FileMaker plans - not fulfilled?

[trilo]

@jormond

Also, the problem is not at all that they couldn’t build a sign-up platform. Not having a sign-up process just isn’t option.

From what you’ve said, the problem is exactly they couldn’t build a sign-on platform.
Other than marketing, there’s no need at all - it’s been done for decades where people could download trials without signing up to anything.

@jormond

Largely, this was just a timing issue. It was working during testing about 90% of the time. The problems that are encountered with a ‘sign-up’ feature… aren’t always fully in the control of the developer team.

I’m sorry but that sounds, well, not right. It’s not a timing issue, it’s clearly an engineering issue if they can’t make it work correctly. I also don’t agree with your ‘control’ assessment - it is exactly in the hands of the developers.

@jormond

Again we are talking about them building something in the midst of them integrating an 2 entirely new products, Connect and Studio.

I’m sure there are people keen to get these and I’m sure there are people who couldn’t care less about them. My opinion, as a long term developer and former FMP Alliance member, is to have the core product as a clear, concise and stable product. I’m not sure any of this is true right now and to have the parent company - by whichever name they choose to be identified - release videos and press statements which have failed to come to fruition just makes them look unprofessional and untrustworthy.

When long term, die-hard users are confused and turning their backs on the product, you’ve clearly damaged your brand. I’m both sad and angry about it because I love the product. They’re just stuffing it.

[jormond]

@trilo

Other than marketing, there’s no need at all - it’s been done for decades where people could download trials without signing up to anything.

There is a need. There is a need to limit the product in some way. Since there really wasn’t a way to do that beyond just a time limit… this is a development project on their end. Outside of that, I can’t talk about anything else on this front. I’m fine with you not believing me. The info is there, I can’t offer anything else to you.

@trilo

I’m sorry but that sounds, well, not right. It’s not a timing issue, it’s clearly an engineering issue if they can’t make it work correctly. I also don’t agree with your ‘control’ assessment - it is exactly in the hands of the developers.

lol… I’m not sure what to say to this. It’s a limited team of developers that were moved onto another project. It is about timing. They were pulled off before finishing it.

@trilo

My opinion, as a long term developer and former FMP Alliance member, is to have the core product as a clear, concise and stable product.

I agree with the sentiment… kind of. But it’s such a narrow view. The tech space is so different now. Claris can’t survive if they ignore the changes and remain with the status quo. We have a vertical market product that relies on FileMaker, FileMaker Server, the Data API, etc. The core of the product is the same. But what are you wanting to continue paying for. No income means the business folds. So I’m not sure where you see the future of FileMaker in the business model you propose.

When long term, die-hard users are confused and turning their backs on the product, you’ve clearly damaged your brand. I’m both sad and angry about it because I love the product.

It’s also a sign of other things. I get sad when I see threads like this go on like this. It feels like no matter what some people are told, or shown, they won’t be happy. I’ve been using the product for 20 years, and am not confused at all by the direction they are heading, and am excited by and use the features they have added. So what does that mean? Also, what effect does ranting negatively against the product online actually do? Nothing Claris is doing is damaging it’s reputation. Maybe it’s the negative view of former customers?

[trilo]

@jormond

There is a need. There is a need to limit the product in some way. Since there really wasn’t a way to do that beyond just a time limit

Developers have been limiting software for years without needing sign ups. Just because ‘everyone is doing it’ doesn’t make it palatable or necessary. I do it with some of my own apps.

@jormond

It is about timing. They were pulled off before finishing it.

From what you said previously, they had it working “90% of the time” but couldn’t solve it. Assuming a sign in will be required for all the other products it seems odd they’d remove staff from it.

@jormond

It feels like no matter what some people are told, or shown, they won’t be happy.

To quote you,‘lol’. Keeping customers happy is straightforward and it starts with delivering what you say. If I announce a new product, don’t deliver it, don’t keep people informed and then remove all trace of it I’d expect people to be unhappy - and distrusting.

@jormond

I’ve been using the product for 20 years, and am not confused at all by the direction they are heading, and am excited by and use the features they have added. So what does that mean? Also, what effect does ranting negatively against the product online actually do? Nothing Claris is doing is damaging it’s reputation. Maybe it’s the negative view of former customers?

Having a contrary position isn’t ranting, I’m not a ‘former customer’ and I’ve been using FMP since the mid 1990s. Whilst I concede I no longer live by every announcement I’m incredibly confused by their offerings. Just reading the comments on this thread suggests they have damaged their reputation with their confused and complex ‘roadmap’. You have every right to disagree but perhaps your rose coloured glasses aren’t giving you as clear a vision as those not so besotted.

I should also say thank you for coming on and trying to clear up what they’re doing. Just because we don’t agree doesn’t mean the information isn’t appreciated.

[Diletante]

Us. We transitioned our complex FileMaker product to be specifically targeted at iPadOS on the iPad Pros and the users are so much happier than they were on the Mac or PC. The product now goes with them everywhere, with all the functionality they need but with much less hassle. Redesigning the UI for iPadOS made the product better and nicer to use. It flies on an M1 iPad. We like it, our customers like it.

I think what Claris is doing is in heading in the right direction and they are gradually resolving the confusion in the product lineup that they created. I would like to see a free tier for Claris Pro because it will help to sustain new users coming in to the platform and retain those who need a good DB platform for their personal and pro-bono applications. I think Claris understand this.

As for the alternatives, we keep an eye on what is available and nothing quite has the balance of features to create the sort of product we want to deliver.

[jormond]

I am perfectly fine with having a difference of opinion. However, it feels like people keep trying to put words in my mouth, or imply something that was not said. So I just want to clarify for anyone else reading this thread.

@trilo

Developers have been limiting software for years without needing sign ups. Just because ‘everyone is doing it’ doesn’t make it palatable or necessary. I do it with some of my own apps.

So have I. There are differences with what Claris is doing. This isn’t just a sign up to gather data, it is a sign-up to setup and configure multiple systems on Claris’ end to make everything work together. Because the Freemium tier is not just about Pro. The Freemium tier was about giving people the opportunity to test the entire product line, Pro, Go, Connect, Studio. That allows people to see which tools help them solve their problem.

Also, never did I apply that Claris can’t build a sign-up process. I only said they haven’t finished it yet. Much like anything we build, you run into unexpected and unknowns. This is nothing more than that.

Also, Claris building something for over a million or more people to sign up for is so much different than anything you or I are building. There are different considerations, and needs, and a completely different set of problems.

@trilo

From what you said previously, they had it working “90% of the time” but couldn’t solve it. Assuming a sign in will be required for all the other products it seems odd they’d remove staff from it.

Yet, the implication in my explanation was yet. They are ridiculously talented engineers. Far beyond anything people give them credit for. Seems odd? I agree, but not my decision to make. I wasn’t in the room for the decision. It seems odd that we would try to reverse engineer what the decision should have been or say they are wrong, since we don’t have any of the info they have.

@trilo

Keeping customers happy is straightforward and it starts with delivering what you say. If I announce a new product, don’t deliver it, don’t keep people informed and then remove all trace of it I’d expect people to be unhappy - and distrusting.

This thread keeps talking about what Claris said they were working on like they were “promises”. I don’t get that. The roadmap is fluid, and will change constantly, in Claris’ own words. Why would you expect anything else?

The alternative, is they go back to telling us nothing… and that was worse. You and I both understand development lifecycles. This is just part of that.

@trilo

Having a contrary position isn’t ranting, I’m not a ‘former customer’ and I’ve been using FMP since the mid 1990s. Whilst I concede I no longer live by every announcement I’m incredibly confused by their offerings.

Fair enough. I think I’ve provided all the info I can to help, so I’ll leave the conversation where it is. On an unrelated note, will you be at Engage in Feb? Maybe we could meet up for a drink and I could hear about some of your developer tales!! That’s always fun conversation.

[waltzmn]

Let’s be fair to jormond here. Jormond does not claim to be a Claris employee, just to have information from the developers. Of course Claris is going to put the best possible light on things. :-) We may disagree on interpretations – I do! – but it’s not jormond’s fault that Apple is a user-hostile company, and (I suspect) has forced the FileMaker team to become user-hostile also.

I do think that Apple really has a marketing/communication problem. What is Claris Studio? What need does it fill? Is it a database, a programming environment, a web application? I haven’t a clue. Just look at the responses we’ve gotten here. For me, FMP 16 Developer (indeed, FMP 14 Developer) was close to optimal, because it was a good database and it made runtimes. I haven’t seen any features since 16 that made things better for me. (Obviously others have.) All this web stuff is just clutter, for me. And I develop on a Mac because (apart from the fact that they aren’t a development environment),iPads don’t have the real estate (processor, yes, screen and memory, no), and the PC version of FileMaker is just ugly.

Clearly others want different things. So who will get what they want in Claris Studio? I dunno. Makes it hard to plan. And, for those of us who have to transition away, the sooner the better. For someone like me, who has a thirty-year-old project, written in FileMaker from the days before FM was even relational, that transition could take years. Claris really does need to give us more information.

But that’s not jormond’s fault!

[ace (Adam Engst)]

I just wanted to thank @jormond for sharing, and everyone else for keeping the discussion appropriate. Claris clearly has messaging and communication work to do.

[jormond]

@ace

Claris clearly has messaging and communication work to do.

This is definitely one area we all agree on.

[richard (Richard Earney)]

The Layout Editor has barely been updated in years and is horrible to use!

[waltzmn]

I can live with the Layout Editor, although I agree that it’s often impossible to find a lot of the tools in the inspector. I only make modifications to a layout a few times a year, so I don’t remember what all those goofy icons stand for in the Layout Editor. Claris needs to realize that layout changes don’t happen often, and simplify all the confusing stuff.

But what I want is a way to easily copy a script into an external editor to make it easier to create variations on a theme. Yes, one can duplicate a script, but that’s not the same as operating on it with a GREP editor. Plus it would make it easier to track earlier versions in case one’s changes fail.

My bottom line remains a way to make standalone databases, though, that don’t require paying $500+ for a copy of FMP!

[doughogg]

@waltzmn

But what I want is a way to easily copy a script into an external editor to make it easier to create variations on a theme. Yes, one can duplicate a script, but that’s not the same as operating on it with a GREP editor. Plus it would make it easier to track earlier versions in case one’s changes fail.

This Claris Community thread discusses this idea and does not come up with an ideal solution. I have the 2empowerFM Clipboard Explorer for saving and annotating Filemaker scripts of my own and others that I run into in articles or email threads.
https://community.claris.com/en/s/question/0D50H00006h9F1iSAE/copy-script-to-a-word-processor

[waltzmn]

This Claris Community thread discusses this idea and does not come up with an ideal solution.

I note that the discussion there is seven years old. So no one has come up with a better idea in seven years. Proof that Claris should do something, I’d say. :-)

[gerrie (Gerrie Shults)]

Claris has a FileMaker Developer Subscription for $99/yr.

The licensing requirement states

This copy of FileMaker Pro and FileMaker Server may only be used for testing and development purposes and may not be used in any production environments, including yours or your clients’.

If I am creating personal solutions, not for sale, it seems this is not a production environment. Does anyone know why this would not be a perfectly legitimate use of this license?

[Shamino (David C.)]

I would say that these terms are meant to allow a development team to have an affordable means of developing apps, since one web app may require multiple developers to be using the software at the same time.

If you’re using it for your own personal databases and have no plans to develop apps for others or for sale, then I would say that you are definitely violating the spirit of the license, if not the letter of it.

But that having been said, if your use is strictly personal, then you’re probably too small for their lawyers to care about suing. In the past I’d also add that they would never know, but in this day and age of software phoning home, I can no longer make such a statement.

I would recommend playing it safe. Take advantage of the subscription if you plan on developing software for others or for growing your skills as a developer. But if you plan on just using it to manage your personal databases, I would not choose this option.

[gerrie (Gerrie Shults)]

Thanks for your input, @Shamino. I had already decided to play it safe and am in process of discussing with Claris.