Avis clients sur Claris FileMaker

On peut l'utiliser de façon basique même sans avoir de formation spécifique. Il est accessible en terme d'utilisation (recherche, actions de base) même pour quelqu'un qui ne s'y connait pas en base de données, car relativement intuitif et convivial.
Quand on maitrise vraiment l'outil, il offre une panoplie de possibilités et remplace à lui seul plusieurs autres logiciels (mailing, factures, statistiques...)

La fonctionnalité de mailing à une liste de personnes peut présenter des bug parfois

Filemaker gives us a really easy to develop environment. You can start with a blank canvas, sketch up something, use it, and refine it. Even if it called low code, you can do a lot of advanced things.

I wish I can have more help from the support. Our company wants to step up and invenst into this platform. Maybe I should reach out the awesome community instead of our direct contact.
We had troubles connecting different kind of databases to our current solution. You have to really know what are the limitation of the software.

The database management is great, easy and powerful. The scripts and conditional logic are superpowerful, you can make almost any kind of process with the scripts, just takes time and a high learning curve to squeeze all its possibilities.
Building simple static interfaces is fairly easy and quick.

A) UI: the interface engine is completely outdated for a modern app, is not that you can't build beautiful UI, you can, as far it does not require real responsiveness and conditionals. When a layout (page) needs to have a dynamic interface, which means conditionals for show/hide elements and adapt the rest of the elements, you just can't. Is possible to hide elements of course, but not to adapt the behavior for the rest of the elements. In a simple interface with only a few fields, you can handle it easily, but for complex/flexible UI, it becomes a nightmare with a lot of data that you cannot show dynamically.
10 years ago it was all that was out there, and therefore the CRM UI were those big messy layouts with a lot of data. For nowadays the web design moved to dynamic UI where less is more, if you want an interface to be easy to read and understand, you really need to show less data at the same time, for that you need dynamic and flexible UI, which is not possible to build with Filemaker.

B) Data access/constraint: relations in the database are made in a way (classic relations between tables) that while is intuitive and easy to understand, is very difficult and limited for big and complex relations. Why? It is possible to make any relation, but the quantity of relations you need and the complexity (usually chaos) that comes with is huge. Also, real constraints far data calls from the UI are not possible, you always have to call the full data from the UI.

FileMaker allows anyone to create anything. Ok , that's a bit of an exaggeration. The truth is, with a little work, you can build most every kind of database you would need - Payroll, CRM, Time Management, Mass Market Email, Inventory, etc. And what you can't build, you can find skilled developers to build for you. Plus there are add-ons galore, and FileMaker is compatible with any system that allows for an API interface.

There are only three things wrong with FileMaker. They are 1) the price, 2) the price, 3) the price. It's not that the price tag is not necessarily hefty, but the pricing structure makes entry difficult for a small business. Yet, FileMaker is IDEAL for small businesses in every other way!

Instant compilation & execution of syntax-free code, visually-based object-linking / selection, immediate UI changes, plug-in and web-service extensibility, multi-platform deployment of single code-base solutions, from desktop to web and mobile.

Cost is the only consideration when recommending, though in comparison to other systems, it offers better value, just would benefit from a lower entry-level option for people to discover its power.

I like that FileMaker is simple to learn (and to keep learning), with tons of resources available online including their own forums. Between youtube videos and some paid Lynda.com courses I feel very confident I can develop quality database solutions for my company. It's great software and I actually enjoy working with it.

The recent pricing structure change for version 17 file has me concerned about the direction FileMaker might be taking. So we've held onto version 16 for now and will be waiting to upgrade. Other than concerns about pricing I don't have anything else bad to say about it.

FileMaker works right out of the box as a relational database that can run the back end of your business. Doctors, shopkeepers and consultants can all benefit from using FileMaker. It's powerful yet, simple to use.

Over the years, the licensing of FMP has progressively gotten worse. If I could find another solution, I would. Believe me, I have looked. I return to FMP because I can develop sophisticated solutions myself, or with the help of a seasoned developer.

I have been using the software since its first release in the 80s. It was once user-friendly, but now I need to use a developer who writes code in the background to make it do anything, and I can't service it myself. It does what I need it to do, but it has cost me thousands and thousands of dollars to make it do what I need it to do now because of the built-in obsolescence. Every time I buy a update my operating system or purchase a new computer, I can expect also to spend hundreds of dollars to update FileMaker

I have been using the software since its first release in the 80s. It was once user-friendly, but now I need to use a developer who writes code in the background to make it do anything, and I can't service it myself. It does what I need it to do, but it has cost me thousands and thousands of dollars to make it do what I need it to do now because of the built-in obsolescence. Every time I buy a update my operating system or purchase a new computer, I can expect also to spend hundreds of dollars to update FileMaker

I regularly use this software for inventory reasons, especially in relation to art. With that said, it allows you to build your own layout and database to adapt it to exactly what you want it to be. When fully adapted it works beautifully. Using it in the context of galleries or other spaces where it has been set up is a dream. It allows relatively easy searches in many categories, allowing you to create very specific, isolated keywords to find things later (such as their price, year created, subject matter, title, name of creator etc). It's very useful.

This software is not easy to set up. I did a trial run at my house, as an artist myself, to see if I could use filemaker for my own inventory needs. Once I had the software downloaded, I found it exceedingly complicated to begin to create the boxes/ qualifiers with which I wanted to be able to add data. I don't consider myself a novice with softwares. I think I'm fairly capable on a computer and even after watching a few YouTube tutorials I ended up giving up on the prospect of using this at home. It seems more relevant for businesses where there is someone well-versed in database softwares to adapt it to yoru specific needs.

The flexibility offered by FileMaker is incredible. The more that I learn about how it works, the more I'm convinced that there's nothing you can't build with FileMaker at the core. Also, there's nothing like the community surrounding this platform. FileMaker developers are the most helpful, sharing people I've ever met. You never have to be afraid to ask a question if you get stuck because someone else has run into that problem before and they will help you through the other end.

Depending on your use case, it might be too expensive. The buy-in can be high so you have to be willing to invest in making something critical to your operations.

Easy do applications and understand the application.
Easy interface to work.
Share a database between different users.
Strong security.
Multiplatform, you can develop in Windows, Mac, Web and smartphone.
Very customizable layouts, scripts and database.

Limited on some occasions.
If your solution is very simple, is possible that Filemaker is not a platform for you.

How easy it was to go mobile within minutes of deployment. Data that was traditionally tied to PC and servers was suddnely in the hands of our team out in the field. With no training we had mobile apps overnight.

The WIndows platform is a bit behind vs. the Mac. You can detect that support for WIndows is certainly there but always behind. It is slowly gaining ground though.

This software gets the job done. You can create databases and stores and more with this software; it's very flexible.

This database solution was by far the hardest software I've had to learn how to use. Frequently our company had to hire consulting companies to manage our legacy databases after our lead designer left the team.

It has a complex structure which makes it robust yet it is very easy to use and learn. It makes the planning very easy for our projects. Commands and scripts can be easily combined. It has many custom solutions for different needs and you can get it working in no time. It is very flexible and customisable.

It lacks some of the visualisation techniques for the representation just same as excel sheets. It should also have more licensing options for the small scale to medium scale companies.

Feature set is quite large.
Very easy import/export of data.
Great tool for proof-of-concepts for large systems, or for small to mid-size applications.

Initial login interface is not very customizable. To truly make a custom login, you have to essentially "log in" with a dummy account, go to a specified layout, and then re-log in with the credentials supplied by the user. This opens up potential security holes.
Using the native security virtually eliminates this gap, but leaves little to no customization of initial user experience.
The FileMaker platform is still not easy to replicate asynchronously, and it does not scale all that well to multiple widespread locations without serious effort.