click here to return to the Calico Cat homepage

Microsoft Visual Studio 2005 Express: is it really free?

Today I was browsing though the Microsoft ASP.NET website and I discovered something new. Microsoft is going to be giving away a new product called “Visual Web Developer Express Edition 2005” for free.

You may now be thinking, “Whoa!!! Geeky stuff! Stop reading.” No, don’t stop reading, this article endeavors to take a non-technical look at Microsoft’s business strategy.

As you already know, Microsoft has essentially won the battle of the desktop. You are probably reading this blog using a Microsoft Windows computer, and you’re probably using Internet Explorer as your web browser, and there’s a good chance your computer has Microsoft Office installed on it. Windows XP and Office are Microsoft’s bread and butter products that are making them billions of dollars a year in profits.

But when it comes to the servers the run the websites and databases, Microsoft doesn’t dominate the way it does on the desktop. Only a small percentage of web servers are running Windows, the bulk are running some kind of Unix operating system. Microsoft is facing heavy competition from free “open source” software. A Linux/Apache web server is pretty common, and then throw in PHP and the free open source database mySQL and you have a completely free non-Microsoft web server.

Does it really make economic sense to use this free software? I don’t think so. The biggest expense of any type of IT project is the cost of the programmers and network administrators, not the cost of the operating system software. If easier to use software can save a few hours of expensive programmer time, then the more expensive software pays for itself.

I am a big fan of Microsoft’s software. Once I tried to get the free database mySQL to run on my Windows computer and I couldn’t figure it out. This is typically what happens when you use open source software. Only hardcore geeks can figure out how to use it. For the rest of us, it just sucks. In contrast, when you install SQL Server it just installs without a hitch and it’s ready to use.

Despite my own positive view of Microsoft, Microsoft has a definite image problem with the web development community. Out of principle, a lot of programmers don’t want to spend any money on expensive Microsoft software when they can develop websites completely free using the open source tools, even though a lot of time is wasted with them because they are less efficient.

It finally seems to me that Microsoft realizes it has a problem and is doing something about it. Microsoft is developing a free, or almost-free (I hope for Microsoft’s sake that they just make it completely free), version of its suite of programming tools, called Visual Studio 2005 Express, and there will even be a free version of SQL Server called “SQL Server 2005 Express.”

How does Microsoft make money giving the stuff away for free? Well, they don’t make any money doing that, but they make money by dominating the market, and they make money by selling Windows Server 2003 and the full version of SQL Server (which costs a hefty $5000 per processor, but is still a bargain compared to Oracle).

Microsoft will sell a lot of Windows Server 2003 and SQL Server licenses if they can get the developers to develop software that will only run on those operating systems. Developers will develop with the tools they are used to using, and if they are used to using PHP and mySQL then that’s what they will use. Therefore, if Microsoft desires to dominate web servers like it dominates the desktop, it has to entice the programmers into using its tools. Microsoft, in its greed to make as much money as possible, requires you to pay $2,800 to obtain the “Visual Studio Enterprise Architect Edition.” A price tag like that scares away new developers. I applaud Microsoft’s new strategy of promoting the use of free versions of its development tools.

posted Monday, August 23, 2004

6 Comments:

By Jean-Paul:

I totally understand the fact that many people get frustrated by using Open Source software on the Microsoft Windows operating system. But I've been using open source software for years and I have to say that I haven't encountered any hurdle. Open source software works perfectly on OS X (BSD 4.0 kernel) as well as on any other Unix and Linux flavored operating system. When you think about it, Microsoft has not made it easy for Open Source developers to have access to certain part of the OS. Everything is closed and difficult to understand. Remember that for example when teaching Operating Systems, Windows is almost never used by most universities world wide. Why? Because it's impossible to show the students what is going on in the background. I think you should have a look at the quality open source software / applications available today on the market and compare it with anything else. The major (biggest point) of developing on an OS platform is that you have access to more support and more capable developers than on proprietary technology. It makes sense and that's the way it's always been.

===
Jean-Paul

posted at 4/22/2005 6:09 PM

By ForPetesSakeThereMustBeOneNameICanUse:

The problem with open source is really this .... My first computer came with Windows 95 installed. When it started to fall apart I thought .... hmmmm .. maybe I should have a look at Linux as an alternative. Went to the website of a Linux distribution where I was greeted with the choice of several binaries to download. Problem is for a start, I have no idea whatsoever what to do with binaries once downloaded. Second problem is trying to find out what to do with them, I could find very little advice on how to go about getting anything done. When I posted an enquiry on a Linux forum asking for directions to a source of help, I was greeted by a torrent of derision of the "wot a f**king lamer" variety. Contrast that with the post I put up on a Windows forum asking for help in re-installing Windows 95. First reply was courteous, helpful, and contained a link to a website with full instructions on the task at hand. I printed these out and had Windows re-installed and up running the same evening without incident or losing any of my personal files. Sure it (Windows 95) fell apart in the first place, BUT I was able to find out how to fix it easily, and nobody seemed to mind that I was a beginner with little knowledge when I asked for advice.
I'm sure if I'd stuck at it given a few weeks or months I'd have learned enough to install Linux somehow on something somewhere ... but I'd have spent a huge amount of time and effort just learning that instead of getting on with using and learning the applications which produce the results I need ... which is the whole reason I have a computer at all. And I won't have been called an idiot just for asking for a pointer to some help to get a grasp of the basics.
To me the "best" operating system is one which allows me to get on with producing results, and has resources available to give usuful help when I have problems. It is irrelevant to me if another runs faster or more efficiently. Yup ... to a computer systems expert Windows might be the biggest load of cack ever produced by anybody and Linux might be the Rolls Royce of operating systems. But, Windows let me get my stuff done whereas I wasn't even able to find out what to do with the Linux download files without a struggle, never mind do anything with it.

posted at 11/10/2005 7:13 AM

By Keewee:

you cant figure out how to get mysql to work? dude - it is now easier than ms sql - and mysql 5 is now released which has some great features. So you get the best database in the world - for free - how cool is that?!?!

posted at 11/11/2005 5:31 AM

By Tom:

Intersting thoughts. I myself have to disagree to some degree. I think the original blog is valid from a certain view point, but not from a professional developers.

Microsoft has indeed one the battle of the desktop, no arguing there. Who really wants to run linux as their main computer? Not many, though I would argue if you did you might be in a better place. But it is not for the feint of heart.

And for the server space, bingo, Microsoft is not in domination. But can they? That is the question.

I admit Microsoft Visual Studio Express is pretty impressive. The IDE they have has always been pretty darn good. Arguably the best. They make things pretty easy. Just drop some widgets and it works.

But as with anything there are trade offs. Microsoft seems to be taking the same approach to programming as they did with general computing. Make it easy so anyone can use it. The stuff I saw with Visual Studio Express make it very simple to do things that take much longer in other systems, but the trade off is the control you have. Much of the system is hidden underneath. You can dig into it, but the vibe seems to be to ignore it. The problem is that the IDE generates the code for you and if your not a programmer, you can easily end up with a mess of code running on the back end.

Sure MySQL is more difficult, but it is not for the casual user. If you want to run a small personal website, choose the MS solution. But ask yourself if Amazon runs visual studio or microsoft servers? It isn't the cost of the software that drives people to open source, it is the ability to do what you REALLY need done. Microsoft makes that difficult.

Bottom line: Check out Microsoft Visual studio express edition. You can't beat the price and it is a great way to learn about programming or to learn about the .Net language. Perhaps it will open a few doors for people who can't afford the real tools. But Visual Studio is still limited in many respects, which is why they sell the other versions for thousands of dollars in some cases.

Just my thoughts
Tom ;)

posted at 12/01/2005 11:59 PM

By Haris:

Bingo! On microsoft side we have ease of use and user friendly. While on the other side, opensource tools are free and allow programmers to go more in depth.

So microsoft close the gap a little bit by releasing a free developer tools.

The ball has been tossed to open source community. In which way will open source community respond?

As a developer, this is my wish list to open source community.

1. Create a powerfull development IDE on the same calibre (or exceed) MS Visual Studio 2005.

2. Include UML design tools that allow reverse engineering. Code to UML and UML to code function.

3. Make em intuitively user friendly.

That's my $0.02

By the way... I still want to know, is VS2005 really free?

posted at 1/11/2006 9:28 PM

By NeoDimension:

I am a person having In-depth experience of both the sides.

I have done lots of programming on Windows as well as Linux.

There is a big problem with the Open Source. There is no standardization. Where Microsoft being a company, is very well organised.

But open source has its own advantages! Just imagine, me being a developer, I can open just any software implementation and read how its implemented.
I can study MySQL and maybe start my own dbms project! I can study the Linux kernel and learn the functions of OS in depth.

THE BIGGEST ADVANTAGE BEING:
I can modify stuff to my need.

MS will never be able to match that.

YET, MS will continue to rule for decades to come.
Not everyone is born geek, and those who are, think others are really stupid. The thing is I have passion for computers, and making my Qt program compile on linux is passionate for me, and i can spend hours on that! But not every one can do that... or is willing to.

Linux follows modular concept, which is advantage as well as disadvantage.

Windows XP is not modular (but Vista is). The plus point is, when i have a clean WinXP installation, I can assure that a WinXP compliant s/w will run on it without trouble. But the same cant be said about Linux at all!!!
to be clear, about any modular OS. Dunno how Vista will fair...

posted at 4/13/2006 5:14 PM