Jump to content
lenomadecom2

Filemaker 15 - petition against new licensing model

Recommended Posts

Following the launch of the new version of filemaker 15, May 2016, the database becomes prohibitive for Filemaker developer, clients or hosting industry. This industry may cease to exist because customers simply all may migrate to other technology.
Help us convince Filemaker and Apple to reconsider their license business model and keep them at acceptable costs for customers and service providers.

https://www.change.org/p/philippe-waterloos-modification-de-la-licence-filemaker-15

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd migrate away in a heartbeat if only there was a platform with mostly similar features. As I understand there are none at the moment, that's why they can keep the product horrendously overpriced. It's a small market so they probably don't care and growing with lowering prices is a huge risk and involves a lot of effort and they probably don't want to go anywhere out of their comfort zone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/18/2016 at 8:48 AM, Buckie said:

I'd migrate away in a heartbeat if only there was a platform with mostly similar features. As I understand there are none at the moment, that's why they can keep the product horrendously overpriced. It's a small market so they probably don't care and growing with lowering prices is a huge risk and involves a lot of effort and they probably don't want to go anywhere out of their comfort zone.

The only thing that is crazy expensive is the stuff FileMaker is no good at anyway; high load at high speeds. FileMaker is good at massaging small chunks of data visually, and for generating reports from smaller amounts of data( less than 10 million records ) not to mention the quick development of user interface for it's platforms. You are better off writing your own publish scripts to communicate with other databases for web such as: REDIS, PostgreSQL, couchDB, SOLR/elasticsearch. I write my publishing scripts in XSLT and use XML export to accomplish the action.

I believe the high prices is a polite way to say no interested in doing those features.

Edited by ggt667

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Who Viewed the Topic

    2 members have viewed this topic:
    hutcheedingo  CKonash 
  • Similar Content

    • By 123
      Hey,
      I have a question about hosting my filemaker database. If I buy a license for 5 people form here: https://store.filemaker.com/filemaker-cloud , will I also need to purchase 5 normal FileMaker 16 Pro Client licenses so people can actually connect to the database? I don't quite understand how this works yet, maybe someone can help me out. Do I get the client licenses with the purchase of a server license? I need 5 people to be able to access it. Thanks in advance,
      Mike
    • By carolq
      Just wanted to share a little quirk. We just upgraded to FM16 and were trying to configure the email plug-in in Preferences (Mac and Windows, Pro and Adv users), and the license code wouldn't "stick". We would paste it in, click on Register, and go back in and it would be gone, although the company name appeared. We found that unchecking and re-checking the checkbox on the plug-in fixed it, it appeared permanently after that.
    • By Peter Wagemans
      Hi people,
      A customer is complaining about his FileMaker Pro 16 application acting up: when brought back from the background, the application requires the address of the server, even when the customer is actually logged in to the server. The customer took a screen shot of this, and the application window is clearly visible behind the nagging dialog.
      Clearly again a FileMaker problem, but I'm not going that way anymore, since I have to make a living as well. I was just wondering what could be done to avoid the disconnect, and on reconnect, how to help FileMaker a bit reconnecting.
      The first thing I was wondering about, was App Nap. There's a FileMaker help article here: using-filemaker-networking-on-mac-os-x-with-app-nap-enabled but the last edit is in 2015 and it covers only until 2013. The second google link FMP v14 and App Napp on the FileMaker Community web site seems to confirm that it is still an issue in v14. Why did FileMaker stop editing the article then? Apple has removed the check box option from the "Get Info" window of the application, one way of enabling/disabling it today is to use the excellent Onyx freeware application. But that switches App Nap system wide, not on application level. I'm wondering if it should be off or on, the customer uses the latest MacBook with Sierra.
      The second thing is the password linking mechanism that seems broken as well on reconnect. You open File A, file A needs file B and FileMaker internally passes the credentials used to open File A, to open File B. Unfortunately this doesn't seem to happen on reconnect, and FileMaker asks for the password of File B, with no option to save the password, although this option is set in the file preferences. I made the customer open File B directly, and save the password to the keychain. At least this *should* lessen the annoyances he is facing today.
      Does anybody have any insights to add here?
    • By ajgeronimo
      Hi. We have successfully created a Filemaker Server to Filemaker Server configured. When we tried to add another Filemaker Server to Filemaker server configuration, we got an error "You have exceeded the limit of 1 Filemaker Server to Filemaker Server configuration for this license." In our license, we can sync up to 2 configurations. 



    • By FoggyMt
      My client is using FM Server 14. On it I have a web form that is accessible to the public. It requires no user name or password...it's entirely open via guest login.
      I have server scripts that import the data entered into a broader ticketing solution that is locked down. The tickets are then deleted in the guest-accessed file. We are now looking at upgrading to FM Server 15 and the new licensing model.  I have a sinking solution that this kind of approach is untenable with FM's new paradigm.
      Is this approach broken w/FM Server 15...requiring me to use something like Google Forms for data capture?
×

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.