FileMaker 7 Upgrade?

[MacRumors]

ThinkSecret reports that FileMaker 7 will deliver major new features.

In contrast to previous upgrades, FileMaker 7 should bring significant changes to the database application. The report details some improvements including: improved interface, calculations, security and web features.

ThinkSecret also casts doubts on previous rumors that FileMaker Inc. may be pulled back in-house by Apple, but do not have definitive information

 

[DanUk2003]

About time...

I particularly am interested in the suggested feature of having multiple data tables in a single file; similar to Access...

Very useful...

 

[xtekdiver]

What are the advantages?

What are the advantages of Filemaker over mySQL? And I thought this was going to be part of a new office suite. Could someone elaborate on the relationship of Filemaker to Apple?

 

[copperpipe]

just curious...

What, exactly, does a program like Filemaker do?

 

[Chisholm]

Re: What are the advantages?

Originally posted by xtekdiver
What are the advantages of Filemaker over mySQL? And I thought this was going to be part of a new office suite. Could someone elaborate on the relationship of Filemaker to Apple?

Apple made FileMaker. They spun it out of house back in the mid- late 1990's.

 

[BenRoethig]

Very good news. I hope they come out with a FileMaker express. Macs need a consumer database program. To answer xtekdiver's question, Filemaker is a subsidiary of Apple. It's set up and run like an independant company (like Emagic), but owned buy Apple.

 

[ejb190]

Re: just curious...

Originally posted by copperpipe
What, exactly, does a program like Filemaker do?

FileMaker Pro is a relational database, like Microsoft Access. One way to think of it is as a 3 demensional spreadsheet. Where on Excel you put one product to one customer, in FileMaker you can relate one customer to many products and vice versa.

Personally, I like FileMaker a heck of a lot better for two reasons. First, I write databases for people who don't understand computers. FileMaker is a lot easier to "idiot proof" in my experience. Second, I work cross platform. I do most of my set up on my Mac's at home and usually end up implimenting on a PC. Access is not available for the Mac and no other product is as widely distributed.

Personally, I have not upgraded from 5.5 to 6.0. Not enough changes to bother. But 7 has my attention.

 

[TMay]

Re: Re: just curious...

Originally posted by ejb190


Personally, I have not upgraded from 5.5 to 6.0. Not enough changes to bother. But 7 has my attention.

You, me and probably a lot of others. This should help Filemaker's bottom line.

I'm not into Filemaker all that much, but I'm curious if they will adopt OSX journaling in some fashion.

 

[djwu]

i know that ...

I was called by a FileMaker rep following up on my evaluation download of the software. He said that this next version of FileMaker will have unicode support and support for Asian languages. He said that the timeline would be planned to be out by the end of 2003.

 

[bennetsaysargh]

well, i just want to point out that the filemaker expo or conference is coming up soon in Phoenix. i think in about 2 weeks.
my uncle is going.

 

[copperpipe]

donka schon

thanks for the explanation...

 

[Bonte]

os 9 and win98 ???

 

[sturm375]

For those interested in FileMaker

You should check out this:

http://www.4d.com

I've been using it for the last 4 years, and it is very easy, and very powerful. The last edition: 4D2003, incorporates Web Services via SOAP. More information on this

here

Check out what others have had to say moving from FileMaker to 4D here.

Check out a comparison between 4D, FileMaker, and MS Access here.

Trust me, if I can program in this environment, anyone can

 

[Mezzo]

Originally posted by BenRoethig
Very good news. I hope they come out with a FileMaker express. Macs need a consumer database program. To answer xtekdiver's question, Filemaker is a subsidiary of Apple. It's set up and run like an independant company (like Emagic), but owned buy Apple.

I don´t think that an express version is useful. A kind of "express version" is actually used in AppleWorks. But Filemaker is so easy to use if you don´t want to build up complicated structures. For simple cd-archives and stuff like that it is no problem to use Filemaker.

Bigger solutions surely need bigger know-how but Filemaker grows with its tasks.

 

[GregGomer]

Good to hear someones thoughts on 4D, I've looked at it before, but it just looked confusing, and much harder to use then File Maker.

I hope that the new FileMaker with multiple tables in One file will allow use to use relational databases on the web now. In the past, you could only host one file on a web site, and any links to other files didn't work. Which made this feature nearly unusable to me. So if this is fixed, that alone will be a huge huge huge new feature, and I'll upgrade for sure.

As well, does anyone know if 4D allows you to host web sites that have relational databases. I.e. a customer database connected to a project database?

Thanks,

Greg

 

[Gaucho]

FileMaker - a great tool

For those who are relatively new to FileMaker, I just wanted to add my two cents.

I've been using it since version 3.0 and currently use FileMaker 6.0 Dev. version. It is a robust database program which allows you to pretty much create anything you can imagine. Anything from a simple database for keeping track of a DVD collection to as sophiscated as a corporate solutions. It is very easy to use, and easy to learn the more complex development aspects of the software, too. I have never had any training in it but have been able to write a number of increasingly more sophiscated databases easily. I have found that it has so many uses. For me, it's a priceless addition to my mac and productivity.

It sounds like version 7 will be a great addition since there haven't been many changes since vers. 5 - 6.

Cheers!

 

[keithcobbett]

Re: For those interested in FileMaker

Originally posted by sturm375
You should check out this:

http://www.4d.com

I've been using it for the last 4 years, and it is very easy, and very powerful. The last edition: 4D2003, incorporates Web Services via SOAP. More information on this

here

Check out what others have had to say moving from FileMaker to 4D here.

Check out a comparison between 4D, FileMaker, and MS Access here.

Trust me, if I can program in this environment, anyone can

I don't know. I used 4D a while back, granted it was an OS 9 version and old, I wasn't too impressed. Had to take a 5 day class to learn to program the code, unsupported quickly, wasn't very user friendly. Again, this was an older version. I personally like Filemaker and have used it for years. I will look into the newer version of 4D though. What can it hurt? Thanks for the links.

 

[edenwaith]

Bringing the wayward children home?

I like Apple most of the time, but I'm a little edgy if they want to bring FileMaker back into the fold. Probably best if FileMaker is kept as separate as possible for now, so that company can concentrate on just Filemaker, instead of going in twelve directions at once.

Also look at what happened to ClarisWorks...became AppleWorks, and then became the neglected child in Apple's family. Apple seems to promote MS Office more than their own AppleWorks! Unless there is going to be an integration of FileMaker into AppleWorks 7 (for lack of a better name), then perhaps it might be the ammo Apple needs to bring AW 7 ahead of...well...anything.

 

[vitrector]

No comparison

Filemaker is an awesome program that lets anyone program any database, with or without experience. Despite being a huge fan, I admit that it has some serious shortcomings, but the ease of use shadows that. And most shortcomings can be dealt with using scripted "work arounds."
I once tried to develop a database in MS Access, and found it somewhat clumsy, though not difficult. Definitely more time consuming. Then I learned that IT here allows Filemaker on the computers (yes we have serious restrictions), and haven't had to go back to Access again! What a blessing.
Currently, I am working with a programmer from our institution on a medium database job for which she is using Access, the institutional standard. It's been almost a year, and a large amount of time spent (though a low priority job for both her and me), and we still have SIGNIFICANT bugs to work out, even though it is a SIMPLE database. I could have written what is necessary in weekend, or a week tops, in Filemaker....
So there is a real world comparison.
And I am not a MS hater; I just like Macs and Filemaker....

 

[sturm375]

Originally posted by GregGomer
Good to hear someones thoughts on 4D, I've looked at it before, but it just looked confusing, and much harder to use then File Maker.

I hope that the new FileMaker with multiple tables in One file will allow use to use relational databases on the web now. In the past, you could only host one file on a web site, and any links to other files didn't work. Which made this feature nearly unusable to me. So if this is fixed, that alone will be a huge huge huge new feature, and I'll upgrade for sure.

As well, does anyone know if 4D allows you to host web sites that have relational databases. I.e. a customer database connected to a project database?

Thanks,

Greg

4D has a built in web server for dynamic web pages, or to dynamically serve static web pages. Under developmen 4D allows 1 hour of web server, then it shuts down. Quit and restart, and you have another hour. The web extension license, which by the way is needed to serve Web Services, is an extra charge, but once purchased, allows unlimited web clients.

Not having ever used FileMaker myself, I can only repeat what I've heard from others. Once you go 4D, you ask yourself why you would ever go back. You can do anything from building a relational database without any programing, to adding some custom code, and create very nice applications. I have used MS Access, and can honestly say that 4D is 100x more powerfull, and easier.

I also know that due to the Web Services implimentations, 4D won best in show at a recent Macworld convention. The global community of tech help is extremely nice, knowledgable, and accessable.

 

[iJed]

This is sounding very promising... Its been a while since I owned or used a copy of FileMaker but this version has got me really interested. I've been looking for a good low-end DBMS for a while now and FileMaker 7 looks like it will be it. I'm sure it will be rather easy to learn too coming from an Oracle background.

 

[Juicy]

FM, Inc. is missing the boat: SQL/MySQL

I love FM. But it's nowhere near as fast MySQL. And I need that speed for web apps. On the other hand, even with phpMyAdmin, MySQL is nowhere near as easy to use as FM.

FM, Inc. needs to seriously reconsider their complete isolation from the rest of the database world. They have all the pieces to make something extraordinary out of FM. But they seem too satisfied with making marginal improvements, and treading water.

First: FM should fully support SQL. In and out. In a very straightforward manner. It would be the underpinning for making a FM a great management (and even backup) tool for SQL DBs.

Second: FM should add a mode that makes it a complete front-end to MySQL. MySQL users would flock to it in droves. Imagine the power of using the FM interface with MySQL DBs! (Why doesn't FM, Inc. want this money?)

And last: MS Access has a mode that is so natural, so intuitive, so Mac-like, that it's a wonder it's been a PC-only option for so many years: schema view. A user can manipulate an E-R diagram to make changes to his DB schema! FM needs this! Imagine the power of using FM in schema view to design, construct and maintain MySQL databases! Talk about a killer app!

FM, Inc.: please step up to the plate on this! Don't settle for hugs from your choir. Make FM7 insanely great! It's completely within your grasp to dominate this part of the database world. But you need to do it now, before MS makes friends with the open source world and Access beats you to it!

-B...

 

[outZider]

Regarding schema view, take a look at OpenBase.

 

[Juicy]

OpenBase price

The price of OpenBase puts it out of the scope of this discussion. Neither MySQL nor FileMaker compete in that price range. But working together (in the manner I described), they could eat into that higher price range. And FM, Inc. could enjoy the profit.

-B...

 

[Mezzo]

Re: FM, Inc. is missing the boat: SQL/MySQL

And last: MS Access has a mode that is so natural, so intuitive, so Mac-like, that it's a wonder it's been a PC-only option for so many years: schema view. A user can manipulate an E-R diagram to make changes to his DB schema! FM needs this! Imagine the power of using FM in schema view to design, construct and maintain MySQL databases! Talk about a killer app!
-B... [/B][/QUOTE]

Well I think that discussions about the "best" database are as useful as discussing the "best" platform (PC, Mac, Linux etc.)

The most important point is, that the individual user is able to develop his own application with as less limitations as possible. I am very pleased with FMPro 6 wether it´s on my Mac or on a PC.

The only thing I wish to get in Version 7 is the easy integration in wordprocessing software e.g. AppleWorks or (if necessary) MS-Word. So there should be the possibility to call up FMPro with a script to add different fields in a letter without using the clipboard.