FileMaker Pro 13 Prematurely Appears on Apple's Online Store [Updated]

[fmwiz]

The big problem with Bento was that, as I understood, it was not compatible with FileMaker DBs. Our address book, mailing lists, label formats and such is in FileMaker Pro 5. Bento would have required us to reenter and recreate everything. Right now I'm keeping one system running Snow Leopard ONLY so I can run FMP5 under Rosetta. I wish SOMEBODY would make a basic FM compatible DB program. Even if I lost our formats, I can redo them. What I don't want to do is enter all the names and addresses again.

Unless your FileMaker 5 database is really complex with a lot of calcs and scripts, you should be to just open it up with FileMaker 11 and then open it with FileMaker 12+ and it will pretty much work (a few of the printable layouts might need to be adjusted). A FileMaker consultant should be able to help you with this pretty easily to find one go to http://developer.filemaker.com/search/

I can't even export my project to other databases, FM-pro uses some special formats that cant be exported easily. FM-pro in its basics sucks but its the only database runtime maker i could handle as a non professional.

This is outright false, you can export as Excel, CSV, Tab Separated, DBF, Merge, HTML Table and XML.

I'm actually interested in it again for invoicing but there are plenty of better invoicing solutions i.e. Freshbooks etc. I checked FM site and there are no POS/CRM solutions. Of course there is CRM because FM is a *faux DBMS but there is no CRM + POS system. If FM had a deep dedicated POS module /integration it would be great. FM seems like its mainly used for inventory.

Could someone tell me what OS X POS systems companies are using together with FM? How are these companies sending POS data to FM?

FileMaker is really geared towards building custom apps, as POS is really a commodity app at this point (much like CRM). However if you want a POS in FileMaker one to check out is http://www.kibizsystems.com/

The problem with you people is you're looking backwards. You need to be looking forwards. In 20 to 30 years businesses and government will still want access to their data. Perhaps you aren't so long sighted but even many consumers would like to continue to have access to their media, movies, songs and other data down the road. You're looking the wrong way.

Considering we commonly convert FileMaker 3 (released in 1995) databases to FileMaker 11 then 12 I am not sure why you think the data would not be accessible down the line.

 

[ejb190]

Considering we commonly convert FileMaker 3 (released in 1995) databases to FileMaker 11 then 12 I am not sure why you think the data would not be accessible down the line.

And I frequently run FM 8, 9, 10, and 11 - all connected, running the same database on the same network! The things is you have to watch out for are features or scripts that the earlier versions don't support.

 

[DonMega]

Real professionals use the right tool for the job...

Adobe's big leaps forward to me have been in ACR. But hey, that's just my opinion .

r.harris you are absolutely correct. That's why I'm still using Aperture + Photoshop. And according to the IRS, I'm a professional photographer. I made 45% of my gross income this year and last year from my photography.

As for the original topic, I have no problems with FileMaker doing what I want it to, I'd just like it to use the power in my Mac Pro more efficiently. I've got six cores at its disposal and it will only take advantage of one.

 

[fmwiz]

As for the original topic, I have no problems with FileMaker doing what I want it to, I'd just like it to use the power in my Mac Pro more efficiently. I've got six cores at its disposal and it will only take advantage of one.

FileMaker Server is multi-threaded and can take advantage of all the cores. One thing to understand with any database doing multiple threads is hard and can lead to deadlocks, etc.

 

[Solomani]

I'd say the reverse, suck Claris / FileMaker back into Apple, their prices are ridiculous compared to Apple's in-house pro software and not in the same league.

Amen. Years ago, the Apple-owned subsidiary Claris/Filemaker was doing everything right, they even made timely updates to products like AppleWorks and Filemaker Pro.

In the last couple of years, Filemaker seems to have been sitting on their butts, doing nothing to go forward, and what few products they do have they have butchered to the point of alienating customers (e.g. Bento).

If Filemaker is not able to get its act together soon, it may be time for Apple to close down the moribund Filemaker Inc. and just annex it right back into Apple.

 

[G4DP]

They need to spin Aperture and the other "Pro" software off into their own subsidiary like they did Filemaker. Where the hell is Aperture 4.0?

They didn't spin anything off. The bought the company.

 

[9000]

The important question: is this going to be yet another dumbed-down and iOSified version of an otherwise great software?

If it is: FileMaker, I hardly knew you. I thought you were just for making files. But I'm going to miss you.

About the hardware, I don't think very many pros can use a new Mac Pro without PCI slots! VVVV

 

[DonMega]

They didn't spin anything off. The bought the company.

They spun off Claris which in turn bought the fledgling FileMaker from Nashoba Systems. So, in essence we are both right.

 

[Mac4Felix]

Smile ....

Wow. So many dumb statements from clueless people.

There is actually no better product available to develop smart business solutions for small and medium businesses or corporate departments.

FileMaker Pro is very a powerful and stable tool for innovative solution development.

Apps, solutions and systems made with FileMaker Pro offer businesses to increase productivity manyfold at a very reasonable cost.

Only clueless and ignorant people would judge negatively about FileMaker Pro. Watch the space!

 

[robbyx]

Given Apple's history of dumping products I would not want to use Filemaker. The sorts of things one does with a database system one wants to be able to keep doing for the next 20 or 30 years, including having full access to all old data. Apple has a terrible reputation for very poor legacy support. Businesses need legacy support so they can continue to access their data and applications. Unlike consumers we don't want to reinvent the wheel every three to five years.

I'm pretty blown away by some of the ignorant comments in this thread. It's pretty obvious that the naysayers haven't really used the product or are home users balking at the price.

First, FileMaker is a separate company. Apple owns it, but that's all. It's run independently. It's also profitable and has been for years. FileMaker is the #1 selling database for Mac and PC. It's been developed and supported for 20+ years. The suggestion that Apple is going to simply abandon it on a whim is asinine (especially as they're prepping to release version 13).

As for the product itself, there's no other tool on the market that does what FileMaker does. You don't need a computer science degree to rapidly develop a custom, multi-user, cross-platform GUI application, much less maintain and support it. It's far more than a dumb form generator as others have very wrongly suggested.

FileMaker is expensive because it's a specialized tool. It's not a mass market product anymore than AutoCAD is (and I don't see anyone tearing AutoDesk a new one for their pricing). So many ignorant and just plain stupid comments in this thread. Wow.

----------

Reading some comments I'm a bit worried.

A few weeks ago I posted a thread asking for advice on the best OS X business management software/database. I have a friend who is branching out her business, using Square as her backend as she she has been a Square client for a while. I just got her a Square Stand for her iPad w/ a cash drawer and USB scanner. I recommended FileMaker Pro 12 Advanced - seems robust, can be tailored and has iOS apps. Either that or use Square's dashboard and Square Market which tracks sales, inventory, site hosting, etc. but worried it may be limiting and will lock her into Square's system. My other recommendation is a 2-bay Synology server for "Time Machine", web site hosting, business database, surveillance station, etc.

I recommended FileMaker Pro as I've used it for many small - med business clients in the past. Yet some have stated Apple may drop support (is this owned by Apple?), and other such comments.

Given she needs a system to track clients, inventory, business records, etc and allow access for other business partners and employees (esp. via iOS apps), is this the best system? I intended to make a custom business template tailored to her needs, now I'm a bit concerned.

Thanks!

Don't let ignorant comments scare you from using a great tool. Why would Apple abandon a financially successful product? Why would they be planning to release version 13? Why would they have been developing and supporting it for 20+ years? The FileMaker haters in this thread are, frankly, full of you-know-what. There's no other tool like FileMaker out there with that kind of bang for your buck.

----------

Amen. Years ago, the Apple-owned subsidiary Claris/Filemaker was doing everything right, they even made timely updates to products like AppleWorks and Filemaker Pro.

In the last couple of years, Filemaker seems to have been sitting on their butts, doing nothing to go forward, and what few products they do have they have butchered to the point of alienating customers (e.g. Bento).

If Filemaker is not able to get its act together soon, it may be time for Apple to close down the moribund Filemaker Inc. and just annex it right back into Apple.

Why would they do that? FileMaker is profitable. Get their act together? Sitting on their butts? Do you even use FileMaker? They've been doing a lot of great work. Version 7 was a sea change. Their interface tools have vastly improved over the past few versions. Script Triggers were a profound change and have made the product into a legit tool for creating custom applications. Nevermind the fact that they've rolled out an iOS version in the past few years too. And how can you complain about "timely updates" when they've been releasing new versions every 12-18 months? What do you want from them? Unbelievable.

----------

I can't even export my project to other databases, FM-pro uses some special formats that cant be exported easily. FM-pro in its basics sucks but its the only database runtime maker i could handle as a non professional.

Totally false. You can export your data in a variety of formats. There are also third party solutions for migrating FileMaker schema and data to other database systems.

 

[mdelvecchio]

Given Apple's history of dumping products I would not want to use Filemaker. The sorts of things one does with a database system one wants to be able to keep doing for the next 20 or 30 years, including having full access to all old data. Apple has a terrible reputation for very poor legacy support. Businesses need legacy support so they can continue to access their data and applications. Unlike consumers we don't want to reinvent the wheel every three to five years.

I think you missed the part where it read Claris is a subsidiary of apple. not the same company, not the same management. FileMaker has been around since the '80s -- thirty years.

 

[Bonte]

Totally false. You can export your data in a variety of formats. There are also third party solutions for migrating FileMaker schema and data to other database systems.

You can do it with some hard work but i made a runtime for thousands of users, streamlining such a commercial product is a nightmare. With every osX update it lost functionality until it totally stoppend working, updating was practically imposible because the database files themself need to be replaced and the user has to import his data from the old version.

Totally worthless, maybe its become better now but i don't trust it anymore.

 

[jscooper22]

I've been developing FileMaker since 1994 (v2.1). It's fascinating to see the lengths people go through to disparage a piece of software they clearly don't understand or just don't like.

FileMaker doesn't make files or make forms. It is a database system that can be run on a single machine, served to a small number of clients from that same machine, or loaded onto a server so other systems and platforms can talk to it. It can connect (and be connected) via ODBC. Data can be imported and exported to just about anything, and there's a PHP engine to handle data calls from the web.

What I've noticed over the years, is that many of it's users are people who wander into the Apple Store or Best Buy and say "I need a database" and are handed FileMaker. A solution can literally be built in a matter of minutes (it'll be ugly, but it'll work). It can grow in size and complexity until the user hits a knowledge wall and needs to call a consultant (which I was for many years).

OK, maybe I sound like a commercial. But like I said I've been using this thing for nearly 20 years. During the same time I've also developed in Sybase, SQL Server, Access, VB, PHP, etc. FileMaker is far and away my favorite. I currently manage an IT Dept for an architecture firm and FileMaker is one of our key pieces of software along with suites from Microsoft, Adobe and Nemetchek. When someone asks me if a program exists to do X, often I tell them "Nope. But we can make one!"

If you come from a traditional database world, it takes some getting used to. The IDE and the UI are the same app; there's a "table occurrence" concept that makes context very important, and, like most systems, there are times when you think "why the heck should I need to spend a day working around the way it does THIS?" But overall, it's saved my firm, and my past clients, more time and money, and with fewer pains, than trying something in Access, Oracle or anything else.

Here ends my Monday Morning Rant. Have a nice week.

Jeff

 

[maflynn]

I was expecting this, since I just bought FMP 12

 

[FieldingMellish]

I have been using the product since the Claris days and recall how things got once version 7 came out with relational capability. We were clearly not in Kansas anymore. I liken it to Photoshop insofar as how much of the cool stuff lay hidden until it's needed. Only then, does the user start to understand how capable and complex the software is. Filemaker versions that followed started folding into the software aspects that only the power users knew how to pull off via workarounds. Same with Photoshop.

 

[Wintermute121]

Who is “backwards” here?

The problem with you people is you're looking backwards. You need to be looking forwards. In 20 to 30 years businesses and government will still want access to their data. Perhaps you aren't so long sighted but even many consumers would like to continue to have access to their media, movies, songs and other data down the road. You're looking the wrong way.

I find it amazing how you seem to know more about database management systems, file format longevity, portability etc. than anyone else in this thread.

Have you ever actually worked with FileMaker Pro? And by “working”, I don't mean “played with it for one or two hours, then gave up”.

Do you understand the product and its features? Do you know that and how you can import and export many (quasi-)standard formats, including CSV, tab-delimited text files and XML?

Can you maybe tell us about another DBMS that supports access to legacy files in your "20 to 30 years" timeframe? Please narrow down to products that can be maintained as easily as FM Pro. Make sure it's cross-platform (iOS, OS X, web).

You may be a database professional who has outgrown FileMaker. Good for you. Or you may not know what you are talking about, talking trash about one of the most stable and mature products for OS X.

As for my own FM Pro experience: I've been using it since version 2, which I bought May 1, 1993. I know this, because I just looked it up in a FileMaker database that has all my business transaction data ever since I started working with computers. This DB started its life as a very simple flat file in an obscure Atari ST database application in 1987. Since 1993, my data has been sitting in FM Pro, and I've been adding a bazillion features. It's stable, I have never (!) lost any data, the UI is looking as polished as commercial software, and I did all this without knowing how to code myself out of a paperbag. Meanwhile, I have owned about a dozen Mac and survived countless OS updates. No other software from the early nineties has survived in my toolbox, but FM (I'm at version 11) just keeps on working.

But I guess you know better. Because you don’t “look backwards”.

 

[Daalseth]

Unless your FileMaker 5 database is really complex with a lot of calcs and scripts, you should be to just open it up with FileMaker 11 and then open it with FileMaker 12+ and it will pretty much work (a few of the printable layouts might need to be adjusted). A FileMaker consultant should be able to help you with this pretty easily to find one go to http://developer.filemaker.com/search/

True. My FM stuff is exceedingly basic, however for that very reason I'm not willing to invest several hundred dollars in the new FM. This is why I was so hoping Bento would have worked. It was like $79.

 

[longterm]

However, this is exactly the reason I won't buy filemaker.... because its not in the store. I own 3 computers which I would like to run a small database on, I am NOT going to buy 3 copies, so it is (badly) done in numbers so I can have the same data set available via iCloud.

You don't HAVE TO have 3 copies:

With one license, you can use the same license to install on all 3 computers. Here's the catch though: if you're accessing a file hosted in FileMaker Server, only ONE of these 3 computers can use the database at any one time. However, if you only use it on one machine at any one time, you're good to go.

FileMaker's price is in line with high-end professional-grade software like Photoshop or digital audio software (which is much much more in some cases).

The question I pose to small company owners is this: how much do you value your time? How much do you value your data? Complaining about the relatively small price of FileMaker for a business is like a cab driver saying, "I'm going to use cheap used tires because good ones are too expensive. I'll have a lot of flats and I'll lose fares and my reputation will be tarnished, but hey, I want to use cheap products."

 

[fmwiz]

You can do it with some hard work but i made a runtime for thousands of users, streamlining such a commercial product is a nightmare. With every osX update it lost functionality until it totally stoppend working, updating was practically imposible because the database files themself need to be replaced and the user has to import his data from the old version.

Totally worthless, maybe its become better now but i don't trust it anymore.

Sounds like you were in over your head with the app then, as there are many ways to import the data from old runtime versions into a newer runtime version via an automated fashion. FileMaker even documented one in their help files http://www.filemaker.com/help/html/fmpa_tools.24.17.html

 

[Casiotone]

that is what Filemaker Advanced is for - you make a database and turn it into a self running 'runtime' application that you can provide to as many workstations as you like - 2 or 2000....

A self running 'runtime' application is a local database. I guess you can move the data to an external shared database, but that complicates thing and adds some overhead. It also means that you can't do quick bug fixes and add features without having everyone download a new version of the runtime.

For a simple solution it might do, but a runtime is simply not the same thing as connecting to a remote database.

What I'm asking for is simply the equivalent of Filemaker Go on iOS, a free viewer/editor that can connect to remote databases, but for Mac/PC.

----------

You don't HAVE TO have 3 copies:

With one license, you can use the same license to install on all 3 computers. Here's the catch though: if you're accessing a file hosted in FileMaker Server, only ONE of these 3 computers can use the database at any one time. However, if you only use it on one machine at any one time, you're good to go.

FileMaker's price is in line with high-end professional-grade software like Photoshop or digital audio software (which is much much more in some cases).

The question I pose to small company owners is this: how much do you value your time? How much do you value your data? Complaining about the relatively small price of FileMaker for a business is like a cab driver saying, "I'm going to use cheap used tires because good ones are too expensive. I'll have a lot of flats and I'll lose fares and my reputation will be tarnished, but hey, I want to use cheap products."

I don't think you're allowed to install a single license on multiple computers, it's just that the copy protection can't detect it until you share a database over the network.

I'm not complaining about the price overall, but it would make sense to make a free client much like they did on iOS, or better volume pricing for small businesses.

 

[Crispinhodges]

It's a database program... and it does a friggin' lot. Bento was a poor attempt at making an affordable version... and lacked a lot of features from its bigger brother.

Sadly Bento had a few features that FileMaker lacks too. Like calendar and contacts integration on osx

 

[Foresee]

The problem with you people is you're looking backwards. You need to be looking forwards. In 20 to 30 years businesses and government will still want access to their data. Perhaps you aren't so long sighted but even many consumers would like to continue to have access to their media, movies, songs and other data down the road. You're looking the wrong way.

Quite often looking back gives you a good perspective of things to come. The point here is that FileMaker has had a great track record since the early adopters of the Mac and now it runs quite nicely on a PC. What other database has had that type of longevity and is cross platform? I can provide you with a very thorough list of those that have come and gone. Give me a good example of a technology or data type that was just thrown out the window one day with no possible migration? And as far as FileMaker is concerned, there are a number of ways to export the data and to import it into another system with little difficulty. If all you are doing is thinking 20-30 years into the future then you would never pick a platform. You might think about crawling into your bunker to escape the madness.

 

[lkeyes]

FileMaker Sucks? -- I guess I didn't get the memo.

Hm..... worked with FM version 4 many years ago (late 90's?) to build an application to display property photos for a code-enforcement office. At the time it was the only database that could robustly deal with large external media files, (like photos). Currently building cross-platform applications with FM12 for Mac/Windows/OSx for medical surveying, budgeting, grant applications, you-name-it.

Want to see your data from Oracle or mySQL, or SQL-Server on an iPad, in an attractive, slick, and responsive interface? In literally about an hour of development time?

Want to build an OSX business application in an order-of-magnitude less time than writing a native iPhone/iPad app? Or, at least prototype your native app to see what you're going to be developing?

Want to quickly put a front-end on a database and deploy it to up to five internal users via a browser-based interface? on Macs and PCs? (for the cost of a single copy of FM12 at $299, ($179 for non-profits and education. customers).

What other database allows you to create the screens and all of the database back end, including ODBC connections to big iron databases, and then deploy it to Windows desktops, Mac desktops, iPhones, iPads, and to anyone with a browser?

And that's just the plain vanilla desktop version. With the developer's version, you can create native Windows or Mac single-user runtimes, and it includes additional debugging and programming support.

The nice thing about it is that you can create solutions for "in-between" types of applications, currently held in spreadsheets, or in Access tables, that would otherwise be too expensive to produce in a one of those "real databases".

The combination of mySQL on the backend and FM on the front end, however, is, as they say.... awesome.

 

[\-V-/]

Sadly Bento had a few features that FileMaker lacks too. Like calendar and contacts integration on osx

I'm going to miss the simplicity of Bento... going to have to re-teach my folks a new program to deal with their 15 year list of customers. Fortunately, FMP imports the Bento data just fine... but with a great amount of interface tweaking. I'm eager to see what FMP 13 will be like.

 

[Bonte]

Sounds like you were in over your head with the app then, as there are many ways to import the data from old runtime versions into a newer runtime version via an automated fashion. FileMaker even documented one in their help files http://www.filemaker.com/help/html/fmpa_tools.24.17.html

I used it with FMpro 4 up to 9 and then gave up, the file formats changed a few times, the muti-file approach changed to 1 file and only later we could use SQL. Imposible to update runtimes but i had to because the old version was getting errors and eventually stopt working on osX.

I lost my trust in FM-pro and real pro's are better off with server software and html-5 i would think.