1 2 Previous Next 21 Replies Latest reply on Apr 16, 2012 7:45 AM by jormond

    New features again are not really finished

    intex

      Some of the new features of FM12 are not really finished - same thing has happened in the past for example with script variables not working for every script step, conditional formatting not being conditional objects and so on. FileMaker is more and more getting like a big Swiss cheese. Nice and big but with many holes.

       

      Current lacks are in my opinion:

       

      - FM12 can´t import FM11, 10 or older data without conversion. So how should runtime users import data from an older solution without loosing text formatting and pictures ?

       

      - FM GO is for free - great. But this way the desktop FM is even more expensive for those users, who just want to use a given database in a network. The networkable runtime is missing even more.

       

      - CSS based layouts are cool, but why does FM Advanced not have a stylesheet editor. Why can´t there be styles for headers, group headers, field names, help texts and so on ? Why are there no predefined styles with the native look and feel of the operating systems ? Some of the given styles are really ugly and definitely unusable for serious work ("electric" is awful).

       

      - The new "New window" command is great allowing us to define modal windows, dialogues and - thanks god - runtime solutions finally can have a close button. But why the hell can´t we change the settings on the fly for an existing window ? So we have to close an existing window and reopen it just for changing for example the maximize button state. A start dialogue window is getting difficult this way. And since when does a "dialogue window" have scrollbars ?

       

      - FM12 will live for the next 12 to 18 months I guess - so it will be the program for Lion and Mountain Lion. Did the wholly Apple owned company FileMaker not hear of the new system features of the mother company's OS ? How about iCloud, full screen mode and unvisible scroll bars ?

       

      - Why does the new Advanced not support the Mac App Store in any way ? The store is more than one year old now ...

       

      Any other lacks in the new functionality ?

        • 1. Re: New features again are not really finished
          bedriakay

          yes, additional there is a relational tree error.

          pls see attachment.

          fmpro-error.bmp

          • 2. Re: New features again are not really finished
            gcatnine

            could you pls. explain?

            • 3. Re: New features again are not really finished
              golife

              For user "Intex": ... correct. I agree. All underlined.

               

              I was never really happy with any new Filemaker version as there was always still something missing... and the list of new features implemented was just too short.

               

              • Scripting editor: And why do we have to use one of the most awful script editor I have seen anywhere... I adore LiveCode (Runrev) for such nice scripting environment. That was a great idea, this Hypertext. And it worked. And it even survived. How user friendly all these chunk-expressions (word 1 of line 1 of whatever)... You can do whatever the developer wants do with with each object, move them around, hide them, show them, group them, ungroup them... And in Filemaker? What a difficult and time consuming way of creating, editing and debugging scripts ... And that is the basis of a developers activity. Or is it not? Is this not core functionality? (And do not tell me that otherwise newbies are not capable of learning to write a script. Either someone is ready to write a script, or he/she will never ever write a script.)

              • Scripting layout and visual controls: Why can we not change the layout and visual controls through a script? It must be possible to script a layout, and not only draw it there and create another layout for another situation or screen. That must all be doable through coding. Just by script it is created, edited and built and deleted. What else? What for do we have a computer and system... to automate tasks. Because we want to modify whatever is visible, whatever a user can read, write, hear and see. I expected such functionality 10 years ago.

              • Custom control Lookup Dialog Window: Why is there not a really great and sophisticated lookup/search dialog window since that functionality is used in every application? The current drop down or pop up control is not what I am looking for. It is too primitive. I am looking up customers by name and city and street and some other variable, they are displayed in a nicely aligned table view if more than one is found, I can select ... and go. And the primary key must be invisible whenever I want, and not just when I am using drop-down fields.

               

              • SQL Support: There is now more support for SQL. Great. Why is it still limited and can not be used through all versions of the application, but especially in runtime versions (which must be networkable of course)? How easy it would be to search for customers for example using SQL without all such strange script steps... And that is only an example. To learn SQL is not such a big thing...

               

              • Custom control tables: Why not really have some really cool custom controls such as lists with movable columns also allowing lists inside lists... There are so many nice custom controls around ... Why do we have to live with such a limited set of relatively basic primitive controls?

               

              • Modal windows and others: I agree with user Intex, a modal window does not have scroll bars, and I also do not want to see a close box or anything that looks like a application window while it is only a modal window. And yes, as with all objects, the behaviour of windows and all objects must be scriptable in a dynamic way. (But not with in this horrible scripting environment that hangs on to Filemaker since days immemorial like an aged old hat. Cut it.)

              • Custom control hierarchical lists: What about a hierarchical menu with different visual representations to organize a fantastic dynamic navigation system or any other hierarchical list to use with and without drag and drop? How many applications I could not build just because this hierarchical user control is missing? It is essential. Systems in the 80th were using such controls.

               

              • Style sheets, templates, dictionaries, views: And yes, I want real style sheets, not just themes that just change simply a color schema. I want templates to build upon and master templates for templates for templates. I do NOT want to have to repeat tasks that are parent to many child tasks. I want to keep and overview and control of ALL elements in data dictionaries that are also showing all relationsships between all databases and all instances. I do not want to mess up with dozens of calculated fields presented in the he same fields definition window - or at least I want to have a choice what I want to see and what not, only real fields, or onyl fields of certain type, or only calculated fields, or only help fields. The same with relationships where many relationships only are used for internal help functions, but are not really making the application understood. There must be user defined views to not have all this mess around. I want, I need, I like to have... it is my right as a user. I like to pay for it and see Filemaker as a powerful rich company that leads the forefront of development.

               

              • Professional look & feel of applications: Did you ever see really professionally looking applications made using Filemaker sold on the market? There are not so many. And yes, applications must behave and look professional for the platform developed, and they should not look like a toy that seems to fall apart each time it is used, visually often cluttered without sense of design. Here Filemaker could set guidelines and not come up with themes that are mostly unusuable and graphically even just awful. When all the horses around are galloping, Filemaker seems to trot behind like a donkey. 2 years since the last version. And probably there be some small enhancements again in the next version in 2014? But am I exited waiting for the next version in 2 years? No. Not at all, to be honest. But I would like to look forward to be...

               

              I am around Filemaker since the very very first version came out. I am dissatisfied with the speed of development and the missing vision for something new and someting really enticing. What is sold to us is nothing new and nothing that should not have been there anyway since long considering that Filemaker is around for more 25 years. But I did not give up hope since there are no real competitors I can see yet.

               

              Competition therefore would be a great thing. Where are the competitors?


              My vision for Filemaker would be a marriage of LiveCode with FMP with a lot of enhancements... The best of these worlds together... And it would still be the development environment for the "rest of us" without having to study C++ for one year or more. It still needs study and such really joyful attitude to develop what a customer really wants ...


              Or why not make Filemaker so really rich in everything, that we all will praise it for being the real choice of choices.


              But I fear these are dreams only.

               

              The speed of development for Filemaker needs to be mulitplied by 10. And someone with a great VISION should be employed .

               

              Message was edited by: golife

              • 4. Re: New features again are not really finished
                2ninerniner2

                golife wrote:

                 

                I am around Filemaker since the very very first version came out. I am dissatisfied with the speed of development and the missing vision for something new and someting really enticing. What is sold to us is nothing new and nothing that should not have been there anyway since long considering that Filemaker is around for more 25 years. But I did not give up hope since there are no real competitors I can see yet.

                 

                 

                Same here ... bought Version 1 in the fall of '85 for my brand-new "Fat Mac" - Mac 512   In the intervening 27 years (as of this year), I have bought many an upgrade, but the 12 Advanced upgrade that I bought this week, will probably be my last.

                 

                I have found my "competitor" and am, in a way, sad to say "so long" to FileMaker. This new version just did not measure up to what is going on these days - you know, the web? Not a single enhancement of any consequence for IWP. Native printing? Nope, not with this new version. Native container upload? Nope, not with this new version. This is "rudimentary" functionality for most any serious, modern web app. And which is easily implemented with Alpha Five V11.

                • 5. Re: New features again are not really finished
                  marianco

                  I think you guys that are complaining about all that FileMaker is missing are missing the point. FileMaker is aimed for the consumer, not the database programmer. It is meant to be simple to use so that end users can actually build and develope and modify their own databases. If you add a lot of complexity to FileMaker, then you lose a lot of its soul.

                   

                  If you want a monster version of FileMaker on high dose steroids, then that has already existed for over 20 years: 4th Dimension v.13 has every wish you could ever want and more. Its features are so extensive most professional 4D developers never get to read more than a fraction of the 4D documentation in their careers.  It is easy to write for since the language was originally based the Pascal language which is a lot simpler than C++.  You should feel right at home since even FileMaker copied 4D's relationship diagram. If you want a fusion of RunRev and FileMaker, then 4D is even more  - a ton more.

                   

                  4D is for the big boys - or those who think they are outgrowing FileMaker. You can create compiled stand alone databases with the developer version that are up to 2000 times faster than what you can do with FileMaker. 

                  • 6. Re: New features again are not really finished
                    marianco

                    Note that 4D, Inc has dedicated itself to an aggressive 18th month cycle for releasing new version upgrades of 4D. They also frequently release multiple bug fix versions per year if you join their partner program in addition to their official intermediate updates. If you want rapid development by the company, 4D will give it to you in spades.

                     

                    The only problem with 4D is whether or not you will be able to keep up with it. Your head will spin with how much power it give you. You can get lost like the Sorcerer's Apprentice.

                     

                    4D is like a stick shift Formula 1 race car on nitro. It will allow you to do anything you ever wished or dream FileMaker could do. FileMaker, on the other hand, is like riding a car with a chauffeur and you do the back seat driving.

                    • 7. Re: New features again are not really finished
                      intex

                      sorry, but I didn´t mention anything that would be consumer unfriendly, the opposite is true

                       

                      - what is consumer friendly with the incapability of directly importing fmp7 fileformat ?

                      - would a normal user of Filemaker wonder about the option to change an exisiting window when he can change a new window ?

                      - is Lion full screen and iCloud support only for programmers ?

                      - FM Pro is most often too expensive for people who only want to use existing database and not creating new ones.  That has nothing to do with pro or consumer - it´s just a fact.

                       

                      and an "Advanced" version could definitely be a bit more advanced than just building some menus, functions and a runtime, that is crippled (no PDF, no diagrams, no network at all, no Appstore support)

                      • 8. Re: New features again are not really finished
                        MichaelDolley

                        Can't Import .fp7 - I can see this being an issue. Could you import FileMaker 6 files into 7? I wasn't really around at the time.

                         

                        FileMaker Go and the networkable runtime - FileMaker Go pushes people towards FileMaker Pro & FileMaker Server. It's a companion app. A networkable runtime doesn't do that.

                         

                        No Stylesheet Editor - The style sheets are installed with FileMaker. If you were allowed to create your own stylesheets you'd need to be able to distribute these with the file. I think it would be a nightmare for hosted solutions. What does FileMaker do if it couldn't find the custom stylesheet?

                         

                        Lion/Mountain Lion support - I can't see iCloud integration making any sense for a cross platform application. I am not a huge Mac user, but how would FileMaker work in Full-Screen mode when it allows multiple windows?

                         

                        App Store Support - Again, this is about runtimes. FileMaker doesn't want people selling runtimes through the Mac App Store because they want people to buy FileMaker or even Bento.

                         

                        I think some of these complaints are more general FileMaker complaints. I also think that a lot of this is runtime related, and FileMaker is never going to

                        • 9. Re: New features again are not really finished
                          CarstenLevin

                          Just commenting on this one:

                          • Custom control Lookup Dialog Window: Why is there not a really great and sophisticated lookup/search dialog window since that functionality is used in every application? The current drop down or pop up control is not what I am looking for. It is too primitive. I am looking up customers by name and city and street and some other variable, they are displayed in a nicely aligned table view if more than one is found, I can select ... and go. And the primary key must be invisible whenever I want, and not just when I am using drop-down fields.

                          Search windows will, in our way of developing FileMaker solutions be very context driven. What is relevant in this situation?

                          Therefore the new window modes is solving this issue for us.

                           

                          Best regards

                           

                          Carsten

                          • 10. Re: New features again are not really finished
                            intex

                             

                            FileMaker Go and the networkable runtime - FileMaker Go pushes people towards FileMaker Pro & FileMaker Server. It's a companion app. A networkable runtime doesn't do that.

                             

                             

                             

                            I think very much it would do since today we are loosing a lot of business due to the price of FileMaker, which is much too high for the secretary or normal business user just working with a given database. These people don´t care for making their own dbs, instead they are even kept out of layout mode by priviledges. If FileMaker would be more affordable for plain users, all 3rd parties could sell much more and FileMaker would win on the Server side.

                             

                             

                             

                             

                            No Stylesheet Editor - The style sheets are installed with FileMaker. If you were allowed to create your own stylesheets you'd need to be able to distribute these with the file. I think it would be a nightmare for hosted solutions. What does FileMaker do if it couldn't find the custom stylesheet?

                             

                             

                             

                            styles are embedded in the fmp12 file itself as soon as they are used - so there is no technical problem.

                             

                             

                             

                            Lion/Mountain Lion support - I can't see iCloud integration making any sense for a cross platform application. I am not a huge Mac user, but how would FileMaker work in Full-Screen mode when it allows multiple windows?

                             

                             

                             

                            Safari supports multiple windows and full screen too. FileMaker Adv. supports the kiosk mode - why not on the fly ? Again there are no technical reasons. It´s just some kind of lazyness in thinking things to an end.

                            • 11. Re: New features again are not really finished
                              CarstenLevin

                              I think you guys that are complaining about all that FileMaker is missing are missing the point. FileMaker is aimed for the consumer, not the database programmer. It is meant to be simple to use so that end users can actually build and develope and modify their own databases. If you add a lot of complexity to FileMaker, then you lose a lot of its soul

                              Here I do disagree: Yes FileMaker is easy to use for the occational solution. But the database engine and the relational structure behind FileMaker is supporting very large solutions.

                              But, here you and other are right: Designing a complex system for houndreds of users performing and automating complicated tasks is demanding. And it will take developers who know what they are doing to build systems like that. Developers with many years of experience behind them.

                              • 12. Re: New features again are not really finished
                                intex

                                I just stumbled over a new lack in functionality:

                                 

                                We now have hover effects - but why only for buttons and not any item on the screen? So you have to build pseudo-buttons.

                                 

                                And even worse - why are there no "mouse over" script triggers when they can locate the mouse for hover effects ? One could build your own infotips, your own contextsensitive help system or blend in more commands when the user is currently in a certain area of the screen. Conditional objects - oh, they are missing too - would be a great addition to mouse over script triggers.

                                • 13. Re: New features again are not really finished
                                  golife

                                  Is Filemaker a toy ???

                                   

                                  Secretaries and the boss are amazed when you put up something fast and dirty, but when you want to develop something that really makes sense, that is well designed, that prohibits wrong data entered by users, that is scalable, then you end up with some kind of major development nevertheless, but only then the tool-set provided does not satisfy you. And you are then sitting for hours, days and weeks... And you are still not satisfied with the output. And the more complexity you  create, the more difficult  it is to handle such complexity. That is Filemaker.

                                   

                                  There is no application and database development for "everybody" and for the "common customer" or the "customer", of the "rest of us". This idea does not work and never worked. If it were just to put up some rolodex files and enter some addresses... ok... But do I need a relational database for this? And did you ever seriously count the hours that you have been spending trying to create a really nice application in Filemaker? Did this investment pay off?


                                  There is a big mismatch between theory and practice.

                                  • 14. Re: New features again are not really finished
                                    MichaelDolley

                                    I think very much it would do since today we are loosing a lot of business due to the price of FileMaker, which is much too high for the secretary or normal business user just working with a given database. These people don´t care for making their own dbs, instead they are even kept out of layout mode by priviledges. If FileMaker would be more affordable for plain users, all 3rd parties could sell much more and FileMaker would win on the Server side.

                                     

                                    I don't see how what you are suggesting is a good business case for FileMaker Inc. You're suggestion would allow developers to create full featured runtimes, and the end user wouldn't need FileMaker at all. In that situation the only people buying FileMaker would be developers.

                                     

                                    As for the bigger argument on the price of FileMaker, it has been around for years, and isn't a specific 12 issue. I think it's up to developers to make the case for FileMaker licences or work with the limitations of runtimes.

                                    1 2 Previous Next