AndyHibbs:
Continuing the discussion from Interesting from Apple’s earnings report :
Welcome to this forum Brian.
Thanks for your input here and I've replied by creating a new topic (share link and 'New Topic') as I believe your comments shouldn't be buried in my original post heading.
although our first big iPad project is using FileMaker Go, all interaction with the (FileMaker) server is via APIs and JSON, hence it need not necessarily be FileMaker Go. So there is nothing really stopping us having an Android client that is not anything to do with FileMaker.
Hi Andy. I know this is an older thread (I just signed up today), but I wanted to highlight and support your quote above. I agree 100%. In my opinion, there are 3 or 4 options as far as deploying a FileMaker-backed mobile app.
Native development with iOS or Android, using in Swift/Obj-C or Java/Kotlin, resepctively. This is somewhat slower than FileMaker development, but the feature set and performance are light years ahead of FileMaker Go. Native apps provide the fastest performance and no compromises.
React Native can deploy cross platform apps, and they’re still compiled using (mostly) native UI objects. They’re a small step behind option 1, performance and feature wise. If you need to deploy to both iOS and Android and want the fewest compromises, this is the best way to go, IMO.
FileMaker Go (and FIAS)
Xojo, LiveCode, etc.: These are pseudo apps built using a proprietary IDE and language. The UX and feature set is pretty far behind what’s available in real iOS or Android apps. That may not be critical to your deployment, and that’s fine. Xojo and LiveCode can satisfy a demand for cross platform deployment, and I applaud their efforts in filling that need, but these apps can require a fair amount of compromise. In my case, more than I’m comfortable giving up.
A few years ago I took option 1. I opted to learn Swift and build real iOS apps in Xcode, with automatic sync, offline use, horizontal collection views, etc., etc. My primary example being the Art Con app – http://artcon.app . It has over 1K users and is backed almost entirely by the Data API. For anyone who has the time and aptitude to learn Swift (or Java, or React), I would point folks that direction if their priority is deploying zero-compromise mobile apps. All of the options are fine, just be aware of what you’re getting (and not getting) with each.
Again, I wholeheartedly support everything you've posted, the Data API has opened up so many opportunities.
The only thing I would add is within the Xojo, LiveCode comment
In many ways this applies to FileMaker as well, as we're constantly having to compromise thanks to the benefits of the amount of output we get for the amount put in, which has always been FileMaker's main strength. Hence, in a world where we already compromise, perhaps many could work within these constraints. If not, you've already addressed that.
Many thanks
Thanks for sharing your insights, Andy. I completely agree that the Data API has significantly expanded the possibilities for integrating FileMaker with other platforms. Your breakdown of deployment options is very useful, especially for those considering alternatives to FileMaker Go. While native development offers the highest performance and flexibility, I think React Native presents a great middle ground for teams that need cross-platform support without giving up too much on user experience. Your point about compromise is also well taken, as every platform has trade-offs, and FileMaker’s strength has always been its balance of ease of development and functionality. It really comes down to the specific needs of each project. Appreciate the thoughtful discussion!