What does /g/ think of FileMaker?

so... it's apple flavored ms access?

>>56336604
Bump

>>56336624
It has database management in it yes, but it allows you to create fully functioning apps as part of it.

>>56336604
I've come across this thing a few times and it has the same issue as all the other ones like it has: it gets adopted because you can do small applications really quickly in it, even without knowledge of databases and relatively small knowledge of programming, but becomes nightmarishly complex lateron because obviously Geoff the retard from accounting made the application and had no knowledge of databases and programming, but now the company has invested so much time and resources into it there's no way back until things go horribly wrong.

By the time it gets to that point, the company will look for outside consulting, first to build a version 2.0 of whatever they've concocted in Filemaker, only then to lateron wonder if they don't need something more professional. Given that Geoff from accounting made the application in his spare time, they'll expect you to do it for whatever small change Geoff could find in between the breakroom couch pillows and any negotiation will start at rock bottom prices while demanding the world and preferably the sun it orbits as well.

The fact that the company you're at handed this to an intern is indicative that they'd rather pay Geoff from accounting to jerk off and smell his own farts at his desk than have him do even this. Do the work, get the credit and then run like hell

>>56337396
I'll take this advice as gold dust, many thanks anon.

The app I've made for them isn't account related, simple form filling at one site. But I could see how if they wanted to expand it to their sites across the country it could be a fucking nightmare, just because of the Server version alone.