Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Johnny Boy

Number of tables

Recommended Posts

mikehkg

HarryGlos; tks a lot for your response and info on my post.

 

I have trial converted my solution into 7 these days and had come to realize that there is no way that i am able to upgrade to 7 for the time beeing; in fact our solution is very large and very complicated, but i only have about 200 hours a year for database maintenance. I have to buy the conversion tools for 400 U$ (MetadataMagic fo fix the file references! and FM Robot) to merge SOME files (there's no way i would merge files which already have like 200 scripts, as i don't want to sift through all those scripts when fixing something (plus renaming them before importing them so i can still reconize which table they belong to).

 

I also figured the typical shortcommings of all new FM releases, interface-wise (for example Relationships Graph: alternative view by list, broken/circular/invalid scripts are clearly visible) which would add great help for migrating as well as new development).

 

I understand why people say "FM has left loyal clients in the desert": imagine next year's Office 2005: people need to buy 200 U$ thirdparty software just to be able to open their old files; then still open every single file and reformat and control all functions before use; i guess there would be a lawsuit against Miscrosoft even before they bring the software into the shops!

 

I totally agree 7 kicks ass, but is also creates a lot of extra work, and from an upgrade of software, i do expect a built-in feature to seamlessly convert existing files without going through converting processes manually.

 

I feel very funny that within weeks of the 7 release, thirdparty Software already

detected nearly a hundred of conversion issues, while FM was not able to

implement fixing those issues during 1 1/2 year of development work for the new release.

 

My company has decided to invest the next 12 month time budget into maintenance again rather than migration, in the hope that Filemaker would like to have us back on the next release by adding integrated migration tools into FM 8.

 

I'm truly sad to stay behind at this moment, but its not economic for us to migrate under these circumstances.

 

I also realized that in order to fully appreciate 7 (converting is kind of like adding a

turbo into your oldtimer, which does not improve the chassis) , it really would make sense to re-write the whole solution; i have filled a permanent lucky-draw card now, hoping i can soon stop my daily-bread work and dedicate my life to Filemaker for the next 12 month so to catch up with their upgrade scedule.

 

Girlie-Mons" should be moving to 7 swiftly because its new and cool and in fashion, no effort shall be to big to catch up the trend. So i probably remain one of those old fashioned : Hasta-la-Vista, Baby! types, bleeding from pain but tryin to stop blinking with my eyes ....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
FileMakin' Tom

Well Said Mike . . . exactly my sentiments

 

Tom

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
harryglos

Hi Mike,

 

You are absolutely right... You cannot convert a very complicated solution into 7 with only 200 hours available to you for the year.

 

I’ve recently had an eye opening experience regarding conversion! All of the solutions I’ve converted have been of my own designed, so conversion was, for the most part, the same each time!

 

A friend of mine has a FileMaker solution made in 5.0 and asked if I would make the conversion for him. Well, he’s a friend, we were on the golf course, I owed him five bucks (which he still made me pay, the animal) so I said yes. I learned an important lesson, that I know every one of you reading this post already knows... Never say the “Y” word before looking at the project. I will never be able to charge enough to pay me for the time it will take me for this conversion! Multiple people obviously built the solution with + and - knowledge of what they were doing. The scripts, calculations, relationships, field formats, layouts, have no sameness to them, no LOGIC to follow. The bottom line is, this conversion is going to be a nightmare and and I’m suppose to (remember I said suppose to) know what I’m doing! 7 is the best, but it is not without struggle and yes, FileMaker should have and could have done more to make the job less painful. I know they will “belly up to the bar” on a lot of these issues and it couldn’t be too soon could it!

 

Mike, you are certainly not a Girlie-Mon, I don’t know what moron smile.gif would have ever put that on the forum, but don’t be “hasta-la-vista-baby” for long!

 

My wife just said to me this morning “you don’t golf with Carl as often as you use to” and I said “would you golf with a guy who kicks the ball out from behind trees, tees it up in the middle of the fairway and can’t even count”? and my wife said “ of course not” and I said “well, Carl wont either”!

 

Maybe worst of all is that my good friend FileMakin Tom, may be, er, could be, ah, partially be, er, ok ok, I’ll just come right out and say it, I’ll just put the word right out there ....Right!!! The more I see that word the more I see another... Naaaaaaaaa!

 

Harry

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This thread is quite old. Please start a new thread rather than reviving this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use