In terms of price, you can set up and run a PHP/MySQL-based server, all running on Apache httpd, MUCH more cheaply than you can with ASP (which is usually hosted on a Microsoft box - license required - running IIS, with .Net - so immediately off the bat, you're running at a potential financial loss (unless you choose to use one of the Apache ASP.Net interpreters, which are good, but not quite as good as running it natively, of course). Of course, take all this with a pinch of salt, I have developed for both platforms, but I always tend to err slightly towards the opensource/GPL standards, and for me, the magic combination of Apache web server running PHP with maybe a few other libraries such as GD for realtime image generation / manipulation is so much more flexible, incredibly powerful and less resource-intensive. Bop a MySQL database on to that for dynamic data handling, which you can itself control using PHPMyAdmin (again, free) and you've got yourself the perfect starter platform for just about any project you could envision. Oh, and (imho), there are fewer vulnerabilities with the Apache/PHP/MySQL setup than there are with the Microsoft/IIS/MSSQL setup, IIS really is full of holes and has been patched so many times it's reaching ludicrous levels now. Of course, with Apache, you're not tied down to one platform (MS) - you can host on anything, BSD/Linux, Win32, Win64, Mac (IIRC, it should do fine because OS X is basically Unix under its skin but I don't use Macs on a daily basis)... Apache will just run on anything, and people port it to their own platforms and modify it to fit their own needs, and they can do so because the source code is readily available. If you want a litmus indicator as to the popularity of Microsoft & IIS hosting contrasted against the open-platform Apache setup, check out the Netcraft site for its regular Server Survey. The most recent (as of writing this) is the August 2006 report, and the figures are a stark indicator as to the declining popularity of MS/IIS setups for hosting: http://news.netcraft.com/archives/2006/08/01/august_2006_web_server_survey.html The data is tabulated as follows... Developer, (active sites) as of July 2006, Percent (of the total market), (active sites) as of August 2006, Percent Change. Apache: 26800267 63.25% 27891065 62.05% -1.20 Microsoft 12674698 29.91% 13720037 30.52% 0.61 NB: the "Microsoft" category is an umbrella category which contains the sum of sites running Microsoft-Internet-Information-Server, Microsoft-IIS, Microsoft-IIS-W, Microsoft-PWS-95, & Microsoft-PWS, but the VAST majority of these numbers are IIS on Windows Server setups, the amount of other MS-based hosting setups contributing to the Microsoft figure is negligible. Even with the slight decrease in active sites hosting on Apache, it is still totally dominant, having broached the 50% market share a while ago (I think it was early last year, or the year before). Remember that many large hosting companies often run rafts of sites hosted virtually on just a few Apache setups, so one small change can alter the figures quite a bit, I always allow at least 3-5% for the margin of error. Also, see the most recent Reliable Hosting Top 10 rankings (as of July 1st - 31st 2006): http://news.netcraft.com/archives/2006/08/02/six_hosting_providers_share_most_reliable_hoster.html ... It's telling that 8 of the ten top providers are running variants of Unix (which pretty much guarantees they're running Apache). Apache hosting is also cheaper than MS IIS hosting, which is another thing to consider in terms of usefulness for a web designer - you can pick up a bargain hosting package for just a few quid a month nowadays, Dreamhost (off the top of my head, and no, I don't work for them!) is an prime example of a host which provides some quality packages for pretty reasonable prices. Also, if you invest in a dedicated server or virtual private hosting, when you install most flavours of Linux, the Apache httpd daemon is already there, resident on the system - bingo, instant web server, with minimal configuration, and many flavours of Linux include PHP and MySQL capabilities along with the Apache installations off the bat. Try being able to serve up dynamic content on an MS Server setup in just a few clicks :D I hope this helps to answer your question... I would certainly view learning PHP as more useful, as it can be applied across the board, where as ASP.Net is, both by the platform it runs on, and by its very nature, much more specialist. Of course, there could be money to be made by specialising, but you have to be VERY good at what you do to ever make a living from specialising in just one programming language. Maybe it'd help if you mastered PHP and then just learnt enough ASP to get by, to hedge your bets! ... Sorry, that's an awful answer :D In my opinion, if I had to say it in four words, PHP is more useful.

I suggest you ASP.NET if you're wanting to make money, PHP if you're wanting to do more interesting things. But if you're a web designer, I suggest starting with something more user friendly, like Adobe Cold Fusion. You may find the first two options a very hard slog, which may put you off.

Learning ASP.Net isn't as expensive as running it for a live web site: the development environment can be had for free (with the Visual Studio "express" editions, http://msdn.microsoft.com/vstudio/express/), and IIS is included with both Windows XP and Windows 2003, so the operating system which you probably already have is the only software cost which is truly required. Mr. Woods is correct that to actually run an ASP.Net web site requires licensing fees, but if you're just learning then presumably you're expecting your employer to pay that stuff when you get a job. I will say that in my experience, ASP.Net is a very powerful framework. I also prefer open source, so its a bit of a tossup. One thing to consider if you're looking at it as a profession is to just pick one and start learning -- many of the skills will translate to other platforms. HTML, CSS, and Javascript skills are going to useful in both environments, and many of the programming idioms will also translate well.

Learning VB is easy and useful. Some of my websites was programmed in VB ASP.NET from the VS.NET family, and as I programmed it manually, I know its workngs and can monitor security of the website.