Thank you TSPigeon. I looked, but never could find the release notes. I haven't upgraded to the new version. It seems incremental, so I'll probably upgrade over the weekend when our system isn't being used.
My question regarding a downgrade path was asked from an "abundance of caution". With FM Server proper, I'd be able to test updates before "committing" via the FM developer subscription. With FM Cloud, there doesn't appear to be a similar approach aside from an hourly instance for testing. Is there something that I'm overlooking? This will be more of an issue with October's upgrade to ver 1.16.
Unrelated,I understand that FM Cloud is a fairly new product, but I've had an issue with the lack of detailed documentation specific to FM Cloud. Certain aspects are quite well documented (installation, security, SSL, ...), yet other aspects are not. A prime example would be the fact that FM Cloud is based on FM 15, not FM 16. It would be great to see a more cohesive documentation scheme for FM Cloud similar to the other mature FM products.
Thank you for your response!
I am interested in your observations regarding the FileMaker Cloud documentation. It's clear you had difficulty finding the Release Notes. Were you able to find the Help or the Getting Started Guide?
I hadn't thought to explain the FileMaker Cloud versioning--i.e., 184.108.40.206 indicates the 15 platform--but I will consider it since the scheme is different on Linux.
You should check with the plug-in developer regarding compatibility of the plug-in with the latest version of FileMaker Cloud.
Wow, surprised the Cloud equivalent to FM16 won't arrive until October. Was hoping to try before then. I hope some of the limitations on PSOS will be removed.
Thank you for your reply Victoria,
I had found the Help and Getting Started guide that you have mentioned. In addition, I’ve found a couple of ssl and security setup guides that have been incredibly useful. Now that its been explained, yes the versioning makes perfect sense; unfortunately, I didn’t “put it together” that the 15 referred back to the underlying system tech.
The documentation that I’ve read is well written and quite useful. It allowed for a seamless implementation of the system. It seems to stop at the point of implementation, day-to-day server administration, and the large differences between FM Server and FM Cloud. The flaw I’ve run across is in terms of FM functionality; FM Cloud is often treated the same as FM Server in terms of functions, but they are slightly different products and often referred to as being different, yet there's very little documentation outlining the differences. The versioning is one example (15 vs 16). Other examples are PSOS, pdf processing (which now makes sense since its based off of FM15), server directory access, …. The answers to many of these questions can be found by scouring through discussion boards and reading through different documentation in the sales/marketing guides and the ones discussed above. That being said, what would make this “easier” is one document reviewing the differences. For instance, there was a statement in one documents I read when I was first looking at FM Cloud (not sure which one as this was a while back) that stated that FM Cloud’s access to server directories was very limited. I had a question if this would impact use of PSOS scripts using the server directories for temporary storage. The only way I could find out was to test it. The issue was that at the time I didn’t have access to FM Cloud. I was reworking and testing our FM application using the FM Server via the FM Developer subscription (where it would of course work). More recently, I discovered that json functions didn't work via PSOS; this was because of FM Cloud being based on FM 15.
As far as FM Cloud version testing goes, with the FM Developer subscription, FM applications can be tested with updated versions of FM Server prior to operational implementation. There doesn’t appear to be a similar solution in place for FM Cloud aside from creating another instance with an hourly access (and billing). For our plugin, yes I'll certainly reach out to the developer prior to implementation; I completely get that FM is not responsible for plugin support.
All of this aside, I think the FM Cloud product serves a great purpose. For our company, we don’t have a large user base nor do we have servers. Because our user base is currently small and our FM application's computation requirements are fairly small, the AWS monthly hosting costing, as compared to other hosted solutions, is quite reasonable. I’m looking forward to the future of FM Cloud!
On an unrelated note, I noticed in the release notes that the future FM Cloud 1.16 release will have clients limited to FM16? Why this limitation on clients when FM Server 16 allows clients from FM Pro 14, 15, and16??? I for one have clients using standalone, "retail" FM15 licenses. Licenses I want to keep for redundancy for when AWS (and FM Cloud) goes off line.
From the document:
“FileMaker Cloud 1.16.x (available in October 2017) will only be compatible with FileMaker 16 clients.”
Thank you for the detailed feedback. I agree that differences between Server and Cloud are not described in a systematic way. There is a section in the Help called FileMaker Cloud Considerations that mentions a few, but that could be supplemented.
Would a trial subscription work for testing? You will incur AWS charges but won't be charged for FMC for 15 days.
Client version support is not my area, but I know that others in FileMaker read this forum as well.
Oddly, you and Christian Schmitz (Monkeybread Software) responded at the same time about the trial subscription option. I didn't realize the demo was still an option once you signed up.
Thank you again for your time,