Take your pick!
- CFMC
- CFC
- FC
- FMC
- Claris FMCloud
- Claris Cloud
- ClaClo
- FmCloud
- FileMaker Cloud
- Anything but these
0 voters
2 Likes
I feel a reference to Claris is essential in the name while FileMaker isnāt.
My rationale is that there are many cloud products, many FileMaker cloud products. Claris is the distinguishing element in the reference.
It would be a disservice to the community to use language that creates the impression that thereās only one recipe of FileMaker in the Cloud.
It is more accurate to focalise on the type of implementation of FileMaker cloud hosting
This is what I'm trying to clarify. We have plenty of FMS flavours. How do we identify the Claris FileMaker Cloud product.
3 Likes
In this case I think certain choices in the poll are problematic. For instance, if people voted in majority for fmcloud or FM since fm managed hosting aka cloud has been operated for nearly 11 years under this trademark by a CPP (formerly FBA).
Productive computing, 360works, FMP Host, DBservices, Claris, Soliant, and many many more sell a FileMaker Hosting service (aka Cloud, aka FM Managed Hosting) and they vary greatly.
To expand on an example someone used in another thread, cloud is a generic word, like car. Nobody can claim Car to be a trademark nor associate a specific built to that name. Although a bit more precise, SUV car (think FM cloud), itās still very generic. 4wd SUV car is starting to be a lot more telling (Dockers FM cloud). If you add the manufacturer Nissan 4wd SUV cars (Claris AWS EC2 FileMaker Cloud) you are definitely getting there. The best UUID though is when the product (service in this case) name is present
Nissan Rogue 4wd SUV car (Claris AWS EC2 FileMaker Cloud or 1-more-thing fmcloud.fm on dockers cloud.
People love shortcuts and acronyms but the same way we chastise lazy table naming e.g. prodcat (productions catalog of course...or product categories?), maybe we should avoid doing this for what is, after all, just another offering of FileMaker Software Managed Cloud Hosting services ....
I suggest we keep the provider and the service category to build a differentiating convention when we refer to products.
Claris cloud (small c)
Soliant cloud or Soliant managed hosting
360 cloud
1mt cloud
Letās be kind to newbies and avoid confusion traps.
Well, Claris calls it Claris FileMaker Cloud.
It's not short, but if it is about avoiding confusion, that's probably what we should use. People who have heard me talk about code readability know what I think of abbreviations.
From there, if we are looking for something shorter, FileMaker is the part everyone is already accustomed to see as FM. So Claris FMCloud would be where I land.
FM Cloud would be my next choice, but it removes Claris and as we know, other hosting providers have their own offering, so that could become confusing if Claris is not mentioned, in my opinion. (Same applies to FileMaker Cloud)
As for Claris Cloud, that is too likely to get abbreviated to CC and I prefer for Claris Connect to hold that spot.
The other elements just feel cryptic.
1 Like
FMP = FileMaker Pro, FMS = FileMaker Server, FMC = FileMaker Cloud. I guess there could be confusion between FMC for AWS and the current FMC. But FMC for AWS nearing EOL (already End of sale). (FMPA is almost out of support as well).
In the podcast, Clarisā CEO talks about the future of FM. This information will help finding a fitting synonym for discussions.
Put forward any suggestions you like.
I started this topic because both @FabriceN and @AndyHibbs observed that "cloud" or "fm cloud" doesn't mean "claris filemaker cloud." I'm interested in discovering what words we use.
2 Likes
I wouldn't like to turn this forum into another self-promotion fair, but @Cecile suggested to open a fmcloud.fm dedicated forum.
I'll be glad to answer questions there without hijacking other threads:
3 Likes
The problem I highlighted is less about the actual description, but the way it is communicated.
This is copied from my Skype account that was received from a contact of mine this week āI have read somewhere that cloud hosting doesn't support CWP and pluginsā
āCloud computingā itself has many definitions, this is just one from the Internet: āthe practice of using a network of remote servers hosted on the internet to store, manage, and process data, rather than a local server or a personal computerā.
Personally I believe that a cloud solution should process everything within the Internet, hence I would define a FileMaker Server delivering to an end user via WebDirect as a cloud solution, along with our own system where both FileMaker Pro and FileMaker Server are run on Internet servers, custom web publishing, etc.
However, processing via FileMaker Pro on a local computer to FileMaker Server on an Internet server is, in my view, not a pure cloud solution, but a partial cloud solution, as not all processing is carried out within the Internet. Dropbox is interesting, I believe everybody accepts that it is a cloud solution, but the majority of processing is carried out by usersā computers. In this case the local computer is connected to the Internet, so is everything processed by a computer connected to the Internet a cloud solution?
Hence we are in the Marketing world and we all know there are no rules to cover that.
Referring back to my Skype example above, I donāt believe there can be a single description stipulated, for goodness sake I still call a vacuum cleaner a hoover, but all that does is show my age. Claris FileMaker Cloud, FileMaker Cloud, FMC, even FM Cloud, but that is very close to @FabriceN and his companyās identity, whether we like it or not, are going to be used. The key thing is to be clear on the message being presented.
Personally, I would have addressed this along the lines of: āFileMaker cloud based around Windows or Mac servers will provide the same functionality and compatibility as on premise systems. FileMaker cloud based around Linux is incompatible with plugins, CWP......ā. We must remember that there are vendors for all 3 platforms, not just Windows or Linux and we certainly donāt want any anti-competitive implications within this forum.
All the best
Andy
2 Likes
I say hoover too. Call me old! 
Seriously, it is an underrated strength of the FileMaker platform to be a distributed application (part of the work is done on the client, part on the server). Distributed apps are now everywhere. The creators of FileMaker were incredible visionaries.
2 Likes
Iām glad Iām not the only one @FabriceN 
Yes, it is interesting to see where the technology leads us. The fact that so much effort is being put into features such as PSOS, sorting on server, WebDirect, etc. is maybe an acknowledgement that a distributed application for all processing isnāt suitable for the Internet based world now.
However, we thought our streaming (initially Citrix XenApp and now Microsoft RemoteApp) would be dead and buried now as technology moves on. However, the concept of streamed applications appears to be in its ascendancy, which of course does use distributed processing, which works great as everything is within the Internet.
The one thing that is certain, is that things will continue to change.
All the best
Andy
we're getting old. When I was working on VAX computers, some used to call them 'hoover' too (-:
VAX, PDP... anybody out there? 
2 Likes
DEC VAX, couldnāt āhoover upā water with those, but took a whole room up and a hard disk the size of a pizza box.
Do I miss the bridges/gateways of AppleTalk (over PhoneNet LOL), DECnet, IPX, SNA, NetBEUI and many Iāve forgotten. Absolutely NOT. Thank goodness for TCP/IPš
2 Likes
Interestingly Iāve just downloaded an update to 360Works Scribe that we use here.
Inside the downloaded folder are these plugin folders:
FMCloud
MAC
WIN
I would prefer to see:
FMLinux
MAC
WIN
Unless @FabriceN has a standard plugin written specifically for his services?
2 Likes
I had pretty much followed a line of thought similar to what @Bobino stated.
My observation of Claris docs is that a single doc seems to start out by calling it "Claris FileMaker Cloud", and then moves on to using the shortened "FileMaker Cloud".
Per discussion already well-articulated by others, I can't see myself using "FileMaker Cloud" unless I am absolutely certain that the context of the usage will offer no ambiguity. And so, I have resigned myself to getting used to just saying/writing the full (brand-qualified) name.
But -- when I saw the options in this poll, I felt that I could get on board with "Claris FMCloud", as, in my mind, it maps back pretty well to "Claris FileMaker Cloud".
4 Likes
Yes, Iād like to see that also but unfortunately 360Works plug-ins are not Linux compatible, or at least not for the regular version of FileMaker Server. They are compatible with FileMaker Cloud only. I donāt know why, there must be a good reason but I donāt know it.