you will see 'what if' its different from prod. environment when you undertake developing a big app.
if you develop in your dev environment, and later test a big chunk of code in live and found out that a critical function does not function correctly in a live environment, you will get your ass handed over to you in regard to cost, time, deadline.
the alternative of that, would be to continually develop in live environment. then, this would mean that you are basically making your dev environment identical with your live environment.
and, 'the logical execution on both', is not identical. come after you have developed sufficient apps on xammp, and found out that the apache/php you are using in your xammp is not behaving like the version you are using in your live lamp stack.
it doesnt need to be identicaly - it needs to be reasonably close. at least, the functions/directives you are going to use, if not all.
xammp running on windows os may allow certain operations with the php version it has. the same php version on apache on a certain flavor of linux may behave differently.
but. you may not ever need that particular function on your site. so, acceptably close is enough.
because of common usage, xammp on windows oses has more compatibility with production environment (generally end up being lamp flavors) than xammp on a mac. because, these have been amended by the community.
'xammp in some flavor' running in your desktop os, still means 'different from the production environment' you are going to run the thing on. xammp on mac will need to behave as xammp on a mac.
I know I’m out of the web dev loop, but as I recall, in most cases the web mantra seems to be to crank it out as quick as possible before it’s obsolete. The exposure I’ve had (which admittedly is a small sampling) leads me to believe that even basic core principles of traditional software development are thrown out the window in a mad dash to get something that “looks right”.
its not web development that is in a perpetual 'mad dash' to get things out - it was the 'traditional software development' was a relic of ancient times when software as well as the hardware it runs on was mainly used by big megacorporations. back then users were these, and their demands were big, persistent and what they got the software developers to build remained as standard for decades. there are still a lot of important financial institutions which are running on as400 for example.
so, software was treated as if it was something for a big, slow, years-long engineering project, like bridges or car prototypes.
that approach was wrong from the start. that would be needed only for infrastructures and operating systems, platforms the software was to run on, like linux.
if we should make a car analogy, the 'software engineering' approach was necessary for designing the car infrastructure - ie hybrid/gasoline or electric, the basic principles of a car type and so on.
software, was to be used on the car itself. like its car stereo, air condition, seat covers and so on.
but, the traditional, obsolete understanding of software, tended to take ALL of them as 'big engineering' projects which were to be designed and built in years' time.
but, the car chassis and type should have been independent from the car stereo you put into the car, the seat covers and so on. the latter require more customization, more choice, speedier design and production cycles. noone can wait for a car company to come up with a car bundled with a different stereo to be able to use a different stereo in their car.
and then came the web. real people, end users came into the equation. they demanded custom, easy, fast stuff. and this has changed the software production forever. noone can wait for years to use something. a lot can happen in the duration of a year, and a lot can go without being done.
trying to scare people into digging in their feet and becoming schizophrenic ?
in a world where top 1% gets 52% of all wealth generated, top 5% including that 1% gets a whopping 72%, and bottom 85% - practically everyone - gets only 15%, there is a lot you need to do before you ever need to get to the point of trying to scare people into savings.
http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html
and no - the top 5% had not come to grabbing that much of everything by 'saving'. you cant get 72% of everything, by saving. it can quite easily be said that, this crowd has no concept of 'saving' at all, while skiing behind their 7th yacht...
please dont sell bullshit to us, or go learn what you are wanting to sell.
this is not only unenforceable, but also explicitly excludes open source license and software from the law. preferential treatment is not allowed in any case in eu law. if a law is passed, no party can be excluded from enjoying the benefits. this law discriminates FOR a certain party. not even a certain industry.
who am i replying to - with uid over 2 mil, and an insane post, you are apparently that microsoft shill guy that uses multiple accs.
excuse me but i couldnt hold myself. your logic is so glaringly naive that i am appalled to even start commenting on it.
leaving the idiocy aside, are you aware that this kind of law will basically put any corporation in the place of a 'rights holder' which will be able to ban/unban ENTIRE physical industry sector products and corporations by just filing a complaint like DMCA ?
we are talking about allowing the custodianship of the exports/imports to private corporations.
some hardware manufacturer is competing with microsoft sidewinder line of products ? file a dmca complaint 'hey they are using pirated excel' !!! -> whooops ban.
who is going to prove that they are using pirated excel ? who is going to ensure that they arent ? who is going to ensure that they have stopped using pirated excel ?
will the foreign nation allow american inspectors and american bureaucrats on its soil, and the foreign private corporation in foreign country allow those inspectors full access to their sensitive information ?
no. even contemplating it is morondom. really. there is no politically correct word for this - any such usage will dilute the meaning - this is blatant morondom.
i cant describe it in any other way ; the people who came up with this plan at microsoft, are MORONS. and they should be fired post haste before they drag the company to even worse depths of morondom and public relations/public image disaster.
the argument you have been making was, if copyright was not there, great works of art wouldnt be produced. as you see from 14th century dutch painters, this is not correct.
moreover, if we go back to hellenistic and roman age, it becomes even more pointless. the sculpture industry and art that was there by then, puts today's into shame in all respects. yet, there was no copyright, or even the idea of it.
the point of network is to provide an exchange currency. not a means for making money. the people who adopt the network, should be adopting it for the exchange currency already. you are not supposed to make any coins out of thin air, unless the network is small and needs help.
i would call you a man with no brains - early adopters had basically 'made' the bitcoin network. they are the ones who helped it gain traction, while you were sitting on your ass. if you are jealous, you should have adopted bitcoin at the start like them. they deserve the coins they got, because they contributed to the system at the most critical moment.
Namely, it is the people who got in early and mined coins or bought them at a low exchange rate who have most to gain. Latecomers have little to gain and the most to lose. If the system collapses or is regulated out of legitimacy, it is the latecomers who will suffer the most. I would not go so far as calling it a pyramid scheme but it certainly shares some similarities in terms of who benefits and who does not.
had you read anything about the idea behind this, you would know that that 'shortcoming' you speak of, was devised as a means to increase adoption rate of the system at the start - if you contributed to system early, you would get more coins. if you bought coins early, the would be worth more. this provided its fast adoption rate.
please dont talk out of your ass next time.
as for 'auditing/taxing' people, taxing is already a reality regardless of what means you use as money. tax is not relevant to money unit or coin that is used. that shows the extent of your naivete on the subject of taxes and accounting. what is taxed is not your money - your income. your income, may be in schamabazoos. and as soon as you convert this to property or merchandise, you get taxed.
as for legislating against it - that is not something that can be used as a shortcoming. the power holders already legislate against many things you take for granted in your life, because it is dangerous to them. are you stopping using them ? no.
im not even going to talk about your 'theory' about 'poisoning' transactions by injecting packets to erase wallets.
first, dont talk about 'rationale', since it lacks in your approach from the start. im not even commenting on that, because it is totally absurd to come up with the "platform x also cant run platform y's apps" -> its not platform x is powerless to run platform y's apps, but, platform y is specifically made as incompatible with the other with no interoperability. not even emulators are allowed for it on other platforms. its restriction by design. nothing to defend. not to add platform y lacks power in general to run platform x's apps. nowhere near even.
second, there will be no point to putting someone as foe in your list, if you are going to keep replying to their posts. your rationale is off there too.
i cant even begin to comment on how idiotic to compare the 'apps' that are present in app store with debian packages. (not to mention why the hell is debian even being compared). shitty small codelets for doing very simple stuff on a device, versus packages that range from sound editing to graphics production.
actually i should put you in my foe list. this is the 3rd time i spotted a lack in your rationale. i shouldnt waste more time in future. may be putting you to foe will bar me from seeing your posts.
it didnt escape me that you have adjusted your relationship with me to foe, before replying. one wonders, why is that.... extreme fanobism maybe ? to the point that it causes one to attempt to defend a restricted and application poor os/device by saying that pcs cannot use their apps, despite it should naturally be so, and is irrelevant to the strength of the platforms or the restrictedness of the latter ?
you dont need to answer - it appears like that was it.
Slashdot Mirror
you will see 'what if' its different from prod. environment when you undertake developing a big app.
if you develop in your dev environment, and later test a big chunk of code in live and found out that a critical function does not function correctly in a live environment, you will get your ass handed over to you in regard to cost, time, deadline.
the alternative of that, would be to continually develop in live environment. then, this would mean that you are basically making your dev environment identical with your live environment.
and, 'the logical execution on both', is not identical. come after you have developed sufficient apps on xammp, and found out that the apache/php you are using in your xammp is not behaving like the version you are using in your live lamp stack.
it doesnt need to be identicaly - it needs to be reasonably close. at least, the functions/directives you are going to use, if not all.
xammp running on windows os may allow certain operations with the php version it has. the same php version on apache on a certain flavor of linux may behave differently.
but. you may not ever need that particular function on your site. so, acceptably close is enough.
because of common usage, xammp on windows oses has more compatibility with production environment (generally end up being lamp flavors) than xammp on a mac. because, these have been amended by the community.
doesnt matter.
'xammp in some flavor' running in your desktop os, still means 'different from the production environment' you are going to run the thing on. xammp on mac will need to behave as xammp on a mac.
hahaha ! you people are so shindigbaabs (SCB). i would prefer gaguli approach (GAGI) myself ...
I know I’m out of the web dev loop, but as I recall, in most cases the web mantra seems to be to crank it out as quick as possible before it’s obsolete. The exposure I’ve had (which admittedly is a small sampling) leads me to believe that even basic core principles of traditional software development are thrown out the window in a mad dash to get something that “looks right”.
its not web development that is in a perpetual 'mad dash' to get things out - it was the 'traditional software development' was a relic of ancient times when software as well as the hardware it runs on was mainly used by big megacorporations. back then users were these, and their demands were big, persistent and what they got the software developers to build remained as standard for decades. there are still a lot of important financial institutions which are running on as400 for example.
so, software was treated as if it was something for a big, slow, years-long engineering project, like bridges or car prototypes.
that approach was wrong from the start. that would be needed only for infrastructures and operating systems, platforms the software was to run on, like linux.
if we should make a car analogy, the 'software engineering' approach was necessary for designing the car infrastructure - ie hybrid/gasoline or electric, the basic principles of a car type and so on.
software, was to be used on the car itself. like its car stereo, air condition, seat covers and so on.
but, the traditional, obsolete understanding of software, tended to take ALL of them as 'big engineering' projects which were to be designed and built in years' time.
but, the car chassis and type should have been independent from the car stereo you put into the car, the seat covers and so on. the latter require more customization, more choice, speedier design and production cycles. noone can wait for a car company to come up with a car bundled with a different stereo to be able to use a different stereo in their car.
and then came the web. real people, end users came into the equation. they demanded custom, easy, fast stuff. and this has changed the software production forever. noone can wait for years to use something. a lot can happen in the duration of a year, and a lot can go without being done.
"Microsoft said it is committed to 'privacy by design'" == Empty talk
"but thinks the Federal Trade Commission should use a light regulatory touch" == we are corporate whores that want to exploit people as much as we can
Has anyone realized yet that working with microsoft directly taking payments basically means your company's going to go out of business?
despite your alliances and cooperation with microsoft ?
give me a break.
pockets then ? where will we need to shove our phones up in order to be safe of any downsides ?
trying to scare people into digging in their feet and becoming schizophrenic ?
...
in a world where top 1% gets 52% of all wealth generated, top 5% including that 1% gets a whopping 72%, and bottom 85% - practically everyone - gets only 15%, there is a lot you need to do before you ever need to get to the point of trying to scare people into savings.
http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesamerica/power/wealth.html
and no - the top 5% had not come to grabbing that much of everything by 'saving'. you cant get 72% of everything, by saving. it can quite easily be said that, this crowd has no concept of 'saving' at all, while skiing behind their 7th yacht
please dont sell bullshit to us, or go learn what you are wanting to sell.
this is not only unenforceable, but also explicitly excludes open source license and software from the law. preferential treatment is not allowed in any case in eu law. if a law is passed, no party can be excluded from enjoying the benefits. this law discriminates FOR a certain party. not even a certain industry.
who am i replying to - with uid over 2 mil, and an insane post, you are apparently that microsoft shill guy that uses multiple accs.
full bastardry. so, they want to exempt open source licenses from copyright laws, but, their own licenses in.
then that means copyright law is invalid ?
indeed. quite so - it is modded, somehow, insightful.
excuse me but i couldnt hold myself. your logic is so glaringly naive that i am appalled to even start commenting on it.
leaving the idiocy aside, are you aware that this kind of law will basically put any corporation in the place of a 'rights holder' which will be able to ban/unban ENTIRE physical industry sector products and corporations by just filing a complaint like DMCA ?
we are talking about allowing the custodianship of the exports/imports to private corporations.
some hardware manufacturer is competing with microsoft sidewinder line of products ? file a dmca complaint 'hey they are using pirated excel' !!! -> whooops ban.
who is going to prove that they are using pirated excel ? who is going to ensure that they arent ? who is going to ensure that they have stopped using pirated excel ?
will the foreign nation allow american inspectors and american bureaucrats on its soil, and the foreign private corporation in foreign country allow those inspectors full access to their sensitive information ?
no. even contemplating it is morondom. really. there is no politically correct word for this - any such usage will dilute the meaning - this is blatant morondom.
i cant describe it in any other way ; the people who came up with this plan at microsoft, are MORONS. and they should be fired post haste before they drag the company to even worse depths of morondom and public relations/public image disaster.
the argument you have been making was, if copyright was not there, great works of art wouldnt be produced. as you see from 14th century dutch painters, this is not correct.
moreover, if we go back to hellenistic and roman age, it becomes even more pointless. the sculpture industry and art that was there by then, puts today's into shame in all respects. yet, there was no copyright, or even the idea of it.
mark. 12 mil 16 k to be precise actually.
that quadruples ie9. europe should be sleeping at this hour, and yet they are still downloading.
cant. 'app' has been used as a term for web scripts for a long time. 'web app'.
"ie will survive, firefox will die" -> that possibility went out of the window by eu commissions mandating of the browser ballot box in europe.
the point of network is to provide an exchange currency. not a means for making money. the people who adopt the network, should be adopting it for the exchange currency already. you are not supposed to make any coins out of thin air, unless the network is small and needs help.
you have provided reasons. they were not only invalid, but also off target. i dont even know what you are still discussing.
There was no copyright at the time when greatest works of art were produced. this includes late 14th century to early 15th century.
you dont know anything about art history, yet, you are talking out of your ass.
please dont talk bullshit next time.
i would call you a man with no brains - early adopters had basically 'made' the bitcoin network. they are the ones who helped it gain traction, while you were sitting on your ass. if you are jealous, you should have adopted bitcoin at the start like them. they deserve the coins they got, because they contributed to the system at the most critical moment.
Namely, it is the people who got in early and mined coins or bought them at a low exchange rate who have most to gain. Latecomers have little to gain and the most to lose. If the system collapses or is regulated out of legitimacy, it is the latecomers who will suffer the most. I would not go so far as calling it a pyramid scheme but it certainly shares some similarities in terms of who benefits and who does not.
had you read anything about the idea behind this, you would know that that 'shortcoming' you speak of, was devised as a means to increase adoption rate of the system at the start - if you contributed to system early, you would get more coins. if you bought coins early, the would be worth more. this provided its fast adoption rate.
please dont talk out of your ass next time.
as for 'auditing/taxing' people, taxing is already a reality regardless of what means you use as money. tax is not relevant to money unit or coin that is used. that shows the extent of your naivete on the subject of taxes and accounting. what is taxed is not your money - your income. your income, may be in schamabazoos. and as soon as you convert this to property or merchandise, you get taxed.
as for legislating against it - that is not something that can be used as a shortcoming. the power holders already legislate against many things you take for granted in your life, because it is dangerous to them. are you stopping using them ? no.
im not even going to talk about your 'theory' about 'poisoning' transactions by injecting packets to erase wallets.
first, dont talk about 'rationale', since it lacks in your approach from the start. im not even commenting on that, because it is totally absurd to come up with the "platform x also cant run platform y's apps" -> its not platform x is powerless to run platform y's apps, but, platform y is specifically made as incompatible with the other with no interoperability. not even emulators are allowed for it on other platforms. its restriction by design. nothing to defend. not to add platform y lacks power in general to run platform x's apps. nowhere near even.
second, there will be no point to putting someone as foe in your list, if you are going to keep replying to their posts. your rationale is off there too.
i cant even begin to comment on how idiotic to compare the 'apps' that are present in app store with debian packages. (not to mention why the hell is debian even being compared). shitty small codelets for doing very simple stuff on a device, versus packages that range from sound editing to graphics production.
actually i should put you in my foe list. this is the 3rd time i spotted a lack in your rationale. i shouldnt waste more time in future. may be putting you to foe will bar me from seeing your posts.
it didnt escape me that you have adjusted your relationship with me to foe, before replying. one wonders, why is that .... extreme fanobism maybe ? to the point that it causes one to attempt to defend a restricted and application poor os/device by saying that pcs cannot use their apps, despite it should naturally be so, and is irrelevant to the strength of the platforms or the restrictedness of the latter ?
you dont need to answer - it appears like that was it.