 |  |
For people unfamiliar with their new licensing, it is as follows:
While the licensing is a big change from the old scheme, it's to be expected. From a business stand point, I agree with the licensing model changes. Every change is within reason except for one... the inability to network the runtimes
FileMaker Pro 3.0 SDK allowed for runtimes to be created with networking functionality intact. While I agree that there may have been *too* much networking functionality with the 3.0 runtimes (I don't think the runtimes should have been able to act as a host), I don't understand the logic from removing it completely.
I'm not complaining about the inability to network the runtimes so much as I am curious as to why such a decision was made. If a compromise isn't reached and some sort of acceptable decision by FileMaker, Inc. can't be made, it would be a simple a business decision on our part to move to a different database platform. Not because FileMaker Pro isn't a great database platform, but because it's no longer a viable development platform for our business model.
A Background On Our Business Model
Digital Point Solutions develops high-end "shrink wrapped" FileMaker Pro and Oracle systems for various vertical markets, with approx. 5,000 installs across 6 product lines. Our most popular product is Optigold ISP, which is deployed at 2,000 sites in 49 states and 35 countries around the world. Every Optigold ISP customer must purchase 1 copy of FileMaker Pro Server, and FileMaker Pro 4.1 is recommended (but not required). I would guess on average, each site obtains 5 licenses for FileMaker Pro 4.x. So, by having Optigold ISP as a FileMaker Pro based product, FileMaker, Inc. has had a substantial amount of sales they would otherwise not have.
If we were to migrate to FileMaker Pro 5.0, we would force all 2,000 sites to purchase FileMaker Pro Server 5.0 and FileMaker Pro Unlimited 5.0. Under FileMaker's new licensing scheme, each site would also be forced to purchase an average of 15 FileMaker Pro 5.0 licenses as well, just for the ability to run a FileMaker Pro solution (they don't need any development functionality of any sort).
My Proposal
FileMaker Pro's new licensing scheme cut out a use for FileMaker Pro, which is developing shrink wrapped software using FileMaker Pro. I don't think that FileMaker Pro 5.0 Developer should have networkable runtimes (at $500, it would be robbing from FileMaker, Inc.). What I *do* propose is another product... FileMaker Pro 5.0 SDK, which is identical to Developer, except that the runtimes are networkable. I think such a product should be a little more strict with the networking, in that I don't think the runtimes should be able to act as a host, only a client (or maybe just a client to FileMaker Pro Server 5.0). I also think that the price of "FileMaker Pro 5.0 SDK" should be more expensive than the other FileMaker products.
The current licensing scheme will hurt us (as we would need to redevelop our products on a different database platform), but I truly think it's in FileMaker's best interest to think about it.
Shawn D. Hogan
President, Digital Point Solutions
If anyone (especially FileMaker) has any thoughts or comments, please feel free to email me directly at shawn@digitalpoint.com.
Return to Digital Point Solutions' Home Page