Likelihood to Recommend If your company is really small, I can understand the need for a product like this. However, I would go for MS Access... FileMaker Pro can not be integrated with other systems (like MS Access can at least be handled by C# for instance, and can be integrated with MS Excel or even SQL server). I'm really not sure in what scenario one would choose for FileMaker Pro. If your application or company grows bigger, you're going to have a problem to move to another environment. Also, the fact that only one person can work with the backend at any given time is a problem in a somewhat larger company.
Read full review It is very easy to verify Images with drawable resources Color Verification we can do this by referring to the same hex code as the developer team used so that it is reused. Opening a desired activity without performing End-to-end flow which eventually saves time. If the application is built on Android we can go testing activity with Espresso as it provides all the necessary APIs Espresso is not appropriate to iOS app automation, from a business point of view we need to hire new resources for iOS testing. Read full review Pros The relational database management system makes the program highly customizable to fit the needs of any product. You can add a ton of information to each record and update your inventory on a regular basis with an Excel import or manually inside of the record. It has the capability to incorporate barcoding, which can manage your available inventory with ease. The scripting language allows FileMaker to automatically calculate complex algorithms automatically or generate report outs with the click of a button. This allows for greater UI, especially with active users who are not familiar with writing code. Almost all of our internal data is linked to the FileMaker database The server license allows many users to update the database in real time, which is handy if your inventory is constantly changing. We have users with Macs, PCs, iPhones and handheld tablets linked to our FileMaker database and they are updating the information constantly throughout the day. If you invest some time into formatting and scripting the database, there is a high ease of use for users without knowledge of any programming or FileMaker itself. Read full review Automatic Waiting logic before failing any test Black box and Grey box testing Easy to Understand and Very Flexible Supported Java And Kotlin Fewer Efforts compare to other Mobile Automation Frameworks Execution is very Fast Read full review Cons Developer features need to be beefed up - namely adding the ability to search code for a phrase or keyword and the ability to do the same in the "relationship graph" in the database. Add ability for users to edit the same table record at the same time by version control. Allow Filemaker Server to use more than 1 core; currently multi-processing is not supported and it can be tricky to find just the right server to support the application you've built to the fullest capacity. Read full review As Espresso works on the ideal thread if the threads are not handled properly by the developing team it can lead to challenges in the execution of your tests. Depends more on the developer's code we cannot develop tests as individual frameworks, we share the repository with developers. We need to be cautious while making changes in the tests, as we share same repository Read full review Likelihood to Renew It it not really up to me but my opinion does have some weight in the decision and the reason I would renew my use FileMaker Pro 8.5 is because I am finally getting used to it! Now that I have been working with the program, tasks have become quicker and projects are getting done faster. File Maker Pro 8.5 really is a versatile tool and I think we are just scratching the surface with it's abilities.
Read full review Usability The usability rating I'm providing is for the development interface - the usability of the application you build is relative to how much effort is put into the application. Filemaker needs to roll out some features that are "modern" sooner rather than later. They do roll out new features every year, but at a slow pace. We generally get 1 new TRULY useful feature every year. They need to step it up some!
Read full review Support Rating The forums are great with lots of helpful experts and the staff monitor them to provide help where needed. There have been a couple of unique technical issues I've had to deal with that I haven't been able to get resolved so I chose to score this a 9 instead of a 10.
Read full review Implementation Rating Suggest you use an iterative R.A.D. or AGILE development approach. (i.e. rather than writing a gigantic spec for a system, then building it). FileMaker facilitates quick prototypes. Developing an example, then allowing users to "try it out" is a snap.
Read full review Alternatives Considered FileMaker is still the quickest way to go from zero to having a minimum viable working solution. Simple solutions can be built in as little as a afternoon of development. It is the only tool I am aware of which allows tech savy end users with domain knowledge to build bespoke apps for their businesses without undertaking professional software development training.
Read full review As our app is complete on Android Espresso is the best choice over
Appium Fewer efforts in Espresso over
Appium , as Espresso provides some built-in library to perform the operation. Easy to use, Espresso is very easy to understand and we can perform operations with very little code. Developers can contribute, as they have good command over Java and Kotin languages and also use Espresso for unit testing.
Read full review Return on Investment We are a more agile company because of FileMaker. A few of us who are tech-savvy enough to manage the database (but are not professional developers) can make needed adjustments to our database without having to employ an in-house developer or contract with a 3rd party. As our business processes evolve and change, it's easy to update the database to accommodate those changes. Read full review As it is an Open Source tool it cost-effective East to use, so that you can train many new Joiners to start delivering the tasks Maintainance is very low, as we depend on the developer's layout files we can reuse their elements We can cover most of the scenarios which helps in the coverage of the tests Read full review ScreenShots