Thank you for your post!
I am going to move this thread from the FileMaker Community Feedback Space, which is specifically for input on the Community itself, to the Discussions Space where others might find your post easier and offer further advice.
Are you an in-house developer? If so, how many staff are in the organization? Sometimes the site license pricing can work out for a single company if the company is large enough. I think it's unlikely that FileMaker will get rid of site licensing model so why not ask FileMaker sales about site licensing if you haven't already discussed it.
I'll say this without any inside information...and it represents my own personal opinion on the "Legacy" pricing term.
It's a marketing thing. In all my years of working with marketing...I've learned one thing...they like to spin words and use them for strategic reasons. I've seen it done in unethical ways, I've seen it done in genius ways. Many companies will use words to help steer customers in one direction or another. It's not meant to indicate a rule, but more of a preference. FMI's preference is that as many as possible use FLT. But most customers, I would say, are still on AVLA, VLA, and Site Licenses. Site License ( if you have 25+ employees and everyone uses FM ), and VLA w/maintenance being the most economic LONG TERM options. From a marketing standpoint, those options aren't front and center. The FLT is easiest license that will fit many companies entering the FM world. It allows them to get into the product for a fairly low entry cost. And it allows them to not worry about Desktop vs iOS vs WebDirect for how their users will connect.
But I repeat, FMI is highly driven by Marketing. "Legacy" is being used as a marketing nudge. For the software we use, and how we use it, FM doesn't benefit at all by going to a host-only direction. None of their closest competition pushes you into that mold, that I've seen.
Marketing usage ≠ dictionary definition.
I'm confused by your question. If you're running disconnected with Go, your licensing model shouldn't matter. You can synchronize the data from the local databases on the iOS devices back to the server, regardless of the licensing model.
Go does not require a connection to operate. Only FileMaker for Connections does. If you buy separate FileMaker Pro / Advanced licenses, then they don't require a connection, either (as Joshua has laid out).
I have clients using both models (Teams and Legacy) in what appears to be the same way you're describing. What exactly is the issue?
Yep, thinking the same as Mike Mitchell.... There's no reason why FileMaker Go can't be used 'offline' along with using it to connect to a FileMaker for Teams server, though I think the FLT license terms are that there should be a license for each user rather than the number of simultaneous connections to the server (which Legacy licensing with Concurrent Connections offers)...
However, there are also other methods that can be used... I have built solutions for FileMaker Go which work offline for the most part, and then send data, when they have an internet connection, (using the 'Insert from URL...' script step to POST data) to web hosted php scripts etc, which then insert that data into such things as MySQL databases, or even using the FileMaker php API to insert into a database hosted on a Filemaker Server, thereby avoiding the need for concurrent connection licenses or FileMaker for Teams altogether, i.e. the 'app' in FileMaker Go can be used by a much higher number of people without licensing issues....
And this is the best thing about FileMaker Go - that it does work offline!, as well as being able to communicate with online systems and APIs. I really can't think of anything else for iOS that allows me to easily build sophisticated 'apps' like this that work offline, with all the functionality of barcode scanning, insertion of photos, signatures, GPS etc, and everything else that is possible with FileMaker solutions for Go :-)