Not sure if this is relevant to anyone here but I've spent the last 24 hours playing with this new platform (they have been around for 10 years) but this platform is new. It has a few missing parts that would make it fantastic like the native touch events - swipe etc but they are planned for delivery soon.
Very competitive pricing from free(totally free with all features) through to enterprise.
Worth a look - https://www.appgyver.com
Can you host their apps on your own servers?
Yes - you can connect to any backend of your choice.
You build native iOS, Android, Mac or progressive web apps - they do the build work and you one then deploy via the App Store etc.
There are more and more players in the low code/no code space. Appgyver uses flow diagrams as a way to code, and they are not alone, I think Microsoft PowerApp does the same.
All low code/no code systems come with shortcomings, FileMaker is no exception and I guess Appgyver has some also.
Appgyver's free offer bugs me. Software editors needs money to carry on developing.
Claris must beware those (new) competitors. We will see with 19 what they comes up with.
They make money from enterprise companies - DHL is named as one. The work they do for those companies in terms of developing the platform is then released to the free tier. I have built 3 simple apps in a day - deployed them as web apps and native iOS using my developer subscription.
Yes there are a few rough edges but it just shows what Filemaker are up against and in my opinion makes the pricing for Claris Connect look a little ridiculous.
@Mark would you mind showing the numbers they have (or had in the past) for their enterprise customers (the ones that do not get to use the free tier of their pricing)? This way, it is easier to make a complete comparison.
I saw 2 different numbers: $899 per month (here and here) and $299 per user per month.
Please update if you have some other numbers that are more current.
I don’t have that information. Only companies who turnover >$10m are on that plan.
Mark, just in case you didn't see this: FileMaker gets a mention
Thanks Andy - it's a huge growth area and the big players in the industry are now involved. Hopefully Claris can respond quick enough to compete.
Very interesting. Thanks for sharing!
I see it's based on React Native, that is interesting. An app for Android could be built and connect to an FMS via Data API. Thank you for sharing.
That’s exactly what I have done. Super easy.
This isn't really intended for debate, as it this has been the subject of numerous posts and it will only result in the 'too expensive' and 'great value' opinions.
However, for the record, this came from an email exchange with a UK company's Tech Support Manager earlier this week:
" We are moving away from FM as it was taking too long to develop and very costly in development fees."
I must stress that this is not a customer of ours and the information was offered purely as a result of me asking why they were moving away from FileMaker, particularly as they did have a lot of licenses. I also asked for permission from them before posting this.
I also appreciate that this may be down to the skills of the developer they have chosen to work with or perhaps they are not defining their requirements clearly, but I still believe the low code space is going to become much more competitive in the future.
I love the product but find it almost impossible to sell to my customers. My market segment is small/medium businesses in the merchanting/retailing sector - my solutions need to integrate into enterprise database systems using ODBC etc.
When I get to the point of quoting for a project, typically less than 5 users, the cost of FIleMaker stands out like a sore thumb and is ALWAYS picked up and queried. I always get asked why they need 5 users when the solution is for 2 users.
I’m probably just bad at selling but it is frustrating and I’m actively looking at alternatives like the AppGyver platform I mentioned before.
Mark, IMHO, Either two things are going on here to explain FM pricing. First, the 5 user required payment is the breakpoint that it becomes profitable to them. Or second, which the one I really believe, FM has bitten into the Pareto 80/20 customer principle. Either way it is a rough ride for us small developers.
Regards
This is not what one would expect as an opinion about FileMaker 
.Either the developer was not at ease with FileMaker, or this developer had to modify an existing app that had been badly designed at first. And believe me, these apps exists.
The price looks paramount to small companies, and the subscription model is not loved by manies. There is a great value in FileMaker that users can't get, just think about optimization in Draco when loading a Layout. Only developers see a value in that. But what's makes me mad is the fact that bugs are not fixes, sometimes after years 
.
+1000 on this, citizen developers will praise that. But in the end, will these products deliver real value ? How will it be possible to debug those apps made of boxes you link ?
Up to now FileMaker has a very good implementation of low code - well if you forget apps with lots of scripts - but Claris will have to do better.
I think I got the same email Andy - they're trying to sell their site licenses on, I believe, although I'm not even sure if that's allowed?!
The idea that development in FileMaker takes too long is probably more indicative that the firm is inexperienced in custom software development, consequently they don't understand how long things take.
James, I couldn’t possibly comment. However, if I were to receive a message like this I would make a non committal but advisory response along the lines of ‘I don’t know where you stand in transferring ownership of these, but I would think at the least you’d need to involve FileMaker/Claris if you find a buyer.’