Emulating FileMaker (was Re: jjSQL handlers)

[Josh Mellicker]

Bill,

Thanks for your reply. It has given me lots of ideas :-)


On Jun 20, 2006, at 1:59 PM, Bill Marriott wrote:

> Josh Mellicker wrote
>> Really, I am looking to emulate FileMaker's "Layout" view.
>
> Quartam Reports comes the closest to this I've seen (in Rev).
>
> http://www.quartam.com/

I need to give this a serious look, thanks for the lead.

>
>> I also want to make the process of building multi-table join queries
>> visual and intuitive.
>
> Multiple utilities for this using MySQL. MySQL WorkBench comes to  
> mind as
> the most advanced.

Wow, just downloaded this, looks great! Thanks! I have searched  
around for something like this without finding anything this cool.


> None of them written in Rev as far as I know.
>
>> Eventually, I would like to race a FileMaker developer to put   
>> together a
>> basic multiuser, multitable data app and tie or come in  very close!
>
> Good luck! All a FileMaker user has to do is click a checkbox and  
> their
> database is multiuser.

I should have said "multiuser worldwide from a fast server"... sorry!


> The point really isn't to make a "basic" database
> either. You can do that in 15 minutes with MySQL and PHP. The point  
> is to
> make a powerful system that is also easy to use (and easy to  
> develop in).

True dat.
>
>> Okay, why not just use FileMaker you ask?
>>
>> 1. Well, last time I checked (years ago), the process of getting the
>> database on a remote server so anyone could access seemed like a real
>> pain, I can set up a fast MySQL db in a minute or two and it's  
>> ready  to
>> go. MySQL is multi-threaded and handles tens of millions of   
>> records and
>> users easily (maybe FM does this now too, not sure!) (And  MySQL's  
>> free!)
>
> All versions of FileMaker support some level of multiuser  
> functionality, and
> as I mentioned, it takes clicking a checkbox to making it so. If  
> you want to
> use a remote server, you just set up an account with one of the  
> dozens of
> FileMaker hosting companies and you're good-to-go. Pricing for such  
> hosting
> services is as low as $30/month. (Or buy FileMaker Server Advanced  
> and do it
> yourself.)


I just did a tiny amount of research, and it seems Filemaker hosting  
is typically $20 - $100 per month per database, and has user limits  
(like 20 users max). I will look into it more, but so far it does not  
seem like a good solution for a large scale project where several  
hundred people might be connected at once, it seems like the price  
would be astronomical.

We are running about 30 - 35 MySQL databases on our dedicated server  
currently, and have several hundred people using them at once, not  
sure if FileMaker can scale to that or beyond... we pay $150 monthly,  
but have unlimited MySQL databases with unlimited connections.

>
> FileMaker 8 (current version) also is multi-threaded (handles 1, 2,  
> and
> 4-processor hardware) and can handle tens of millions of records.  
> Actually,
> 64 quadrillion records. A single database file can be up to 8  
> terabytes in
> size. Fields can hold hold up to 2GB of data. You're limited to 1  
> million
> tables per file and 256 million fields per file.
>
>> 2. Along with data, if you also want other functions, like ftp,   
>> graphic
>> and video functions, and to build a standalone app, Rev is  much  
>> better
>> than FM.
>
> FileMaker can FTP with the addition of any of several plugins. It can
> natively display QuickTime and several forms of graphics files (all  
> of the
> ones Rev supports I believe). Those files can be embedded into the  
> file or
> referenced by path. Any type of file can be embedded into a FileMaker
> "Container" field. FileMaker 8 Advanced enables you to build  
> royalty-free
> runtimes for Windows and Macintosh.

I don't think Filemaker has the power that, for example, Trevor has  
given Revolution with the QT external where you can detect timecode  
tracks in QT movies, or copy and paste segments. I know this is  
unusual, but our customers are video producers so the apps I need to  
build need to manipulate media as well as data.


> [It *is* true that Revolution-based
> runtimes are more customizable.]
>
> Stephen Barncard wrote
>> As far as I know, Filemaker does not have a text interface,  
>> command line
>> like MySQL. A good MySQL book, the command line and Rev,  one can  
>> get any
>> data in any format.
>
> You can access FileMaker databases using ODBC/JDBC, XML/XSLT, PHP (via
> FX.php), Lasso, and of course FileMaker clients. In other words,  
> you can use
> Rev to access a FileMaker file, and you can use PHP to build a web  
> site with
> a FileMaker back-end, just like with MySQL.
>
> FileMaker also is unique in having an "Instant Web Publishing"  
> interface
> which lets people connect using a web browser -- the solution looks  
> and
> works more or less exactly as it does from within FileMaker. All  
> without
> writing a single line of code.
>
> I'm not saying that FileMaker is always going to be the ideal  
> choice for a
> multi-user database deployment. But I wanted to correct  
> misconceptions that
> are repeated over and over about the product.
>
> If you want to build a Rev-based application that lets you build/ 
> manage
> rich, LAMP-based DB applications (Linux, Apache, MySQL, PHP)* as  
> easily as
> you can build FileMaker solutions then more power to ya! I've seen  
> about
> half-a-dozen half-finished efforts out there. But half-finished  
> doesn't win
> the race. I think it will take you a very, very, VERY long time to  
> replicate
> FileMaker's:
>
> - Table/Field definition module
> - Relationships graph
> - Value lists
> - Field formatting options
> - Access Privileges module
> - Layout module
> - Scripting module
>
> My goodness, we don't even have a decent table object built into  
> Rev, and I
> haven't even seen anyone come out with a fully-featured, high- 
> performance,
> quality add-in/replacement for that!
>
> Where Revolution shines is its ability to create highly-customized,
> streamlined clients... software that doesn't have to do all the things
> FileMaker does. But does the few things it has to do very well. And  
> yes, if
> you want to have custom WindowShapes, complete control over window
> decorations, alpha blending, custom dialogs, slider bars, and many  
> other
> interface customizations then Rev is definitely the better choice.  
> But in
> terms of database power FileMaker is years ahead.


It seems that way... I am making leaps and bounds now with Rev, but  
that's because I'm still learning.

Thanks for all the valuable information, and taking the time to  
answer. Your post is thought-provoking, informative and very helpful.


Josh



>
> * If you're using the Rev CGI, would that make it a LAMR-based  
> solution?
> (i.e., Linux, Apache, MySQL, Revolution? eep!)

lol