Filemaker crashing since Mojave update - Navigation menu
Looking for:
Filemaker pro 14 with mojave free.macOS version history |
Filemaker pro 14 with mojave free. macOS 10.14 Mojave Will Be the Last to Support 32-Bit Apps
OS X Mavericks version The update emphasized battery life, Finder improvements, other improvements for power users , and continued iCloud integration, as well as bringing more of Apple's iOS apps to OS X. Mavericks, which was named after the surfing location in Northern California , [5] was the first in the series of OS X releases not only for being named for places in Apple's home state since earlier releases used the names of big cats , but also for being the first one to be a free upgrade since Mac OS X During a keynote on October 22, , Apple announced that the official release of The full list of compatible models: [13].
The menu bar and the Dock are available on each display. Compressed Memory is a virtual memory compression system which automatically compresses data from inactive apps when approaching maximum memory capacity. Timer coalescing is a feature that enhances energy efficiency by reducing CPU usage by up to 72 percent.
Apple now supports OpenGL 4. Some skeuomorphs , such as the leather texture in Calendar, the legal pad theme of Notes, and the book-like appearance of Contacts, have been removed from the UI. The system has native LinkedIn sharing integration. Notification Center allows the user to reply to notifications instantly, [37] [38] allows websites to send notifications, [39] and, when the user wakes up a Mac that was in a sleep state, displays a summary of missed notifications before the machine is unlocked.
Finder gets enhancements such as tabs , [14] full-screen support, and document tags. The new iBooks application allows the user to read books purchased through the iBooks Store. The app also allows the user to purchase new content from the iBooks Store, [44] and a night mode to make it easier to read in dark environments.
The new Maps application allows the user the same functionality as in iOS Maps. The Calendar app has enhancements such as being able to add Facebook events, [46] and an estimate for the travel time to an event. The Safari browser has a significantly enhanced JavaScript performance which Apple claims is faster than Chrome and Firefox. However, the user can pin or remove websites from the view. Older video codecs cannot be viewed in Quick Look.
One complaint is that Apple removed the local sync services, which forces users to get iCloud to sync iOS devices with the desktop OS. From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Tenth major release of OS X. This article relies too much on references to primary sources. Please improve this by adding secondary or tertiary sources.
Macintosh Unix [1]. Rhapsody Developer Release Hera Server 1. The Open Group. Retrieved December 4, Apple Inc. October 22, Apple Support. March 25, Retrieved March 25, June 20, Retrieved March 18, Archived from the original on June 10, Retrieved June 10, Retrieved July 31, The Verge.
Retrieved 22 October Retrieved October 25, Retrieved Archived from the original on September 23, Archived from the original on July 16, Archived from the original on June 13, Retrieved June 13, Retrieved June 12, Low End Mac. Mac Daily News.
September 10, Retrieved September 29, Cult of Mac. Retrieved June 11, Retrieved 27 April Ars Technica.
OS X Daily. November 13, Retrieved January 2, September 23, Retrieved October 23, January 1, Retrieved January 1, October 28, OS X History Architecture Components Server Software.
Server 1. Operating systems by Apple. History Outline Timeline of products. Classic Mini Nano Shuffle Touch. Mini Air Pro Accessories. Card Pay Wallet. Arthur D.
Sugar Susan L. Woolard Jr. Jerry York. Italics indicate discontinued products, services , or defunct companies. Authority control: National libraries Germany.
Categories : MacOS versions X operating systems software Computer-related introductions in Namespaces Article Talk. Views Read Edit View history. Help Learn to edit Community portal Recent changes Upload file. Download as PDF Printable version. A version of the macOS operating system. Closed , with open source components. October 22, ; 8 years ago [2]. Mac App Store.
Hybrid XNU. OS X Mountain Lion. Unsupported as of September OS X Mavericks Security Update Mavericks. Preceded by OS X Succeeded by OS X Financial Card Pay Wallet. Current Arthur D. Category Commons.
macOS Mojave Will Be the Last to Support Bit Apps - TidBITS -
Hey Josh, please be serious : this link was posted many times today, especially in this thread. What do you mean? The first 2 paragraphs talk about the planned update and timing. I too was tricked into reading it 4 times. Which is why it's both funny and serious!! Honestly if your going to buy a new computer in the next month it is more probable that its not going to have Mojave preinstalled.
That being said I would have expected an update within weeks not months. Considering the mostly cosmetic issues. I do enjoy everyones speculation why it takes so long.
I would bet the contrary : Apple is very experimented in this game. My last comment, just a citation afterward you will have the last word, i promise :. I guess that would be true if you buy directly from Apple. They are notoriously good at managing their supply chain. But any 3rd party reseller isn't going to crack out inventory and update the OS. Most places have stock sitting on shelves for a couple weeks at the least.
Usually, customers wait for newest models which is expected for Oct. FM16 and Mojave - specify field dialog box issue - randomly empty - randomly showing fields. They been good about replacing them most of the time, but I had one incident with them where they gave me a lot of hassle and made ammeter mistakes when diagnosing the computer the drive was installed in. Support within days of release, not 60 or 90 days down the road.
Mojave like each and every update contains bug fixes and security enhancements, which in the case of Mojave is even more true because it's similar to the Snow Leopard release, a refinement to the OS. It's not like I'm asking for Dark Mode support or even immediate support for Mojave's newest features, beyond basic bug fixes and security enhancements.
I'm simply asking for basic compatibility, so I can take advantage of bug fixes and security enhancements in Mojave for end users and developers within days.
A server update would be nice too, but I'm less concerned on that end since it's not exposed to novice end-users. Waiting days for a server update is fine. In all the known bugs are not show stoppers. I just think waiting months is just a bit too long. I've been using FileMaker since Claris , so it's not like I'm new to this scene.
I then had it replaced with a OWC. All they stated is I should send new Report if problem still consists with Golden Master. How old was the original SSD?
They do fail. I had an internal OWC SSD but it melted after a year and left residue all over the inside of my 15" MBP and another was defective on arrival but we didn't realise it right away. No issues. I serious doubt Apple placed restrictions on installing Mojave on 3rd party SSD drives or that the beta damaged your drive.
In my 30 years of managing Macs, that really makes no sense to me, unless there was a faulty firmware upgrade. An hourly backup on Time Machine should be more than enough for data integrity. In all honesty, i stopped buying anything from OWC. I've had too many issues with their gear over the years and their management has gotten a little too cocky for my taste. Success does that sometimes. In my last incident they made so many amateur mistakes that I gave up on them. Plus, their Thunderbolt-3 solutions are shit.
Software RAIDs are cheaper to make and I'm sure it boosts their profit margins but if you ever have to do a complete rebuild, especially with a laptop, you'll quickly learn that's not the way to go.
That's important when rebuilds can take a day or days with larger drives. Plus, hardware RAID are simply going to be more reliable since the software is fixed in the firmware.
It just doesn't run. So leave your servers alone. Unrelated to Mojave, but I found the same hanging on ODBC imports when it was importing into a table where there were auto-enter functions on a field. I ended up having to import with no auto-enters and then manipulate the data. That has improved with the current version, but occasionally still happens. This was on windows platform.
Don't know if that is possibly related, but I thought it sounded similar, so I thought I'd mention it. Both failed will not install. Yes correct FM No luck. You seem to have some other kind of issue.
Did you upgrade from High Sierra to Mojave or did you do a clean install? I first did an upgrade and had weird issues. So I did a clean install and used migration assistant to restore from a backup. So I reinstalled over it, without erasing the disk, and it booted up fine. It seemed to be some kind of weird cache or permissions issues, which makes sense if your restoring from a backup with years of cruft on it. The increased security measures probably conflicted with something.
Do you have any third-party utilities installed? For example, anti-virus software? If so, make sure those are all turned off before installing. If you are still having difficulty, contact our Technical Support department at toll-free North America.
If you are outside of North America, contact the FileMaker office nearest you. I did a clean install of Mojave on a MacBook Pro. Re-downloaded FMPA We are trying to hold off buying any new machines until after October,. Nothing official. Just the rumor mill. If we can hold off until October, and they release something worthy, we don't have to buy 4 year hardware at brand new prices. If they don't, well, we don't have a choice then. We have dozens of machines that are getting too old to run the most recent OS.
I had an existing install of FileMaker 17 on HighSierra. Last night, I ran the update for Mojave. If run into anything significant I'll update my comment. This appears to be a problem specific to your computer? Have you tried running a full Apple diagnostic on your computer? Use internet recovery on your MBP to download and install Mojave directly from the internet. We need those operators. You can just type the text for the operators yourself. Oh, I thought they were non existent!
OTOH, not everyone remember what operator does what. Your cheat-sheet is below. But honestly, the only symbol I've ever used this list for on a Windows machine is the return character, as I'm not sure there's a way to do that from the keyboard. Everything else is on your keyboard. It's not I that needs a cheat sheet. I was referring to my clients. You can also copy them all from this page I wish it were that simple on Windows.
I can enter the ascii code for the symbol itself, which works, but it's not an easy or obvious one to remember. Maybe I'm the only person who knows that a return is ascii 13, so ALT is what I've always tried in the past and that doesn't work.
I'll have to try to remember ALT And this Knowledge Base article many versions! This is all useful advice and very helpful - but aren't you spending your time on somehow fixing something that is clearly on FMI's plate?
As an Apple subsidiary they should have fixed that ready for the Mojave release - it can't be that difficult. And not only for FM17 as indicated in the press release posted by FileKraft but also for previous versions. I'm running There is a caveat though: The operators vanish again after some time; I could not figure out yet whether there is some "logic" in this.
So the dialog box size and position has to be reset over and over again. Let's hope for a proper fix of that in the next update. Check and see if this is consistent with all solutions. I have an issue where the calculation editor shows up blank with button bars or trying to define an auto calc but only in one solution and only on Mac pro running mojave. I have a bizarre problem with FMP 17 and Mojave. When I open the script editor, nothing displays when I select a script.
The script steps editor simply shows "No script selected. The problem seems to be with outdated Works plugins. Time to download new versions, if available. Has anyone run their custom-signed app that they sell outside of the App Store through Apple's new Notarization process for Mojave? This site contains user submitted content, comments and opinions and is for informational purposes only. Claris may provide or recommend responses as a possible solution based on the information provided; every potential issue may involve several factors not detailed in the conversations captured in an electronic forum and Claris can therefore provide no guarantee as to the efficiency of any proposed solutions on the community forums.
Claris disclaims any and all liability for the acts, omissions and conduct of any third parties in connection with or related to your use of the site. All postings and use of the content on this site are subject to the Claris Community Use Agreement. Search Loading. Register Login. Report a Product Issue. View This Post. July 1, at PM. Importing from from spreadsheet. Crash when creating new buttons in layout mode. The FMP file is Too much work just to do FMI's homework! Forward that to OWC.
That would be interesting. Benjamin Fehr, Thank you for reporting this! Thank you for contacting OWC and please have an awesome day! Yes beta 3 18Ag is the latest. Is anyone else having the same issue?
I am sure they already have something in the works. Sent from my iPad. Speaking of Mo NDA to send in as email to: forumsupport filemaker. I'm running Mac Limited resources. Simple fact, FileMaker would need to devote countless hours to testing and refactoring code to work with some aspects of Mojave.
Only to have that work thrown out the window when the next beta drops and have to start over. I use FileMaker 17 every day on the latest OS.
I don't agree that FileMaker 17 is unusable. Unusable is not the right descriptions. Again, while I'm not discounting that you may deal with some issues, it's not "17 is unusable". We are using it just fine. Lots of users. Zero issues. Never run into many of the bugs that everyone says are so bad.
MacOS Mojave's new security posture and privacy segregation affects the following:. Some software titles required significant modifications, but FileMaker 17 appears to have fared well with the Mojave update. Regarding OS compatibility updates for GA general availability software:. FileMaker can too. It requires a directive from the top, simply stating, "Compatibility updates for FileMaker will be released at launch of major OS releases. No more delays. Tell me what is needed to make this happen.
Our customers demand it. How do all these top-tier software developers make it happen? Corporate leadership says, "Do it" What is relevant in professional and individual use is that a version is officially cleared for use with the current OS version by the manufacturer.
The intricacies of migrating back to a previous OS version are not known by everyone and sometimes Apple does not even allow a roll-back. I do not know the root cause of this hard fail several months of incompatibility of current FM with current OS. But compared to Windows, where this is almost a non-issue, macOS must break more things in a new version than Windows does.
My opinion is, software in GA general availability , i. FileMaker 17, should receive compatibility updates at the OS release, or immediately thereafter. It's , and developer betas are available months in advance for a reason - to ensure day-to-day software like MS Office, antivirus, and creative applications are ready to go on the OS release date. These developers can do it, so can FileMaker. Companies like Apple and Microsoft are in the driver's seat - encouraging rapid OS update adoption, with all the marketing pushes, pop-ups, and pre-downloads for a reason.
Obviously they want to focus more on what's next, and having a greater number of users at the same level is beneficial to everyone downstream - support, IT specialists, software developers, hardware vendors. Oftentimes though, the end user get the squeeze - especially with developers who have their own schedule in mind. We know it will break the current FileMaker version. True, buying a new Mac you will get the latest macOS.
I wonder if there is a way to backgrade a new computer to the previous OS? Maybe what users should do is ask Apple to stop breaking older software with new OSs.
While the current marketing-driven release cycle of macOS and Windows is deplorable for several reasons, the OS is the underlying foundation and therefore sets the pace. As you said, sw vendors should keep up with it or lobby the OS makers for a better approach. No rush, other than the pressure Apple and Microsoft applies to users with pop-ups, pre-downloads, and marketing tactics. Hell, Windows forced an update on some folks a while back.
Apple MacOS release updates are generally significant - especially in the security and privacy area - or in technological movements, like the jump from PowerPC to Intel, or x86 to x Aside from these examples, all the changes I deal with are totally within the realm of reason.
In my opinion, developers should aim to keep their software up-to-date with the current OS at the release date or immediately after. MS Office, antivirus, creative apps, etc, all make it happen. Developer betas are released months in advance, and a solid effort should be made to study the changes, and get compatible with the latest OS. It's not rocket science, just work. The problem is much worse than FMI, or even some of us think it is.
Responsible users would not upgrade lightly their production tool, sure. That said, people are people, users are users, and thanks to encouragement, including pesky notification to upgrade, plus the upgrade to avoid security threat consensus, some people, even one individual in the company, will upgrade and it will probably be the boss. Then he launches Filemaker and then it craps. Who's gonna take the blame for this, apple?
Certainly not, Filemaker will have the blame for it, and also probably the in-house dev. No matter how you mince it, Filemaker is the software that prevents people to upgrade to latest os release that's "so important for security", therefore Filemaker is bad. Adding to that that Filemaker is an Apple-owned company, makes this just baffling.
So this is terribly bad for Filemaker's reputation. And that's a terribly terrible marketing idea. That's reputation just thrown down the trash. One thing that's also quite particular, is that those issues that arose with high sierra and Mojave are GUI ones. Moreover, why is there GUI issues in the first place? I'm going to be extremely blunt about this: these OS release cycles and FM release cycles have been around for a number of years now.
If at this point we are still surprised by them, that's on us. Not them. Any change, no matter how small or big has the potential of upsetting our software. Which is why it is on us to make sure nothing upsets that. Including telling clients to hold off on updating their OS. And for us to start testing what we have as soon as we can.
It's easy to blame others, but we are the ones delivering value to our customers by providing them with software. The deployment is just as important. You take no risk with new OSes and new versions. If you do; don't blame anyone else. This is the same dance all Mac Admins go through will all software, not just FileMaker. I repeat, no matter on how your "mincing words", the one thing that prevents user to upgrade their OS is Filemaker.
For the user, the culprit, the annoying boy, is Filemaker. That's it. Who cares about updating their OS just because they can!? If that is what customers do then clearly we missed an opportunity to talk to them about the importance of the stability of the deployment. And that in turn points back to us, not them. If a solution based on the FM platform is critical to the business then that should be the main driver for updating an OS or not. Not the other way around. It shouldn't be about updating the OS and then getting all up in arms about it breaking things.
You're totally missing the point. Yes you're right, it's not important. But people want it, and the industry helps them pesky Apple upgrade notification, and even FileMaker ones when you're launching 16 when 17 is available. Yes, in a work environment, you're not here to want.
But still people want them. Why can't they upgrade? And whose to blame, the pesky guy that installed FileMaker that tells them not to upgrade. The fact that we're right to say to them not to upgrade is totally un-relevant, that's just frustration. So Filemaker frustrates. And unlike other software, you've to wait a lot to get the go, in fact, you've to wait way more than any other software.
And unlike other software that's an apple owned company. That's double the frustration. That's it, that's' perception. And the only thing that count is perception. User wants to upgrade, FileMaker gest in the way, unlike other tools, unlike cloud tools. Therefore Filemaker looks bad. Is that cool that filemaker is always late, no it's not cool. Would it be better if it wasn't, of course! So, Filemaker should be ready the day of the realease, or a week after max.
It's one thing to brag about Workforce innovation platfform, and then fall appart just when the user wants to innovate with the latest upgrade. That's a total marketing disaster.
Moreover, for us Filemaker devs, it's just complicatig our work for nothing. Because FMI is not ready, then we'll have to justify, and advocate, escuse, convince. Lots of wasted time, just because FMI is not ready. That's it, tahts' perception. And the inly thing that count is pereception.
User wants to upgrade,. And that's the perception we need to break. You are not in control of the release cycles of Windows, Apple or FM. But you are in control of what your customers use. If not, then again, like I said before, it's a missed opportunity to tell them what is important. If they don't listen to you about this, then you can't really give them the value that they are after.
And the reality these days is that the client may have to forgo "dark mode" for sake of stability. This tells me your technology stack is pretty small then. And that's fine. This is still an expression of your own experience, and not the experience of all users.
FileMaker has never held us back from upgrading. At least not alone. There are so many other things that get in the way before we even can think about upgrading FileMaker. At my place, Filemaker is the only software with such issues, that's it.
It's also important to remember FileMaker doesn't have a team of engineers. Having zero-day compatibility is rare, and those companies that do it are significantly larger. Why should I not upgrade say the user? So Filemaker is the culprit. If you are not in control of your environment then you have no control whatsoever.
It does not matter whether your chosen platform is FM,. NET, Java, or anything else. If you think otherwise then you are just deluding yourself. The fact that you are being bitten by the combination of macOS and FM is purely coincidental. It would and will happen to you with other platforms too.
You develop to a certain business spec and a given framework. That is all you can promise. If the client goes beyond that then it is outside of your envelope. If you think FMI is going to solve that for you: nope. Not going to happen. That's yours to solve. The ensuing discussion, yes, has been helpful. This post started off in a rant, but has actually evolved sort of into less ranty and more discussion.
Not sure I've ever seen a post evolve. Everyone, this is a healthy discussion about important topics - release schedules for FileMaker platform software in relation to OS releases, and compatibility with non GA versions of FileMaker.
In my opinion, the current software release life cycle for the FileMaker platform is flawed, coupled with the diverse licensing strategies - not very Apple like, but FileMaker is it's own thing. This opinion is shared by many in the community, and I understand why others are not so up for the discussion - what can we do?
The important thing is having these discussions, in dedicated topics, to discuss from time to time. There's no need to lay blame any anyone's feet - each company and development team have their own strategies and software life cycles. Personally, if I were in charge, FileMaker would be an annual subscription platform, on a per user, perhaps per server basis. Volume discounts. Reasonably priced, but certainly maximizing profit potential. Pricing is transparent and available on a pricing page, and no need to call anyone.
Continuous release cycle. The most up-to-date version always available to subscribers. Compatibility releases with each OS release. I'd really like to know how much coders there is at filemaker? FMI is hiring like crazy. They have software engineering teams in CA, TX, Given the tightening job market for experienced developers, I also wonder how many seats are hot, and how many are ready to fill.
I'm not sure, and I'm not sure Adobe tells us how many engineers they have. Do you think that's a number any company would want to give out? What makes you state this as any kind of qualifier? What if they had one super-engineer doing all the work of engineers at another company?
How is this going to sway any argument in the thread so far? Meh, workforce productivity ratios, but we're missing a few variables. I'm not asking FileMaker to solve anything for me, I just ask them not to create problems themselves by not being able to update their software in a timely manner like tons of other companies do, especially if they're apple owned. I'm just saying that this Mojave compabitlity issues are just a total PR disaster, demolishing marketing and advocating efforts, and that's it shouting themselves in the foot while other companies, that aren't apple owned have no such issue.
Your sound deployment advises have nothing to do with the issue, the issue is that Filemaker is super late in the Mojave compatibility stuff, that it harms the platform perception a lot, make us waste time to explain user, but also make us responsible admin postponed upgrades that users want or need new macs.
That's just a waste of time and efforts, like the very existence of that thread which would have never existed just if FMI could release that dam upgrade like tons of other companies untied to apple furthermore , do. So the point of that thread is to tell FMI, that this delayed upgrade stuff is hurting the platform a lot, that it can't be possibly seen in a good way by regular users, and that as an apple company it's even more important.
When you want to do marketing, you try to avoid bad stuff. So I'm telling FMI : don't overlook this, don't shy way, it's important. Did I? I did not brought this topic. Since somebody else talked about it, I was just asking out of curiosity. Because I'm curious about it. The qualifier may have been in the perceived intent of the post in the sequence of the thread.
I was trying to interpret why the number of FMi engineer would have any bearing on the topic at hand,. Since neither you nor I are native English speakers we can probably leave it at that. I have hope for it. Cool, knowledgeable people are here that can steer it the right way. Does anyone find it peculiar, the way I do, that I get all kinds of email notices from FileMaker, including telling me things I don't need to know e.
Instead, I get the news from colleagues and threads like this one.. On September 24, a blog post here was put out about FileMaker and Mojave. While Filemaker's major updates 14, 15, 16 and 17 added a lot of UI functionality and were very welcome for improving the limited way we had to present data, I can not really say I've noticed the same for annual OS X releases. What concerns me more is the now annual version upgrades for both Filemaker and the OS X and the never ending dot version updates which also have to should be tested before going into production.
More headaches I don't need. Nag dialogues for updates and new releases don't help and hardly reinforce the cautious approach users should take before upgrading. I guess what I'm really pissed at, is lack of stability and bugs in early version releases are considered acceptable in this day and age, marketing and releasing new versions seem more important than bullet proofing what we already have.
I got stung with the hike in maintenance agreement costs this year, I locked in for a further 3 years. I'll happily take the updates to come over that time as OS X transitions to full 64bit, but when this current maintenance agreement expires I'll take a cold hard look at the Filemaker platform, FMI have massively increased their "spoils" from the gravy train but are now giving precious little back for the increased cost. Screenshot taken today. No information that there will be an update including Mojave compatility.
I still struggle with this. Maybe, it's a question of where to set the focus. Maybe there are more important things WIP with all the need of related tools. If the daughter doesn't have the necessary information - who else? I tried to vote it up but cannot access to your idea, get a "generic" error. Strange, seems to be broken. 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.
Comments
Post a Comment