Thanks for the link. I meant to say this on the last reply but forgot. We are looking at FileMaker business alliance program which gets us access to the SBA if I understand correctly. I am the only developer though and the hoops required for FBA are slowing me down on getting it. I had hoped to package FileMaker with our solution on the last two contracts but it did not happen. Our goal is for this fall. It definitely seems like a perfect fit for us.
2 Likes
Site license allows external web direct users (at least it used to be). So it might be worth also for less than 12 people company.
I think anyone who has a software they no longer maintain and choose to change other components it interacts with (OS, or other stuff) is at risk here. Not just the mac users. Keeping FileMaker stuck on a given version and changing MS Outlook between 32bit and 64 bit or vice-versa is a good example. Changing an anti-virus or firewall software can also have some impacts one may not have anticipated.
On Mac, FileMaker has been 64bit only for a good while, but a lot of people using software that is 32bit got bit (pun intended) when they moved to Catalina. Keeping your software stale while modifying other components at the same time has never been the recipe for stability.
Mac users may be more familiar with all this because Apple is pushing hard for changes. Harder than most I would say. It has good and bad implications, not all their moves get as much traction as they would hope, but each of us can choose the hardware we want to use. The bottom line is if you want to use something for the longest possible time, you better shrink-wrap your machine and avoid changing components on it.
For others, updating both software and hardware at regular intervals is just how they achieve stability.
2 Likes
I have clients who have been using the same Visual FoxPro executable over many Windows versions for over 15 years.
2 Likes
I have a friend that loves FoxPro, for him it's the best db in the world.
VFP is a great tool if you like writing a lot of code. It's more complex in many ways than FileMaker, but not necessarily "better" for the client. In many ways, FileMaker is just too awesome. Many things native in FileMaker have to be "bolted on" with kludgy OLE controls or whatever with VFP. And even then, the OLE "bolted on" stuff doesn't do as well or have the same capabilities as FileMaker. Email, PDF, INSERT FROM URL, are obvious examples where FileMaker is totally current and has excellent capabilities. Amazing plug-ins for non-coders, a vibrant user community are other ways FileMaker is incredible.
But, hey, VFP is so 10+ years ago now...
However, it's moot since the client cannot get past the crazy FMS pricing compared with $0.0/year, year after year for the now totally defunct, discontinued, and obsolete (but still running for 15 years...) VFP.
Well, Visual Basic can't run on latest Windows versions, but the runtime is still present, so you can still run these old applications one have. Windows 1, MacOS 0 
.
In which case your client will ask you to create a vm inside a vm with an older Windows version until he retires.
Sorry, but that’s not a realistic solution for an IT organization. No further windows updates?
Sorry I was being humorous. I have seen organizations stick to old systems beyond any reasonable time trough means incredibly dubious. I was not implying that was an appropriate mean 
1 Like
Gotcha.
FileMaker would be, IMHO, an excellent replacement for this client's VFP application. However, it's probably about a $1M development effort given all the stuff going on in that incredibly complex app. All academic since the client wouldn't consider FMS anyway.
Thanks C.
1 Like
licinsing cost is only one kid in this block )-:
- we got customers who do have problems with the cost, mainly if there is kind of a holding behind, 'Siftungsrat' here. Thats a group of people who are excited with questoning fees, the smaller the amount, the more...
- the bigger problem is the question 'how long does my iOS crm work fine, when in one, two, three year(s) new colleagues are joining with new iPhones. The current version of fmgo requires ios13, fmgo18 under ios13 is slooow(er) than under ios12
- the same with macOS, as mentioned several times, we got customers who do plan the updates, over the next few years. There are other systems that do define this planning, one of the pps requires macOS10.12, if the customer goes Windows as a plan B, that would be costy, really costy..
We need versions that are more solid concerning os requirements - and quarterly upgrades...
3 Likes
I have a client who's been using the same version of FileMaker (6) for about 18 years. On Windows of course. The solution's worked fine ever since.
A testament to the design and quality of both the platform's and developer's abilities. Forward ahead.
3 Likes
Agreed. However, is this client using server? In which case what did they do when windows server 2007 EOL in 2016?
That's good to know, but this reply is out of context with the above discussion. 
On a slightly related and humorous side note... the same thing the people still using Windows XP are doing. Praying their hardware doesn't die.