Bento (FileMaker Xtra Light)

Since no one has mentioned it yet, FileMaker has just announced what
might be called FileMaker Xtra Light...except that they named it Bento.

Available at . The announcement:

FileMaker Previews Bento, The Stylish Personal Database for Leopard

Incredibly easy software unleashes your Address Book contacts and iCal
events, and organizes your Mac-based info in one place

SANTA CLARA, Calif. – November 13, 2007 – Today FileMaker, Inc. began a
public preview of Bento, a new personal database designed specifically
for Mac OS X v.10.5 Leopard. Bento is designed to help Mac users
organize their lives by giving them one place to put their important
information, from contacts and calendars to projects and events. Bento
can organize activities related to work, home, school and community.

Bento automatically displays contacts and calendars kept within Address
Book and iCal. There is no need to re-enter existing names, phone
numbers, email addresses and upcoming events into Bento so users can
start organizing and extending to their information right away.

“Bento is the personal database for the millions of Mac users who
appreciate the elegance and ease of use of their Mac,” said FileMaker
president Dominique Goupil. “With Bento, we are providing an incredibly
easy way to manage all your information -- iCal calendar events, Address
Book contacts, digital media and files -- all in one place, effortlessly.”

Bento users can organize contacts, calendars, photos and files so they
can easily do the following and more:

• Manage a vast amount of contact details
• Coordinate events, parties and fundraisers
• Track projects, assignments and deadlines
• Connect related information together
• Prioritize tasks
• Catalog inventory, donations and items for sale
• Record hours worked and payments due
• Assign ratings to service providers and sellers
• Create libraries for music, movies and other media
• Store files and photos in relation to projects and events

Bento builds on Leopard’s gorgeous new look and consistent design to
bring simplicity and style to personal databases.

Key features include:

• Built-in links to Address Book and iCal. Be productive instantly by
integrating and adding to your contact and calendar information. Add
photos to your contacts, add invitees to an iCal event, and more. And
because Bento links with Address Book and iCal, you can see data on your
iPhone or share it over the Web with .Mac.

• Stylish templates and themes. More than 20 ready-to-use templates
sport elegant themes to reflect each user’s unique style, personality or
activity. Forms and fields are designed with coordinated colors,
layouts, fonts and text styles for immediate use.

• Works with iPhone and .Mac. Bento links to live Address Book and iCal
data. No synchronization is necessary to be in sync with Bento, since
Apple’s core technology takes the information to iPhone and .Mac for
sharing over the Web.

• iTunes-like search. Searching, organizing and sorting records is
simple. Create collections to store work, personal or volunteer tasks in
the same way you would create smart playlists in iTunes or albums in iPhoto.

• Drag, drop and import with ease. Rearranging, regrouping and viewing
lists or forms are drag-and-drop easy, as is importing or exporting data
from Microsoft Excel, Numbers or any other program that creates CSV files.

• See things your way. One-click customization options for themes,
columns displayed, label positions, text sizes, shading, and alignment;
the Table View allows for easy sorting and quick stats in Summary Row;
Add more pages to view different slices of information.

• Get the Leopard experience. Users will love many of the exciting new
Leopard capabilities in Bento, including: Media Manager, which allows
users to store and change images in Bento fields; live connection to
iCal, which exchanges data between calendars and tasks; Advanced Find,
which re-uses the “Advanced Find” module from Leopard’s Finder for
pinpointing specific information within the database; and Time Machine,
the new Leopard feature that allows for easy database back-ups.

Availability
Bento is designed to run exclusively on Mac OS X v.10.5 Leopard. A free
public preview is available at . FileMaker
intends to ship Bento in January, 2008. The Bento public preview is
time-limited beta software meant for evaluation purposes only. Please
read the software license accompanying the preview software for full
terms and conditions.

Re: Bento (FileMaker Xtra Light)

Post removed (X-No-Archive: yes)

Re: Bento (FileMaker Xtra Light)

Martin Trautmann wrote:

> On Tue, 13 Nov 2007 14:07:30 -0800, Howard Schlossberg wrote:
> > Since no one has mentioned it yet, FileMaker has just announced what
> > might be called FileMaker Xtra Light...except that they named it Bento.
>
> What is this?

It is a general purpose home user database, with a very nice user
interface.

Think of it as a potential replacement for the database module in
AppleWorks (though it isn't a complete replacement, and goes further
than AppleWorks in some areas).

It doesn't have direct support for AppleWorks databases but can import
data via text files, so it should be easy enough to get data across to
it from AppleWorks, or from existing lists managed in other
applications.

> > Bento automatically displays contacts and calendars kept within Address
> > Book and iCal. There is no need to re-enter existing names, phone
> > numbers, email addresses and upcoming events into Bento so users can
> > start organizing and extending to their information right away.
>
> The functions that I read here could be done by any FileMaker database.

Except for automatic integration with iCal and Address Book, and it is
significantly easier to use than FileMaker Pro. It actually looks like a
Mac OS X application, unlike FileMaker, which is still pussyfooting
around with an appearance which has barely changed in the last decade.

I've only had a brief look at Bento, but at first glance it reminds me
of something like StickyBrain, but imposing some structure on the data.
I used to use StickyBrain, was talked into upgrading to SOHO Notes and
regretted it ever since. I've now deleted SOHO Notes and was looking for
a replacement for managing notes, with sync to my PDA. This might be
suitable, but I'll have to try it and see (and I doubt it will be able
to sync).

Just getting tabular and searchable views of Address Book and iCal data
is extremely useful.

It has an introductory movie and what looks like a decent manual. The
download is only 27 MB, and the application expands to about 53 MB once
dragged to the Applications folder.

I also own FileMaker Pro, which I've been using since version 3, for
gradually more complex tasks. I'm currently learning how to use the
Advanced version and to do some more serious database development. I can
see that both Bento and FileMaker Pro will be useful to me, for
different types of task. I'll probably use Bento for all my personal
"collection" databases and time/project management, relegating FileMaker
to more advanced tasks.

Bento is specifically designed NOT to compete with FileMaker Pro. It
doesn't communicate with any existing FileMaker product, except via
import/export of text files. No scripting or significant automation, no
networking or Internet capabilities. If you want those, use FileMaker
Pro instead.

It could be a starting point for someone who needs to manage data, and
they can move on to FileMaker Pro if they need more advanced features.

> > • Coordinate events, parties and fundraisers
> > • Track projects, assignments and deadlines
> > • Connect related information together
> > • Prioritize tasks
> > • Catalog inventory, donations and items for sale
> > • Record hours worked and payments due
> > • Assign ratings to service providers and sellers
> > • Create libraries for music, movies and other media
> > • Store files and photos in relation to projects and events
>
> That's yet another closed source solution, maybe comparable to functions
> that are already within Leopard or Microsoft Outlook?

It overlaps somewhat with Leopard features such as notes and tasks (and
I hope they can integrate into it - I want something other than Mail
which can deal with Leopard's notes and which can sync them to an iPod
Touch or iPhone).

I didn't think Outlook was a general purpose database. It can do some of
the above things. Besides, it doesn't exist on the Mac short of running
Windows, and Entourage doesn't cover the full Outlook feature set.

> Who does need these function?

Anyone who is currently using the AppleWorks Database and in search of a
modern replacement without having to spend too much money, or is using a
spreadsheet to manage lists of any kind of structured data (not the best
tool for that task).

> I do not see any hint about a special FileMaker exchange. Does the price
> tag provide any information about its complexity?

MacWorld is saying US$49 (or $99 for a family pack), putting it into the
same realm as iWork.

By comparison, FileMaker Pro is US$299 per user (discounted somewhat for
5 or more licences).


--
David Empson
dempson@actrix.gen.nz

Re: Bento (FileMaker Xtra Light)

> Bento is designed to run exclusively on Mac OS X v.10.5 Leopard.

Which might suggest that FMI actually did have full access to Leopard
development for some substantial time prior to release of Leopard.
Which might in turn suggest that FM9/FMS9 numerous shortcomings re
Leopard were not down to having to wait for the final release; or did
they just find time to build an app "designed to run exclusively on Mac
OS X v.10.5 Leopard" in the last few weeks.

I was only slightly amused by the popmenu on the blurb page that flagged
in red that this was for Leopard only, but that allowed selecting your
OS as Tiger. More lack of attention to detail, didn't seem like info
gathering.

Not having Leopard as yet, I'll have to wait to see if they have
perpetuated repeat fields.

That the Benito (!) site runs under asp might even strike some as odd.





Chris

Re: Bento (FileMaker Xtra Light)

Chris Brown wrote:

> > Bento is designed to run exclusively on Mac OS X v.10.5 Leopard.
>
> Which might suggest that FMI actually did have full access to Leopard
> development for some substantial time prior to release of Leopard.

They would have had the same degree of access to early Leopard seeds as
every other Select/Premiere developer (at least from WWDC, back in July,
if not earlier). That is plenty to provide a basis for developing a new
application.

I doubt they had "special access" to Apple internal seeds.

(Incidentally, it looks like Bento is a mixture of Carbon and Cocoa, but
I expect the UI is Cocoa.)

> Which might in turn suggest that FM9/FMS9 numerous shortcomings re
> Leopard were not down to having to wait for the final release;

They had to wait until the final release was out so they could test
their fixes. They were obviously working on 9.0v2 for quite a while,
given the number of changes (not just Leopard related ones). In the
event they got the urgent fixes out quite promptly, and they must have
been holding 9.0v2 back while waiting for Leopard's release.

The Instant Web Publishing problem might be a new one which appeared
late in the development of Leopard and FileMaker weren't able to handle
it in time.

Their late announcement of a pending partial update for 8.5 seemed more
like a panic in response to negative feedback.

> I was only slightly amused by the popmenu on the blurb page that flagged
> in red that this was for Leopard only, but that allowed selecting your
> OS as Tiger. More lack of attention to detail, didn't seem like info
> gathering.
>
> Not having Leopard as yet, I'll have to wait to see if they have
> perpetuated repeat fields.

From reading the forums, you can place multiple items in a single field
on a single record, which then won't export to a CSV. Sounds similar to
repeating fields.

I'm not sure how this is implemented (Bento is using SQLite under the
hood).

> That the Benito (!) site runs under asp might even strike some as odd.

Indeed.

--
David Empson
dempson@actrix.gen.nz

Re: Bento (FileMaker Xtra Light)

The interesting thing I find about this product is how it links so well
with Address Book and iCal. How do we do that with FM Pro? I'd love to
be able to tie FM databases to these apps on Mac, and to their
corresponding apps (Outlook/Exchange?) on the PC. But I haven't seen a
good way to do this without having to buy plug-ins.

To your point... This whole thing about how FMI is supporting Leopard
for us poor, cheap, reticent FM8.5 users bugs me the more I think about
it.

Leopard was originally rumored to be shipping in March. That was before
8.5 was EOL'd, and certainly before FM9 shipped. Of course, Leopard was
postponed and we have no idea what the state of Leopard code was when
FM8.5 was EOL'd. The other apps I've seen that are reported broken with
Leopard were released ages ago...long before a Leopard release date was
rumored. I won't squawk about that sort of thing. But FM 8.5 is
different.

BUT: I just can't believe that something major like changes to OS X's
Internet functionality were held off until after FM8.5 "died". Nor can I
believe that FMI had no inkling about Leopard changes when FM8.5 was
release. FM tied Web Publishing to OS X technologies that had to change
to keep up with rapidly changing Internet moves, and apparently FM's
functionality is way too dependent on these on the OS X platform (don't
know about Windows).

If I let my mind drift a bit, I can imagine radical things like "FMI
knowingly shipped a defective product in 8.5 and they should fix it now".

Even Microsoft continued to patch Office X for years after it was EOL'd.
Adobe is the only vendor I can think of who tends not to patch older
versions. Oh yes: ACD is also behind on Canvas, but that seems to be
based more on a business decision to kill Canvas than anything else.

Seems to naive me that, given where FMI claims FM should be used, that
they should ensure that the shipped functionality works for at least a
year. This isn't about guarantees... it's about being a responsible,
trustworthy vendor who claims they want business-important applications
deployed using their product.

The cynic in me wonders if FMI is looking at the Web Publishing problem
as a key vehicle for driving FM upgrades to 9.x, and hence allowing them
to meet high revenue/volume projections. Interesting coincidence that
Activation hits FM9 just as Web Publishing starts to fail in FM 8/8.5.

Back when I was a CSA, and later an FSA, I increasingly got the idea
that FMI wasn't too concerned about that sort of thing, especially when
it came to smaller developers/customers.

The good news: If someone really needs Web Publishing and wants to stay
with 8/8.5, you could buy a PC pretty inexpensively and just use that.
I'm sure Apple wouldn't mind if we started buying PCs instead of Macs
for Web serving, and it certainly wouldn't bother FMI a bit.

Abbott

In article ,
Chris Brown wrote:

> > Bento is designed to run exclusively on Mac OS X v.10.5 Leopard.
>
> Which might suggest that FMI actually did have full access to Leopard
> development for some substantial time prior to release of Leopard.
> Which might in turn suggest that FM9/FMS9 numerous shortcomings re
> Leopard were not down to having to wait for the final release; or did
> they just find time to build an app "designed to run exclusively on Mac
> OS X v.10.5 Leopard" in the last few weeks.
>
> I was only slightly amused by the popmenu on the blurb page that flagged
> in red that this was for Leopard only, but that allowed selecting your
> OS as Tiger. More lack of attention to detail, didn't seem like info
> gathering.
>
> Not having Leopard as yet, I'll have to wait to see if they have
> perpetuated repeat fields.
>
> That the Benito (!) site runs under asp might even strike some as odd.
>
>
>
>
>
> Chris

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

Re: Bento (FileMaker Xtra Light)

Martin Trautmann wrote:
> On Tue, 13 Nov 2007 14:07:30 -0800, Howard Schlossberg wrote:
>> Since no one has mentioned it yet, FileMaker has just announced what
>> might be called FileMaker Xtra Light...except that they named it Bento.
>
> What is this?

FWIW, you might find this interesting -- some screenshots and movies
that someone posted:

http://www.misterorange.com/bento/Bento_First_Impressions.ht ml

As David already mentioned, Bento is meant for low-level users --
someone managing their recipes or their little league team or their DVD
collection. Much lower cost, much high ease of use, much less
complexity. They don't even use the term 'database', but instead refer
to 'collections'. But note that there are 16 different field types.
There are predefined collections with predefined (and locked) fields,
and you can drag a related collection onto a layout (and have it nicely
aligned and placed) without having to worry about table context,
relationships or anything else. It has no scripting and is not meant as
competition for FileMaker. There is currently no easy upgrade path from
Bento to FMP, except that data can be exported from Bento as
comma-separated.

Re: Bento (FileMaker Xtra Light)

Abbott wrote:

> The interesting thing I find about this product is how it links so well
> with Address Book and iCal. How do we do that with FM Pro? I'd love to
> be able to tie FM databases to these apps on Mac, and to their
> corresponding apps (Outlook/Exchange?) on the PC. But I haven't seen a
> good way to do this without having to buy plug-ins.
><
FMP did link with Apple Mail [Send mail script] but this does not work
in Leopard with FMP 7, 8.5 and 9. I cannot be sure about FMP 9 -- it did
not work with demo I downloaded but that does not allow one to apply the
update.

Send mail works OK with Entourage of course!

--
Richard Parkin

Re: Bento (FileMaker Xtra Light)

Abbott wrote:

>
> To your point... This whole thing about how FMI is supporting Leopard
> for us poor, cheap, reticent FM8.5 users bugs me the more I think about
> it.
>

Same here. For myself, it has become one of those defining insights,
about just what sort of company and product FMI/FM is.


> Leopard was originally rumored to be shipping in March. That was before
> 8.5 was EOL'd, and certainly before FM9 shipped. Of course, Leopard was
> postponed and we have no idea what the state of Leopard code was when
> FM8.5 was EOL'd. The other apps I've seen that are reported broken with
> Leopard were released ages ago...long before a Leopard release date was
> rumored. I won't squawk about that sort of thing. But FM 8.5 is
> different.


> Nor can I believe that FMI had no inkling about Leopard changes when FM8.5 was
> release.

Yes, I just don't buy the 'we are part of Apple, but they don't tell us
anything' routine. My point was that FMI would have had to had access to
Leopard a LONG time ago, in order to get Bento out now. It is after all,
'designed exclusively for Leopard'. Or would some suggest that the Bento
group (should there be one) didn't know what the FM group were doing?
The problems with FM9/8.5/Leopard are all last minute final Leopard
release dependant? I just don't accept that. A mix of sloppy
carelessness (the system language issue) and deliberate lack of
assigning appropriate resources seems far more likely.


> Seems to naive me that, given where FMI claims FM should be used, that
> they should ensure that the shipped functionality works for at least a
> year. This isn't about guarantees... it's about being a responsible,
> trustworthy vendor who claims they want business-important applications
> deployed using their product.


That perhaps is the real issue isn't it? FMI are just not. FMI have been
frenetically trying to position themselves to become a bigger player for
quite a while. The push to PHP/SQL compatibility, web publishing, even
the KanaHankaku et.al. on micro level, is all fundamental to that. In
the scrabble to get to where they apparently think they need to be,
attention to the detail has got left behind (if this was in fact ever
part of FM philosophy; it has never seemed like it to me), or has
suffered due to lack of applied resources. Spread too thin. Just
another corporate entity looking for growth, stuff the actual product,
thats only a vehicle, and it is only a product. Never mind the quality,
feel the width. Certainly not really elegant or truly sophisticated, but
flexible, mostly functional, perfunctory.


>
> The cynic in me wonders if FMI is looking at the Web Publishing problem
> as a key vehicle for driving FM upgrades to 9.x, and hence allowing them
> to meet high revenue/volume projections. Interesting coincidence that
> Activation hits FM9 just as Web Publishing starts to fail in FM 8/8.5.
>
> Back when I was a CSA, and later an FSA, I increasingly got the idea
> that FMI wasn't too concerned about that sort of thing, especially when
> it came to smaller developers/customers.


I have never thought that FMI gave a damn about the developer community.
A smart company would have some structure/strategy for channeling
and acting on feedback.



> That the Benito (!) site runs under asp might even strike some as odd.

Indeed.
...

And then there are the FM Server techbriefs, that seem predominantly
written with windows screen shots. Appease the majority, or a product of
day to day hardware?

Re: Bento (FileMaker Xtra Light)

In article , Chris Brown
wrote:

> Abbott wrote:
>
> > Nor can I believe that FMI had no inkling about Leopard changes when FM8.5
> > was release.
>
> Yes, I just don't buy the 'we are part of Apple, but they don't tell us
> anything' routine.

FileMaker Inc. is not "part of Apple". It's a completely separate
company that happens to be owned by Apple. As far as I understand it,
FileMaker Inc. is treated just like any other developer and has no
special privileges.

Helpful Harry
Hopefully helping harassed humans happily handle handiwork hardships ;o)

Re: Bento (FileMaker Xtra Light)

My comment was about linking to the calendaring and contacts
functionality that ships with OSes. I know about the links to mail apps.

In article <1i7l6n4.111tzj410670oqN%news.abuse.rp@ntlworld.com>,
news.abuse.rp@ntlworld.com (Richard Parkin) wrote:

> Abbott wrote:
>
> > The interesting thing I find about this product is how it links so well
> > with Address Book and iCal. How do we do that with FM Pro? I'd love to
> > be able to tie FM databases to these apps on Mac, and to their
> > corresponding apps (Outlook/Exchange?) on the PC. But I haven't seen a
> > good way to do this without having to buy plug-ins.
> ><
> FMP did link with Apple Mail [Send mail script] but this does not work
> in Leopard with FMP 7, 8.5 and 9. I cannot be sure about FMP 9 -- it did
> not work with demo I downloaded but that does not allow one to apply the
> update.
>
> Send mail works OK with Entourage of course!

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

Re: Bento (FileMaker Xtra Light)

"Howard Schlossberg" wrote in message
news:13jmah0ebn1dv2d@corp.supernews.com...
> Martin Trautmann wrote:
>> On Tue, 13 Nov 2007 14:07:30 -0800, Howard Schlossberg wrote:
>>> Since no one has mentioned it yet, FileMaker has just announced what
>>> might be called FileMaker Xtra Light...except that they named it Bento.
>>
>> What is this?
>
> FWIW, you might find this interesting -- some screenshots and movies that
> someone posted:
>
> http://www.misterorange.com/bento/Bento_First_Impressions.ht ml
>
> As David already mentioned, Bento is meant for low-level users --
> someone managing their recipes or their little league team or their DVD
> collection. Much lower cost, much high ease of use, much less complexity.
> They don't even use the term 'database', but instead refer to
> 'collections'. But note that there are 16 different field types. There
> are predefined collections with predefined (and locked) fields, and you
> can drag a related collection onto a layout (and have it nicely aligned
> and placed) without having to worry about table context, relationships or
> anything else. It has no scripting and is not meant as competition for
> FileMaker. There is currently no easy upgrade path from Bento to FMP,
> except that data can be exported from Bento as comma-separated.

Actually, the home page says:

"The new personal DATABASE from Filemaker..."

Re: Bento (FileMaker Xtra Light)

Abbott wrote:

> My comment was about linking to the calendaring and contacts
> functionality that ships with OSes. I know about the links to mail apps.
I think you mean to say the lack of links to mail app to correctly
descibe the current situation.

I understood your posting and agree with it but the situation with FMP
is now worse than it was!

>
> In article <1i7l6n4.111tzj410670oqN%news.abuse.rp@ntlworld.com>,
> news.abuse.rp@ntlworld.com (Richard Parkin) wrote:
>
> > Abbott wrote:
> >
> > > The interesting thing I find about this product is how it links so well
> > > with Address Book and iCal. How do we do that with FM Pro? I'd love to
> > > be able to tie FM databases to these apps on Mac, and to their
> > > corresponding apps (Outlook/Exchange?) on the PC. But I haven't seen a
> > > good way to do this without having to buy plug-ins.
> > ><
> > FMP did link with Apple Mail [Send mail script] but this does not work
> > in Leopard with FMP 7, 8.5 and 9. I cannot be sure about FMP 9 -- it did
> > not work with demo I downloaded but that does not allow one to apply the
> > update.
> >
> > Send mail works OK with Entourage of course!
>
> ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet
> News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
> 120,000+ Newsgroups ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy
> via Encryption =----


--
Richard Parkin

Re: Bento (FileMaker Xtra Light)

Helpful Harry wrote:

>>
>>> Nor can I believe that FMI had no inkling about Leopard changes when FM8.5
>>> was release.
>> Yes, I just don't buy the 'we are part of Apple, but they don't tell us
>> anything' routine.
>
> FileMaker Inc. is not "part of Apple". It's a completely separate
> company that happens to be owned by Apple. As far as I understand it,
> FileMaker Inc. is treated just like any other developer and has no
> special privileges.
>
> Helpful Harry

Apple own FMI; yes/no?


It would be a somewhat bizarre exception in the corporate world, if an
essentially parent company did not have interaction with something it
owned. In this case, it is not overly surprising that Apple has not
wanted to be seen, to have close ties to FMI, the quality of the product
(interface execution predominantly) is so vastly 'different' to the
Apple norm.

Apple would appear to have had significant interaction on the bento
interface, at least from what I have seen from the look of the screen
shots. I'll have to wait until I upgrade to Leopard, and spend another
$500 or so, not on Leopard, but on FM9 presumptive integrity.

As I suggested in my earlier post, did FMI pull the benito out of the
sack in the last month?

Re: Bento (FileMaker Xtra Light)

In article , Chris Brown
wrote:

> Helpful Harry wrote:
> >>
> >>> Nor can I believe that FMI had no inkling about Leopard changes when FM8.5
> >>> was release.
> >> Yes, I just don't buy the 'we are part of Apple, but they don't tell us
> >> anything' routine.
> >
> > FileMaker Inc. is not "part of Apple". It's a completely separate
> > company that happens to be owned by Apple. As far as I understand it,
> > FileMaker Inc. is treated just like any other developer and has no
> > special privileges.
>
> Apple own FMI; yes/no?

Yes, Apple owns FileMaker Inc., but it has completely separate
management, staff, accounting, etc. - it is a separate company.

No doubt if Apple did give FileMaker Inc. special privileges other
companies like Microsoft would be complaining about
"anti-competitiveness".



> It would be a somewhat bizarre exception in the corporate world, if an
> essentially parent company did not have interaction with something it
> owned. In this case, it is not overly surprising that Apple has not
> wanted to be seen, to have close ties to FMI, the quality of the product
> (interface execution predominantly) is so vastly 'different' to the
> Apple norm.

Well that would prove my point then, wouldn't it? :o)



> Apple would appear to have had significant interaction on the bento
> interface, at least from what I have seen from the look of the screen
> shots. I'll have to wait until I upgrade to Leopard, and spend another
> $500 or so, not on Leopard, but on FM9 presumptive integrity.
>
> As I suggested in my earlier post, did FMI pull the benito out of the
> sack in the last month?

Other than a quick glance, I haven't seen Benito. I'm not even sure if
it's a true user-defineable database (like FileMaker or AppleWorks'
module) or simply a pre-built solution which allows minor tweaking.

No doubt they have been working on it for a while and technically it
might work with Mac OS X 10.4 and they've simply decided to limit it to
the new version as many developers do, possibly due to a few later
additions.


Helpful Harry
Hopefully helping harassed humans happily handle handiwork hardships ;o)

Re: Bento (FileMaker Xtra Light)

Helpful Harry wrote:

>
>
>> It would be a somewhat bizarre exception in the corporate world, if an
>> essentially parent company did not have interaction with something it
>> owned. In this case, it is not overly surprising that Apple has not
>> wanted to be seen, to have close ties to FMI, the quality of the product
>> (interface execution predominantly) is so vastly 'different' to the
>> Apple norm.
>
> Well that would prove my point then, wouldn't it? :o)
>
>


No Harry, it wouldn't. Just because Apple may not to be seen to have
close association with FMI, does not mean that they do not have
interaction.

Most major corporations that own subsidiaries, do so at least in part,
in order to maximize profits to the greater group; if one was a major
supermarket chain, then owning transport companies, and using them as
contractors, would cycle transport profits, back into the greater group
(rather than contracting a transport company owned by anybody else; any
kissing goodbye to that quantum). Vertical integration I think they
refer to it as. It is in the parent Co. interest, and that of the
shareholders, to feed business to those subsidiaries you own, and to
contribute to their success (in this case development process) wherever
possible. Otherwise they would be failing to exercise their duty to
their shareholders...

Re: Bento (FileMaker Xtra Light)

In article , Chris Brown
wrote:

> Helpful Harry wrote:
> >
> >> It would be a somewhat bizarre exception in the corporate world, if an
> >> essentially parent company did not have interaction with something it
> >> owned. In this case, it is not overly surprising that Apple has not
> >> wanted to be seen, to have close ties to FMI, the quality of the product
> >> (interface execution predominantly) is so vastly 'different' to the
> >> Apple norm.
> >
> > Well that would prove my point then, wouldn't it? :o)
>
> No Harry, it wouldn't. Just because Apple may not to be seen to have
> close association with FMI, does not mean that they do not have
> interaction.
>
> Most major corporations that own subsidiaries, do so at least in part,
> in order to maximize profits to the greater group; if one was a major
> supermarket chain, then owning transport companies, and using them as
> contractors, would cycle transport profits, back into the greater group
> (rather than contracting a transport company owned by anybody else; any
> kissing goodbye to that quantum). Vertical integration I think they
> refer to it as. It is in the parent Co. interest, and that of the
> shareholders, to feed business to those subsidiaries you own, and to
> contribute to their success (in this case development process) wherever
> possible. Otherwise they would be failing to exercise their duty to
> their shareholders...

FileMaker Inc. is not a "subsidiary". It's a totally separate company -
that's the point. Unless something drastic happened, money from Apple
does not go to FileMaker and vice versa.

Of course there is some "interaction" between the two (no doubt
FileMaker Inc. is a signed up member of Apple's developer scheme), but
that doesn't extend to Apple sharing all their secrets way ahead of any
of developer.

Helpful Harry
Hopefully helping harassed humans happily handle handiwork hardships ;o)

Re: Bento (FileMaker Xtra Light)

Isn't FMI wholly owned by Apple? (in deference to Harry, I'll refrain
from the "subsidiary" word, although I always thought it was implied).

At the end of the day, though, FMI has pretty much taken their own
direction. Although created for the Mac (after Nutshell became FM), ever
since their decision (Claris days) to support Windows, FM has seemingly
increasingly paid attention to Windows over Mac. Then they seem to have
started focusing on corporate over individual users. All of this is
undoubtedly revenue/profit-driven (more Windows users than Mac; a
corporation buys more licenses at a time than you or I do, etc.).

I'm still missing the ability for FM/Mac to dial a phone without using a
plug-in. Works on a PC, but was dropped when OS X shipped. This is a
small thing, but simple. I also wish FM would give us customizable
button bars like some of their salespeople told me were coming into
FMP5. There are more important features I wish were there, and would be
much more useful to me and my clients than SQL and Oracle connectivity.
FM's not interested.

But this whole thing about support...and having a product that's been
"discontinued" for less than 6 months be not supported for key
functionality that FM touts...that's totally unacceptable to me and
others.

Forget software. Consider hardware. Linksys, Netgear, and many other
vendors who sell firmware-upgradable gear (including Apple's iPods, BTW)
typically provide updates for at least a year, and sometimes more, when
functionality is found to be buggy. Apple extends Mac warranties when
problems are found (liquid cooling pumps in G5; power supplies in
Wallstreet; logic boards in several models, etc.).

But FMI seems to believe they have no responsibility to ensure that
their users have full functionality of their products for a reasonable
amount of time.

I wonder: has anyone tried FM 8.x Web Publishing with OS 10.4.11?
Apparently it's got a new version of WebKit, but I don't know if it's
the same one as Leopard uses. I'd love to see that test. And I'd love to
see FMI's support answer if 8.x fails with this supported OS.

Chris: I'm not using IWP, but if you are, perhaps you could give this a
quick try.

Abbott

In article <171120071238548177%helpful_harry@nom.de.plume.com>,
Helpful Harry wrote:

> In article , Chris Brown
> wrote:
>
> > Helpful Harry wrote:
> > >
> > >> It would be a somewhat bizarre exception in the corporate world, if an
> > >> essentially parent company did not have interaction with something it
> > >> owned. In this case, it is not overly surprising that Apple has not
> > >> wanted to be seen, to have close ties to FMI, the quality of the product
> > >> (interface execution predominantly) is so vastly 'different' to the
> > >> Apple norm.
> > >
> > > Well that would prove my point then, wouldn't it? :o)
> >
> > No Harry, it wouldn't. Just because Apple may not to be seen to have
> > close association with FMI, does not mean that they do not have
> > interaction.
> >
> > Most major corporations that own subsidiaries, do so at least in part,
> > in order to maximize profits to the greater group; if one was a major
> > supermarket chain, then owning transport companies, and using them as
> > contractors, would cycle transport profits, back into the greater group
> > (rather than contracting a transport company owned by anybody else; any
> > kissing goodbye to that quantum). Vertical integration I think they
> > refer to it as. It is in the parent Co. interest, and that of the
> > shareholders, to feed business to those subsidiaries you own, and to
> > contribute to their success (in this case development process) wherever
> > possible. Otherwise they would be failing to exercise their duty to
> > their shareholders...
>
> FileMaker Inc. is not a "subsidiary". It's a totally separate company -
> that's the point. Unless something drastic happened, money from Apple
> does not go to FileMaker and vice versa.
>
> Of course there is some "interaction" between the two (no doubt
> FileMaker Inc. is a signed up member of Apple's developer scheme), but
> that doesn't extend to Apple sharing all their secrets way ahead of any
> of developer.
>
> Helpful Harry
> Hopefully helping harassed humans happily handle handiwork hardships ;o)

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

Re: Bento (FileMaker Xtra Light)

In article
, Abbott
wrote:

> Isn't FMI wholly owned by Apple? (in deference to Harry, I'll refrain
> from the "subsidiary" word, although I always thought it was implied).

Yes, Apple owns 100% of FileMaker Inc., but (as far as I understand it)
it's run as an entirely separate company. Staff are separate, money is
separate, etc. and that includes development. Obviously FileMaker Inc.
will be part of Apple's Developer scheme, but no different to any other
major develop like Microsoft and Adobe. They aren't on the "inside"
when it comes to Apple's own secrets.

Helpful Harry
Hopefully helping harassed humans happily handle handiwork hardships ;o)

Re: Bento (FileMaker Xtra Light)

Helpful Harry wrote:

> Yes, Apple owns 100% of FileMaker Inc., but (as far as I understand it)
> it's run as an entirely separate company. Staff are separate, money is
> separate, etc. and that includes development. Obviously FileMaker Inc.
> will be part of Apple's Developer scheme, but no different to any other
> major develop like Microsoft and Adobe. They aren't on the "inside"
> when it comes to Apple's own secrets.

My insight and relationships within FMI have led me to the same
conclusion as Harry. It can be quite frustration, but I don't think it
is FileMaker's fault. I think it is the culture of Apple that creates
this lack of cohesion between the companies.

FWIW, Bento is marketed as a FileMaker product, but I have seen much
speculation based on code libraries that indicate that FileMaker
resources were NOT spent on Bento. All indicators point to Apple as the
developer of Bento, which would also explain why it works so well with
Leopard.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Howard Schlossberg
FM Professional Solutions, Inc. Los Angeles

FileMaker 8 Certified Developer
Member, FileMaker Business Alliance

Re: Bento (FileMaker Xtra Light)

In article
,
Abbott wrote:

> I wonder: has anyone tried FM 8.x Web Publishing with OS 10.4.11?
> Apparently it's got a new version of WebKit, but I don't know if it's
> the same one as Leopard uses. I'd love to see that test.

WebKit is client-side. It's not especially useful in implementing a
server.

Re: Bento (FileMaker Xtra Light)

In article <13jujvohb894r32@corp.supernews.com>,
Howard Schlossberg wrote:

> Helpful Harry wrote:
>
> > Yes, Apple owns 100% of FileMaker Inc., but (as far as I understand it)
> > it's run as an entirely separate company. Staff are separate, money is
> > separate, etc. and that includes development. Obviously FileMaker Inc.
> > will be part of Apple's Developer scheme, but no different to any other
> > major develop like Microsoft and Adobe. They aren't on the "inside"
> > when it comes to Apple's own secrets.
>
> My insight and relationships within FMI have led me to the same
> conclusion as Harry. It can be quite frustration, but I don't think it
> is FileMaker's fault. I think it is the culture of Apple that creates
> this lack of cohesion between the companies.

Legally, there shouldn't _be_ cohesion. They're a self-directing
business entity, in part created to reduce the appearance of favoritism.

G

Re: Bento (FileMaker Xtra Light)

In article ,
Gregory Weston wrote:

> In article <13jujvohb894r32@corp.supernews.com>,
> Howard Schlossberg wrote:
>
> > Helpful Harry wrote:
> >
> > > Yes, Apple owns 100% of FileMaker Inc., but (as far as I understand it)
> > > it's run as an entirely separate company. Staff are separate, money is
> > > separate, etc. and that includes development. Obviously FileMaker Inc.
> > > will be part of Apple's Developer scheme, but no different to any other
> > > major develop like Microsoft and Adobe. They aren't on the "inside"
> > > when it comes to Apple's own secrets.
> >
> > My insight and relationships within FMI have led me to the same
> > conclusion as Harry. It can be quite frustration, but I don't think it
> > is FileMaker's fault. I think it is the culture of Apple that creates
> > this lack of cohesion between the companies.
>
> Legally, there shouldn't _be_ cohesion. They're a self-directing
> business entity, in part created to reduce the appearance of favoritism.

To a lesser degree, the same "separateness" occurs within Apple as well
- the software side is separate from the hardware side, and even
sub-departments and sub-sub-departments within those two areas are
often separated. It's all part of keeping the lid on secrets as much as
possible, which means only those that need to know actually know. The
same happens to some degree at Microsoft and any other big company.

Helpful Harry
Hopefully helping harassed humans happily handle handiwork hardships ;o)

Re: Bento (FileMaker Xtra Light)

Post removed (X-No-Archive: yes)

Re: Bento (FileMaker Xtra Light)

In article , Martin
Trautmann wrote:

> On Sat, 17 Nov 2007 12:32:51 -0800, Howard Schlossberg wrote:
> > All indicators point to Apple as the
> > developer of Bento, which would also explain why it works so well with
> > Leopard.
>
> Thanks, an interesting detail. Now there's a wide filed of further
> speculation: why do they sell it via FileMaker Inc.? Will there be
> further stuff that's sold outside the MacOS? Will there be further
> products, back to the wider range of Claris?
>
> I did not understand the purpose of Bento within the current FMP range,
> which is dual-platform. It makes sense that it could be an add-on which
> did not make it into Leopard directly.

I don't think Bento is part of the FileMaker Pro family at all. It's a
separate application (although may use some of the same underlying
code). The use of "FileMaker Xtra Light" in the title of this topic was
just the original person's joke.

Apple of course do already sell software outside of the MacOS: iWork,
iLife, Final Cut, etc. Which begs the question of why Apple would give
the Bento product to FileMaker (assuming Apple even did create it). The
only real link is that it's a database, but that's highly tenuous.

On the other hand, judging by the highly dodgey and buggy examples that
ship with FileMaker Pro (or at least older versions), maybe Apple did
create Bento.

I guess we'll know more when someone has had a chance to properly try
Bento out.

Helpful Harry
Hopefully helping harassed humans happily handle handiwork hardships ;o)

Re: Bento (FileMaker Xtra Light)

Gregory Weston wrote:
> In article <13jujvohb894r32@corp.supernews.com>,
> Howard Schlossberg wrote:
>
>> Helpful Harry wrote:
>>
>>> Yes, Apple owns 100% of FileMaker Inc., but (as far as I understand it)
>>> it's run as an entirely separate company. Staff are separate, money is
>>> separate, etc. and that includes development. Obviously FileMaker Inc.
>>> will be part of Apple's Developer scheme, but no different to any other
>>> major develop like Microsoft and Adobe. They aren't on the "inside"
>>> when it comes to Apple's own secrets.
>> My insight and relationships within FMI have led me to the same
>> conclusion as Harry. It can be quite frustration, but I don't think it
>> is FileMaker's fault. I think it is the culture of Apple that creates
>> this lack of cohesion between the companies.
>
> Legally, there shouldn't _be_ cohesion. They're a self-directing
> business entity, in part created to reduce the appearance of favoritism.
>
> G


So does FMI appear on Apples end of year financial statements presented
to shareholders, or not?




While overt day to day cohesive activity may not be a feature of the
Apple/FMI axis, and I am quite prepared to accept this, I will state
again, it is in Apples interest, to do whatever they can to aid FMI in
performing better. Clearly they don't do this with any sort of
diligence, or else FM would be a damn site better product.

My take would be Apple would not want to be seen as interactive with
FMI, or else that would taint FM products in certain ways, in the eyes
of a significant percentage their windoze consumers.

Re: Bento (FileMaker Xtra Light)

Howard Schlossberg wrote:
> Helpful Harry wrote:
>
>> Yes, Apple owns 100% of FileMaker Inc., but (as far as I understand it)
>> it's run as an entirely separate company. Staff are separate, money is
>> separate, etc. and that includes development. Obviously FileMaker Inc.
>> will be part of Apple's Developer scheme, but no different to any other
>> major develop like Microsoft and Adobe. They aren't on the "inside"
>> when it comes to Apple's own secrets.
>
> My insight and relationships within FMI have led me to the same
> conclusion as Harry. It can be quite frustration, but I don't think it
> is FileMaker's fault. I think it is the culture of Apple that creates
> this lack of cohesion between the companies.
>
> FWIW, Bento is marketed as a FileMaker product, but I have seen much
> speculation based on code libraries that indicate that FileMaker
> resources were NOT spent on Bento. All indicators point to Apple as the
> developer of Bento, which would also explain why it works so well with
> Leopard.


Looking at the way the two act towards their developer communities,
which is the more open/has a better record at this rather minor level?
Apple. By far.

One could make a number of 'performance' comparisons between the two. My
take would be Apple would be the better between the two, in most. The
numerous manifestations of differences in corporate ethos and how those
are applied to execution of the business, are what result in all those
features/omissions... things that people (rightly) think should have
been attended to, long go. Why is Apple successfull? They have an
excellent product, they know how to evaluate the market, and act on it.


They can interact when they choose to though it seems. It does not
surprise me in the least that Apple are probably the developers of
Bento. Even superficial appearances, and info, suggest it is far to
polished for it to be something FMI have (historically) the resources
(i.e. ability ) to produce.

Re: Bento (FileMaker Xtra Light)

Abbott wrote:

>
> I wonder: has anyone tried FM 8.x Web Publishing with OS 10.4.11?
> Apparently it's got a new version of WebKit, but I don't know if it's
> the same one as Leopard uses. I'd love to see that test. And I'd love to
> see FMI's support answer if 8.x fails with this supported OS.
>
> Chris: I'm not using IWP, but if you are, perhaps you could give this a
> quick try.
>
> Abbott
>

Hi Abbott,

don't use IWP, but just tried a local IWP using FMA 8.5 on OS X.4.11 and
it seems to work. Can publish a db (Purchase Order template) and login
via Safari.

Re: Bento (FileMaker Xtra Light)

Chris Brown wrote:
> Abbott wrote:
>
>>
>> I wonder: has anyone tried FM 8.x Web Publishing with OS 10.4.11?
>> Apparently it's got a new version of WebKit, but I don't know if it's
>> the same one as Leopard uses. I'd love to see that test. And I'd love
>> to see FMI's support answer if 8.x fails with this supported OS.
>>
>> Chris: I'm not using IWP, but if you are, perhaps you could give this
>> a quick try.
>>
>> Abbott
>>
>
> Hi Abbott,
>
> don't use IWP, but just tried a local IWP using FMA 8.5 on OS X.4.11 and
> it seems to work. Can publish a db (Purchase Order template) and login
> via Safari.
>
>


Just booted from an external drive with OS X.4.10 and FMA 8.5 , and the
same IWP process will not work; no URL granted in IWP.


Booting back into OS X.4.11, new file using a different template, IWP
generates a URL, the URL entered into Safari, loads the IWP page, lists
the file, which can be logged in to. A new record created, submitted,
appears in the original open in FMA 8.5.

Re: Bento (FileMaker Xtra Light)

Which raises an interesting question: If Apple really created Bento,
then why didn't they include it in iWork? At present, iWork is missing
two capabilities that were in AppleWorks: database and graphics apps. It
would seem that Bento could provide the former.

This is all weird to me.

In article <191120070903352891%helpful_harry@nom.de.plume.com>,
Helpful Harry wrote:
>
> I don't think Bento is part of the FileMaker Pro family at all. It's a
> separate application (although may use some of the same underlying
> code). The use of "FileMaker Xtra Light" in the title of this topic was
> just the original person's joke.
>
> Apple of course do already sell software outside of the MacOS: iWork,
> iLife, Final Cut, etc. Which begs the question of why Apple would give
> the Bento product to FileMaker (assuming Apple even did create it). The
> only real link is that it's a database, but that's highly tenuous.
>
> On the other hand, judging by the highly dodgey and buggy examples that
> ship with FileMaker Pro (or at least older versions), maybe Apple did
> create Bento.
>
> I guess we'll know more when someone has had a chance to properly try
> Bento out.
>
> Helpful Harry
> Hopefully helping harassed humans happily handle handiwork hardships ;o)

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

Re: Bento (FileMaker Xtra Light)

Thanks for trying, Chris. I'm not experienced with IWP, though. From
your experiment, are you saying that IWP works fine with 10.4.11 but not
with 10.4.10?

In article ,
Chris Brown wrote:

> Chris Brown wrote:
> > Abbott wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> I wonder: has anyone tried FM 8.x Web Publishing with OS 10.4.11?
> >> Apparently it's got a new version of WebKit, but I don't know if it's
> >> the same one as Leopard uses. I'd love to see that test. And I'd love
> >> to see FMI's support answer if 8.x fails with this supported OS.
> >>
> >> Chris: I'm not using IWP, but if you are, perhaps you could give this
> >> a quick try.
> >>
> >> Abbott
> >>
> >
> > Hi Abbott,
> >
> > don't use IWP, but just tried a local IWP using FMA 8.5 on OS X.4.11 and
> > it seems to work. Can publish a db (Purchase Order template) and login
> > via Safari.
> >
> >
>
>
> Just booted from an external drive with OS X.4.10 and FMA 8.5 , and the
> same IWP process will not work; no URL granted in IWP.
>
>
> Booting back into OS X.4.11, new file using a different template, IWP
> generates a URL, the URL entered into Safari, loads the IWP page, lists
> the file, which can be logged in to. A new record created, submitted,
> appears in the original open in FMA 8.5.

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

Re: Bento (FileMaker Xtra Light)

In article ,
Chris Brown wrote:

> Gregory Weston wrote:
> > In article <13jujvohb894r32@corp.supernews.com>,
> > Howard Schlossberg wrote:
> >
> >> Helpful Harry wrote:
> >>
> >>> Yes, Apple owns 100% of FileMaker Inc., but (as far as I understand it)
> >>> it's run as an entirely separate company. Staff are separate, money is
> >>> separate, etc. and that includes development. Obviously FileMaker Inc.
> >>> will be part of Apple's Developer scheme, but no different to any other
> >>> major develop like Microsoft and Adobe. They aren't on the "inside"
> >>> when it comes to Apple's own secrets.
> >> My insight and relationships within FMI have led me to the same
> >> conclusion as Harry. It can be quite frustration, but I don't think it
> >> is FileMaker's fault. I think it is the culture of Apple that creates
> >> this lack of cohesion between the companies.
> >
> > Legally, there shouldn't _be_ cohesion. They're a self-directing
> > business entity, in part created to reduce the appearance of favoritism.
> >
> > G
>
>
> So does FMI appear on Apples end of year financial statements presented
> to shareholders, or not?

A wholly-owned subsidiary would show up on financial statements as
investment, just like any other entity in which the company owns stock.

Re: Bento (FileMaker Xtra Light)

Abbott wrote:
> Thanks for trying, Chris. I'm not experienced with IWP, though. From
> your experiment, are you saying that IWP works fine with 10.4.11 but not
> with 10.4.10?
>
> In article ,
> Chris Brown wrote:
>
>> Chris Brown wrote:
>>> Abbott wrote:
>>>
>>>> I wonder: has anyone tried FM 8.x Web Publishing with OS 10.4.11?
>>>> Apparently it's got a new version of WebKit, but I don't know if it's
>>>> the same one as Leopard uses. I'd love to see that test. And I'd love
>>>> to see FMI's support answer if 8.x fails with this supported OS.
>>>>
>>>> Chris: I'm not using IWP, but if you are, perhaps you could give this
>>>> a quick try.
>>>>
>>>> Abbott
>>>>
>>> Hi Abbott,
>>>
>>> don't use IWP, but just tried a local IWP using FMA 8.5 on OS X.4.11 and
>>> it seems to work. Can publish a db (Purchase Order template) and login
>>> via Safari.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Just booted from an external drive with OS X.4.10 and FMA 8.5 , and the
>> same IWP process will not work; no URL granted in IWP.
>>
>>
>> Booting back into OS X.4.11, new file using a different template, IWP
>> generates a URL, the URL entered into Safari, loads the IWP page, lists
>> the file, which can be logged in to. A new record created, submitted,
>> appears in the original open in FMA 8.5.
>
> ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
> http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
> ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----


seems to, but as I don't use it, beyond the elementary test I can't say.

Under 4.11 it posts a URL, under 4.10 it doesn't. The (4.11) URL can be
acessessed locally.

Re: Bento (FileMaker Xtra Light)

In article ,
Gregory Weston wrote:

> In article ,
> Chris Brown wrote:
>
> > Gregory Weston wrote:
> > > In article <13jujvohb894r32@corp.supernews.com>,
> > > Howard Schlossberg wrote:
> > >
> > >> Helpful Harry wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> Yes, Apple owns 100% of FileMaker Inc., but (as far as I understand it)
> > >>> it's run as an entirely separate company. Staff are separate, money is
> > >>> separate, etc. and that includes development. Obviously FileMaker Inc.
> > >>> will be part of Apple's Developer scheme, but no different to any other
> > >>> major develop like Microsoft and Adobe. They aren't on the "inside"
> > >>> when it comes to Apple's own secrets.
> > >> My insight and relationships within FMI have led me to the same
> > >> conclusion as Harry. It can be quite frustration, but I don't think it
> > >> is FileMaker's fault. I think it is the culture of Apple that creates
> > >> this lack of cohesion between the companies.
> > >
> > > Legally, there shouldn't _be_ cohesion. They're a self-directing
> > > business entity, in part created to reduce the appearance of favoritism.
> >
> > So does FMI appear on Apples end of year financial statements presented
> > to shareholders, or not?
>
> A wholly-owned subsidiary would show up on financial statements as
> investment, just like any other entity in which the company owns stock.

FileMaker Inc. is not a "subsidiary", it's a totally separate company.
No money goes from Apple to FileMaker Inc. nor vice-versa, therefore
FileMaker Inc. wouldn't appear on Apple's financial accounts (other
than perhaps a "write-off" when the company was first spun-off from
Apple).

Helpful Harry
Hopefully helping harassed humans happily handle handiwork hardships ;o)

Re: Bento (FileMaker Xtra Light)

In article
, Abbott
wrote:
> In article <191120070903352891%helpful_harry@nom.de.plume.com>,
> Helpful Harry wrote:
> >
> > I don't think Bento is part of the FileMaker Pro family at all. It's a
> > separate application (although may use some of the same underlying
> > code). The use of "FileMaker Xtra Light" in the title of this topic was
> > just the original person's joke.
> >
> > Apple of course do already sell software outside of the MacOS: iWork,
> > iLife, Final Cut, etc. Which begs the question of why Apple would give
> > the Bento product to FileMaker (assuming Apple even did create it). The
> > only real link is that it's a database, but that's highly tenuous.
> >
> > On the other hand, judging by the highly dodgey and buggy examples that
> > ship with FileMaker Pro (or at least older versions), maybe Apple did
> > create Bento.
> >
> > I guess we'll know more when someone has had a chance to properly try
> > Bento out.
>
> Which raises an interesting question: If Apple really created Bento,
> then why didn't they include it in iWork? At present, iWork is missing
> two capabilities that were in AppleWorks: database and graphics apps. It
> would seem that Bento could provide the former.
>
> This is all weird to me.

That's true too, although Bento (from the VERY quick look I've had at
the news / website) doesn't appear to be a proper database in the sense
of FileMaker Pro or AppleWorks' database module. It appears to be a
simple application for a specific purpose, that can be slightly
modified. For example, it can catalogue your emails, but you can't make
a custom database to catalogue your collection of antique Apple ][
computers.

The graphics parts of AppleWorks (both vector and bitmap) were
extremely buggy and badly done, as was adding graphic images to the
other modules. "Numbers" has taken a while to join the iWork "team", so
maybe "Draw", "Paint" and "Data" will make an appearance eventually
too.

Apple should also include these as standard on new Macs, just as they
did with AppleWorks, rather than as an optional extra. At the moment no
Mac ships with a word processor (unless you count the text editor).




Helpful Harry
Hopefully helping harassed humans happily handle handiwork hardships ;o)

Re: Bento (FileMaker Xtra Light)

Helpful Harry wrote:

> In article
> , Abbott
> wrote:
> > Which raises an interesting question: If Apple really created Bento,
> > then why didn't they include it in iWork? At present, iWork is missing
> > two capabilities that were in AppleWorks: database and graphics apps. It
> > would seem that Bento could provide the former.
> >
> > This is all weird to me.
>
> That's true too, although Bento (from the VERY quick look I've had at
> the news / website) doesn't appear to be a proper database in the sense
> of FileMaker Pro or AppleWorks' database module. It appears to be a
> simple application for a specific purpose, that can be slightly
> modified. For example, it can catalogue your emails, but you can't make
> a custom database to catalogue your collection of antique Apple ][
> computers.

You can create arbitrary libraries, with arbitrary fields, and a fairly
high degree of control over the form layout (not as flexible as
FileMaker), including multiple forms. Looks like a general purpose
database to me.

It comes with a bunch of templates for libraries (with a very iWork-like
user interface), but they are fully cusomtizable and you can create your
own libraries from scratch.

The library templates included in the beta are: Blank, Projects,
Contacts, To Do Items, Events, Files, Inventory, Event Planning, Time
Biling, Home Inventory, Expenses, Exercise Log, Vehicle Maintenance,
Classes, Digital Meda, Student List, Membership List, Products For Sale,
Equipment, Issue Tracking, Items Sold, Customers, Donations and Notes.

A "library" in Bento is equivalent to a table in FileMaker, but it
incorporates forms (layouts) as well as record structure.

Bento also has "collections" which are sort of like manually selected
find operations - each collection can contain an arbitrary selection of
records. Think Groups in Address Book and you have the idea.

You can also have Smart Collections, which are similar in principle to
scripted Find operations in FileMaker Pro.

A significant aspect of Bento is that in normal operation it has a
single unified database (based on SQLite) containing all your libraries,
rather than having separate documents. In this way it is similar in
operation to Address Book or iCal. It doesn't quite fit in with iWork's
document-oriented model.

> The graphics parts of AppleWorks (both vector and bitmap) were
> extremely buggy and badly done, as was adding graphic images to the
> other modules. "Numbers" has taken a while to join the iWork "team", so
> maybe "Draw", "Paint" and "Data" will make an appearance eventually
> too.

You can do a fairly large number of "Draw" tasks in Pages, Keynote and
Numbers, so there may not be any need for a dedicated Draw application.
Paint is not replaced yet.

> Apple should also include these as standard on new Macs, just as they
> did with AppleWorks, rather than as an optional extra. At the moment no
> Mac ships with a word processor (unless you count the text editor).

TextEdit is a pretty good basic word processor. It is a vast improvement
over SimpleText.

--
David Empson
dempson@actrix.gen.nz

Re: Bento (FileMaker Xtra Light)

In article <191120071820563474%helpful_harry@nom.de.plume.com>,
Helpful Harry wrote:

> In article ,
> Gregory Weston wrote:
>
> > In article ,
> > Chris Brown wrote:
> >
> > > Gregory Weston wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Legally, there shouldn't _be_ cohesion. They're a self-directing
> > > > business entity, in part created to reduce the appearance of
> > > > favoritism.
> > >
> > > So does FMI appear on Apples end of year financial statements presented
> > > to shareholders, or not?
> >
> > A wholly-owned subsidiary would show up on financial statements as
> > investment, just like any other entity in which the company owns stock.
>
> FileMaker Inc. is not a "subsidiary", it's a totally separate company.

FileMaker Inc disagrees:

"Ownership: FileMaker, Inc. is a wholly owned subsidiary of Apple
Computer, Inc. (NASDAQ: AAPL)."

Re: Bento (FileMaker Xtra Light)

In article <191120071829405083%helpful_harry@nom.de.plume.com>,
Helpful Harry wrote:

> That's true too, although Bento (from the VERY quick look I've had at
> the news / website) doesn't appear to be a proper database in the sense
> of FileMaker Pro or AppleWorks' database module. It appears to be a
> simple application for a specific purpose, that can be slightly
> modified. For example, it can catalogue your emails, but you can't make
> a custom database to catalogue your collection of antique Apple ][
> computers.

It's a database. It's not a DBMS. (Sorry. Recovering Oracle DBA.)

> The graphics parts of AppleWorks (both vector and bitmap) were
> extremely buggy and badly done, as was adding graphic images to the
> other modules.

I didn't use the "draw" side much, but I used AW's "paint" mode quite a
lot over a long period of time. I don't recall any especially glaring
bugs, although I'll admit my use dropped off quite a bit in the 6.x era.

> "Numbers" has taken a while to join the iWork "team", so
> maybe "Draw", "Paint" and "Data" will make an appearance eventually
> too.

Hopefully they'll also improve Numbers. A lot. It's got some really nice
UI ideas in it, but for performance AW puts it to shame and for features
pretty much every other spreadsheet app out for the Mac does.

Re: Bento (FileMaker Xtra Light)

Post removed (X-No-Archive: yes)

Re: Bento (FileMaker Xtra Light)

In article ,
Martin Trautmann wrote:

> On Mon, 19 Nov 2007 07:27:43 -0500, Gregory Weston wrote:
> > > FileMaker Inc. is not a "subsidiary", it's a totally separate company.
> >
> > FileMaker Inc disagrees:
> >
> > "Ownership: FileMaker, Inc. is a wholly owned subsidiary of Apple
> > Computer, Inc. (NASDAQ: AAPL)."
>
> No, A owns B, but B still a company of its own.

I'm not sure with what (or whom) you're disagreeing. You've responded
"no" to me (or specifically to a quote from FMI that I provided), but
you haven't actually contradicted me (or that quote) in any way.
FileMaker is a wholly owned subsidiary of Apple. Always has been, since
Claris was created. That doesn't mean it's not a self-directed corporate
entity.

> Once again: Ownership does not indicate anything about the flow of
> informations.

True. The question (most recently) was about where/how FMIs financial
activity was reported on Apple's filings and shareholder reports.

G

Re: Bento (FileMaker Xtra Light)

On Nov 19, 7:16 am, Martin Trautmann wrote:
> On Mon, 19 Nov 2007 07:27:43 -0500, Gregory Weston wrote:
> > > FileMaker Inc. is not a "subsidiary", it's a totally separate company.
>
> > FileMaker Inc disagrees:
>
> > "Ownership: FileMaker, Inc. is a wholly owned subsidiary of Apple
> > Computer, Inc. (NASDAQ: AAPL)."
>
> No, A owns B, but B still a company of its own.
>
> There may be a closer relationship that B has better access to A than
> others - or there may be the exact opposit that B is not allowed to have
> any better access, due to any weired legal matters, so that in fact B
> has less access than other unrelated companies.
>
> I wonder why people here do not understand those matters. Just because
> I got a daughter (in fact more than one), she won't behave necessarily
> as I would do, not does she know everything I know and vice versa...
>
> As far as I understand, profit and losses are part of Apples budget
>
> http://ccbn.10kwizard.com/xml/download.php?repo=tenk&ipage=5 286035&fo...
> names the numbers for FileMaker, together with Asia Pacific
>
> http://ccbn.10kwizard.com/xml/download.php?repo=tenk&ipage=4 566832&fo...
> shows the Annual filings for 2006 instead.
>
> Once again: Ownership does not indicate anything about the flow of
> informations.
>
> - Martin

Yes a subsidiary can have almost no connection to its parent company.
But I don't think that's the case with FM and Apple. FM employees are
covered under Apple's benefits program for instance. You can catch a
shuttle from FMI campus to the Apple campus, FMI employees all got
iPhones, etc. The relationship between the two is stronger than say
the Boston Globe and the New York Times Corporation.

And even if the control isn't there, Filemaker and Apple sure
advertise their relationship much more frequently than other
subsidiary companies. Filemaker, a wholly owned subsidiary of
Apple... is all over FMI website, and Bento's advertising materials.
You don't see Iams advertising they're part of Proctor & Gamble. If
they want the imprimatur of the Apple logo, they're going to have to
deal with the flak too.

G




If FM wants the impratuer

Re: Bento (FileMaker Xtra Light)

Post removed (X-No-Archive: yes)

Re: Bento (FileMaker Xtra Light)

In article ,
Gregory Weston wrote:

> In article <191120071829405083%helpful_harry@nom.de.plume.com>,
> Helpful Harry wrote:
>
> > That's true too, although Bento (from the VERY quick look I've had at
> > the news / website) doesn't appear to be a proper database in the sense
> > of FileMaker Pro or AppleWorks' database module. It appears to be a
> > simple application for a specific purpose, that can be slightly
> > modified. For example, it can catalogue your emails, but you can't make
> > a custom database to catalogue your collection of antique Apple ][
> > computers.
>
> It's a database. It's not a DBMS. (Sorry. Recovering Oracle DBA.)

The details David Empson posted indicate that it is more of a database
system than I thought from my very quick glance.



> > The graphics parts of AppleWorks (both vector and bitmap) were
> > extremely buggy and badly done, as was adding graphic images to the
> > other modules.
>
> I didn't use the "draw" side much, but I used AW's "paint" mode quite a
> lot over a long period of time. I don't recall any especially glaring
> bugs, although I'll admit my use dropped off quite a bit in the 6.x era.

Try using anything other than screen-resolution images and the whole
system falls apart, even in the very newest version. It's a bad bug
that's been there since day one, but Claris / Apple never bothered to
fix. It makes it very painful to try and do simple DTP-style work in
AppleWorks since your images always print out at blocky
screen-resolutions, unless you know the work-arounds.



> > "Numbers" has taken a while to join the iWork "team", so
> > maybe "Draw", "Paint" and "Data" will make an appearance eventually
> > too.
>
> Hopefully they'll also improve Numbers. A lot. It's got some really nice
> UI ideas in it, but for performance AW puts it to shame and for features
> pretty much every other spreadsheet app out for the Mac does.

It is basically only version "1.0", so it should get better over time.

I haven't used any of these iWork applications, but hopefully they
don't have the same bugs as AppleWorks does.










Helpful Harry
Hopefully helping harassed humans happily handle handiwork hardships ;o)

Re: Bento (FileMaker Xtra Light)

In article ,
Gregory Weston wrote:

> In article <191120071820563474%helpful_harry@nom.de.plume.com>,
> Helpful Harry wrote:
>
> > In article ,
> > Gregory Weston wrote:
> >
> > > In article ,
> > > Chris Brown wrote:
> > >
> > > > Gregory Weston wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Legally, there shouldn't _be_ cohesion. They're a self-directing
> > > > > business entity, in part created to reduce the appearance of
> > > > > favoritism.
> > > >
> > > > So does FMI appear on Apples end of year financial statements presented
> > > > to shareholders, or not?
> > >
> > > A wholly-owned subsidiary would show up on financial statements as
> > > investment, just like any other entity in which the company owns stock.
> >
> > FileMaker Inc. is not a "subsidiary", it's a totally separate company.
>
> FileMaker Inc disagrees:
>
> "Ownership: FileMaker, Inc. is a wholly owned subsidiary of Apple
> Computer, Inc. (NASDAQ: AAPL)."
>
>

Yes, they've used the word (probably for legal reasons), but it's still
not a "subsidiary" in the sense you were trying to indicate - FileMaker
Inc. is not some sort of sub-department of Apple that shares all the
information and money. It's a completely separate company, a separate
identity.

Helpful Harry
Hopefully helping harassed humans happily handle handiwork hardships ;o)

Re: Bento (FileMaker Xtra Light)

In article <201120070859286532%helpful_harry@nom.de.plume.com>,
Helpful Harry wrote:

> In article ,
> Gregory Weston wrote:
>
> > I didn't use the "draw" side much, but I used AW's "paint" mode quite a
> > lot over a long period of time. I don't recall any especially glaring
> > bugs, although I'll admit my use dropped off quite a bit in the 6.x era.
>
> Try using anything other than screen-resolution images and the whole
> system falls apart, even in the very newest version. It's a bad bug
> that's been there since day one, but Claris / Apple never bothered to
> fix. It makes it very painful to try and do simple DTP-style work in
> AppleWorks since your images always print out at blocky
> screen-resolutions, unless you know the work-arounds.

Fair enough. I never used it for anything other than screen resolution.

> > Hopefully they'll also improve Numbers. A lot. It's got some really nice
> > UI ideas in it, but for performance AW puts it to shame and for features
> > pretty much every other spreadsheet app out for the Mac does.
>
> It is basically only version "1.0", so it should get better over time.
>
> I haven't used any of these iWork applications, but hopefully they
> don't have the same bugs as AppleWorks does.

It doesn't. It's got its own new and exciting bugs. No, actually I have
to say I've found it fairly robust. Just godawful slow at some things
that really shouldn't be, and weren't in AW on much slower machines.

Re: Bento (FileMaker Xtra Light)

In article <201120070901374320%helpful_harry@nom.de.plume.com>,
Helpful Harry wrote:

> In article ,
> Gregory Weston wrote:
>
> > In article <191120071820563474%helpful_harry@nom.de.plume.com>,
> > Helpful Harry wrote:
> >
> > > In article ,
> > > Gregory Weston wrote:
> > >
> > > > In article ,
> > > > Chris Brown wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Gregory Weston wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Legally, there shouldn't _be_ cohesion. They're a self-directing
> > > > > > business entity, in part created to reduce the appearance of
> > > > > > favoritism.
> > > > >
> > > > > So does FMI appear on Apples end of year financial statements
> > > > > presented to shareholders, or not?
> > > >
> > > > A wholly-owned subsidiary would show up on financial statements as
> > > > investment, just like any other entity in which the company owns stock.
> > >
> > > FileMaker Inc. is not a "subsidiary", it's a totally separate company.
> >
> > FileMaker Inc disagrees:
> >
> > "Ownership: FileMaker, Inc. is a wholly owned subsidiary of Apple
> > Computer, Inc. (NASDAQ: AAPL)."
> >
> >
>
> Yes, they've used the word (probably for legal reasons), but it's still
> not a "subsidiary" in the sense you were trying to indicate - FileMaker
> Inc. is not some sort of sub-department of Apple that shares all the
> information and money.

Something's gotten tangled up in this thread, because I wasn't trying to
indicate any such thing. "Subsidiary" is not a synonym for "division."
The word implies a corporate existence distinct from that of the
controlling entity and I don't recall suggesting otherwise.

> It's a completely separate company, a separate identity.

Right. I'm fairly certain that's what I indicated in my posts,
reproduced above.

Re: Bento (FileMaker Xtra Light)

On Nov 18, 5:09 pm, Abbott wrote:
> Which raises an interesting question: If Apple really created Bento,
> then why didn't they include it in iWork? At present, iWork is missing
> two capabilities that were in AppleWorks: database and graphics apps. It
> would seem that Bento could provide the former.
>
> This is all weird to me.
>
> In article <191120070903352891%helpful_ha...@nom.de.plume.com>,
> Helpful Harry wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > I don't think Bento is part of the FileMaker Pro family at all. It's a
> > separate application (although may use some of the same underlying
> > code). The use of "FileMaker Xtra Light" in the title of this topic was
> > just the original person's joke.
>
> > Apple of course do already sell software outside of the MacOS: iWork,
> > iLife, Final Cut, etc. Which begs the question of why Apple would give
> > the Bento product to FileMaker (assuming Apple even did create it). The
> > only real link is that it's a database, but that's highly tenuous.
>
> > On the other hand, judging by the highly dodgey and buggy examples that
> > ship with FileMaker Pro (or at least older versions), maybe Apple did
> > create Bento.
>
> > I guess we'll know more when someone has had a chance to properly try
> > Bento out.
>
> > Helpful Harry
> > Hopefully helping harassed humans happily handle handiwork hardships ;o)
>
> ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----http://www.newsfeeds.comThe #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
> ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

What makes sense to me is that Apple would have FMI develop a PIM and/
or have them release it because Apple something missing in its
software and FileMaker will get an advertising boost.

G

Re: Bento (FileMaker Xtra Light)

In article ,
Gregory Weston wrote:

> In article <201120070859286532%helpful_harry@nom.de.plume.com>,
> Helpful Harry wrote:
>
> > In article ,
> > Gregory Weston wrote:
> >
> > > I didn't use the "draw" side much, but I used AW's "paint" mode quite a
> > > lot over a long period of time. I don't recall any especially glaring
> > > bugs, although I'll admit my use dropped off quite a bit in the 6.x era.
> >
> > Try using anything other than screen-resolution images and the whole
> > system falls apart, even in the very newest version. It's a bad bug
> > that's been there since day one, but Claris / Apple never bothered to
> > fix. It makes it very painful to try and do simple DTP-style work in
> > AppleWorks since your images always print out at blocky
> > screen-resolutions, unless you know the work-arounds.
>
> Fair enough. I never used it for anything other than screen resolution.
>
> > > Hopefully they'll also improve Numbers. A lot. It's got some really nice
> > > UI ideas in it, but for performance AW puts it to shame and for features
> > > pretty much every other spreadsheet app out for the Mac does.
> >
> > It is basically only version "1.0", so it should get better over time.
> >
> > I haven't used any of these iWork applications, but hopefully they
> > don't have the same bugs as AppleWorks does.
>
> It doesn't. It's got its own new and exciting bugs. No, actually I have
> to say I've found it fairly robust. Just godawful slow at some things
> that really shouldn't be, and weren't in AW on much slower machines.

There's an article somewhere on the Interent where they test a brand
new Windows machine against a Mac Plus for things like launch times,
doing the same tasks on equivalent applications ... and the Mac Plus
wins around half the tests. :o)

Much of this slow down can be traced back to useless toys or eyecandy
like window shadows or background tasks like Dashboard that are always
running. You may have a machine that's 5 times faster, but it's also
doing 5 times as much.

I'm still using a 10 year old G3 PowerMac with MacOS 9 and it's faster
at doing many things than the newer G3 and G4 iMacs running MacOS X!!










Helpful Harry
Hopefully helping harassed humans happily handle handiwork hardships ;o)

Re: Bento (FileMaker Xtra Light)

In article ,
Gregory Weston wrote:

> In article <201120070901374320%helpful_harry@nom.de.plume.com>,
> Helpful Harry wrote:
>
> > In article ,
> > Gregory Weston wrote:
> >
> > > In article <191120071820563474%helpful_harry@nom.de.plume.com>,
> > > Helpful Harry wrote:
> > >
> > > > In article ,
> > > > Gregory Weston wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > In article ,
> > > > > Chris Brown wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Gregory Weston wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Legally, there shouldn't _be_ cohesion. They're a self-directing
> > > > > > > business entity, in part created to reduce the appearance of
> > > > > > > favoritism.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > So does FMI appear on Apples end of year financial statements
> > > > > > presented to shareholders, or not?
> > > > >
> > > > > A wholly-owned subsidiary would show up on financial statements as
> > > > > investment, just like any other entity in which the company owns
> > > > > stock.
> > > >
> > > > FileMaker Inc. is not a "subsidiary", it's a totally separate company.
> > >
> > > FileMaker Inc disagrees:
> > >
> > > "Ownership: FileMaker, Inc. is a wholly owned subsidiary of Apple
> > > Computer, Inc. (NASDAQ: AAPL)."
> > >
> > >
> >
> > Yes, they've used the word (probably for legal reasons), but it's still
> > not a "subsidiary" in the sense you were trying to indicate - FileMaker
> > Inc. is not some sort of sub-department of Apple that shares all the
> > information and money.
>
> Something's gotten tangled up in this thread, because I wasn't trying to
> indicate any such thing. "Subsidiary" is not a synonym for "division."
> The word implies a corporate existence distinct from that of the
> controlling entity and I don't recall suggesting otherwise.
>
> > It's a completely separate company, a separate identity.
>
> Right. I'm fairly certain that's what I indicated in my posts,
> reproduced above.

Sorry, I must have confused different people somewhere along the line.

Helpful Harry
Hopefully helping harassed humans happily handle handiwork hardships ;o)

Re: Bento (FileMaker Xtra Light)

In article <201120071244490716%helpful_harry@nom.de.plume.com>,
Helpful Harry wrote:

> In article ,
> Gregory Weston wrote:
>
> > > I haven't used any of these iWork applications, but hopefully they
> > > don't have the same bugs as AppleWorks does.
> >
> > It doesn't. It's got its own new and exciting bugs. No, actually I have
> > to say I've found it fairly robust. Just godawful slow at some things
> > that really shouldn't be, and weren't in AW on much slower machines.
>
> There's an article somewhere on the Interent where they test a brand
> new Windows machine against a Mac Plus for things like launch times,
> doing the same tasks on equivalent applications ... and the Mac Plus
> wins around half the tests. :o)

I remember that one.

> Much of this slow down can be traced back to useless toys or eyecandy
> like window shadows or background tasks like Dashboard that are always
> running. You may have a machine that's 5 times faster, but it's also
> doing 5 times as much.

Actually, in the specific case of Numbers performance issues, it's all
functional inefficiency. In any sane spreadsheet, when a cell changes
you'd look in an internal cache for any formulas the reference it,
recalculate them, and let that mechanism cascade. Numbers seems to have
a flag on each cell that says whether or not it's referenced in a
formula and if the flag is set it recalcs every single one whenever the
cell changes. Which is an improvement in 1.0.1; in 1.0 you just had to
leave the cell, no editing necessary.

Even with trivial formulas, you get up to a few thousand iterations and
it's murderously slow on a Core 2 Duo 2GHz, while AW handled exactly the
same manipulations in a fraction of a second on a 200MHz 604e.

G