On 15/02/2011, at 11:54 PM, Dan Stein wrote: > > I would not ever suggest using anything but FMS to do this. Using FileMaker > in peer to peer is always risky for more reason then I can count.
I would be interested in hearing some of those reasons that justify a ten fold cost increase. I also have some experience in this. I have been hosting a range of solutions including content management and e-commerce for lots of clients for over a decade and I haven't run into any. On 16/02/2011, at 2:23 AM, Robert Shubert wrote: > Witango 6 will only focus on ODBC and JDBC connectivity. All native > connectivity is deprecated, although what was in the v5.5 server should still > work, but it’s not officially supported. If xDBC connectivity is as good as the native stuff I don't have a problem with this. If it introduces new problems, I do. But FileMaker Pro (single user) can be used as an xDBC datasource. If it is as robust as FMP6 was with native support I fail to see the reasons for not supporting it. What it all boils down to is this. I will continue to host and develop Witango based solutions with FileMaker as the back end. Clients come to me because they are familiar with FileMaker. There is an opportunity for me to sell more Witango licenses to clients who can justify there own server. But the simple fact is the number of those clients drops off dramatically when I tell them their FileMaker license cost has just increased by a factor of 10. Wayne Irvine ---------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from this list, please send an email to [email protected] with "unsubscribe witango-talk" in the body.
