with the echo of laughter as the final note. ROFLMAO

[Søren Dyhr]

It seems to me that all this turmoil has nothing to do with how agile filemaker is as tool, but what a developer can get away with pretending. The issue seems only to be, annoyance with Filemaker/Claris termination of the ability to produce networked runtimes way back in 1995.

We have witnessed a few of these tightening ups over the years, these are primarily done to ensure the profit, and when it comes to it are skilled people spoiled for choice anyway... If it comes to producing foil-wrapped solutions, with myriads of open-source freely available ... but any garanties as how productive you'll end up being can't really be issued.

If you thought you have eyeballed a nice little quick earner, are you mistaken - try Las Vegas with you aspirations instead, and remember to kick the croupier and the slot-machine for not seeing your talent - just to keep you habit going.

--sd

[Genx]

I think the best thing to note in topics like this is that FileMaker isn't getting any worse hehehe, or there's always happiness to take us away:

[fabriceN]

I like wishlists, it reminds me letters to Santa Claus. Mine is almost unchanged since FM 4, but I have to admit that the ideas FMI guys had in the mean time were so great that I just hadn't thought of them (the webviewer being the best example).

Fabrice's wishlist to Santa Cla(ra)

- dynamic set field (by name, by ID) (script step, and why not calculation function)

- revamped printing layouts

- nested layouts

- nested portals

- turn auto enter on/off (script step)

- calculations on layout

- conditional formatting : calculate attributes

- set Next Serial value that works without specifying a field

- imports based on field ID

- go to record [by ID] ID (existng script step new option)

- foreach (function)

- get ( scriptstack ) (function): list of all current scripts with parameters (the bottom part of script debugger)

- get ( declared variables) (function). list of all current variables (the Current tab of Data Viewer, but only for variables)

- get ( mousecoordinates ) (function)

- get ( lastclickedobjectname ) (function)

- get ( windowID )

- ESS : Outlook/Exchange, iCal, GoogleAgenda, AddressBook

- import/export scripts on server

- Exit script option : control parent script

- Script handlers like

. - "On Get ( LastError ) = 400 ; Exit script"

. - "On Get ( ScriptResult ) = 1 ; Perform Script [...]"

Edited July 25, 2008 by Guest

[Genx]

ESS Outlook/Exchange, iCal, GoogleAgenda, AddressBook - i really don't think that's going to happen. Outlook/Exchange is patched too often and not always something you'd find in a small business enviornment, GoogleAgenda is too open sourcey. You can probably

I think the most useful and realistic thing on there would be dynamic set field / enter field.

[fabriceN]

I didn't say it would be realistic. Wishlists are just there to dream a little of a better world ???

[Colin Keefe]

I can make one prediction, at least, Fabrice.

A dozen years or so from now, someone will reference unimplemented items in your wishlist as proof that FileMaker sucks.

[LaRetta]

:exactly:

[fabriceN]

You're surely right, but then we'll take the list of what HAS been implemented in the mean time to hilight how great FileMaker is ???

[mr_vodka]

I can make one prediction, at least, Fabrice.

A dozen years or so from now, someone will reference unimplemented items in your wishlist as proof that FileMaker sucks.

:giggle:

[Lee Smith]

I can make one prediction, at least, Fabrice.

A dozen years or so from now, someone will reference unimplemented items in your wishlist as proof that FileMaker sucks.

It won't take that long, I predict that it will be next year, or after the next upgrade of FileMaker. ???

Edited July 25, 2008 by Guest

[grubber]

ESS Outlook/Exchange, iCal, GoogleAgenda, AddressBook - i really don't think that's going to happen. Outlook/Exchange is patched too often and not always something you'd find in a small business enviornment, GoogleAgenda is too open sourcey.

Fabrice I've dreamed of this too. Genx is right that static API's would break on updates BUT if Filemaker gave a way for 3rd parties to create ESS connectors (like plugins) to external API's? (via XSLT, JSON, GDATA) Filemaker could become the hub of the cloud.

Imagine being able to drop a TO of your Goggle Calender or Basecamp onto the graph and integrate it into your system without having to know a line of code...ah bliss. You have to imagine (or dream) they are looking at it closely.

Olly

[David Jondreau]

I think the most useful and realistic thing on there would be dynamic set field / enter field.

Certainly the most likely out of Fabrice's list.

Also, "calculations on layout" shouldn't be too hard (you do it sloppy with the Web Viewer now).

I think nesting layouts (like Access subforms) would be pretty huge. Imagine building a nav bar that you only need to change one and it changes all your user layouts?

Get(ScriptStack) would be really nice too.

Good list Fabrice.

[fabriceN]

Yes, nested layouts would be huge. Get rid of most portals, use customisable, sortable table views within a form layout, reuse layouts...

But as far as dynamic set field is concerned (I won't believe they'll do it before I see it ! and I don't believe anyone outthere is interested in FieldIDs ), I am surprised that no plug-in of my knowledge offer this as a calculation function. I know some plug-ins that use SQL queries like brilliant DoSQL, but I am sure it would be possible to make it a one-function-FileMakerish-syntax plug-in. Am I missing something ?

[The Shadow]

Now ... do you or any other user has any comments on what I said about that article in FM magazine? Or any comment on that article.

Maybe its just my sunny disposition, when I read the article, I see a ton of things that have been implemented from this list. Multiple tables per file, multiple windows and window positioning, rework of security, re-login script step, functions to change the font, sortable portals, cut & paste in scriptmaker, full menu control, etc, etc.

It seems to me like the list is getting taken care of. There are still some things missing, but there always will be something else thats wanted.

[John2710]

This is the right tool and also price policy is much friendly. www.4d.com

I was comparing in with FM for quite some time ..and I think this is the right answer.

[Colin Keefe]

...and I think this is the right answer.

Considering you've been making your evaluation using 11 year old information, which has been pretty much debunked in this thread already, yes, it's probably the right answer...for you. Not to diss 4D, it's probably a great product, and I'm guessing you'll be quite happy.

[Genx]

It's not really that great a product... In truth, you could get away with something better like netbeans for example - better and free.

That being said, still doesn't replace FM.

[John2710]

I have found this

http://akagumo.com/review/software/filemaker-9

[Jalz]

Hi Guys,

Just thought I'd add my 2p worth t this thread. Like all I'm anxious awaiting the details for the new release, if its anything like Bento 2 in the way it integrates with other applications really easily i.e. outlook and Excel, has a native GUI and a couple of other much needed tweaks like script triggers, extended dialog boxes with drop down lists and robust printing options....and on and on...

I can dream.. }:(

[Genx]

I would upgrade just for a native GUI and no actual new features.

[David Jondreau]

What is the difference between a native GUI and FM's GUI? Is it the app's interface elements don't match the OS's?

[Genx]

The app's interface match elements back from the 90's It's almost vintage

[Ted S]

For some of us the 90's don't seem that long ago. }:(

[Genx]

Yes, and while I will not call you vintage we have to remember that software and design, has, and will continue to advance at exponential rates for the foreseeable future.

[Vaughan]

Apart from superficial appearances like colour, transparency, 3-d rendering, I cannot think of *any* GUI interface functionality differences between 1990s and today. Radio buttons... check boxes... drop-down lists... pop-up menus... edit boxes... all there.

The only difference has been the addition of drop-down calendar input option. Everything else was around on the original Macintosh.

Except for the mouse scroll wheel.

[Genx]

"Apart from superficial appearances like colour, transparency, 3-d rendering"

All interface is in it's nature superficial. I can turn off all the effects on Vista and take it back to windows 98 standards... then FileMaker will match, but I'm still not going to.

The truth of the matter is that shinny things look cool, are easier on the eye and are easier to sell.

[LaRetta]

The truth of the matter is that shinny things look cool, are easier on the eye and are easier to sell.

Absolutely. It is difficult to convince a business that FileMaker is top-notch when it's native radio buttons look like a child drew them. The guts may be important ... but so is the fluff. And FM natively ain't no eye candy. :tongue2:

[comment]

Everything else was around on the original Macintosh.

It's not so much an issue of what was around then (though I agreee with Genx and LaRetta that appearances are important), but what is the standard today. For example, take a look at the tools available for user input:

http://developer.apple.com/documentation/UserExperience/Conceptual/AppleHIGuidelines/XHIGControls/chapter_19_section_4.html#//apple_ref/doc/uid/TP30000359-TPXREF195