But it's fairly easy to determine what their strategy is, given that they've been open sourcing most things that touches Azure. Azure also hosts Linux Servers and given the world is moving towards hosting on Linux, they're following the trend to stay relevant and appeal to more developers.
Basically this comes down to making the .NET ecosystem more appealing and attracting more developers to Microsoft platform and development tools which will integrate seamlessly with their Azure hosting services and other commercial server products.
Is it though? I would believe that the people using the community edition are the same people that were previously using the express edition, i.e. hobbyists and students who were not going to pay for it anyhow. And as you already described in your last paragraphs: if their plan works out, I would imagine visual studio license revenues to go up in the long term as more people are attracted to the eco-system.
I don't pretend to understand the calculus of the decision, just offering this point you may have overlooked.
Prices for cloud servers are falling, so do they really plan to take part to a race to the bottom? I remember this discussion from November https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8582096
No, they can code in Linux using Vim if they want.
Not exactly. Anyone inside an "enterprise organization" (according to Microsoft's arbitrary definition) is even worse off than before, because Microsoft won't be releasing the Express editions any more.
From http://www.visualstudio.com/products/visual-studio-community...
Here’s how individual developers can use Visual Studio Community:
- Any individual developer can use Visual Studio Community to create their own free or paid apps.
Here’s how Visual Studio Community can be used in organizations:
- An unlimited number of users within an organization can use Visual Studio Community for the following scenarios: in a classroom learning environment, for academic research, or for contributing to open source projects.
- For all other usage scenarios: In non-enterprise organizations, up to 5 users can use Visual Studio Community. In enterprise organizations (meaning those with >250 PCs or > $1 Million US Dollars in annual revenue), no use is permitted beyond the open source, academic research, and classroom learning environment scenarios described above.
I doubt that there were ever significant numbers of developers in enterprise organizations using Express Editions anyway. If you are doing serious business, the cost of paid licenses (and MSDN subscriptions) is generally justified if you are going to be using MS technologies.
That was Sun's strategy for Java; it didn't work out well for them. Java became huge, but Sun never did figure out how to make a dollar from it.
They also get commercial support contracts from it.
And they got money from licensing various trademarks, test suites, J2ME and so on.
But yeah - ultimately Sun weren't able to build a killer business out of Java. They had a variety of small revenue streams but nothing that could compete with Windows.
Making ASP.NET Linux deployable ensures that Windows stays in the hands of developers. Making Azure Linux friendly ensures that Microsoft can take a slice of that market. And pushing Universal Apps and giving Visual Studio Community and Windows 10, an OS that allows Universal Apps to run on the desktop, for free motivates developers to fill up the app store.
This decision was inevitable and IMHO a huge step in the right direction.
About the .NET on Linux move, so the strategy could be to make more people willing to develop with .NET, bet that they buy VisualStudio, which means Windows desktop licenses and be prepared to see Windows Server replaced by Linux instances running (hopefully for them) on Azure. For that to work they must be bold in selling Azure and luring developers to the .NET stack. I don't foresee developers leaving their 5/10 years investment on other stacks en masse. Maybe new developers will consider .NET as a viable alternative to all the other open source tecnologies. It's a generational gamble and it's going to pay only if they really can compete against AWS and the other VM providers.
However I understand that they must do something, or they'll end up as the company that makes a console and an OS for video gamers and for cheap computers.