Claris' FileMaker is presented as a Workplace Innovation Platform, and is used to create a custom app. Manual processes can be automated with Claris FileMaker Pro, and apps can be created to manage contacts, track inventory, organize projects, etc.
$21
per month per user
Microsoft Access
Score 7.6 out of 10
N/A
Microsoft Access is a database management system from Microsoft that combines the relational Microsoft Jet Database Engine with a graphical user interface and software-development tools.
$139.99
per PC
Quickbase
Score 8.6 out of 10
N/A
Quickbase helps users tackle any project, no matter how complex. Quickbase helps customers see, connect and control complex projects. Whether it’s raising a skyscraper or coordinating vaccine rollouts, the no-code software platform allows business users to custom fit solutions to the way they work – using information from across the systems they already have.
$700
per month
Pricing
Claris FileMaker
Microsoft Access
Quickbase
Editions & Modules
Platform Subscription
$21
per month per user
Individual desktop license
$594
one-time fee
Microsoft Access
$139.99
per PC
Enterprise
Full Customizable
per month/billed annually
Business
Starting at $2,200
per month
Team
Started at $700
per month
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Claris FileMaker
Microsoft Access
Quickbase
Free Trial
No
No
Yes
Free/Freemium Version
No
No
No
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
No
Yes
Entry-level Setup Fee
No setup fee
No setup fee
Optional
Additional Details
—
—
Quickbase offers three key plans, with feature distinction, simple and consistent entitlements, and a flexible licensing model, giving users the option of either user based or usage based licensing across all 3 plans.
MYOB has great accounting features but doesn't have the customisability or features to create the business management system that will do what you want it to do. Using a FileMaker Pro solution for business management and MYOB/XERO for the accounting is a great combination.
I chose FileMaker over a custom DB with Azure and SQL Server because of the low code nature of FileMaker. And we needed ease of access with Apple products so we didn't use Microsoft Access.
We previously had deployed QuickBase. However, we realized that QuickBase would not allow us to construct our app the way we worked. That is where FMP came in. Its ability to adapt to the way we work made transitioning very easy.
Quick Base is internet-based and easily programmable by the end-user. Because of that, it is not as customizable as FileMaker. We had very specific purposes that were more easily accomplished in FileMaker (eg. Auto-calculating fields were more fool proof-ly accomplished in …
I've used Microsoft Access, and it doesn't compare to Filemaker. The Filemaker software system is robust and had the ability to expand and work with other programs. I have a small business, and I can say that for a small to medium sized business, I do not think there is a …
Access is very complex leading to longer deployment, more user training, and therefore higher costs. Caspio is decent but quite limited in its native ability.
FileMaker Pro is the chaotic, cumbersome and non-integratable little sibling of MS Access. And even MS Access can't be taken serious in a medium sized company. FileMaker Pro can not even be compared to serious products like OutSystems and Sitecore. It's also not free... whereas …
I am now using WORKetc for my CRM, and there are more benefits to me and my business using this software than using FileMaker Pro. WORK Etc Benefits: CloudBase, App, Email Response Update Project Automatically, Invoicing, Reports, Tags, Some quick add features Work Etc. Cons: …
The most direct competitor to FileMaker Pro is Microsoft Access. If you understand the way Microsoft Access works, then you can probably get more functionality and features in Microsoft Access. With that said though, FileMaker is much easier to learn and develop in. I tried …
I used to work with Access some years ago, and liked the rigid structure. It had rules that were easy to adhere to, and once learnt, it was a powerful way to collect data.
When I discovered FileMaker, I had to completely unlearn what I had thought were the boundaries of data …
As compared to other tools, FileMaker is a more robust and backwards compatible tool. As a product is always has had a stability that is unseen. I have developed solution over the years that even after 15 years are still used and loved by customers. As compared to programming …
I compared FileMaker to Microsoft Access - and am so pleased I selected FileMaker - it was a clear choice to create a database - provide management tools within the database to some users and then give access to many users through the web interface. With Microsoft or other …
FileMaker was so much easier to use and much more flexible. I tried creating a database in access and just got frustrated. In the early 1990's my boss loaded FileMaker 2.0 on my computer & told me to see what I could do with it. With no formal programming training, I created …
FileMaker Pro focuses more on data collection in a single, flat file while Access allows for relationships to be drawn between data tables the reduces duplication. I have not worked with FileMaker Pro for several years but found it to be very unwieldy for my needs which were …
FileMaker is much more robust for sharing amongst users. However, Microsoft has proven useful in its availability to our user base as well as helping drive complex needs to a centralized solution.
We enjoyed the cloud-based set up of Quick Base. Microsoft Access also required more detailed database knowledge. Microsoft Project required expensive user licensing. We also need a program that would run it easily on Apple iPads.
Quick Base is 1000 times more intuitive and does a lot of the work for you. Microsoft Access is very much for users that actually do know how to code-if you ask me.
It's a tie. Quick Base is more stable and easy to access (ironic since Microsoft Access has the word access in the name) since it's a hosted online, but the ability to integrate (especially with Microsoft products) and customize forms and reports makes development, as it …
Before using quickbase we primarily used Microsoft Access databases for our quick turn around projects, and QuickBase's secure web based platform resolved a lot of our access on our corporate server issues.
Microsoft Access was one of the DB programs that I have used in a job previous to my current one. I found it to have many more features than Quickbase does but it was a lot harder to set up and maintain. Also, it was harder to share among multiple teams. I basically feel that …
Prior to Quickbase, we used Microsoft Access. The limitations were that it was not available on the cloud and coworkers were getting locked out of the database. You could not make development changes until everyone was out of the database.
When we were choosing Quickbase, we looked at FileMaker Pro and a couple of other ones that I don't remember, but we ultimately went with Quickbase just because of the flexibility of building it exactly how we needed it to be.
If you don't know any programming languages, it's no problem to get started with Quick Base. On-line guides and prompts, plenty of examples and help are always available. There are template sample databases available for modification, and these provide a great opportunity to …
I have personally used Quickbase and Salesforce and am so much more impressed by Quickbase. Salesforce puts so little power in your hands, for any change you have to ask their developers and it comes with a big price tag and time lag. Quickbase is easy and nimble and you can …
We only tried FileMaker Pro before Quickbase, and it was quite hard to achieve what we needed. It took a few days to figure out how to create a couple relationships in FileMaker Pro, where we were able to develop almost our whole application in the same amount of time in …
When we originally set out to create our human resource management system, we strongly considered developing it on the .NET platform. However, that would mean that we'd have to rely on a small team of experts for not only the initial development, but also future enhancements. …
QuickBase is adaptable, easy to use and can scale quickly. With either option for a simple drag and drop solution or a more complex code written for a specific application, QuickBase is clearly the winner here.
Creative Operations - Brand Marketing - Business Solutions & International
Chose Quickbase
Quick Base was MUCH more flexible and utilitarian. It did not restrict us, or make us conform our processes to their software, as many other solutions do. It has back ups, security, and support so that we are not alone. The community forums are great too. Lots of learning …
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.
As a Material Purchasing/Planning/inventory tracking application, Microsoft Access serves its purpose well. It's presentation is clean, data entry is simple and the ability to customize search fields is welcome. It does, however, come with some caveats; namely, when setting search filters and the need arises to back up a step or two, with Microsoft Access you have to reset, or "clear all", adding extra steps/time to a query.
I no longer think that Quickbase is the way of the future. They do not fix major bugs in a timely manner, and are releasing basic functionality behind a paywall. I believe that Enterprise Level Tier should be given certain things, like SLAs on Support and up-time. However, as a low-code no-code platform the majority of the accounts, "builders", and users are not going to be able to justify the cost of an Enterprise Tier Plan, and won't be able to use the features that Quickbase continues to advertise.
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.
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.
Microsoft Access has not really changed at all for several years. It might be nice to see some upgrades and changes.
The help info is often not helpful. Need more tutorials for Microsoft Access to show how to do specific things.
Be careful naming objects such as tables, forms, etc. Names that are too long can get cut off in dialog boxes to choose a table, form, report, etc. So, I wish they would have resizable dialog boxes to allow you to see objects with long names.
I wish it could show me objects that are not in use in the database for current queries, tables, reports, forms, and macros. That way unused objects can be deleted without worrying about losing a report or query because you deleted the underlying object.
I'd like to see a link on email notices that take you directly into said notice. On an app that only has 1 or 2 email notices firing, there's no issue. However, we have some tools that are so complex that they have about 20 email notices firing at any given time based on the action users take. In this case, if we have to go in to modify a notice, we have to guess or scroll down the long list of notices to see which one we need to customize. It would be great if Quickbase had the URL of said notice somewhere at the footer of that notice so when Administrators click on it, it takes them into the exact notice they need to update.
When filling out or reviewing a lengthy form, I'd like to see the Save & close button, as well as a Save & next option at the bottom of the form rather than having to scroll back up to the top of those forms just to click on those choices.
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.
I and the rest of my team will renew our Microsoft Access in the future because we use and maintain many different applications and databases created using Microsoft Access so we will need to maintain them in the future. Additionally, it is a standard at our place of work so it is at $0 cost to us to use. Another reason for renewing Microsoft Access is that we just don' t have the resources needed to extend into a network of users so we need to remain a single-desktop application at this time.
For our use-case of QuickBase, there really aren't any other products out there that can offer us the same out-of-the-box solutions they provide to us. We're also so integrated with it in our daily processes that to move away from it abruptly would cause mass chaos, so it's going to be renewed for at least the next several years.
It's almost what it should be after so may years and with Apple's longevity and strength behind it. For people who earn their living based on efficiency I think there are too many developer obstacles that waste time and therefore money.
Microsoft Access is easy to use. It is compatible with spreadsheets. It is a very good data management tool. There is scope to save a large amount of data in one place. For using this database, one does not need much training, can be shared among multiple users. This database has to sort and filtering features which seem to be very useful.
Quick Base has done everything we have asked it to do and then some. Our original goal was to have one system for CRM that encompassed both the sales process and the customer management. We have gone w-a-y beyond that with analytics, project management, system bug logging, and historical effort reporting.
Once we did get Quick Base configured and customized it was reliably available when we needed it. We may have had one or two occasions when the product was inaccessible but those were few. The greatest challenge with its availability was its difficulty with integrating with our systems.
Some of our tables that hold over a million records are starting to perform poorly, with some summaries taking over 20 seconds to load. This may be an indication that it is best to archive old data when reaching large volumes like this.
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.
While I have never contacted Microsoft directly for product support, for some reason there's a real prejudice against MS Access among most IT support professionals. They are usually discouraging when it comes to using MS Access. Most of this is due to their lack of understanding of MS Access and how it can improve one's productivity. If Microsoft invested more resources towards enhancing and promoting the use of MS Access then maybe things would be different.
If you utilize the community, the support is amazing. Unfortunately, I find their actual support system a bit underwhelming. They don't seem to have a great process for interacting directly with an issue and often sweep significant issues under the rug by categorizing them as "Enhancement" ideas or legacy items.
Quick Base already is having a separate portal of providing training to customers and it is very easy to use and updates as per the new features added in to the application
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.
I was not directly involved with the initial account implementation, only a bystander. For the app I directly implemented for my department only, I wish I had know to create an app diagram first. I don't remember if that was suggested. I think that would be a great help tip tool when a new app is created, to have a page with a check list of what is needed or how to get started. If you are a regular app builder, then you can bypass it or have the ability to turn it off in the app settings.
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.
Excel is a fantastic - robust application that can do so much so easily. Its easy to train and understand. However - excel does not provide a reporting function and that is typically where we will suggest a move to [Microsoft] Access. [Microsoft] Access requires a little more knowledge of data manipulation.
Well, there's a plethora of low-code tools out on the marketplace and, you know, there's a reason that we've decided to partner with QuickBase because it has all the right balance of the ability to integrate with the ability for a citizen developer to create apps successfully. So if you look at something like Zo Ho's low-code offering, for example, yes, there are some similarities there, but they're really dependent on all of their other licensed products to get you where you want to be, where with QuickBase you have the ability to truly create something custom.
It has evolved really well with our company, but there is a hard limit to the table size that has begun to affect us and not let us grow. The table size limit is set at 500 MB and we have had to jump through quite a few hoops to be able to get by.
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.
ROI is HUGE. Our company saved over 3.5 million in one year alone based on developments that year in Quickbase that saved time for many teams
Less user error - implementing automations and standardized workflows has led to less user error as was previously seen by maintaining spreadsheets or Smartsheets