I can't imagine why a startup would lock themselves into Microsoft's ecosystem knowing that the more you grow the more those licenses are going to bite.
Unless you are doing it totally wrong the license will cost far less than paying developer wages and if your team is more productive in that environment it is a net gain. I agree that if you have a startup with no revenue and everyone works for free the licensing can be an issue (unless you use Bizspark).
I can't speak for others but in my case, consuming services of the Windows Azure platform takes care of licensing (there's not additional license costs). There is a degree of lock-in but there are also many benefits. As I said, it's my personal opinion and experience, based on the kind of applications I usually develop and the kind of market I work for (enterprise).
That reminds me of the reasoning during the housing bubble when people took adjustable rate mortgages with a low teaser rate, then got nailed when the higher rates kicked in. BizSpark payment shock after year 3.
As I understand it, companies get to keep any licenses they procure during the three year period at no charge upon graduating the program. Procuring additional licenses then starts to cost, but those are discounted for a two year period post-graduation.
Saying it's analogous to shady adjustable-rate mortgage practices is a bit of a stretch.
Maybe a small stretch.. But if you expect your company is going to be rapidly growing going into year four, you are going to go from zero software cost to very high software costs. After three years of commitment and investment are you going to spend the time to switch platforms? At that point you are stuck. Better to commit to free from the start.
