Doug Wallis, FileMaker product manager, shares the highlights with the community.
In addition, we've published extensive release notes and have several new engineering blog posts in the works.
8 Likes
I have FMP 19 which works fine, but how much would it cost me to upgrade to 2023?
Perpetual license? No subscriptions, PLEASE!
Thanks.
FMP perpetual is still available.
How much? $
If there are any useful features like being able to actually search my scripts, a CF step-wise debugger, or about 70 other things I've documented (and even shared with FMP management) painfully missing in FileMaker, I would consider an upgrade if it's not very much (<$99).
But, I don't care about "Claris Connect" since for those kinds of things I prefer Zapier with a MUCH bigger library of connectors, less expensive, and not (hog-)tied to any particular vendor.
4 Likes
Same as before. It depends if you have a maintenance or not. Free if you have maintenance. Cost of new license if not. Cost of new license hasn't changed in Canada.
Follow the breadcrumbs through to @FabriceN 's blog post for a good explanation of what is new in this version. TLDR; A lot of performance and server related improvements
1 Like
@OliverBarrett I believe for single license owners, upgrade pricing is available if you own FileMaker 16 or newer. FileMaker 15 and prior would translate to the cost of a new license to get the new version.
It is probably best to get licensing questions addressed directly by Claris or by a Claris Partner you trust.
1 Like
Single FM Pro upgrade license is about 1/3 price of the new license. Price depends by country. It’s worth it if you have already a single license and want to stay up to date.
Although i might wait and see what’s in free Claris Pro license if there is no need to connect to FMS.
From the Claris store:
You can upgrade the product only if you already own a copy of FileMaker Pro Advanced versions 16, 17, 18, or 19; or FileMaker Pro 16. You can’t install this product if your copy of FileMaker Pro or FileMaker Pro Advanced is part of a volume license.
So yes, upgrade pricing is still available (and I stand corrected — thanks @Bobino). Pricing is still higher than @OliverBarrett's stated ceiling.
1 Like
Glad to know FMP 19 works fine for you. Everyone gets to determine when upgrading to a newer version makes sense for them or not.
That said, even if we all have features we would like to see in the product, the fact those did not make it in the release does not equate to a specific release to be "marketing driven software". I believe anyone who reads the release notes for Pro, Server and Go understands how this release builds on the existing components of the platform.
If someone simply looks at the new version numbering, new logo and watches a marketing video, I guess they may feel like marketing has a larger fingerprint on the product than what it really is.
For what it is worth, people who work on macOS can use the free version of MBS to get "script searching", and there are other 3rd party products that can assist with that also.
We should all acknowledge that it takes both a good product and good marketing for the platform to thrive. For both of those, it is impossible for Claris to please each and every one of us, but I trust they do their best for everyone involved with the platform.
4 Likes
2empower Developers assistant lets You search in FM - it's very powerfull - the last time I checked it, there were 2 Versions available
FileMaker is an outstanding tool for some applications and I hope it keeps on growing - although there are many wishes left (in every new version - but thats with other 'tools' the same)
1 Like
@OliverBarrett people are trying to help with their suggestions, but it seems what you are looking for is either not available on the market or not available at the price point you are willing to pay for. Perhaps you can see this as a business opportunity to fill that void, or use that as motivation to look for an alternate development platform.
As a moderator here at FMSoup, I do not feel like those kinds of exchanges can be very fruitful, and I do not believe all of our wishes for feature request or specific licensing implementation need to take place in the same thread as the original poster here. If you would like to initiate a discussion about the features you would like to see in the product, or the pricing you feel is appropriate for upgrades and new licenses as they pertain to your own specific situation, please do so in a new topic where it will be easier to frame the context and have fruitful exchanges.
4 Likes
OK. My main intent was to express that I would like to see more foundational enhancements to FileMaker. Since I made this basic point initially above, I will remove the other postings. Thanks.
1 Like
I was wondering why Claris didn't use "23.x.x" internally so that versions align with the year. The numbering convention had almost lined up with the year until we hit v19. Setting the version to approximate the year would take us back to those days. FileMaker 2023 would be v23, FileMaker 2024 would be v24. As it stands, we now have to remember that 2023 = v20, and I assume 2024 = v21, and so on.
Robert Holsey makes a valiant attempt to explain why FileMaker 2023 has the application version 20 in a vlog on the Claris web site. Robert explains that "doing something else would likely break many of your solutions that rely on versions ticking up consistently."
Those words really made my ears tingle: "many of your solutions." I have coded on the basis of a differences in behaviour between different versions. New versions introduce different ways to do things, so we add code that allows us to use the best code for the situation. But that happens after new versions arrive, not beforehand. I don't know why anyone would create code forking to anticipate hypothetical and unknown behaviours of future products.
However, the product testing community have advance copies of the product. They would be the only group who could sensibly do that. To me, it sounds as though Robert is speaking directly to the the product testing community.
1 Like
Agreed. Skipping numbers would be just fine, I think.
I've used version numbers for specific numbers like you stated for targeting specific versions and also less than a number to help prevent opening a db in an older version of FM.
I'm not sure how not having v20, v21, or v22 would break things. It could even for from v19 to v2023 without a problem. But reverting back to a two digit number after using a four digit number would cause problems.