More on fP 6.0 features

[John Esak]

> Great, Nancy.  Kudos to you and your talent with the existing toolset.
> However, there are -others- out there (with whom I work
> regularly) who -do-
> need 'x' widget, 'y' knob, and if they don't get them, you can
> wave merrily
> at them as they depart for greener pastures where such features
> abound, and
> which let them easily interact with heterogeneous software very easily,
> rather than jumping through 25000 hoops.

You may have noticed that I have been (conspicuously) quiet on all this 6.0
stuff. I am far more concerned with getting a good 5.1 sometime during the
18 month dev cycle I think there should be until 6.0. So, I have just have
one comment/question for you Mark.

Just _exactly_ where (to which precise/exact/name-please product) are all
these filePro developers departing to... what is the "greener" pasture?  I
mean, seriously now, this time I want a precise answer. Are you seriously
telling me there is some "drop-in" package out there, some database engine,
some _anything_ that will allow a filePro developer to migrate his packages
over easily and thoroughly?  Hell, forget easily, just do the thoroughly
part... I don't mind a little work... easy isn't a consideration... but I'll
kiss your butt on national TV (in prime time) if you can show me _any_
development tool/program/database out there that would allow me or anyone to
convert a typical filePro application to "its" environment in less than 6
months. Now, for typical filePro application... in my case they represent, a
completely dynamic (full-scale) accounting system including G/L, A/P, A/R
and P/R... (running several companies, many in the $20 to $50 million dollar
range in sales, 20,000 invoices/P.O.s a year, etc., etc.) Now add to that
the completely integrated Order Entry module and all the
Shipping/fulfillment system.  Then, be sure to add in the also-fully
integrated Production system complete with bar-code tracking from moment of
production through bill-of-lading.  After those are done, add in the also
fully integrated rolodex/customer/vendor system, Quality Control System and
about 200 other small (yet fully integrated) applications that make a
company run.  Heck, throw away the 6 month time limit... I'll even give you
a year, how's that?  :-)

The point is, I don't think I'm going to be kissing your butt any time soon.
Such a single package (nay, no group of packages)... nothing out there would
allow me to migrate into a brand new filePro-free environment in any
"reasonable" space of time... and I'm one helluva good filePro developer
with a colleague now in Rick who is just as good... and the both of us
couldn't do this kind of job in 6 months or a year.... not with anything I
know.  The very best possibility you could mention might be FileMaker Pro,
and just the conversion to that product alone would be a gargantuan task. So
where is this greener valley?

Now, I'll admit completely that FileMaker Pro has a tool set and feature
list that leaves filePro looking like the 25 year old legacy program that it
is... leaves it in the dust. I mean there are things in FileMaker Pro that
allow you to instantly web-enable your applications and much, much more.
There is database integration on a level filePro could not possibly hope to
even simulate. Is it the product people should move to from filePro?  I
suppose... it's only $149 per seat (plus some amount for the servers...)
Hell, there is almost no price we wouldn't pay to move fully integrated
filePro apps to something new and modern-systems-based so it has the ability
to stay "new" for the next decade or so... but the transition to such a
product, like FMP would put us out of business.  I wouldn't worry about
_most_ major filePro developers and their apps... because all the same
things apply. It is just too much of a transition, not just for the
programs, but for the inertia of the companies and people involved and the
way they have come to do business and rely on filePro... which absolutely
_nobody_ can deny is "rock-solid". There are very few times when filePro
will be the cause of a problem... and when such a thing occurs and is
transmitted to FP Tech, it gets fixed. I'm not sure how that would go with
other "greener valley" programs.

So, while I thoroughly agree the tool set needs to be improved and fixed and
added to. I think (and we may agree on this) all that is for 5.1.  The idea
of 6.0 filePro should be to change the entire schema/engine/thing to be new
and damn the compatibility. I would much rather convert my giant,
integrated, long-standing filePro applications to something called 6.0
filePro than to anything with any other name... no matter how close it
sounds.

John




>
> > However, adding developers will add users - more users than if you just
> > sell filePro to the end user type developers.  I know only a few
> > developers that use filePro exclusively and make a full time living at
> > using it for development.  There are much more in-house developers that
> > work for the end-user full time.  These people, while very
> important, do
> > not add many users to the list.
>
> It's just the opposite from my PoV.  You have your application developers
> like yourself and others out there who sell their product to multiple
> companies and thus move at least runtimes.  You have your in-house people
> who buy one devkit and maybe a runtime, and they're good for an infinite
> amount of time because they -are- in-house, and don't really resell
> anything for the most part (with a few exceptions).  I'm not sure
> where you
> get developed your rationale, but my observations differ vastly--besides
> meshing far more with basic common sense.
>
> > I see where the Biometrics could attact new developers and build that
> > base where someone will take a chance and invest in the time to develop
> > for a niche and sell many units into that niche.
>
> Pardon the analogy, but that's like building the one of the world's most
> sophisticated snowplow blade--complete with teflon coating, a tritanium
> edge, and all the goodies--and then strapping it it to the front of a '56
> Chevy pickup.  Sure, the blade may be impressive, but what's driving it
> isn't quite as robust as a 2004 Ford F-150, much less one of the big
> diesel-slurping boys they bring out in the dead of winter during
> a blizzard.
>
> And niche is -precisely- the problem they have right now.  They -need- to
> get mainstream if they want to survive in the long haul, period.  You can
> disagree all you like.  I don't think you'll see sales rocket (or even
> moderately twitch) unless they can get with it in some modern connectivity
> at the least.
>
> > I think there needs to be some buzz in the market about filePro - Rapid
> > Development capability - or as a front end to ODBC data (excellent use
> > for filePro).  Discussing it here amongst the choir is a waste of time.
> >   I want to see it in mags, forums, web links, - anywhere and
> everywhere.
>
> You won't see that, in all likelihood, because it hasn't progressed very
> much in the last decade.  They released 4.5, 4.8, and 5.0.  Aside from
> ODBC (now sold separately anyway), what have you gotten?
> Blobs/memos, memo
> printing, long variable names, a handful of new functions (including raw
> I/O) that were probably trivial to implement, and new indexes.  Not a heck
> of a huge leap in evolutionary terms, here.
>
> What's to advertise?  You need more features and to dump some of
> the legacy
> limitations (80x25) before you can tout it as the next best thing since
> sliced bread in today's marketplace, or you're simply tossing
> money away at
> advertising that won't generate any tangible and return.  The expectation
> of return on investment for major marketing would be (IMHO)
> entirely wasted
> at this point in time.  Now if they abstract the fP storage and let you
> plug into *SQL data sources at will, suddenly you'd have a RAD toolkit for
> -every- database out there, complete with simple language, fast UI and
> report design, and you'd -have- something you could toot your horn about.
> Especially since it seems nobody does terminal/console stuff anymore--most
> everything is GUI or web-based now.
>
> > IMHO - That will expand the market faster than any features.  Sell what
> > you got - not what you will have - someday.
>
> "What you got" isn't readily marketable in comparison to the feature sets
> people are used to in other areas.  If it was, people that have been
> long-time fP users and even advocates wouldn't be leaving in a semi-steady
> stream.  You're not going to convince people to give up their *SQL (even
> MSSQL, God save their souls) and all the power and flexibility they have
> for RAD that could, quite frankly, be designed -for- other
> engines and then
> re-marketed.  I'm saying, you have the RAD part done already, make it
> applicable to all reasonable manner of database engines, and then you have
> something with -incredibly- increased viability.  Of course, the UI needs
> some tweaks, like nuking screen sizes, before it'd be 100%, but even with
> that ancient limitation, it'd still rock thrown on top of any
> other engine.
>
> Nothing personal, but you've -always- been a status quo sort of developer,
> Nancy.  It's nothing new--it's evidenced by your posts from the last five
> years, if not the last 11 years.  You generally don't care about seeing
> anything new unless you need it, which is rare since you're
> usually content
> to just muddle through and create a workaround, if you even need it.  IOW,
> you don't tax the limits of the system, and therefore you haven't outgrown
> your sandbox yet.  Others have, and are in the process of doing so, and
> they can't afford to be status quo--their organisations won't permit it if
> they're in-house, and their prospects pass them by if they're application
> developers/resellers.  The application itself isn't competitive
> in any area
> except one--console/terminal/printer RAD--and it comes with the baggage of
> a less-than-stellar storage engine for which little effort has gone into
> making it interoperable in heterogeneous environments that are far more
> prevalent today than they were 10 or 20 years ago.
>
> You're perfectly entitled to your opinions, as I am mine.  I think TPTB
> would be ill-advised to base decisions based on yours, but That's Just Me.
> It's not personal, I just see the situation entirely differently.  Keep in
> mind--you may do the conferences (even teaching at them), you may
> be on the
> advisory council, and you're a longtime developer.  However, you're one
> developer that occasionally talks to people about doing things.  Most of
> what I do is help -multiple- people from various backgrounds, experience
> levels, and environments figure out how to get from A to B with what's
> present.  I can't say for sure, but I'd take a rough guess that I talk
> in-depth about developers' needs with more people than you do--probably
> because most times I'm talking to someone, they -need- something.  It's
> sort of the nature of my work--either something is broken, or something is
> needed.  You only have to worry about your end-users' needs.  That's fine,
> and if it's working for you, I can see why you don't feel change
> is needed.
>
> If you open your eyes and ears and stop singing, "La La La! -- I
> can't hear
> youuuuu!" long enough (about ten minutes should suffice), you'll see that
> other people actually -do- have needs that must be met, or fP goes bye-bye
> in their shop--or in their development.  I know several people that tossed
> away 15-20+ years of fP experience and investment because it no longer cut
> it for them under varying circumstances.
>
> Until you can stem the flow of exodus, marketing for new users is pretty
> insane.  Figure out why people are departing and eliminate those reasons
> before wasting the capital on an advertising campaign that will fizzle.
> That's common sense business strategy, not rocket science.  It
> just happens
> to be undiluted by years of emotional investment, which is probably why
> many don't agree with it or want to hear it.
>
> Anyone notice that the list seems to have gathered more fP newbies lately?
> They seem to have inherited systems that old-timers left for whatever
> reasons.  Five will get you ten that, wise reinvestment or not, 40%+ of
> them will eventually decide to go with something more mainstream and write
> their entire organisation's application set in something else because it's
> more accepted and standard.  Yes, that speaks to another point as
> well--you
> can tell a CEO that *SQL has a standard behind it.  They understand that.
> They understand interoperability as well.  You point to an
> isolated product
> and its merits, and they go, "Yes, but will it plug into our existing
> software?"  And there, you start getting into Workaround Land.
> And much as
> you'd like to tout fPODBC, that's still Windows-only, and the *nix shops
> are out of luck there.  And believe it or not, there -are- still many that
> refuse to run Windows servers and share my disdain for them in a
> server role.
> Take that away, and your realtime interoperability capacity is
> next to nil.
>
> In spite of everything I've said, I think fP has its high points,
> and could
> be brought to bear on a much bigger market than it currently
> targets.  They
> have to take a few steps, mildly change the direction a bit, but it could
> happen.  But if it doesn't evolve, it won't grow the user base no matter
> how much glossy paper and coloured ink you toss at people.
>
> YMMV.  I'm neither trying to incite, nor am I really up for a flame or
> religious war.  I'm trying to provide TPTB (assuming they even watch
> or care) with objective analysis which they can take or leave at their
> leisure.  If you or anyone cares to disagree and present counterpoints,
> such is your right and they may benefit from that as well--I could be
> wrong.  I don't happen to believe I am, but I know I could be.  Point
> being, this isn't a flame or even knocking the product--this is simply how
> I interpret the long-term data I've observed.
>
> mark->
> --
> Bring the web-enabling power of OneGate to -your- filePro
> applications today!
>
> Try the live filePro-based, OneGate-enabled demo at the following URL:
>                http://www2.onnik.com/~fairlite/flfssindex.html
> _______________________________________________
> Filepro-list mailing list
> Filepro-list at lists.celestial.com
> http://mailman.celestial.com/mailman/listinfo/filepro-list