3 Replies Latest reply on Mar 6, 2017 9:01 AM by amysink

    Migrating to FLT

    deanchampeau

      We're being "encouraged" to move to FLT licensing, where the basis for pricing is user count rather than the number of concurrent connections. That's arguably a great way to go, and apparently it's industry-standard. Nevertheless, it is pretty jarring for me, who has always enjoyed the flexibility of the concurrent-connection model. As I understand it, if we upgrade our contract with FMI under the CC model, we can lock in that pricing model for another 3 years. But after that, it sounds like FLT is going to be the only option. My FMI rep didn't say this explicitly, but that's how I interpret things.

       

      Anyway, even though change is rough (for me at least), I'm trying to embrace the idea of FLT. But FMI could make it easier for people like me to get behind the change if they did some things that added value to the user "object". The first thing that comes to mind is giving FileMaker Server the ability to run reports on users that shows statistics about login time, the number of commits, the number of visited layouts, that sort of thing. A report like this would allow developers to see what users are truly active and maybe phase out users that are not very active, making room for new users that truly use the solutions. That's just an idea that comes to mind. I'm sure you wizards could come up with a ton of other ideas for making the user-based pricing model more compelling.

       

      Any thoughts?

        • 1. Re: Migrating to FLT
          Johan Hedman

          For future request of FileMaker, please add those at

          Product Ideas

           

          What FMI is saying right now is that you can get fixed price for another 3 years. Things can change, but that is the info that they are going for right now. 

          • 2. Re: Migrating to FLT
            wimdecorte

            deanchampeau wrote:

             

            under the CC model, we can lock in that pricing model for another 3 years. But after that, it sounds like FLT is going to be the only option. My FMI rep didn't say this explicitly, but that's how I interpret things.

             

            That's probably exactly what they want you to think as Sales pressure; so that they can generate the numbers to prove that everybody loves FLT.

             

            I would not worry about FLT if you prefer concurrency, lock in the price for the 3 years.  Nobody can predict what will be the preferred / best licensing model three years from now but I doubt very much that concurrency is going away.  FLT does not fit every business model so not offering a concurrency license would be... well... strange.

            3 of 3 people found this helpful
            • 3. Re: Migrating to FLT
              amysink

              wimdecorte wrote:

               

              Nobody can predict what will be the preferred / best licensing model three years from now but I doubt very much that concurrency is going away. FLT does not fit every business model so not offering a concurrency license would be... well... strange.

               

              FileMaker costs and licensing has been very unpredictable since FileMaker v13 was introduced.