The difference is, obviously, that open source software is completely free, and the others aren't.
I'm not trying to start yet another OSS vs. MS war here, but all other things being equal, with one option you have to pay money for server/DB licenses (and then constantly worry about compliance), and with the other you don't.
I understand why companies use Windows - they need common desktop apps, they need Office. But the question was about web development. There is little advantage to using MS tools, in fact most of my web dev associates would say they are worse. Worse, and expensive, especially the databases.
Why sign up for that kind of trouble? Stick to OSS.
I agree with most of your comment, and would add that there are hidden costs with choosing the windows platform that are not so obvious such as:
Easier access to support with OSS web platforms than .Net. I find OSS proponents much more open and willing to blog about difficult issues that they have solved and provide free code and workarounds. This is not as true in the .Net realm, but it is getting better.
Third-party libraries/plug-ins cost money in the .Net world. Its much easier to find free IDE plugins and libraries/apis for your platform in the OSS world. in .Net the alternatives cost money usually a small amount, but it does add up. (I'm guessing because it's cheaper for corporations to spend a small amount to solve a problem than hire a dev to custom build a solution, and .Net has a large corporate install base.)
However, I have to disagree with the statement about the tools and database. I gave them a try recently and actually found the experience much more pleasing than I thought... in fact going back to eclipse for work on the monday had me missing a few features in Visual Studio. I can't speak about SQL Server in a prod environment, but the db dev tools with the express version of visual studio are pretty cool. Rather than going by third person reviews, try it out yourself, you can get the web installer at http://www.microsoft.com/Web/downloads/platform.aspx and the MVC tutorial at (http://weblogs.asp.net/scottgu/archive/2009/03/10/free-asp-n...)
Personally I think the tutorial just proves my original point if you do work through it. Its a chapter from a book by the creators of .Net MVC and whilst free, the whole book is not, most other popular frameworks would release the full book as a free download.
I'm talking about transition costs. Vendor lock-in is only an issue if you need to move.
Microsoft has a BizSpark program that lets you have access to their entire suite of development and desktop applications for $100 at the end of 3 years. That's cheap! Almost free.
But still, I'm talking about Vendor Lock-In and transition costs. For example, say it takes you 2 years to build your product, you start on Microsoft and then need to transition to Linux. How much would that cost?
What if it turns out you just can't find enough developers on OSS to move your product forward or they cost too much and you want to move Microsoft, because all the metrics say the TCO on the microsoft side is actually lower. How much would it cost to escape the OSS lock-in?
"Free" OSS is not actually free. The product is free, but services still cost money. The OSS community neglects the services cost from the TCO, but they are very real.
"Vendor lock-in is only an issue if you need to move."
And the reason you'd need to move is because Windows is costing you too much, at which point you realise you're locked in! So, yet another reason to avoid Windows like the plague.
I won't bother to respond to the rest of your laughable shilling.
I'm not trying to start yet another OSS vs. MS war here, but all other things being equal, with one option you have to pay money for server/DB licenses (and then constantly worry about compliance), and with the other you don't.
I understand why companies use Windows - they need common desktop apps, they need Office. But the question was about web development. There is little advantage to using MS tools, in fact most of my web dev associates would say they are worse. Worse, and expensive, especially the databases.
Why sign up for that kind of trouble? Stick to OSS.