FileMaker 10: New Features

[JesseSFR]

FileMaker 10 has a bunch of new features and has received a much needed facelift. Throw all your favorite new features into this forum so we can figure them out.

[JesseSFR]

Geoff just finished a new overview article... he's basically cheating because he finished his book a couple weeks ago so he already had the heads. I think that they may be announcing the book today too.

Enjoy some FileMaker 10 Reading:

FileMaker 10 Overview

[JesseSFR]

I can't believe you can finally save which printer you want to print to... It's sad that that makes me happy.

[El_Pablo]

Can it still open FP7 files?

[JesseSFR]

Nope, FileMaker 10 still uses the tried and true fp7 format so don't have any heart attacks about upgrading.

[mr_vodka]

One thing I HATE...

Customization of toolbar for end users should be pickable from a SET customized toolbar that the developer allows...

I dont want my users having access to all my fields... Nor do I want them to have access to functions that they want to put on the status area....

For now the status area still gets locked!

[JesseSFR]

Vodka is probably touching on the biggest gripe so far with the new look of the Status Toolbar (formerly known as the Status Area). In table view, the user is now able to add any fields that they have access to directly to the layout as needed. I can definitely see how this would be annoying.

The easiest way to get around it is to disable table view for all layouts. This might seem like a little bit of overkill but it is really the only way to prevent the problem without actually putting in place stringent security. I don't use table view so disallowing access isn't a big deal for me but for others it's probably a huge hassle. The problem with this fix is that your fields are still not secure... but most people aren't that concerned about it.

The most secure way to handle it is to set all fields that you don't want a user to have access to in the Access privileges menu and then set all scripts to run with full access. This is a HUGE hassle so I recommend the former of the two. I'm sure Steven can expand on the security issues because he knows that stuff up and down.

[mr_vodka]

On a positive note... I am glad they FINALLY fixed the GTRR ( layout unknown ) bug that has been driving me insane for versions now... No longer will I have to write to FMI regarding it every 6 months! :P

[mr_vodka]

Hey Jesse,

I know that with priv sets and custom menus, you can limit what your users can do with the new features, but it doesnt make any sense to have the users be able to select sort fields from a list of table occurences that the end user has NO IDEA what they mean...

Also, I usually have an interfaces where most things on my custom menu are gone. Now I have to have these on there if they want to put it on the toolbar...

Furthermore, what if there are some functionalities that I do not want the priv set to lock down but I dont want them to put it on the toolbar???

It just seems silly to me that FMI gave the ability for the end users to customize their environment, but the developer not have a method to control from the set of tools that the developer WANTS to give their end users...

[Lee Smith]

Why not just Hide the Status Area, i.e. Show/Hide Status Area Script Step?

[JesseSFR]

Vodka,

The Sort field thing I believe has been something that has bothered FileMaker developers forever. I can definitely see the value of being able to customize your sort dialog.

this I'm not quite sure what you are getting at:

Furthermore, what if there are some functionalities that I do not want the priv set to lock down but I dont want them to put it on the toolbar???

Do you mean you want to allow in the custom menu but disallow it on the toolbar?

[JesseSFR]

That would definitely be the easiest solution! I'm guessing some people would like to get around the table view issue but still like their status area. I'm a big proponent of no status area myself.

[mr_vodka]

Why not just Hide the Status Area, i.e. Show/Hide Status Area Script Step?

Obviously that is what makes sense now. But these are new features they tout. What is the point of having a customizable status toolbar only to have it hidden??

[mr_vodka]

It would have been great to have a toolbar with only options that I want them to see.

Right now they can put on ones that they cant even do anything with. It will be greyed out, but why even give them that ability?

[Lee Smith]

You can drag the items off of the Status Area too,

[David Jondreau]

Thing is, after building my own Status Areas for a couple years, I'm coming around the block and think opening it up is a good idea. Especially because the interface is now 1000% cleaner. It's horizontal and the graphics are from 2006 instead of 1994.

[mr_vodka]

Yes I know. lol. All I am saying is that it would have been good to have a developer driven list of objects that can be put on and taken off...

[JesseSFR]

I believe the thinking behind this implementation is that the toolbar is considered an application level setting so if a user opens any filemaker app they will have the same toolbar. I guess if they were to remove the icon their toolbar would change across apps. I can definitely see the problem with leaving them greyed out though. Someone will see the show all records step and think... hey... I want that one!

[mr_vodka]

DJ. That is what I mean. I always have locked ths status area. With the new features I am considering unlocking it. However, I am afraid to because of the issues that I have been talking about.

I have about 20 different priv sets. My users are authenticated externally via AD. However, as most users will fit into one of those priv sets, some of them have "additional" functionality which our user admin wants to control.

So I have a control panel of sorts that allows access to additional things. If I had to create priv sets for all the possible ever changing scenarios, it would be absurd.

So, there is an underlying priv set for each user's basic rights.

Also, I dont want to maintain hundreds of custom menus.

[JesseSFR]

It's much harder for legacy solutions that have multiple files and I believe mr vodka's solution has about 600 files and was created the the late 1800's so it's a huge hardship. I know I have clients that have 70 file solutions and it's going to be really obnoxious going through all of them and disabling the table view.

[Steven H. Blackwell]

Read what I have said in the Security forum aboutmanaging the customized status area.

[mr_vodka]

It's much harder for legacy solutions that have multiple files and I believe mr vodka's solution has about 600 files and was created the the late 1800's so it's a huge hardship. I know I have clients that have 70 file solutions and it's going to be really obnoxious going through all of them and disabling the table view.

Lol. Almost all correct... Except I dont use table views. :P

[mr_vodka]

Read what I have said in the Security forum aboutmanaging the customized status area.

I did read it this morning. It still leaves me with the issues that I have. I guess I will have to keep it still locked.

[David Jondreau]

It sounds like you have a pretty complicated set of privileges. For me, it's a lot simpler.

If a user drops an icon onto a toolbar that they don't have access to because they are prohibited by Access Privileges or because it's not on the active Custom Menu, then the icon won't function. That's perfect.

Is permitting a user to add an icon they can't use a little inelegant? Maybe, but a New Record button that disappears on a table users don't have New Rec privs to and reappears when they switch layouts would be inelegant too.

Permitting developers to decide which buttons to use would be helpful, but I've resigned myself to the fact that FMP is not 100% designed for the commercial developer.

[LaRetta]

Permitting developers to decide which buttons to use would be helpful, but I've resigned myself to the fact that FMP is not 100% designed for the commercial developer.

... as properly pointed out here. And it's a shame too because the professional developers will end up going elsewhere if they are forced to use inadequate, lame tools.

Oh. And I totally agree with John. Not allowing control over the status area again puts it in my bag of 'not to use' tricks. That's really sad, in my opinion.

Edited January 5, 2009 by Guest
Added OH

[LaRetta]

I DO really like the new toolbar (status area) being on top but it will take getting used to and it's a shame it can't be fully utilized.

Another small, undocumented feature is that, when you have 'select all' activated on a field, the field turns grey instead of black (at least on my test systems). This looks much nicer but it may catch a few people off guard if they have planned their highlight colors accordingly. :smile2:

[comment]

According to the MacWorld review,

"One thing that makes this a compelling upgrade is the fact that, if you're the developer, you’ll be able to pass on significant advantages to end-users with little or no effort."

http://www.macworld.com/article/137892/2009/01/filemaker10_firstlook.html

I guess it's different strokes for different developers...

[JesseSFR]

Alright so we have two more articles up and one coming in about 15 minutes on script triggering. Set Field by Name definitely sounds awesome if used correctly. I just hope people don't start hardcoding those names in there!

FileMaker Server Info:

http://sixfriedrice.com/wp/filemaker-server-10-new-features-backup-scheduling/

Set Field By Name:

http://sixfriedrice.com/wp/set-field-by-name-exposed/

[HALBURN]

I particularly like the new feature where FileMaker, Inc. comes out with a new version every year (with a tiny list of new features) and charges the same upgrade price across the board, regardless of which previous version you are upgrading from.

[Jed69]

Can anyone tell me if the new version of Pro Advanced allows exporting of PDFs and Excel files in Runtime solutions?

[Mike Paine]

Big deal - my 1985 DOS database - Open Access - had saved finds. The find requests were even in the ground-breaking SQL query language.

It also had built-in charting of found sets, cross-tabulations ("Pivot-tables" for Excel fans) and a very powerful programming language.

FM10 is very disappointing in comparison.

[Genx]

On the general note on FM 10 features. I think that this might be the first product release since FM 7 where there has been no doubt in my mind that it is version worthy and not just a tack on. The changes are significant and many and the granuality of the script triggers, set fields by calc, browse based subsummaries, live sorts, saved searches etc. is much, much more than what I've come to expect from the FM development team. I may even consider using FileMaker for some serious development again and not be so ashamed to pull out the old status area

All in all without even having had the chance to play with the product yet, the overviews I've read show this shaping up to be a brilliant release opening up new avenue's and methodologies that were previously unavailable to us. This is truly a great way to start the new year and a pleasant suprise.

.. Still no progress bar though ahahaha.

Regarding server, it's nice that it's truly expandable now to 999 and that it takes advantage of multi-cores, i just hope that it doesn't start maxing out all 8 cores on server's instead of just one when it's handling an xml request :P

Edited January 6, 2009 by Guest

[comment]

opening up new avenue's and methodologies that were previously unavailable to us.

Such as?

[Rich Willis]

For me, the most frequently overlooked truism is that the projects we build are for use by an end user, not the developer. In my particular case, the fact that the Status Toolbar LOOKs friendlier than the old status area means that my end users will find it easier to learn to use. If I have to learn some new skills or techniques to safely and effectively implement it's use, that seems to be an additional bonus for me, as a developer.

[mr_vodka]

For me, the most frequently overlooked truism is that the projects we build are for use by an end user, not the developer.

Yes but it is the duty of the developer to create a solution that can keep the best data integrity; which often leads to saving end users from themselves at times.