3 ms·

So here is my take: I'm currently working on a SaaS product built on .NET running on Windows Server, IIS, and SQL Server. We're not really a "startup" anymore,

So here is my take: I'm currently working on a SaaS product built on .NET running on Windows Server, IIS, and SQL Server. We're not really a "startup" anymore, but we're still very small. I wasn't here when the first version of the product was built so I wasn't part of that decision. If I were building this product from scratch today as a money-poor startup, I would probably go with tech stack included Java or Python and PostgreSQL. The primary motivation being cost (as in money). Each developer is technically required to have an MSDN/VS Pro license (renews for just under $1000 per year). This is not very expensive if you're generating revenue, but if bootstrapping it is not cheap. You could cheat and just share a single license; you definitely won't get caught. Windows Server licenses, compared to other datacenter costs, are relatively inexpensive. Windows Server has a few advantages; particularly in it's easy to administer and there are plenty of sysadmins out there than know it well. The elephant in the room, at least for a SaaS product, is SQL Server. The features of Enterprise Edition are so compelling for SaaS (HADR, unlimited RAM, online index operations, compression, and encryption) that it's practically a requirement. But this will quickly become one of the most expensive costs in your datacenter. But in my experience, SQL Server has some real advantages that I haven't yet discovered for PostgreSQL. The "community" around SQL Server is huge and has a ton of great people who love to help (often for free!). For instance check out http://brentozar.com http://brentozar.com or http://sqlblog.com/blogs/adam_machanic/ http://sqlblog.com/blogs/adam_machanic/. There are programs like Bizspark which can bring the initial software license investment down to nearly $0. But if you're not generating significant revenue after three years, the licensing costs could hurt. So like everything in world, it depends. But the bottom line is that, in my opinion, if you're bootstrapping then costs matter and Microsoft products (SQL Server in particular) are a huge cost which have real viable alternatives.

penguat 12y ago
new VS subscription licences don't seem to be well publicised, but I'm pretty sure that $1000 could be cut down: http://www.visualstudio.com/en-gb/products/visual-studio-online-professional-vs http://www.visualstudio.com/en-gb/products/visual-studio-onl... - Assuming I'm reading it correctly.
- daigoba66 12y ago
  That's very interesting. But it's not clear if you get the other important MSDN benefits, specifically dev licenses for Windows, Windows Server, and SQL Server.
  - dragonwriter 12y ago
    No, it doesn't include MSDN, its just Visual Studio itself + cloud hosted TFS. "Visual Studio Online" seems to have replaced the non-MSDN tier of retail, one-time purchase Visual Studio licenses with a monthly licenses.
omnibrain 12y ago
If you have outgrown Bizspark but are still relatively small the Microsoft Action Pack Subscription may be suitable for you.
- daigoba66 12y ago
  The big difference is that Bizspark gives you "production" licenses. The Action Pack licences are restricted to non-production usage only. We actually use the Action Pack today to get access to the latest VS Pro. But it's "limited to three developers", and the other MSDN software benefits are severely limited compared to MSDN pro (e.g. only certain editions of Windows Server and SQL Server).
- narrowrail 12y ago
  Right. Eventually your business grows, you're doing $3M in revenue, and have 8 employees with a total burden of $1.5M. How much will it cost to run with per core fees for various components? Was the ease of use and maintability worth it (at this point, one can start to calculate but it gets murky)? Will it add or subtract from the infratstructure costs? I don't know, but I'm not going to go down a proprietary path to find out. EDIT: Of course, it always depends on where you are coming from. If you are in a large corp. with MS tech already entrenched or come from that environment, it makes sense (as it seems many are that are weighing in). Or, if you are building to flip, and are most productive in this ecosystem.
sirchristian 12y ago
Your analysis of SQL Server is spot on. It's the biggest expense going 100% on the MS stack.

penguat 12y ago

new VS subscription licences don't seem to be well publicised, but I'm pretty sure that $1000 could be cut down: http://www.visualstudio.com/en-gb/products/visual-studio-online-professional-vs http://www.visualstudio.com/en-gb/products/visual-studio-onl... - Assuming I'm reading it correctly.

daigoba66 12y ago
That's very interesting. But it's not clear if you get the other important MSDN benefits, specifically dev licenses for Windows, Windows Server, and SQL Server.
- dragonwriter 12y ago
  No, it doesn't include MSDN, its just Visual Studio itself + cloud hosted TFS. "Visual Studio Online" seems to have replaced the non-MSDN tier of retail, one-time purchase Visual Studio licenses with a monthly licenses.

omnibrain 12y ago

If you have outgrown Bizspark but are still relatively small the Microsoft Action Pack Subscription may be suitable for you.

daigoba66 12y ago
The big difference is that Bizspark gives you "production" licenses. The Action Pack licences are restricted to non-production usage only. We actually use the Action Pack today to get access to the latest VS Pro. But it's "limited to three developers", and the other MSDN software benefits are severely limited compared to MSDN pro (e.g. only certain editions of Windows Server and SQL Server).
narrowrail 12y ago
Right. Eventually your business grows, you're doing $3M in revenue, and have 8 employees with a total burden of $1.5M. How much will it cost to run with per core fees for various components? Was the ease of use and maintability worth it (at this point, one can start to calculate but it gets murky)? Will it add or subtract from the infratstructure costs? I don't know, but I'm not going to go down a proprietary path to find out. EDIT: Of course, it always depends on where you are coming from. If you are in a large corp. with MS tech already entrenched or come from that environment, it makes sense (as it seems many are that are weighing in). Or, if you are building to flip, and are most productive in this ecosystem.

sirchristian 12y ago

Your analysis of SQL Server is spot on. It's the biggest expense going 100% on the MS stack.