Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.databases.filemaker > #1536

Re: Value Not Dependent on the Found Set

Show all headers | View raw

In article <1lcp28r.1fiyolt17pegqoN%clkaufmann@gmx.ch>, Christoph
Kaufmann <clkaufmann@gmx.ch> wrote:
> Helpful Harry <HelpfulHarry@BusyWorking.com> wrote:
> > 
> > Upgrading simply just for the sake of it has always struck me
> > as pointlessly silly, and expensive.
> 
> My new customers often have more advanced versions of Filemaker than I
> have, and most of the time, the solution is just as it was in Filemaker
> 6 and earlier. One table per file, no script parameters, no variables,
> no tabs, hundreds of fields per table. What did they upgrade for?
> 
> There appears to be a problem for Mac users: Many versions of Filemaker
> do not run on a Mac bought approx. 2 or more years after the Filemaker
> version was released, like FMP 8 on OS 10.6. or just anything before FMP
> 12 on Maverick (and no Filemaker Server runs on Maverick yet). Getting
> an new computers means upgrading filemaker.
> 
> Whereas Filemaker 3-12 version seem to run on Windows XP, 7 and 8.

Getting a new computer can make the upgrade less pointless since it's
often no longer upgrading the software simply for the sake of upgrading
... unless of course getting the new computer itself was simply for the
sake of upgrading, and the old one was still perfectly fine.

One of the problems on the Mac was Apple's switch from PowerPC to Intel
chips. The older versions of Mac FileMaker simply weren't written to
run on Intel chips. Apple has also re-written large parts of Mac OS X,
removed Rosetta (for running PowerPC applications on Intel Macs).


Upgrading tends to be a vicious circle whereby the software upgrades
force the hardware upgrades, and vice versa. With the obvious exception
of a computer that breaks down, there's usually little need for most
people to upgrade.

Helpful Harry  :o)

Back to comp.databases.filemaker | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Value Not Dependent on the Found Set csampson@inetworld.net (Charles H. Sampson) - 2013-11-11 09:16 -0800
  Re: Value Not Dependent on the Found Set Howard - FM Pro Solutions <fmprosolutions@gmail.com> - 2013-11-11 09:33 -0800
    Re: Value Not Dependent on the Found Set csampson@inetworld.net (Charles H. Sampson) - 2013-11-13 09:47 -0800
      Re: Value Not Dependent on the Found Set Erik Appeldoorn <ursus.kirk@gmail.com> - 2013-11-13 19:29 +0100
        Re: Value Not Dependent on the Found Set csampson@inetworld.net (Charles H. Sampson) - 2013-11-16 00:01 -0800
          Re: Value Not Dependent on the Found Set "E. Appeldoorn" <ursus.kirk@ziggo.nl> - 2013-11-16 10:24 +0100
            Re: Value Not Dependent on the Found Set csampson@inetworld.net (Charles H. Sampson) - 2013-11-18 10:14 -0800
              Re: Value Not Dependent on the Found Set Helpful Harry <HelpfulHarry@BusyWorking.com> - 2013-11-19 08:42 +1300
                Re: Value Not Dependent on the Found Set csampson@inetworld.net (Charles H. Sampson) - 2013-11-19 09:20 -0800
                Re: Value Not Dependent on the Found Set Helpful Harry <HelpfulHarry@BusyWorking.com> - 2013-11-20 09:08 +1300
      Re: Value Not Dependent on the Found Set Helpful Harry <HelpfulHarry@BusyWorking.com> - 2013-11-14 09:19 +1300
        Re: Value Not Dependent on the Found Set csampson@inetworld.net (Charles H. Sampson) - 2013-11-16 00:01 -0800
      Re: Value Not Dependent on the Found Set Howard - FM Pro Solutions <fmprosolutions@gmail.com> - 2013-11-13 12:41 -0800
        Re: Value Not Dependent on the Found Set Helpful Harry <HelpfulHarry@BusyWorking.com> - 2013-11-14 18:57 +1300
        Re: Value Not Dependent on the Found Set csampson@inetworld.net (Charles H. Sampson) - 2013-11-16 00:01 -0800
          Re: Value Not Dependent on the Found Set Howard Schlossberg <howard@nospam.fmprosolutions.com> - 2013-11-16 15:08 -0800
            Re: Value Not Dependent on the Found Set Helpful Harry <HelpfulHarry@BusyWorking.com> - 2013-11-17 12:43 +1300
              Re: Value Not Dependent on the Found Set csampson@inetworld.net (Charles H. Sampson) - 2013-11-18 06:58 -0800
            Re: Value Not Dependent on the Found Set csampson@inetworld.net (Charles H. Sampson) - 2013-11-18 10:02 -0800
              Re: Value Not Dependent on the Found Set csampson@inetworld.net (Charles H. Sampson) - 2013-11-20 07:00 -0800
                Re: Value Not Dependent on the Found Set Howard - FM Pro Solutions <fmprosolutions@gmail.com> - 2013-11-20 09:44 -0800
                Re: Value Not Dependent on the Found Set Helpful Harry <HelpfulHarry@BusyWorking.com> - 2013-11-21 09:04 +1300
                Re: Value Not Dependent on the Found Set Howard - FM Pro Solutions <fmprosolutions@gmail.com> - 2013-11-20 12:55 -0800
                Re: Value Not Dependent on the Found Set clkaufmann@gmx.ch (Christoph Kaufmann) - 2013-11-21 16:59 +0100
                Re: Value Not Dependent on the Found Set Helpful Harry <HelpfulHarry@BusyWorking.com> - 2013-11-22 09:22 +1300
  Re: Value Not Dependent on the Found Set clkaufmann@gmx.ch (Christoph Kaufmann) - 2013-11-11 19:38 +0100
  Re: Value Not Dependent on the Found Set csampson@inetworld.net (Charles H. Sampson) - 2013-11-20 23:00 -0800

csiph-web