4 ms·
At Lelala (https://www.lelala.de https://www.lelala.de), the MS stack with the typical layers is used: - IIS + ASP MVC - MSSQL (via ORM layer) - bunch of .NET/
by Lelala 12y ago
At Lelala (https://www.lelala.de https://www.lelala.de), the MS stack with the typical layers is used:
- IIS + ASP MVC
- MSSQL (via ORM layer)
- bunch of .NET/C# tools & stuff to support the main system
Since it was asked what happens if the BizSpark period is over, let me state on detail about the model:
In BizSpark, its true that you go vendor lock in as long as you are building strict dependency on their platform, lets say if you use EF for accessing SQL, you may have a problem in the long run.
But:
Even if you've left BizSpark, a MS Server License is to be paid once? (not per year, not every two years etc.)
I do not understand where the myth comes from that one has to pay every year or continuously to use MS licenses?
The math is simple:
A W2K12 Standard server license costs around 850 USD (~ 700 EUR) - once - even if Opensource would is cheaper in term of license costs, a software running 24/7 for a one-time payment of 700 EUR isn't that expensive.
Now, it comes down to scale up or scale out:
- in the one scenario, because of no costs you can scale massivley out, going from one machine to n machines
- but if you ever tried to administrate your machine park lonely(!!) if it counts 5+ machines (while you have to develop/maintain & run the app itself, too!), some may consider to hire a network admin (which is a fixed salary per year which usually outweighs the costs of your MS Server license)
The reason why C# is used, is simple (and was stated above):
- C# and .NET are very convenient and mature environments to write apps in
- C# is considered by me as a beautiful language, i really like it (coming from x years of "C-styled-syntax-languages" could make me somehwat biased ;-)
Instead of the licensing costs of MS products, i see much more important difficulties in the mid- to long-run future if someone built on it:
MS maybe not survive the upcoming decade because of huge market shifts; then, in 10 years, it may be a problem if you will not get any support because the company maybe no more existing.
God thanks, the next version of ASP MVC has a VM for *nix-derivatives, so you could solve this issue by running your app on a Linux-box.
(And if you then have built your app additionally on a top of an ORM, you won't have any issues)
- Lelala 12y agoP.S.: i forgot: Jeff Atwood made a GREAT comparison on up-vs-out-scaling some years ago: http://blog.codinghorror.com/scaling-up-vs-scaling-out-hidden-costs/ http://blog.codinghorror.com/scaling-up-vs-scaling-out-hidde...
- andrea_s 12y agoI would add that (i) the pricing you can see on the details page http://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/pricing/details/virtual-machines/ http://azure.microsoft.com/en-us/pricing/details/virtual-mac... are already inclusive of Windows Server licensing, and (ii) depending on the nature of one's shop, it might make sense to get a MSDN subscription instead - and that's probably why people are talking about recurring costs to use the platform.
- aleem 12y ago> Even if you've left BizSpark, a MS Server License is to be paid once? Microsoft has a 3-year release cycle for their products. You'll end up paying every three years. For every single product. Microsoft's biggest cash cows are it's OS and Office products and always have been. > A W2K12 Standard server license costs around 850 USD (~ 700 EUR) Assuming you have just one server. At the least you will need a production server and a development server. And at least one for every developer. That's one OS license, one SQL Server license and one Visual Studio license per developer. Personally, I love work with a lot of virtual machines off Vagrant for development, testing and deployment. I am not sure how that works with MS licences. > if it counts 5+ machines [...] some may consider to hire a network admin It's fairly easy to manage ~100 machines using Ansible, Docker, Chef, etc. But in the Microsoft stack you probably want to keep the number of machines much lower. > scale up or scale out Scaling up is the right approach on Windows platforms but here is the issue I have with it. You cannot add RAM on the fly, as and when you need it. Nor can you add more processor cores on the fly. With horizontal scale, it's a no brainer but with vertical scale you cannot scale-up temporarily and then scale back down either. This is quite common and desirable for web applications. I was on BizSpark and I was really grateful for the free trial. However, ultimately I shifted away and I am glad I did, even though C# is awesome and I absolutely love Visual Studio, I moved away for a number of compelling reasons.
- duncanawoods 12y agoYou can buy developer versions of sql server licenses. Last time I bought them they cost £35 for the full enterprise package. You can buy msdn packages for unlimited development use of any OS across VMs. Around £600 / year I believe. More expensive MSDN subscriptions include development OSes, Visual Studio & Sql Server at around £1000 / year.
- matt_morgan 12y agoSo this all reminds me of when I was an IT manager and my sysadmin spent like 25% of her time just managing license compliance. My dev worked in open source and spent 100% of his time getting stuff done. MS seems to be getting a lot better about this stuff (dev licenses, free short-term VM images for testing purposes, I don't know what else) but making things cheaper while not relaxing compliance requirements doesn't make it all that much easier.