Looking for:
Filemaker pro 14 with mojave free download |
Filemaker pro 14 with mojave free download.Unleash the power of the platform.
And a wide array of templates, tools, apps, and training materials are at your fingertips on Marketplace. To inspire your imagination, here are just a few things you can do with FileMaker Pro:. Your business spans the cloud, on-premise systems, and even devices. And all of it has to work together for your business to thrive.
We have updated our privacy policy, effective October 13, Please take a moment to review our privacy policy for more details. Claris FileMaker Pro Unleash the power of the platform. Try now with a day FileMaker trial Buy now. Explore our Claris FileMaker purchase options.
FileMaker by the numbers. Technology for everyone. Using FileMaker Pro, any problem solver can: Drag and drop to create layouts. Use built-in templates and add-ons. Run apps on Windows and Mac. Create mobile apps. Share apps on phones, tablets, and laptops. Make instant reports on the fly.
Plays nice with others. The low-code platform has allowed someone like me to build a program that our business can actually run on. Got a business problem? Fix it with FileMaker. Campaign management Product catalog Membership manager Event planner Content library. Case manager Customer surveys Training log Return processing Support contracts. Job tracker Inventory manager Barcode organizer Resource scheduler Equipment maintenance. The power of the platform. FileMaker Pro.
FileMaker Cloud. A three months period for achieving compatibility with a new OS version is fair game. This should be the policy. If there is, for a particular version, need for additional time because of unforeseen difficulties, proactive communication helps a lot.
FMI should make sure that all resellers beginning with Apple proactively communicate existing compatibility limitations i. There could also be a 'check system compatibility' button right on the webshop landing page that gives direct access to compatibility information, or a technical FAQ like the one for licensing. Both FMI and Apple marketing is all about the ease if of use. While I agree somewhat with your comment I think that the product is maturing at a faster rate then we have seen for some time.
At last focus is being given to the issues that have prevented FileMaker use in larger scale projects - Clay had a slide that shows the underlying work that is being undertaken to remove the Java stack and replace with Node. JS for the server technology. This is a huge engineering project that will deliver many improvements in the coming years. They have limited resources, have a seemingly somewhat hands off approach from Apple and a very active marketing team.
It must be a struggle internally if you are in the engineering teams. I can second this. V 17 is a net improvement when coming from v 16 and we have to salute FMI for this notable exception: the left-outs in the server GUI.
If marketing touts ease of use ahead of anything else, closing the compatibility gap with a new OS version within 3 months should be part of the planning. If not, a disconnect between marketing and engineering becomes obvious.
I do not think that a three months period is cool. There might be reasons for this - but it's not cool because many people are waiting for new Mac's I would also expect that FileMaker Go 17 is allready ready for the new 11" iOS devices - they are not but this is a minor problem, it's just the screen size that differs a bit. Not only the missing [operators]. I have a very strange behavior in custom fonction windows too: Every click leaves a blue mark.
Don't upgrade??? Which is somewhat of a shame. Same with my 13" MBAir. Louis, be happy, you can read the text. From my side, I got the most part of time blank screen. This is not my case, nor is FMP As far as plugins are concerned, this is not possible in all cases. So I'm forced to deliver a runtime solution to it but no way to plot a graph in the Runtime version of FileMaker unless you add a PlugIn. Same for another more vertical application that requires the use of RSA coded headings, this is not a fantasy, it is the law for this application to be approved by the tax authorities.
It is still surprising that five and a half months after Mojave's first rush, an Apple branch is not able to deliver a version that works properly on Mojave. Personally, I tried the first beta version of Maojave from June 12th. I mentioned this fact on a thread, the only reaction FileMaker was a threat on the pretext that I exceeded the guidelines of Apple DNA about beta softwares. Again, I got the impression as I right now that FileMaker does not care about the advice of developers and users.
Next year we will have the same state, in May a new version 18 of FileMaker that will be not compatible with the next version of macOS. I'm testing another environment like 4D to do the same thing as FileMaker.
This is a huge investment that I made by learning how to use and then develop on FileMaker and I am very disappointed by the lack of engagement of the FMI with members of its community. We got quite some customers running FM For some of them, going to 17 is planned, for some of them that's not possible for several reason.
I also got virtual machines, besides of the startup time really fine, fast and smooth enough for FileMaker. But not enough space on the 'Air' or on the touchbar MacBook. Mojave VM takes nearly a gig's Excellent machine with crisp display.
Definitely true that budgets and resource allocation play a significant role in this. Budgets and resource allocation reflect priorities and when I see idiotic videos that must cost a lot of money I can't help but reach the conclusion that marketing is winning those turf battles. It is completely illegal, and rightly so, for Apple to give any of its subsidiaries a competitive advantage! It is not true to say that FileMaker is the only application with compatibility issues. Some never will!
This is a major Os release, there are bound to be some wrinkles! The blog post certainly does not explicitly say "bury this in the community where only the most devoted users will see it" but it seems to be evident between the lines. Also, it is worth noting that since September 24 the blog post has had only 25 comments where as this one began 2 days ago and already has triple that number. Thanks to your reminder about it, I now recall reading it and advising some of my clients to hold off until further notice, and the leaders of my local user group mentioned that the consequences are more serious for Server than for Pro.
As to the number of engineers, perhaps you're right that engineers is too much to expect. If that's true, I'd like to start the bidding at The quality of some of the responses here shouldn't be overlooked. People complain about 17 being unusable in Mojave, which is not true. Lots of noise that doesn't contribute to the discussion.
As far as the number of employees, I think guessing veers into the "speculating" category that we're asked to refrain from in the forums. I am good friends with many people at FMI and I don't know how many. I don't worry. I know they're working hard to make the platform perfect for us. We are in a cycle that will eventually be broken, because it always happens in IT, particularly as business and large organisations will not accept continous change, there will be a backlash and the likes of IBM and SalesForce, who have publicly been announcing their adoption of Macs, will kick back and demand stability and continuity.
Apple will need to decide if it is only interested in consumers or leave business to Microsoft and Google, Linux or some new upstart as they did with servers. Microsoft appear to have got it, with weekly announcements of new features gradually released within Office No fanfare, no version change, no backwards compatibility issues, just a quiet announcement of something new. AVLA gives FileMaker the same opportunity if they choose to take it, rather than an annual cycle of bug fixes and no new functionality.
Currently, we have about 6-months opportunity to use the current versions of Mac OS X and FileMaker before the cycle starts again. We have no responsibility or influence over these, many are in non-English languages. Even solutions that rely on browsers are not immune from compatibility issues, Safari v12 removed NPAPI, as did Chrome before, that has broken many things until they get fixed.
Yup, higher complexity for us, not our users and cost, but none of the day-to-day issues being raised above. We do feel the pain expressed here, but eventually the industry will wake up and smell the roses. Citing a famous sci-fi movie android: this is madness! We came to the point were botched OS updates turn devices into bricks. So based on the current schedule Since a patch is expected this month. You are of course expecting the patch to fix the issues and not introduce new issues as has happened in the past disappearing scripts.
Personally I've been running Server 17 on Mojave without too many issues except for remote user counts not being released. I haven't done any major development work in 6 months as I'm waiting for things to settle down before I incorporate new UI schemas.
I enjoy developing and exploring now ways to utilise FM for our Business processes. But I will not complain to much after 6 years of service without a breakdown. I can't care less than I do about not having metal on a machine which will run Filemaker Server for its whole life, without a screen attached to it. This is not exactly what I call "without problems", but it does allow clients having problems with their old macmini servers who HAVE to buy new hardware to get the latest MacMini , install High Sierra and run FMS 15 on it.
Our clients do not care about having the latest OS from Apple. What they care about is to be able to replace a dying - worn out - old - machine with a new one and have exactly the same stuff they had working the same way they are used to. Because for them Apple is a hardware company and Filemaker a software company. And this simple truth goes often forgotten.
You're welcome. Only a couple extra steps, since recovery mode is required for reinstallation anyhow. If there is any solace, WebDirect is compatible with Mojave If there's one thing that OS upgrades generally don't break, that is functionality of the web. Has the time has come to build for webdirect and ios only? That might be the road happiness. As mentioned elsewhere, we have a couple few?
We've now disabled the Mac OS upgrade notifications. FMP 15 is installed on those particular Macs and seems to be working fine, so they will stay there for now.
The next version will be 17 unless our test group meets problems, then it'll be This is business, not "arts and crafts" no offense intended to artists and these non-synchronized version cycles are costly. As developers, we need to run older versions - as long as there are customers who are running those.. We do have VM's, but it's easier to work directly on the os of the machine, especially under macOS Windows is better, faster, will startup fast,.
It was me who put the 3 months statement. There is no problem with the fact that these things require work and work takes time. Then there is a target audience called 'citizen' developer'. People without an admins knowledge. For everyone and especially for a less tech-savvy audience, those incompatibility issues must be clearly advertised at the places the go to look.
Otherwise they get caught between Apples' and FMI's marketing steamrollers who both say: just use it, just go for it. Its all easy and hassle-free. Well, at times it is not, because of the compatibility issues. To be clear: the problem starts with the OS vendor.
FMI has limited power over this. But: the right information at the right time at the right place prevents people from getting trapped and is good customer care. Again for a point of perspective, Microsoft broke their own software as per my original post. Their own update broke their own software and their response and eventual resolution was that a resolution would be released in 2-months. In other words, anyone using their own software, that they broke, had to go without for 2-months.
Thank goodness the community within the above link saved the day. FileMaker are at the behest of Apple, who keep changing things without any continuity consideration, which has always been the case. It is ironic that we have no Windows compatibility issues.
By the way, this was delivered today and I've already found a really good use for it:. We're introducing a new syncing model for sharing calendars in Outlook for Mac.
These changes will bring improved reliability and performance of calendar sharing in Outlook for Mac based on the use of REST technology. This message is associated with Microsoft Roadmap ID: Older hardware? VMware ESXi 6. Many OS options there!
And some older Macs can support various Linux distros - great tutorials a Google search away. I really appreciate all the discussion that this has generated.
Yes, it started out as a rant because I wanted the discussion to start and was hoping for exactly what has happened. Generally, a very civil discussion on the state of things and others' frustration with the delay in the updates. I have read each and every response, and I have been thinking about them all weekend through today. I have come up with a few things that I would like to throw out for consideration by the community and FMI if you are reading this. I'm just thinking about FileMaker for the next 20 years.
I think as a community we need to keep an eye on FileMaker Today, Next Week, Next Year and when we build solutions for our clients, how long we can make them work and last. Until then I will sleep well, thinking about your post. I'll report back. This is one of the great benefits of going to DevCon. You can sit and talk with people like Clay one of the primary developers of the Draco engine , and other engineers. You can hear about the vision, what they are working on, and also as important, why they are not working on other things.
This year, it was talked about, the underlaying technology. They are make a large shift. The idea is that they can switch out the technology under the hood, and nothing changes for us. But it allows for both performance, and faster shifts when technology changes. It's a long term plan. One similar to other areas of the platform that have already seen massive under the hood changes. We are already starting to see the benefits of changes like that.
We will also see more as new stuff is introduced into the platform. The development methodology is not terribly relevant to the product. FileMaker's testing process is fairly extensive. That is the reason it takes so long. They do the beta testing, and go through the whole process. Then when the gold master is updated, they do it again. And when the final shipping release happens, they do the process again. That would have caused some serious for many software platforms.
I'm available should you have any questions. Feel free to reach out via PM. Good call on the 8GB, much more cost effective to upgrade with 3rd party chips. Another strategy, should you buy additional units, or require more storage, is to use external NVMEs Thunderbolt 3 compatible enclosure. Thank you jormond! This is valuable information. All this is invisible to those who did not attend DevCon. One important learning: you can have problems, delays.
Be proactive in your communication. People customers will support you in any way they can. The worst thing to do is keeping silent and leaving people in the dark. They don't have the time to do it in the Roadmap video, though it does show kind of where they are headed. They are definitely in a hard place. They are being more transparent, and it's been great. At the same time, publishing the info that I was able to glean during presentations, and side conversations with FMI staff, requires a lot of time.
The more people they hire to what is essentially marketing, the fewer people they can have on the engineering team. So, for us, it's a toss up. We want more info, we want it easier to find, but we also want them working on bug fixes and new features to keep the platform moving.
I don't envy that position. We try to help as much as we can. They are open to sharing more with us, and being more involved watch the DIGFM recent meetup , but that won't likely happen until after this next release cycle. As I'm reading the replies to this discussion, a pop-up appears on the screen:. As mentioned either in this thread or other related ones, we're living in the golden age of FileMaker as far as I'm concerned.
They've never been more open about what they're doing now and what they expect to do in the future. I can imagine that no one has boring days at FMI. Hope they will maintain a reasonable ratio between engineers and marketing workforce. My sports was rowing and we had this joke:. Boat race day. Boat 1 is manned by 8 rowers and one coax. Boat 2 is manned by 8 coaxes and 1 rower. Who wins? I salute them for having opened up.
My guess is that communication can still be improved. Good points, I agree, but I wanted to add a few thoughts from how I have managed OSX on networks for companies in the past, mostly because you will be less stressed if you avoid it instead of fighting it.
I have managed MAC's on networks for years, really I do not release the newest OSX until at least 6 to 9 months after it has been released. I do this because I just do not have time to trouble shoot their inconsideration when releasing a platform that will not work with other applications they also own or for that matter a third party may own, not to mention any potential security threats that have not been found yet.
I have often thought that the new OSX releases should be bi-yearly with major updates to the existing ones yearly. Really IT should not be releasing any OSX or iOS major releases yet, they should still be testing them out in their own environment before they hit anyone else. While I share your frustration that FileMaker Pro 17 isn't yet compatible with Mojave, I would like to make a few points:. I also use FMP 17 with Mojave, and it too seems to work fine.
I had some initial issues with older plugins, but updates remedied that. I don't use Mojave on any of my FileMaker Servers, and have always been slow to update server OS anyway, out of caution.
I use high-end digital audio software Pro Tools on one of my Macs, which is still running High Sierra. Every time a new OS is released, Avid Pro Tools' owner company stresses that Pro Tools users shouldn't update until they've had a chance to certify that Pro Tools will work with the new OS, and if necessary, they release an update.
Pro Tools, like FileMaker, isn't yet certified to be compatible with Mojave. A little, but I'd rather know going in, instead of suffering through having to downgrade the OS. My guess is that FMI has hit significant obstacles which have prevented them from releasing a Mojave-compatible update; I assume they're vigorously working on it.
Even though Apple Inc. Having run a FileMaker hosting company for 20 years, and having been a loyal Mac user for 33 years, I've learned to be patient with OS updates and application updates. Nobody's going to die if I don't update a server's OS; nobody's going to be in danger if I don't upgrade a server box Because people spend money and get faster cars, faster internet, faster everything and expect to squeeze more life and action and professional results from a single minute, and this HW-SW combo just does not deliver it.
I think it is a stretch to put it out there as a universal fact, so it'd be good if we qualify these things and provide more specifics. The FM platform is just that: a platform. How it behaves is largely dependent on how we use it. My experience is not that things are slower than before for instance. I think both you and your clients are really going to like FM on the new Mac minis.
Lightyears ahead of the previous models in every dimension. I recommend working with them to upgrade their solution to FMS 17, to ensure maximum stability, security, and performance. Regarding pricing. On the receipt, Macs and iOS devices are often more expensive than their counterparts, but there are so many other expensive variables in play. OS licensing, reliability, support hours, user satisfaction, etc.
Many enterprise customers are starting to realize Apple's significant value for their businesses. Check out this report. Recently, IBM — who have deployed nearly , Macs in the past two years — have provided concrete data to support this claim. Plus, out of those tickets that are opened, only five percent of Mac users end up requiring an in-person visit. PC boasts a troublesome 27 percent of tickets that require IT visits. While these stats are for the largest Mac deployment in the enterprise, the trend applies to smaller organizations who add Macs to their environment.
Heads are spinning! Apple's focus on security and privacy have a lot to do with the fact that Apple, Inc. Their workforce is massive, and the IP technology they protect is Apple designs it's products for end-users, yes, but at the OS and internal hardware level, they're designing much of the architecture for the enterprise. Good question. Apple is doing their best to ensure MacOS, and other products offer the best in security, performance, and reliability. FileMaker too!
I want to be a little careful because for the most part I thought that the OS wars were over. I get a little antsy when people try hard to convince me that one OS is better than the other. I'm OS agnostic and will use the one that best fits the task at hand. An OS for me is not a life-style choice. It's a tool. So for me: heads are not really spinning.
People tend to use what make sense to them. It's when we get dogmatic that we tend to skew things and use something outside where it fits. I don't believe that corporations are evil or not evil.
I do believe that they all have security front-most in their priorities these days and they all deliver that as best as they can. I may be reading the tone of this thread wrong but it seems to me that it is trying to prove that Apple products are superior in their security focus. Which is not something I subscribe to. From what I see, all OSes are striving very hard to deliver security first.
May be not everyone's cup of tea. It is not coincidental that leisure time became a luxury. The OS and application vendors have no choice but keeping an advantage in the race between system makers and system breakers. And often enough, they have to catch up.
This is live in the age of all things connected. Cranking out a major release every year with a batch of often immature new features is a questionable practise. Different approaches are possible. In the consumer world this is not much of a problem and keeps sales figures up. In the business world which has significantly longer cycle times this causes problems and headaches. But who dares and makes the first step when the entire industry is riding that train?
As a business owner and business consultant, it wouldn't hurt my feelings to slow down the release cycles a bit. Declaring an annual release feels pushed, and in practice, releases come before they're fully baked. This is true of OS's and the applications we run on them. I'm pitching for rollouts that are not crippled by artificial time constraints. Let's get the code stable before we throw it to at the users. I'm in agreement, to each his own.
If only the millions of developers working on thousands of distributions of NIX, coding different packages all trying to accomplish the same thing could work together a bit more often. Where they do, more innovation, performance, and security, arises.
Where they do, true innovation, performance, and security, arise. That implies that anything else is false innovation, false performance and false security. Not trying to pick a fight here, but let's keep it clean and OS agnostic throughout. We're here to help people with the FM platform features. One of its most powerful features is that it is multi-platform.
So we can each have our own favorite platform without being made to feel that we're ignorant because the other platform is supposedly better. That would create an atmosphere where people do not feel like they can share safely. I edited the true to more as you were writing your reply. It works much better! There've been discussions regarding Mojave compatibility, concerns about the disparity between MacOS and FileMaker releases, concerns regarding High Sierra compatibility with new Mac devices - all helped by knowledgeable participants, with great ideas, solutions, and opinions.
Do you feel ignorant, or unsafe in this thread's atmosphere? No Wim doesn't. We all have a responsibility to do our best to encourage open, constructive, discussion. He was simply pointing out that saying one OS is better than the other doesn't do that. It would make Windows professionals who may have a client that is a Mac shop, a touch uneasy to ask a question. There've been discussions regarding Mojave compatibility, concerns about the disparity between MacOS and FileMaker releases, concerns regarding High Sierra compatibility with new Mac devices.
Yep, but none of that made any allusion to one OS being better than the other; which is where the tone of thread was drifting towards beyond the original scope of the thread. I don't. But these threads serve a wide community of members, most of whom never ask a question or participate in a thread. But these threads get read a lot, so it is important to take a stance to be OS neutral, and if you express a favorite to make sure you qualify it as just that: your own opinion.
It's important not to postulate things in the absolute. And yes, we have opinions; nothing wrong with that. Expect them to be challenged. I think that Wim feeling ignorant or unsafe is one of the signs of the apocalypse. Unlike MS Windows, Apple is willing to rework the basement, release after release, year after year - if it delivers better security and privacy. I hear you, though I believe Apple is highly considerate in their efforts.
I have no qualms about the above statements. When folks have valid frustrations regarding Apple or FileMaker - be they about compatibility, hardware, or pricing, or when more pessimistic views are aired - and there are many, many such views in this thread - I'm going to offer solid solutions, ideas, and language in support of Apple and FileMaker efforts. But let's be honest. FileMaker is an Apple company, this forum is served from Apple IPs, notification emails being sent from Apple email servers, and this server is probably hosted in an Apple datacenter.
I'm sure the folks at FileMaker and Apple are comfortable with the 'tone' of my responses on this thread. This community supports great discussions about Windows and now Linux - which is fantastic. Multi-platform FM is an asset to the FileMaker community, developers and end-users.
It's wise. It's smart. It's probably the best way to leverage the modern enterprise - and encourage iOS device adoption. Same with Linux, my second love. Windows, er, not so much. But don't expect unfair critiques, or comments on Windows related threads.
Wim, I respect your extensive contributions, breadth of experience, and standing in the community. You rock. I'm an Apple technician, a developer, a solutions integrator, a salesman. This is who I am. I'll take your stance into consideration, and ensure my contributions are most meaningful. Many MacOS improvements are security and privacy related. Unlike Windows, Apple is willing to rework the basement, release after release, year after year - if it delivers better security and privacy.
Developer betas are available for a reason. Software developers that dedicate a portion of their resources towards compatibility updates for new MacOS releases make the release dates. MS Office, antivirus companies, Adobe - they really have no other option given the number of users they support, but a lot of the smaller developers, Agilebits, MacPaw, Panic, get it done. Apple sure does keep the development community working, working, working. Not a bad thing in my opinion, they're always on to the next best thing!
I have a personal policy of not trying any new MacOS update until someone else in my office tries it first. I'll pretend like Mojave doesn't exist until at least the first 2 patches. Apple should take note of what Microsoft has done with their developer previews and insiders releases because the risk of upgrading to a poorly tested OS is simply too great for many businesses.
Be polite. Everyone should feel comfortable reading Submissions and participating in discussions. FileMaker will not tolerate flames or other inappropriate statements, material, or links. Most often, a "flame" is simply a statement that is taunting and thus arbitrarily inflammatory. However, this also includes those which are libelous, defamatory, indecent, harmful, harassing, intimidating, threatening, hateful, objectionable, discriminatory, abusive, vulgar, obscene, pornographic, sexually explicit, or offensive in a sexual, racial, cultural, or ethnic context.
Post constructive comments and questions. Unless otherwise noted, your Submission should either be technical support or business question or answer. Constructive feedback about product features is welcome as well. Just two of the points in "Section 2" of Community Use Agreement. While I do agree with those saying that we should expect problems, and then recommend to the bosses that they do not upgrade which I'm doing , our company is expanding rapidly and requiring new Mac laptops to be purchased.
We are forced to be on the latest OS with all of the new people entering. Our workaround currently is to have them open a Windows Remote session to use FileMaker which they dislike using in Windows , but at least there aren't UI glitches. I think might be a problem that FileMaker is stuck in the Java world. I'm guessing those UI issues are related to Java windowing issues, or is that a bad guess? The individuals concerned are laboratory technicians using two of our more complex database systems hundreds of scripts, some quite long.
We're watching them closely incase we need to move them to 16 or 17, but so far it's been okay. Just to offer a tiny datapoint. I'm somewhat puzzeled by the 'community use agreement', to be constructive.
So, having Mac-users to work with remote desktop to a Windows machine is a good and effective way to run FileMaker 17! We have customers who are happy to run FileMaker 17 on their Mac's under mojave with the workarounds available resetting the dialoges, etc. Let's do an example with Joe Doe, who has an issue with a software that costs him time to resolve.
After having this for three times, Joe writes to the local support, in a not so nice way. Support reads that and says 'omg', rephrases Joe's mail and forwards that to the next level of support. NL support reads that and feels not so happy with the wording, does some corrections and sends that mail to the dev. Dev reads that mail and is somewhat confused, asking a colleague.
Colleague reads it and says 'oh, seems that it's an user from europe, he want's to say 'hi''. Plans are afoot to transition away from the Java environment over the next couple of releases. Clay mentioned it in one of his deep dive videos from DevCon. Server side I believe. Around the 4 minute mark. He indicated that Java and the Tomcat implementation framework. They are moving to Node. Truly maddening. So, great finally Apple releases new Mac minis.
Oh, and great they moved the goal post from November to December. An update is planned for FileMaker Pro 17 Advanced in the December timeframe to address these issues. An update is planned for FileMaker Server 17 in December The timing and scope of these updates are subject to change at the sole discretion of FileMaker, Inc. Keep in mind, there is a lot under the hood to deal with for this Mojave update. It is not trivial.
I agree it is a hassle to deal with, especially if you have to purchase new Macs. But the whole IT industry is having trouble with some of the changes.
Even those companies that did have zero-day support have commented on the complexity and challenge of making the updates to work with Mojave. Much of it is security changes. So there are a lot of behind-the-scenes approaches that no longer work. Finding ways to make them work are not easy.
This is very much a case of FileMaker, Inc. We are getting the same thing from various vendors, not just FileMaker. That's how the 2nd time they've changed it. I am starting to think that maybe I just move to Windows for all my development work except for FileMaker Go and just use my Mac for everything else.
What is the basis for this comment? I guess this discussion is going unnoticed by FMI. I had a setup with 4 27" monitors. Two of those monitors were running on DisplayLink adapters. They worked great until the drivers were broken with the The problem is that they are still broken. But, guess what? They work perfectly in Mojave. I can tell you, being able to work on 4 screens at once is a huge benefit.
Especially for someone who has the short term memory I have Namely, that I don't have any short term memory. How much fun will that be if we have to build FileMaker Go solutions in Windows?
Just reading back, maybe I missed it. Can you articulate exactly what problems you are facing? I only know of a few, and those ones aren't deal breakers. I am genuinely curious. I'd be up for reproducing anything that is not known, and helping to supply FileMaker with more info about what is broken. MacOS will always be supported in FileMaker. There's nothing in the update information that says otherwise, and speculating as such is not useful to anyone, nor is it allowed on here, in FileMaker's community posts.
There are many folks at FileMaker watching this thread. Most of this thread is useful to them. The known issues with Dark Mode and things not being visible are pretty substantial for me.
There are only 2 developers in my company, we use Macs, and are 2 of the 3 people using Macs at the company now. There used to be more but were transitioned because of another apps issues. Other than Dark mode which I don't consider an issue , I've never seen any 'things not being visible".
When I first upgrade the OS, I didn't see the operator buttons in the dialog, but I never use those, and there's an easy way to reset the GUI in one step. At Geist Interactive, we upgraded day one and haven't had any issues. Frustrating and I see no outreach from FM to compensate its customers for the failure.
Clearly FM has early and minimally beta access to macOS versions for development. Have to inform you I deleted my post that you answered, since it was noted "under moderation". Never saw that in my life I changed my comment. None of our servers are on mac machines. I do not think of issues of My fault. Not FMS We use windows machines for server. What about Mac only shops? What are you seeing them do? Because I didn't "Delete" it or set it for Moderation.
For what? Don't upgrade your server to Mojave. That's not hard to comply with. This conversation is heading back into the ridiculous. So when you are stopping the Web publishing engine, it may crash. Restart it. I agree, this is a rough on IF you are using the Web server for something.
This may be a big deal for you. Again, though, why is your server on Mojave? It will run on Sierra or High Sierra. There is only one scenario I can think of that forces you to install FMS17 on Mojave with no other choice. These are deal breakers for moving to FileMaker staff are watching this thread, and all other threads.
It is a fact. Had a conversation with at least 4 different FileMaker, Inc. A fix is coming. It will come when they have sufficiently fixed the problem. It's not really fair for us to try and tell them how long it should take.
No different than someone that is not a developer to tell us how long it should take to build a feature or fix a bug for them.
They wait until FMS is ready for Mojave. I don't see that as unreasonable. FMS 17 works very well on High Sierra, right? It's not like we're suddenly without server. New Mac minis all Macs only ships with We are indeed using Web server for several integrations. It lasts for me. That's weird it doesn't last for you. In your case, I see, the new machines are greatly needed.
I get the problem. For other macOS-only shops, it might not be such a great need. Have you considered a hosting service until the patch is released? If you must stick to Mac hardware then get a new powerful piece of hardware and put VMware on it, run Windows or a supported macOS virtualized. Seems that this would work without too much hassle until a fix is in. For running FMS I don't really see the lack of Mojave support as a big deal-breaker at this point since the number of deployments you'd need to cate for is going to be manageable.
Try what maxlatitude pointed out. External drive, with High Sierra as boot drive. That will give you the new mini with High Sierra until a patch can be released. And a fairly inexpensive stopgap. Since i never use them, I totally forgot they're missing. It's fine. I barely even have the function list open either. All type-ahead for me. To wimdecorte Thanks you. Appreciate the idea.
It's somewhat part of 'create Your own app'. No problems with FMPA 17 on Mojave in general, but still using the 3 day old Mac Mini as a flower pot stand until we decide what to do. Or get yourself a text expander. See my options. When you are done with the external drive, use it as a back up drive. Dumb question alert If so, anyone care to share? Mainly would be nice to know how to type: return character, not equal, greaterthaneqal, and lessthanequal This info should be out there for everyone.
And I should have mentioned it in a previous post. Well, the fact that FM automatically puts a space before and after the operators is kinda nice though. No problems with the page 4 instructions. We've a metal recycling system upgrade due for installation this month and would have held off a few weeks if the November Mojave update was released on schedule.
With it having slid to sometime in December, we'll probably go for a stop gap solution, hence using the external SSD rather than having to scrub the internal SSD a few weeks hopefully after we go live.
I still find it interesting, as a business owner who is focussed on issues affecting our company more than the software, that FileMaker 17 is compatible on Windows back to an operating system that was originally released 9-years ago and only compatible with a Mac operating system released 2-years ago.
Technology advances vs return on investment, cost of ownership, etc. Here, customers do have a 'plan B' switch to Windows. I just think there will be a move to cautious software evolution in the future, rather than an annual revolution that is, without doubt, disrupting our businesses. My other comments regarding how Microsoft are drip feeding new features in Office point to the way the industry needs to go.
The days of trying to court users to buying cellophane wrapped boxes with a new version number has long gone, I still think software is going to look pretty stupid celebrating their MySoftware v21, or having a mid-life crisis between MySoftware v30 and MySoftware v Instructions can be found on YouTube. Well, the obvious and only thing that Apple mandates is that they don't do an Android Version by all means. Probably still the dogma to go 'Thermonuclear' over Android.
I had the first customer calling me about support of the new MacMini which only ships with Mojave and the fact that he can't get FMS I haven't received mine yet. Adjusting the external boot option is for the High Sierra installer on a USB stick, etc, or to install and boot High Sierra from an external drive.
Feel free to PM if you need assistance. For reference, I got my Mac Mini a couple of days ago and tried to get it booting into High Sierra. It did not work. Despite enabling external boot and reducing the secure boot level from Full to Medium, I was unable to boot from either a known good High Sierra installer I was able to boot from an external disk with Mojave cloned from the Mac Mini's system to prove that external boot worked.
The closest I got with High Sierra ended up in boot recovery saying the startup disk needed to have a special update installed, but none was available.
My Mac Mini has the 3. I don't have access to any Mac Minis with a Core i3 or Core i5 so I haven't been able to redo my test on those variants. This is false. Server 17 works fine on APFS. There is no documentation that states APFS is an issue. No issues other than those identified in the support articles regarding PHP etc. I can only imagine the stress these yearly upgrades have on the development teams. It's hard enough shipping software as it is without artificially induced deadlines that appear more aligned with marketing rather than technical need.
Reply to this message by replying to this email, or go to the message on FileMaker Community. Start a new discussion in Discussions by email or at FileMaker Community. Following Re: Mojave Compatibility in these streams: Inbox. Some issues were identified during the Mojave beta phase but those were related to very specific third party hardware configurations. My understanding is that these issues don't even exist anymore. Mark, I worked for a Mac support company for 15 years from the early 90s.
I remember a very large, long project involving Xserves and rolling out Open Directory across a private school.
Half way through the project, having purchased and gradually rolled out the initial Xserves, Apple released an OS update when it wasn't possible to guess when the next one would be released and from that day all new Xserves shipped with the new OS that was totally incompatible with the previous one as far as Open Directory was concerned.
The project had been planned meticulously and was going very well until then and the proverbial hit the fan. The problem now is that this is happening every year and does undermine the Mac in business, despite all the other advantages it provides. Thanks for your contribution. Mac Mini: I called Apple support yesterday because all my data is on a thunderbolt raid and I need that data on the new Mini I'm about to order one of the 6 core ones , what adaptor, etc.
Personally I am not a big fan of those comparison thingies and almost always use. Easier to read for me and no special characters involved. Do WE really know what it means?
What should that mean for all products for any division of 'parent company'? Apple divisions for MAC certainly never communicated with the Apple][ folks, for example.
❿
No comments:
Post a Comment