I tried to read the Bizspark FAQ, and now my head hurts. But anyways, what I think I was able to get out of it is that:

1. You have to apply. 2. You have to be approved, which takes a minimum of 5 business days, and you may not get approved. 3. At some point you "graduate" and lose your licenses and have to pay for software. The faq does not say when this graduation happens, but I seem to remember hearing something about 6 months.

So, no it is not really free. And it is definitely harder to get it than simply typing:

sudo apt-get install apache2

Unless something has changed:

1. It does take a few days.

2. You do need to be approved. I've heard of plenty of people signing up and getting approved, not about anyone who hasen't. I don't think it's a problem to get approved assuming you're really a startup. And for the record, you don't need to give them almost any information, save a website and filling out a few forms.

3. It lasts for 3 years. I think there's also a limit on how profitable you can be and still be eligible for the program, but it's something high. E.g., if you're making 1 million dollars in profit already, you're not eligible.

All in all, I sense from your tone that you're really looking down on this. But Microsoft is basically giving away thousands of dollars of software to any startup that wants it. Not just servers, but also Windows, the Office Suite, etc. This is a great opportunity and startups that aren't taking advantage of it are missing.

(2) there are in fact people that got disproved, with the most common reason being that they didn't want to provide details about what they actually want to build.

Also people discussing the Spark programs never mention one basic fact - in many countries starting a company is a bureaucratic nightmare and it's not free of charge either. You also need to pay an accountant too, as bookkeeping can get complicated even if you don't have any revenues, depending on the local legislation.

The Spark programs are basically incompatible with most startups, considering how most startups are started - an individual or a bunch of people starting something and experimenting on the side.

> Microsoft is basically giving away thousands of dollars of software to any startup that wants it

Price does not necessarily correlate with provided value, but rather with the scarcity of a resource in the context of supply/demand and the scarcity of many Microsoft licenses is rather artificial.

I use "thousands of dollars of software" every day for free, without having to be approved, without bureaucracy and without a 3-years ticking time bomb.

BizSpark membership lasts for up to three years. In the three months up to the end of the membership, you 'graduate' and get access to discounted msdn subscriptions and support.

You also get to keep any software downloaded during the time you were a member. This includes licensing for servers in production.

There is a fairly clear explanation at http://www.microsoft.com/bizspark/about/Graduation.aspx

I have a win 8 professional license from DreamSpark(my university had to apply for this). The license I got was valid for 2 years, and I graduate in 6 months. So, it's not really hard like you say.

Except that all usage of licenses from DreamSpark must be non-commercial, without ifs and buts. Students are also a minority.

True, but if you really wanted to go MS, you can just find a student willing to download and host it for you elsewhere..

If pushing a new website to the webserver is the best argument of WAMP over LAMP, it sounds a bit odd. Pushing a new simplistic website to a LAMP (default one click installed), has as much difficulty as pushing files to a directory (/var/www). Even if Visual Studio gives a one-button-system, I would still not call that a killer feature over placing files in a directory.

When one pick between WAMP and LAMP, the question one should ask is if a) what framework matches best with the developers skill/knowledge and what features the site is going to have, b) what performance requirements are there, and c) what legacy code will have to run along side. Everything else is just buzz.

Small comment as I agree with your statement in general. Ease of deployment has never been an issue as they are all very straightforward.

The A in WAMP/LAMP is for Apache, so that does not apply here. I'm not sure what the acronym is for Windows/IIS/<database>/.NET.

Why?

The article's target audience is not professional sysadmins, but people who would like to set-up a server and tweak it for their needs.

>> I can think of a number of reasons why someone might opt to go the Windows Server route.

Sure, but practically speaking this happens most often in the corporate env. See above re target audience.

>> can both be obtained for free through the DreamSpark program for college students and through the similar BizSpark program for startups and small businesses.

Why would anyone do this? Just type in terminal three commands and you are done. I am honestly curious - why would anyone use IIS except it mandatory per corporate P&P...?

The thing I dislike most is that with Python/PHP/Ruby/Perl, developing on Windows is an option. If you choose the MS stack, you are totally locked into Windows unless you are lucky enough that Mono work (unlikely for new things).

Do those versions let you use the products on production web servers though?

Isn't that what "full versions" means?

Not sure if you're being sarcastic or not, but "no".

Whether or not a particular software can be used in a commercial context has more to do with licensing than how "full version" it is. In fact, even Trial versions of softwares can often be used in a commercial context during the trial period.

Versus, say, the full version of VMware Player, which while full featured and having no trial period, is prohibited via license to be used commercially.

Yes.