Return to Answer

There is some history here. The overall discussion of What to do with XAMPP/MAMP/WAMP questions happened here on meta.sf last year. We recently had a straight up question on the main-site that covered it: Why not use a WAMP stack?

Which also covers XAMP.

The core of our collective dislike of *AMP installers has to do with their focus: ease of installation. To make a single installer, they deliberately compromise certain other very important to production items like patchability and customizable secure config.

Also:

And, while I understand that solutions like XAMPP have their failings and are NOT a good idea for production deployment, lots of "Information Technology Professionals" use this during development of non-trivial real-world professional projects.

You're missing one of the nuances surrounding "...in a professional capacity" in the opening statement. How we interpret that to mean is, "In production, supporting the service's normal production workload." This is why "during development" earns questions Off Topic closes.

There is some history here. The overall discussion of What to do with XAMPP/MAMP/WAMP questions happened here on meta.sf last year. We recently had a straight up question on the main-site that covered it: Why not use a WAMP stack?

Which also covers XAMP.

The core of our collective dislike of *AMP installers has to do with their focus: ease of installation. To make a single installer, they deliberately compromise certain other very important to production items like patchability and customizable secure config.

Also:

And, while I understand that solutions like XAMPP have their failings and are NOT a good idea for production deployment, lots of "Information Technology Professionals" use this during development of non-trivial real-world professional projects.

You're missing one of the nuances surrounding "...in a professional capacity" in the opening statement. How we interpret that to mean is, "In production, supporting the service's normal production workload." This is why "during development" earns questions Off Topic closes.

There is some history here. The overall discussion of What to do with XAMPP/MAMP/WAMP questions happened here on meta.sf last year. We recently had a straight up question on the main-site that covered it: Why not use a WAMP stack?

Which also covers XAMP.

The core of our collective dislike of *AMP installers has to do with their focus: ease of installation. To make a single installer, they deliberately compromise certain other very important to production items like patchability and customizable secure config.

Also:

And, while I understand that solutions like XAMPP have their failings and are NOT a good idea for production deployment, lots of "Information Technology Professionals" use this during development of non-trivial real-world professional projects.

You're missing one of the nuances surrounding "...in a professional capacity" in the opening statement. How we interpret that to mean is, "In production, supporting the service's normal production workload." This is why "during development" earns questions Off Topic closes.

There is some history here. The overall discussion of What to do with XAMPP/MAMP/WAMP questions happened here on meta.sf last year. We recently had a straight up question on the main-site that covered it: Why not use a WAMP stack?

Which also covers XAMP.

The core of our collective dislike of *AMP installers has to do with their focus: ease of installation. To make a single installer, they deliberately compromise certain other very important to production items like patchability and customizable secure config.

Also:

And, while I understand that solutions like XAMPP have their failings and are NOT a good idea for production deployment, lots of "Information Technology Professionals" use this during development of non-trivial real-world professional projects.

You're missing one of the nuances surrounding "...in a professional capacity" in the opening statement. How we interpret that to mean is, "In production, supporting the service's normal production workload." This is why "during development" earns questions Off Topic closes.

There is some history here. The overall discussion of What to do with XAMPP/MAMP/WAMP questions happened here on meta.sf last year. We recently had a straight up question on the main-site that covered it: Why not use a WAMP stack?

Which also covers XAMP.

The core of our collective dislike of *AMP installers has to do with their focus: ease of installation. To make a single installer, they deliberately compromise certain other very important to production items like patchability and customizable secure config.

There is some history here. The overall discussion of What to do with XAMPP/MAMP/WAMP questions happened here on meta.sf last year. We recently had a straight up question on the main-site that covered it: Why not use a WAMP stack?

Which also covers XAMP.

The core of our collective dislike of *AMP installers has to do with their focus: ease of installation. To make a single installer, they deliberately compromise certain other very important to production items like patchability and customizable secure config.

Also:

And, while I understand that solutions like XAMPP have their failings and are NOT a good idea for production deployment, lots of "Information Technology Professionals" use this during development of non-trivial real-world professional projects.

You're missing one of the nuances surrounding "...in a professional capacity" in the opening statement. How we interpret that to mean is, "In production, supporting the service's normal production workload." This is why "during development" earns questions Off Topic closes.