Definitely.
It’s still inexcusable. Nowadays, what’s preventing them for selling a non-Advanced no-Pro FileMaker that just does simple single-user databases without fancy debugging and super fancy scripting for $100 for a single license? No corporate user would switch to that, but tons of people who have old FM documents would probably prefer shelling out $100 over having to find and learn new tools, re-write their old front-ends, and then transfer over all their exported data.
Profit margins. Claris is not a nonprofit or not for profit organization. There are many, many, many bargain basement priced and free database applications out there, and quite a few good ones in the $50 range. Neither Apple or Claris is about cheap or second or third rate. They sell diamonds, not zircons.
That’s preposterous. This very thread here discusses people leaving FM altogether because there is no viable path forward for non-pro/non-corporate use. No sale means no profit at all.
I’m also seriously considering abandoning FileMaker now that I am retired. But there is a much more significant number of individual users who are not.
I realize this requires a change in perspective for many people here, but where I suspect a lot of casual database use has gone is the cloud. My late friend Oliver Habicht was quite fond of Zoho Creator, for instance, which he used to maintain a simple flat-file database of documents stored in folders.
And Airtable lets you build workflow apps on top of what is essentially a database—I looked into it briefly for a project that I didn’t end up moving forward with, but it certainly seems powerful.
But you do have to accept the fact that your data will be in the cloud and you won’t be able to examine the bits on your actual computer. I’m unperturbed by that, but many people aren’t.
I misspoke and apologize for using the phrase “user friendly”. In my opinion, Access, nor any other relational database I have used or explored, other than early Filemaker, has never been user friendly. I should have said something like “end user useable”, to imply that it had a GUI interface that did not require the user to be a computer programmer/software engineer to utilize it. By using the term ‘friendly’ I was trying to state that it had a GUI interface, like early Filemaker, that would allow the end user to develop a simple relational database without having to learn a programming language. That is what I meant by the term ‘user friendly’ in the context that it was used. As such I do not consider Base to be ‘user friendly’ either. But at least it does have a GUI interface that does not require a degree in Computer Science, or equivalent, to use it.
I use Filemaker (without Filemaker server), for invoicing and salaries and I find their pricing hard to fathom. Companies often create low cost or free products to provide on ramps for their more expensive services. Not Filemaker. I wonder if they are afraid of having to support new users because of how complex Filemaker has become.
Huh??? This doesn’t jibe with the discussion I have been participating in, even though I’m considering other less expensive options than FileMaker. And the only reason I’m considering leaving is because I don’t need as many databases as I did when I was working full time, and I will switch only if I can find a database app that works just about as well. And there will be plenty of younger people in, or about to, enter the workforce, have small or emerging businesses, are engaged in research, managing records, etc. and will benefit from jumping on the Filemaker bandwagon. And like me, I’ll bet there are legions of people who discovered the benefits of FileMaker from going to work in an organization that uses it, and realizes how well it will work for them personally. The trend for working remotely looks like it is segueing into the future. And there are plenty of students that are, and will be, using it as well. Apple and Claris are both companies that target, and appeal to multiple market segments.
Claris earned $72,000,000 last year, b2b and b2c purchasers most likely deliver the bulk of revenue. And I think there is continues to be a very viable a path for individual buyers as well as small businesses.
I think the opportunity for Claris would be a lower cost version that would serve as a way IN to the application, as well as potentially an exit route for someone who wants to keep an old DB running. I think I started with the app through a (probably illegal 
) copy of Claris Works, and from there bought the cooking version of FM and later FM Advanced as my needs developed (Runtime!), and I grew more familiar with the software. I followed a similar path with several other software packages over the years and consider that a cheap entry route can make sound sense, especially if you can target students & universities.
I used the Apple website to upgrade from Filemaker 17 for $199.00. Interestingly the license key did not stick, even though I entered the FMP 17 license as well as the FMP 19 license. I called Claris and was eventually told that I need to remove all old Filemaker versions and then install Filemaker 19 which is annoying to say the least. I have not got around to that. Who knows, maybe a better solution will appear if I hold off for long enough. 
I don’t know Apple’s reasons for not offering/developing a non-pro DBMS app for Mac users but influencing factors are:
I suspect at least some of the above factored into Apple’s decisions regarding Claris, FM, Bento and any related planning. My 2 cents( FWIW )anyway.
I don’t know Apple’s reasons for not offering/developing a non-pro DBMS app for Mac users but influencing factors are:
FileMaker is most definitely as much a consumer application as much as it is a b2b app. There’s good information about its status in the market here:
It’s highly likely that they make many, many more tons of money selling FileMaker subscriptions or onetime purchases.
Customization is a very strong selling point for FileMaker. I mentioned before how annoying and time consuming it was to work around what the evil Access Wizards want you to do when you know precisely what you want to set up.
The revenue from FileMaker App Store commissions is probably microscopic when compared to FileMaker’s subscription or single copy purchases.
Steve Jobs developed Apple’s free basic apps to be a selling point for Macs, particularly at a time when when Microsoft, Adobe, etc., etc. had announced they were suspending or eliminating development and updates of Mac apps. Except for FileMaker, Steve killed the rest of the Claris apps because Microsoft Office wiped the floor with them, but Microsoft never developed a Mac database app. And Access was, and still is, not nearly as versatile, speedy and easy to use as FileMaker is.
And FileMaker is used by many Windows and Android customers and business of all sizes. To keep up this neutral impression among consumers and businesses, Apple spun off Claris. And I suspect that Claris might be thinking of developing other software…maybe stuff that will compete with MS Cloud Services, Oracle, etc.
Personally speaking, I much prefer MS Word, Excel and PowerPoint and I don’t use Apple’s basic apps. But as I mentioned before, I think FileMaker is a million times better, more efficient and speedier than Access.
[/quote]
Too bad there isn’t a “Take Control of TapForms” available. I prefer using either a paper manual or a PDF.
Or, like me, they use Numbers as a flat database due to Apple’s disdain for the Mac consumer market.
You can download the PDF manual from the online docs page - https://cdn.manula.com/user/1444/1328_16794_en_1538683502.pdf?v=20210315221611
There’s also some good videos on youtube.
There’s also Claris Connect, which can make it easier for individuals to integrate information from other apps into FileMaker. It’s targeted to smalll businesses:
Actually, if you go to the online manual that I linked there is a button at the bottom left of the page that says, “Download as PDF” which takes you to this page.
Thanks - I got it!
For a couple of simple projects we used FileMaker Pro at work but have moved to Panorama X due to cost. Panorama X 10.2 is now out and includes a new relational model and a server option. The price is very fair, though for the server you need to buy a $200 training package and they have a $100 package for the new relational model. We are going ahead with it. I will move one of my 4D databases to Panorama if it works out.
I do Access work because we bought a database in Access. MS does have an EOL date for it and I hate working in it. Very wonky and I believe it is close tied into Windows making it very difficult for MS being able to port it. We hope to have a developer move our one project from MS Access to MS-SQL in 2022 and be entirely web based interface. We already moved the database to SQL server back end on Azure last year, using Access just as a front end.
Our 4D use has gone down over time as we moved our custom databases to commercial products. And it has become a developer only product. I like working in it a lot but time to move on.
I’ve been using Filemaker since the early 90s, for both personal and business. I actually just love fiddling with it. Some people play video games, or do crossword puzzles… myself, I mess around in Filemaker. I think the current pricing is absurd. It’s just crazy.
There has been a change in pricing strategy though and it could be that Claris are moving to bring the price down. Filemaker is no longer an annual release, with an annual upgrade price. Like most companies, they’re trying to go subscription (to make more money) but they insist they will continue with the stand alone version too. So… here we are at 18 months since the last paid upgrade and yet we’ve had significant upgrades in between. So the previous annual upgrade price of ~$200 per annum, is now down to ~$140 and if we get to May before another paid vs, it will have been halved. Could we find ourselves in May 2023 with an app that’s cost just ~$70 per annum for the last 3 years?? I hope so.
Mind you… I bought Affinity Photo when it came out of beta in 2015, for 39eur. There have been many huge upgrades. It has now cost me ~6eur per annum for an extremely powerful and complex, pro level app. Ho hum.