It's as Charlie91 said if you have bishops they are good in a more open game, with several pawns missing, whereas a knight can still play usefully in closed situations, where no pieces may have been lost. At the start and in your illustration, white only loses it's weaker bishop, and as white it has the initiative, so if pushed I'd choose the white setup and tailor my game to suit the deficiency on the black diagonals.

 Yo escogo el caballo sobre el alfil

Knight  missing.

Knight .. because it has got a special move

the bishop can Replaced by queen

Knight missing..then i would put my pawns into Light Square. by doing this White Light squared Bishop would become bad. or i would try to exchange off the Light squared Bishop and put my pawns into Light square.

If I have the knight, I'll close the position early; if bishop, I'll open the game early.  It goes both ways.

I'd take the missing knight version.... one knight can still do a lot of work, and the bishops nicely complement each other - otherwise your lone bishop can only cover half the board.

I agree, I would opt to play without a bishop. The knights are very important for opening stability, where one can manage without a bishop.

I would discard the Bishop over the Knight...

ADK

bishop i guess

bishop missing