the sales team has no idea how FDS works, so they can't answer your questions accurately.
Claris doesn't answer licensing questions publicly. Since every scenario has subtlety to it, that allows the sales team to make things work. The difficulty with FDS, the sales people don't benefit from it, so they have no investment in helping you with it.
It's a low-touch product for them. "Here is stuff to test, good luck." They don't really put support or human labor behind it.
Claris relies heavily on it's veteran developer community to help relay info.
Testing is short-term. So the users are short-term, by nature.
This thread is getting hung up on a word being applied to the license that isn't part of the license for FDS. FDS has it's own license. And it is 3 users. User = a person assigned to use that license. License can be reassigned at will by the license owner. Reassignment is an internal thing that isn't/can't be verified at this point.
Concurrent connections would actually make the license less useful, because the concurrent connections server license DOES enforce the number of connections. USER license is not based on connections. Users licenses allow for a user to be connected via Pro, Go and WebDirect all at the same time...and only count as a single user.
We were told that FDS would be replaced by something else. Thins is the replacement has not been introduced. I thought that would come by the end of 2020, but that's not the case.
Just a thought, we were also told that runtime would be replaced by something else, but that didn't happen.
My point is, we shouldn't put much stock in what is being promised, but figure out how to overcome when things are changed and promises are left behind.
IMHO, Filemaker is a great product and I will continue to use it as long as they continue to produce it.
But Claris and previously FMI are terrible at communicating such things.
It seems to me that their marketing and sales are run by programmers or previous programmers, LOL, I am only trying to communicate the ineptness of such matters. I know that that couldn't be true. But, lets get real, when you call the sales rep. of a company and you can't get straight answers on costs, how do you plan from there as far as your investment? Just saying.....
Where were we told Runtime would be replaced with something else? And they kind of did, but it misses many of the use-cases. I think that's a different problem.
I don't recall having seen that in print, but I think I recall they stated during a presentation that they (FMI) were looking at something else. That was a long time ago.
I believe the line was, "We will continue to evaluate and look at options to provide functionality that fits your needs", or something like that. That doesn't say to me, we are actively working on a replacement for Runtime.
WebDirect. That's the licensed replacement for Runtime. It doesn't cover all of the use-cases, for sure.
I'll stop talking about this here, since as I look at the title of the thread, we are way off topic.
Well, I am not looking to ruffle feathers. Nor am I trying to pick a fight, too old for that. Neither am I grousing about the lack of Runtime. I have long since moved on. But they DID state Runtime would be replaced with something else. It was sometime ago and at the time I was grousing about it, LOL, because my business model was based on Runtime because of the clients that I sell to.
But the lessoned I learned is to not count on those type of statements. Especially, in your business model.
But the fact that you can't get a pricing and usage schedule that is clear, where do you go from there?
For the first time I am seriously looking at the the server side of things for the near future. So I need clear answers from Claris about costs and usage. But if we can't get them, where do we go from there?
Start a new thread and ask. Several of us have years of experience with the licensing. The usage and cost side is easy once you figure out what your needs are. We would love to help you get that sorted, point you in the right direction if we can.
FMI said in a conference few years ago to a question when Runtime will be removed from product, that deprecated technologies will be removed when there is a technology that will replace it in its use case, so that businesses who rely on the tech can trust them. I'm quite sure they mentioned new web direct will be it. So far licensing gone to different directions and web direct is still the same.
Good example of decently replacing technology is Data API. It is better than the old XML (/php) api and can be used in 95+% of the use cases there.
The best scenario would probably be that web direct would be replaced with more scalable and modern version that can handle thousands of simultaneous connections. But it's unlikely to happen. I believe current FM engine connected to a good modern web frontend could handle it but we will see if licensing is scalable.
Just popped back to this forum for a peruse - I've pretty much left the FileMaker world now but it's pretty disappointing that despite all the promises these types of discussions are still happening. To be honest whilst I had a pretty steep learning curve moving to Xojo I'm really pleased I put that effort in - it's not perfect but at least I don't have to deal with any licensing nonsense.
How is the rapid development model going - are they delivering on their promises?
I think this thread is an anomaly about licensing issues. It is about the FDS license, not production use licensing. So the comparison isn't the same.
I wish I could talk about the conversations I have with Claris, without angry developers making it into a scene. They are listening more now than ever and are making changes internally to provide users and developers with the tools they need, and at the same time the products that help Claris International continue to grow.
It's exciting to see all of it. And the current release of FileMaker 19 and the shift to an agile approach is addressing concerns faster than ever before.
I disagree. Knowing what is allowed is the most basic question of all.
The fact it's now been over two weeks since "Steve K." told me he wrote the community manager about this concurrent connection issue (with still zero replies even with a follow up from me), "FMI sales", apparently, cannot be trusted to know, and there is no definitive answer here speaks to a mickey mouse licensing strategy. It seems the licensing is too complicated for anyone to understand.....including FMI.
You have the answers above. Honestly, you are making this too hard. You are looking for something that limits your use-case, and there isn't one. Use the testing license for no more than 3 users at any given time. Assign users to your license > run your tests > unassign the users from the license > continue your testing on that custom app or setup your testing environment for another user. That's it.
Claris doesn't have license discussions on the public forums for a reason. It's a legit reason. The concern I have for you, is that you keep trying to reword your test-case to make it so it doesn't fit the license. I don't understand why. You develop a custom app, and you need to test it with a user. Test it with 3 users or less... Assignment as a user on your license happens at your discretion, that's all you need to be in compliance.
I'm really not sure what else I can do to help you understand it. With that said, I won't stand for you insulting the platform, or the company, unnecessarily just because you don't understand the license.
All I am looking for is where in the license agreement it covers concurrent connections (as it used to). If you have that licence text, please post that and the thread is done. Otherwise, it's not stated and is not clear.
Above, I only mentioned that FMI support itself has been unable to get me that information (it was a private message I sent, anyway). No insult, just a statement of fact.
"Concurrent connections" is a term that describes their license type. FDS doesn't have this.
"User license" is a term that describes having a named user. This user can change as much or as often as you need it to.
"3 user licenses" is the language in the terms. They don't feel they need to spell it out any more than that.
Clear:
FDS does NOT have a concurrent connection license.
The license is about users. Users are people. At any given time, don't have more than 3 people assigned to test on your server. Do that and you are in compliance with the license as stated in the Software benefits and downloads page.
This message is primarily addressed to @anon45965781, however it is also addressed to everyone else, including the moderators.
The thread title, and the question being asked, is "Does FDS 19 include concurrent connections?" The question has been answered with "I don't know" and "It's irrelevant". "I don't know" because Claris and lawyers are the only ones that can truly answer this question. "It's irrelevant" because the community interpretation of the license is that FDS server permits use by three users, not concurrent connections.
I respectfully request that moderators close this thread for the following reasons: We are now at post 77 and there has been no new information for a while; The thread is showing some frustration and is now getting heated; I, for one, disagree that wording like "mickey mouse licensing strategy" is a statement of fact, and find it objectionable.
Gentlemen, I believe what was known has been shared and at this point, it is becoming a discussion about opinions. Even though these are encouraged on the.fmsoup.org, in the context of the lounge or certain specific threads, the licensing channel is reserved to asking questions and providing accurate responses of known, verifiable at the source, facts.
For this type of channel, we encourage people to ask their questions and people who know for certain (not guess) to respond to questions or post general information or links about licensing.
I am closing the thread. Thank you all.
@anon45965781, should you receive an answer from Claris, please pm me and I will update the thread with the information.
