1. Home
  2. Low-Code Development Platforms
  3. Claris FileMaker Reviews
  4. User Review of Claris FileMaker
Obsolete and impossible to integrate or migrate.
May 09, 2021

Obsolete and impossible to integrate or migrate.

Anonymous | TrustRadius Reviewer
Score 1 out of 10
Vetted Review
Verified User

Overall Satisfaction with FileMaker Pro

We use FileMaker Pro as a backend and front end for our second hand car store. It has a low learning curve, which makes it ideal for non-developers to maintain both the front end and product store. One might compare this to Microsoft "Access" software. Like "MS Access" it offers a fast environment, but after a while, when your company starts to grow, it may become rather obsolete and cumbersome when it just does not fit into a professional environment. Nowadays it has become one of our legacy products that we can't "just" get rid of.
  • Offers a fast way to store things like "products" on which screens can be build in a fairly easy way.
  • There is a low learning curve, which means that non-developers can use and maintain this.
  • It offers separate environments (test and production), that are fairly easy to keep synchronized.
  • Data is stored in a "hidden" layer that is very difficult to port to a "real" database. This makes it difficult to query using standardized query language, and difficult to import/export to other relational databases.
  • There can be only one session open at any given time. This makes it impossible for more than 1 person to maintain it at any given time.
  • The user interface is a bit chaotic, and the environment itself seems overly complex. Compared to, say, MS Access this makes it a seemingly very professional tool, when in fact it's a rather amateur way of exposing data. Much like MS Access, but MS Access does not pretend to be any more than that.
  • Speed of development.
  • low learning curve.
  • Possibilities that non-developers can use this.
  • It offers a single tool for data plus UI, which makes it a fast way to expose your data to the outside world.
  • Not a single developer wants to work with this. This means that the person who did use it (a non-developer) was forever "the" FileMaker Pro guy. The learning curve may be flat, but it's to steep for any developer that does not want to work with this.
  • After the application grew bigger, the need arose for more than 1 developer to maintain this. This is not possible with FileMaker Pro.
  • We wanted to get rid of the tool but this meant we had to start from scratch since it's not possible to import the data to a real database in a way that makes sense.
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 at least MS Access can be used free, even if your company is (really) small.

Do you think Claris FileMaker delivers good value for the price?

No

Are you happy with Claris FileMaker's feature set?

No

Did Claris FileMaker live up to sales and marketing promises?

I wasn't involved with the selection/purchase process

Did implementation of Claris FileMaker go as expected?

Yes

Would you buy Claris FileMaker again?

No

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.