# Free FileMaker Beta Eval Program for Non-FileMaker Pro users



## KJM01 (Jul 12, 2005)

FileMaker (works great with Excel for Windows and Mac) is currently offering a free Beta evaluation of the next rev of its popular database software. 

If you've never used FileMaker Pro but would like to try it out, this program is for you.

Contact me at the email address below for details.

Kevin Mallon
kevin_mallon@filemaker.com


----------



## PaddyD (Jul 12, 2005)

Just in case concerned board members object to what appears to be advertising, this post has the OK of MrExcel...


----------



## XL-Dennis (Jul 12, 2005)

Kevin,

I need to update myself on FileMaker and it's ability but I'm not prepared to become an unpaid beta-tester. 

Can we use an OLE DB Provider to access it?
Its support for ADO / ADO.NET?
The maximum number of tables?
Its support for SQL 2003?
The maximum number of users at the same time?


----------



## KJM01 (Jul 13, 2005)

Dennis,

Thanks.

Does "SQL 2003" mean the language standard? Because there is no such thing
> as say, SQL Server 2003. There is a 2000, and an upcoming 2005.


----------



## XL-Dennis (Jul 13, 2005)

Kevin,

AFAIK, ANSI SQL2003 is the latest standard 

(At present I'm reading the book "SQL in a nutshell" from O´Reilly written by Kevin E Kleine et all and where they explicit state SQL2003, which I highly recommend to take part of the latest additions).

So yes I refer to the ANSI SQL Standard.

(SQL Server 2000 and 2005 use their own dialect of SQL which most larger RDBMS do and.)

Are You ready & able to give me some feedbacks on my questions or have You other outstanding issues that we need to discuss before moving on?


----------



## NateO (Jul 13, 2005)

Hello,


			
				XL-Dennis said:
			
		

> AFAIK, ANSI SQL2003 is the latest standard


Right, for reference:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SQL

Not so with T-SQL (SQL Server), and not sure about Jet SQL (Access). 

Which makes me curious as to which type of SQL would be supported, they all tend to have their own idiosyncrasies, e.g.,

http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/assistance/HP010322501033.aspx


----------



## KJM01 (Jul 13, 2005)

*Re: FileMaker Evaluation Program*

Dennis,

> Can we use an OLE DB Provider to access it?

FileMaker Pro has a built in ODBC driver that installs in the OS. The user can setup a named DSN or create one on the fly to access FileMaker data. 

FileMaker data can easily be accessed  via ODBC with FrontPage, Excel,
Access, VB.NET, C# (Visual Studio.NET 2003, 2005, and Express), etc.

> Its support for ADO / ADO.NET?

We do not provide an ADO.NET Data Provider, but you can use ADO or ADO.NET
to access FileMaker data. At the last three DevCons I have demonstrated VBA,
VB Script, VB.NET and C# accessing FileMaker data using this method.

> The maximum number of tables?
10,000 

> Its support for SQL 2003?
We support a subset of SQL 92 (assuming this question is regarding the
language standard, and not a mistake surrounding MS SQL Server 2000 or 2005)

> The maximum number of users at the same time? 
50, although most ODBC applications will
have very few connections that are handled centrally


----------



## XL-Dennis (Jul 14, 2005)

> Which makes me curious as to which type of SQL would be supported, they all tend to have their own idiosyncrasies, e.g.,



The development of the standard rely on a non-commercial framework while the development of RDBMS are on commercial terms. So when a group of users ask for something new then it's implemented in the vendor's software first and in case they all can agree it's implemented in the standard.

The best situation would be if the standard took the lead but with commercial interest involved it will never happen.

So for us who take a general stand it's a real difficult  situation.

It's also explain why books nowadays have become very large as they need to cover many softwares with unique dialects of SQL. 

To some extend it also explain why Linux-orientated databases support more parts of the SQL standard as the commercial interest is not explicit set in focus.

It's also explain why I'm interested to learn more specific about FileMaker's support of the standard. 

The software is not big enough (i e among the top RDBMS on the market) and therefore rarely mentioned in more general SQL-books. (Please don't suggest that I should by a FileMaker-book.)



> We support a subset of SQL 92 (assuming this question is regarding the
> language standard, and not a mistake surrounding MS SQL Server 2000 or 2005)



I'm not comfortable with Your attitude about the references You make to MS SQL Server 2000/2005. A friendly notification is that You should drop it once for all.

OK, You support a subset of SQL92 (or SQL 2) which raise additional questions and leave it up to me to find it out myself. This is a typical vendor approach... 



> 50, although most ODBC applications will have very few connections that are handled centrally



Sounds good, especially compared with MS Access.



> > The maximum number of tables?
> 10,000



Sound also good.

It's obvious that You target the web-plattform as You only provide an ODBC-driver but no Providers. The ODBC-driver is general considered to be faster then Providers but on the other hand it's less flexible.

Thanks for taking Your time.


----------

