Hi Brendan,
The field in question is called Ending Mileage.
I tried your suggestion and duplicated a record. After the sync, all the fields had there values transferred from the duplicated record.
If I go back and make a small change to the Ending Mileage field in Mac OS, the change will occur on some records on my iOS device. If I make a small change on the iOS side, no records receive the updated change on the Mac OS side for that field.
The issue with the Ending Mileage field seems to happen only when the record is created with the script I run. If I enter a new record manually, the issue doesn’t occur. All fields transfer correctly and I can make small changes that sync properly.
The script creates a new record, taking the ending mileage from the previous record and placing it in the new record’s beginning mileage field. I then, manually, add the ending mileage into the new record. It’s that Ending Mileage value I enter that is not syncing.
1 var beginning_mileage_id = ‘fld-dac67386ca7d4603b26f76b16554f162’;
2 var ending_mileage_id = ‘fld-adb786f0ef994f84bf565d422f6537b0’;
3
4 var ending_mileage = record.getFieldValue(ending_mileage_id);
5
6 var newRecord = form.addNewRecord();
7 newRecord.setFieldValue(beginning_mileage_id, ending_mileage);
8
9 console.log(ending_mileage);
10
11 form.saveAllChanges();
I have a form that syncs all of its field’s data, except for one field. This field’s data does not transfer whether syncing from Mac OS (Tahoe 26.5.2) to my iOS (18.7.8) phone. It is a number field, entered manually. There’s a number field right before it that’s populated by a script and it transfers the field data fine.
It could very well be an issue with iOS 18.7.8. If it is, it’s time for me to upgrade my old iPhone SE.😎
Hi Ray.
You add a new field to your form with the Field Type set to Script.
Then use the above script in the field. Set the Field ID to be your Title field.
Then you set the First Sort Field to this Script field, not the Title field.
After you add the Script Field, you may need to refresh the records list to update the result in all the records.
Thanks,
Brendan
I am having this same problem but have not used Scripts in TFP before. I am creating a database of my movies and want the sorting to not include articles (such as A, The, An). I took the script above and modified the field ID for mine, but since I have never used scripts before, I don’t know what to do with the script. It only pertains to my field “Title“ but I didn’t want to do a text manipulation to actually remove the article. Is this created as a script form? Am I still sorting by the title or by some other field? I put this in my database and ran it, but it didn’t seem to do anything. I am still sorting the database by “title“ but should I use some other field? I could create a field that removes the article, Hyde that field and then sort by that field, but I was wondering if there was a more elegant way of doing this?
Thanks Brendan. I’m not planning on keeping attendance in the database. I will only use the database, at the least the roster layout part, to print a roster.
I may try, as you suggested, adding a field for each date, but putting these fields in a separate “dates” form, so that my student demographic database doesn’t get peppered with dates fields.
I was imagining using javascript to call data and place it meticulously in text boxes on the layout. Hopefully that meticulous work would only have to happen once. But I’m so unfamiliar with javascript, I don’t see that happening.
You are totally right, it is MB, not GB. Sorry for confusion!
My trial period ends tomorrow, so I have to decide whether to stay with Ninox or to go on the migration path to Tap Forms. There are pros and cons for both products. After checking my app statistics on the App Store I found out that I had my first Tap Forms app back in 2011 – boy, that‘s 15 years now. Time is running. In 2021 it was updated to version 5 and currently the Pro version is under observation. So why did I switch to Ninox and FileMaker Pro in between? Honestly – I don’t know. I think the main reason was that these products were used in the company I worked for. And I know there where some issues losing data – which for sure was my fault. Nevertheless I migrated to the other products.
What does mean all this for my decision? Staying with Tap Forms for 1 ½ decade – even if not in the drivers seat – is a strong signal that this app is something great. While switching to the other products I always came back to Tap Forms. The latest experiences with this app told me why. The development takes – a big thank you to Brendan – huge steps, the trashcan will help avoiding loss of data (perhaps regularly backups as well…) and the support is outstanding. Furthermore the community is here to help out or bring new inspirations.
Taking these facts into consideration there is only one solution: I will end the trial period tomorrow but continue with a subscription. There is so much of functionality within Tap Forms waiting to be revealed, so I am really looking forward to continuing this exciting journey.
Thank you all for being part of my decision – and sorry for this long piece of prose but I wanted to share my thoughts with you as you were directly involved.
Hi Cliff,
There isn’t anything yet to do that. That’s a great idea though. I’ll definitely add that to the scripting engine so you can select the Dashboard. And with that you’d be able to run a Shortcut to do that.
Thanks,
Brendan
I love the new Dashboard feature. Will you be updating App Intents so we could create a shortcut that will open a document into the dashboard? Or can this be done now, maybe using a script?
Hello, is there a script that automatically removes members from a membership database when the cancellation date is reached?
Well we still have some time before MacOS 28 arrives :)
The “Lite” version would be the same but with limitations (max. number of records and/or databases for example). So it should not require much separate maintenance. You would make the update on the Pro, and add the limitations to the Lite versions. The objective would be to NOT cannibalize subscriptions of TP Pro, but to add users that would balk at an annual $50 cost (the problem is that it all adds up, and if all software is subscriptions, users will need other define priorities). it could be a one-time cost (Audirvana Origin includes updates for 2 years, then has paid update), or a lower subscription cost, one that could be justified for a lighter use, within the limitations of the “Lite” version…
If you find the right levels, you should be able to ideally get additional revenue. Because users of the Lite version could “upgrade” to the Pro version easily, you would also provide an easy path to further revenue increases.
Just food for thought at this point…
Hi Guardajoias,
Those are good points. Currently I still have Tap Forms 5 on the App Store for people that have older operating system versions. But that will stop working when Apple removes Rosetta from macOS 28. At that point I’ll probably have to remove it from the App Store if Apple doesn’t do it for me (they did for some of my older versions such as Tap Forms 3.5 and Tap Forms 4 (for iOS)).
It’s a difficult decision to make because I’m only just starting to see progress in my proceeds from the subscription to Tap Forms Pro. All last year it was basically the same as when I only had Tap Forms 5 for sale where revenues were declining year after year. But now in the 2nd year, Tap Forms Pro sales are picking up again and renewals are definitely contributing to that. So do I want to cannibalize that? if I build a lite version, do I still have to maintain that with new OS updates and features? Or do I just right to a one-time purchase at maybe 6x the annual cost? Tough decisions.
Thanks,
Brendan
Hi Brendan,
Your reasoning is well understood. The problem is that we all have different uses of Tap Forms (5 or Pro). Some will have a rather intense and/or professional use, and the $50 annual subscription is fully justified. Others like me use TP5 for a single database, rarely used but important. I use it to track a collection of old books. I use BookBuddy for modern books and it is very convenient and complete, but it does not work well for rare/old books, often in multivolume sets etc. For this I use a database I originally designed in Filemaker, then converted to Bento, and perfected in TP5. I do appreciate the relational features, the reporting, and custom displays. So this database is important to me, but it is the only one use, and I am not adding rare books often. So TP5 is perfect as is for me. $50 annually just to keep it going is hard to justify.
So, maybe a solution could similar to what a software company like Audirvana did. They also chose to move to subscription model when they introduced “Audirvana Studio” to replace the music software Audirvana 3.5, for reasons similar to yours. But after a while they introduced a second option: a single-purchase, “Audirvana Origin” that only works for local music libraries, without the access to streaming services included in the “Studio” version only available by subscription. They now have both kinds of customers.
Maybe for “light users” you could have a version that works with a limited number of records and/or a limited number of databases (2 or 3?). This could be single purchase, or a cheaper subscription price, allowing for upgrade by moving to the higher price. $50 is not far from the old price for a single purchase, and half of the Microsoft Office Suite. Again, I understand, and for heavy/Professional users, it makes perfect sense, but you may actually get more users and revenue by offering a “light” version for more occasional users. You would have to see what are the criteria that make sense.
-
This reply was modified 1 month, 3 weeks ago by
guardajoias.
I have script field that outputs markdown. The markdown works correctly.
In another form I have a field that is defined as a Link To Form field. The Link to Form field contains the script field from the other form. The Markdown is not rendered properly. It displays the markdown.
Checkmark Field checked on Universal layout can’t be found in a saved search.
I have a checkmark field on the default layout and a universal layout. I have a saved search that finds all of the records with the checkmark set to true.
If I set the checkmark on the default layout the saved search works correctly. If I set the checkmark on the universal layout it is not registered as true by the saved search. The checkmark shows up on the default layout but the saved search doesn’t register the check. If you uncheck the checkmark and recheck it on the default layout then it works.
I wrote a script to count the records with the checkmark checked and it didn’t see the records that were checked on the universal layout.
I tried a screen layout and it didn’t have this problem.
Hi Brend.
I was thinking about that, but the problem there ist, that you can only joint 1:many. that does not solve my problem, because I need to be able to split billings an there it get complicated, because I can only set one common field criteria. That ist the fun with many to many so that you can select which belongs to wich without self coded criteria. As I said doing it per hand works fine but I wanted to do it via script and that does not seem to word, when noch creating new record :(
Have a nice day
Steve
