Get the facts: Alpha Five compared to Access 2007 and FileMaker 9
When setting out to purchase a database application platform for the first time, naturally people have questions. To make things easier, we hired a professional software reviewer to produce this competitive features grid.
It objectively compares Alpha Five with Microsoft Access 2007, Filemaker Pro 9, Filemaker Pro 9 Advanced, Filemaker Server 9, and Filemaker Server 9 Advanced.
Our writer's marching orders were simple: compare the products, and be completely transparent. We think he did a great job, and compared the products fully and accurately.
If you're in the market for a new database tool, this grid will help you understand how three of the industry's leading products stack up. And if you're a journalist or blogger, feel free to take this grid and use it. Don't worry about copyright. Just give us a heads up so we can see what you wrote.
9 comments:
The results of this comparison suggest they were put together by an Alpha Five developer who was asked to have a look at FileMaker and Access. Perhaps s/he was trying to be objective and fair but the level of inaccuracy suggests the lack of familiarity, with FileMaker at least, made this impossible.
For example: '#functions supplied'[with FileMaker]: 0'.
I don't know how many functions come with FileMaker but FM provides a 248 page function reference manual and hundred of functions contributed by developers are readily available.
The document indicates that FileMaker Advanced doesn't include a debugger. I think a debugger has been included in the last four versions. (Including FileMaker Server in this comparison, and in many others, is meaningless, and suggests little or no knowledge of the software).
Comparing Alpha's 'Action Scripting' with FileMaker's mere 'Scripting' is surely meaningless, but again suggests greater familiarity with or preference for Alpha.
I have no doubt that in some respects Alpha has advantages over FileMaker in its development capabalities. FileMaker has some fundamental features lacking which are very frustrating to developers. Perhaps Alpha has some too (but I don't know Alpha well). However, this survey is not convincing enough to clarify these differences.
Tom Dupre
Tom, thanks for the note.
We did the best we could, using the public documentation that FileMaker provides. As a result of your comment, we went back and looked again.
We think you are talking about FM's "Scripting Steps." If so, that doesn't correspond to Alpha or Access language functions at all, in our opinion. It would be a different line on the spreadsheet entirely.
Is this what you are referring to? Also, we're happy to update the grid if you can source the info.
Thanks again for the comment.
I agree with the Filemaker developer. I know that a significant number of FM developers are using Servoy for their next level of development. This has a web and Java client with a very similar concurrent licence cost. Alpha is now moving into a market space (web and SaaS) that has some significant players and the FM/Access argument is irrelevant. I would argue that Alpha needs a leg up in this market by integrating Isomorphic's Smart Client technology - that would take the user interface to a whole new level.
@martin blackwell ... so let me get this straight ... you're suggesting i should buy filemaker pro AND servoy? or i should ditch my FMP code base and learn java+servoy? i have 10+ years of filemaker databases that are stuck in client/server. i cannoyt get them to the web without a lot of time and trouble. not interested. so noew i have to learn java or servoy or alpha or c#/asp or what? filemaker is a dead end, that's for sure.
@Martin Blackwell
Servoy is a desktop Java application. There are many, many, many PCs that simply don't or won't run desktop Java for various reasons. Also, desktop Java is SLOW and UGLY. You don't want to be hitched to Java.
'nuff said.
We have updated the grid in response to Tom's comment. Thanks again, Tom. New grid is http://tinyurl.com/a5v9grid4
i'm beginning or still has a lot to learn on ms access. then you want me to switch to alpha... trying to learn another thing without perfecting access solutions.
though i'm looking for alternatives which won't cost me much to develop desktop solution.
We are looking for a development platform type of solution and I am overwhelmed by all the choices. How does Alpha Five compare to these products? We have a LAMP environment now, so we would prefer something that runs on Linux, but are willing to go to Windows in order to gain the speed of development. We had already ruled out Filemaker. Now we are looking at these products and scratching our heads. We need something robust, but it doesn't have to be the most robust thing out there. It just has to be better than Saas things like formsite.com, dabbledb.com, creator.zoho.com, etc and it has to give us more bang for the buck than quickbase.com
So therefore, we are looking at:
awareim.com (runs on Linux)
dbnetsuite.com (Windows)
ironspeed.com (Windows)
webfuser.com (Windows)
Thanks for any perspective you can provide!
I have 15 years experience with Access. I spend enough time to fixing multi-player bugs because it has a file-locking issues all the time. Even Access 2003 doesn't very good to this. The power in the Access is the query designer. Back in 97 no-one has it. Transactions and relation are crap. The transactions works only is in code modules or else I don't have control because is "automatic" and slow. Relationship destroys your data in every possible way because the other party thinks the record is missing so its deletes or updates all the other records from the other table because are orphans etc. Form designer is very good but only produce forms in windows desktop running only compatible versions of Windows. "Client" apps need Accees installation in every pc assuming that the OS are in "compatible" version to the Access version. The Office Web Controls OWC is based in the crappy technology as desktop, had many restrictions and is used only at Intranet-LAN or low traffic webs. I had customer who continuously lost some index or PrimaryKey form tables because some user left open the database. I mean come on we are at 2010, who needs an application with compact & repair in a menu which working only when all users and web disconnects form the database? We don't need compact & repair at all if we working in web using a browser. But that never going to happen with Access. If anyone needs Access please don't use validations rules (except in code). Don't invest in VBA or VB code because it only run inside Access and Windows (so no web for you). If you need speed use mdb format with DAO (Data Access Object) not ADO or the newest ADO.NET which is completely different. Don't even try the replication thingy or GUID random field type cause its bloats and expands the data and that produce delays over the wire. If you execute queries or parameter queries, with or without code, learn how to uncheck options in Tools->Settings dialog using code. Last but not least Record locking Option is never work but has some exceptions and sometimes work! But I don't give my word for this. Always use shared locking and if collision occurs use compact & repair. I just remember the effectiveness of the /decompile parameter near to access executable to open the mdb file in which the code module had become corrupt and doesn't do that the code states or doing strange things like the rest of Access!!
Post a Comment