1 2 3 Previous Next 33 Replies Latest reply on Dec 12, 2015 6:58 PM by taylorsharpe

    Upgrading from 9 to 14

    thor24

      Hi,

      I had developed many business and government programs over the years as a Filemaker Developer but retired a few years ago. Recently I've volunteered to help a community based organization that has a number of Filemaker solutions.

      Unfortunately they have been upgrading as they assumed that was the right thing to do even though their databases have never been modified since being developed on version 5 then 7. I personally decided to stop upgrading when Filemaker went to version 10 when the comfortable interface was replaced by a somewhat confusing change for what appeared to be no valid technical reason.

      As I have now found none of their databases will work on earlier versions. I can't help even though I have access to version 14 it will not run on my imac with snow leopard. Catch 22 pay up or get out seems to be the catch cry with Filemaker these days. I've been studying the community organization's data bases using version 14 and have confirmed my original sense that Filemaker has turned into a money making machine. Good luck to them and their shareholders I guess. The older Filemaker gurus must be turning in their graves or now retired and just don't care.

      I find it interesting that all of my clients going back 20 years are still running my solutions with no interest in upgrading to anything. The oldest runtime is still running on Windows 10 and Filemaker Yosemite. Imagine if the bean counters now at Filemaker had been running it way back then, nothing would still be working unless you paid to upgrade every year.

      I know I'm an old fogey but honest criticism is justified sometimes.

        • 1. Re: Upgrading from 9 to 14
          taylorsharpe

          Your comments are interesting, but I may suggest very dangerous.  The reason why I suggest this has nothing to do with functionality and user interface, it has to do with security.  If your data is valuable in the hands of others, then following your advice to stay with old software is very risky.  And this is not just true of FileMaker, it is true of all platforms and frameworks. 

           

          I am sorry you are not comfortable with the user interface changes and often such changes a matter of personal preference, but major changes were made to get FileMaker away from a proprietary user interface to one based on current industry and security standards such as CSS.  The interface also significantly changed to accommodate the rapidly growing mobile and web markets that simply could not be accommodated in older versions. 

           

          It is easy to call any software corporation a "money making machine".  Technically, every corporation exists to return revenue to share holders and you could call all corporations "money making machines" because that is their purpose.  But corporations that do not deliver acceptable products and improvements quickly get discarded.  And if you find FileMaker licensing expensive, the costs of most big SQL engine corporations is significantly more.  But I'm kind of interested in hearing this perspective from you as a former developer because development cost is more than the cost of software licensing.  In-house developer's often consider FM expensive because in-house developers are often not looking at the cost of their own salaries, but only licensing costs.  FM can really become a bargain if you look at the total cost of ownership that looks at not only licensing, but development costs.  There are times when FM is not the best tool, but it really does have a sweet spot in keeping development costs low through a smooth integration of schema, UI and security when rapid application development is a priority. 

           

          Of course you always have the choice to use open source databases that do not have a licensing cost such as MySQL, Maria, Postgres, SQLite.  While those are great products, they are not rapid application development tools.  But maybe you have volunteer development help and in that case, more complex development work is not a priority compared to the cost of software licensing. 

           

          It is OK to be an old fogey, but I disagree that your criticism because it advises people to continue using software that has known security vulnerabilities and places your clients at risk of data breaches and law suits.  The world is changing and keeping current on software is much more important than it was 10 or 20 years ago. 

          • 2. Re: Upgrading from 9 to 14
            thor24

            I guess it depends on the 'industry' you assume the program is being developed. Filemaker, until version 9 was ideal for small business, now it is not. I still say the cost and upgradeable issues make Filemaker too expensive for small business and I mean the smaller end, owners with maybe 2 or 3 staff. The earlier system could be developed and used for many years, however, making the upgradeable versions non useable in earlier OS adds to the cost of keeping up.

            I've just taken on the responsibility of voluntarily assisting an organisation who have unwittingly been caught up in the costly upgrading of  Filemaker when there was absolutely no necessity to do that. The security issues you raise are of no concern to small businesses so I guess that's not the market of any interest to Filemaker. These businesses are not into networking over the net, SQL or any other higher end products.

            So I stand by what I said in relation to the market that used to be there. 

            • 3. Re: Upgrading from 9 to 14
              Mike_Mitchell

              thor24 wrote:

               

              I The security issues you raise are of no concern to small businesses so I guess that's not the market of any interest to Filemaker. These businesses are not into networking over the net, SQL or any other higher end products.

               

              Well, they may not be concerned, but they should be. 30% of data breaches target small business, and 2/3 target businesses with less than 1,000 employees. 60% of SMBs (small-to-medium businesses) close within 6 months of a data breach, and 72% close within 2 years.

               

              Your accusation that FileMaker doesn't care about small businesses, against the above statistic, doesn't match reality. If FileMaker doesn't improve the security posture of their product, they put their customers at risk of being bankrupted by a breach.

               

              Ignorance of the danger doesn't make it go away.

              • 4. Re: Upgrading from 9 to 14
                Markus Schneider

                FileMaker today is still ideal for small business IMHO. The .fp7 - format was introduced in 2004 and 2012 the .fmp12 - format came out with quite fine changes. Today, one can even create an own, personalized 'app' for iOS with FileMaker/Filemaker Go - what is fantastic for fossils like me who once programmed HP pocket-calculators.

                 

                Switching from .fp7 to .fmp12 is very easy - normally no manual changes needed. Therefore, FM is really end-user-friendly. When one buys one license, costs are really low - over the years. Costs for a license became even cheaper IMHO..

                 

                One of the problems today is the fast-OS-switching... every year a new OS with good chances that one or another thing becomes broken in existing, older app's. In this context, Runtimes are more problematic since they contain 'engine' and 'data' - a new OS that gets rid of some internal functions can break a Runtime. Windows seems to be more 'robust' in this sense than OSX - but one can convert the .fp7 format to .fmp12 - and create a new Runtime. done :-)

                 

                But one needs a more or less current OS.. not just for FM14, browsers will have issues as well (and almost no software is backwards-compatible.. new versions will read/use older ones, but old ones can't do anything with newer ones...

                 

                just my 5c.

                • 5. Re: Upgrading from 9 to 14
                  Tom_Droz

                  thor24

                  I know your just venting, but it is a fun topic!

                   

                  I am a slow adapter.  I still am running word 2002 and think it is better than the current version.

                   

                  I have a solution built on FM12.  When 13 came out I had zero interest in upgrading as the feature set was not that compelling.  When 14 came out, I waited for v3 then upgraded my entire solution.  This took me a good 2 months with a lot of 70 hours weeks.  Why?  Well they had new features that made my solution much easier to use.   My users never like change.   So if I waited for them to demand an upgrade that might be a long time in coming. 

                   

                  My updated solution is cleaner, neater, and faster.   However FM 14 is the most buggy version I have ever used (I started with version 1.something)

                   

                  Just my 2 cents

                  Tom

                  • 6. Re: Upgrading from 9 to 14
                    taylorsharpe

                    thor24 wrote ... The security issues you raise are of no concern to small businesses so I guess that's not the market of any interest to Filemaker. These businesses are not into networking over the net, SQL or any other higher end products.

                    So I stand by what I said in relation to the market that used to be there.

                     

                    You don't have to be serving the data over the internet to be vulnerable.  If you are on the internet, there are security risks.  Being off the internet means you are not using a web browser or getting email or messaging or any of those things that are inherently on the internet.  If they do any of these things, they are on the net and it is just inherently part of computing now to be on the net.  One you realize you are on the net, there are all kinds of hacks to take over and/or access files on a computer.  Security is still very important.  Additionally, most hacks happen against small businesses.  But what is worse, most small businesses are not sophisticated enough to even know they have been hacked or what information they have lost.  You are advising them to do something for which they are not prepared to defend against nor even know when something has gone wrong.  For example, someone hacks in via a hijacked browser or file sharing, then your data can get copied.  That is why it is not only important to keep up on FM versions, but also your operating system and web browser.    

                     

                    I will not disagree that if you have a solution that is not networked, that you can still be safe running an older OS and version of FM.  Just make sure they know not to connect it to the internet. 

                    • 7. Re: Upgrading from 9 to 14
                      Markus Schneider

                      really don't love to say that - but +1 (buggiest version is V14)

                      • 8. Re: Upgrading from 9 to 14
                        Benjamin Fehr

                        You know we don't agree on this. I still believe that FMP12 is the greatest disaster in FMI history!

                        Anyway, stay away from FMP 12 AND FMP 14.

                         

                        FMP 13 is cool √

                        • 9. Re: Upgrading from 9 to 14
                          taylorsharpe

                          efficientbizz wrote:

                           

                          You know we don't agree on this. I still believe that FMP12 is the greatest disaster in FMI history!

                          Anyway, stay away from FMP 12 AND FMP 14.

                           

                          FMP 13 is cool √

                           

                          If you are a coder and writing scripts, there just is no way to go back to the old way of writing scripts after you get used to the new Script Workspace in FMP 14.  That alone makes my development time much more efficient and 14 worth its value to me. 

                           

                          What did you not like about FMP 12?  The new data structure (*.fmp12)?  Moving the User Interface to CSS?  Or that the server technology went 64 bit?  Or are you talking about the number of bugs?  Just curious in particular as to why you consider 12 a disaster. 

                           

                          I personally find FMPA 14 to be stable on my computer, but have had a few annoying crashes.  Most of what I don't like really is not unexpected behaviors, but just are not the way I want it to behave.  So FM won't consider that a bug.  What I will say is that I find it very impressive the stability of the server service which has always been rock solid for me in 12+. 

                          • 10. Re: Upgrading from 9 to 14
                            Mike_Mitchell

                            Taylor Sharpe wrote:

                            If you are a coder and writing scripts, there just is no way to go back to the old way of writing scripts after you get used to the new Script Workspace in FMP 14.  That alone makes my development time much more efficient and 14 worth its value to me.

                             

                             

                            This.

                            • 11. Re: Upgrading from 9 to 14
                              Markus Schneider

                              I believe that we are not allowed to create a poll (-:

                               

                              we created a handfull solutions under V12, lost one customer (with a big solution) because of that slow-down in the data-def's (that FMI never officially was able to reproduce) - and left that construction site...

                              • 12. Re: Upgrading from 9 to 14
                                Markus Schneider

                                if You have to work on more than just the current version, if You are on Windows: You'll hate the scriptworkspace with it's upside down placement, with that new debugger interface.

                                Further on, the new editors won't be available on all developer interfaces

                                and on Windows, it's slooow

                                • 13. Re: Upgrading from 9 to 14
                                  Mike_Mitchell

                                  I work on both platforms regularly. I don’t have any problems with performance on Windows, even Windows 7.

                                   

                                  I’m fine with the debugger interface; in fact, I love the ability to click the “debug” button and have it launch the debugger automatically.

                                   

                                  But, to each his own.

                                   

                                  P.S. I don’t know what “new editors won’t be available” means.

                                  • 14. Re: Upgrading from 9 to 14
                                    Benjamin Fehr

                                    If you are a coder and writing scripts, there just is no way to go back to the old way of writing scripts after you get used to the new Script Workspace in FMP 14.

                                    It was a great change of habits but I agree. If you get familiar with it, you do scripts work much faster at the end.

                                     

                                    What did you not like about FMP 12?

                                    I got badly hurt by those > 360 bugs (according to PhilModJunk Buglist) and the 30% loss of performance (estimate by HOnza). CSS is a great move forward but needed some improvements which we got with FMP13.

                                     

                                    We're certainly moving into the right direction and I wouldn't doubt those major decision with change of file protocol and CSS introduced with FM12.

                                    For me, FM is gonna be the best and most versatile developer platform as soon as FMI starts to improve SW Quality Assurance - SQA

                                    1 2 3 Previous Next