Blog
VMware Horizon VDI to Azure Virtual Desktop (the complete migration guide)
Horizon renewal costs spiking? Get TCO math, a phased migration path, and risk planning for moving from VMware Horizon to AVD.
Table of Contents
- Why Horizon renewals are forcing the migration conversation now
- What changes architecturally from Connection Servers to host pools
- Running the TCO comparison that survives a CFO review
- Migration risks that are worth planning around
- Phasing the move so cutover doesn't become an outage
- How Nerdio Manager reduces migration and day-to-day management work after cutover
- What this means for your Horizon-to-AVD timeline
- Frequently asked questions about Omnissa Horizon VDI
Your Omnissa Horizon (formerly VMware Horizon) renewal quote landed, and the number is sharply higher than what you paid last cycle. The licensing changes landed, and the team that's run your VMware estate for a decade is staring at a platform renewal that is harder to defend while the rest of your stack moved to the cloud.
This guide is for EUC directors and platform owners building the case to move from Omnissa or VMware Horizon VDI to Azure Virtual Desktop (AVD), and planning the migration so it doesn't break in production. You'll get the architecture differences, the real TCO math, the phased migration path, and the risks that need the most planning.
The bottom line is that for most enterprises on eligible Microsoft 365 licenses, the access-rights cost case for Azure Virtual Desktop is already settled. The challenge is execution, and execution is where most migrations either hold together or fall apart.
Why Horizon renewals are forcing the migration conversation now
The migration window opened because the economics changed. Omnissa Horizon remains a Gartner Magic Quadrant Leader for Desktop as a Service. The pressure is commercial.
After Broadcom acquired VMware in November 2023 and sold the end-user computing division to KKR (now operating as Omnissa), the commercial model changed.
Another date tightened the window. After October 15, 2025, Microsoft stopped selling Azure VMware Solution with licenses included, so every new deployment now requires customers to manage Broadcom VCF subscriptions independently.
Gartner's read on the market matches what you're feeling. At the market-category level, Desktop-as-a-Service (DaaS) includes both Windows 365 and Azure Virtual Desktop, although the latter is not a true DaaS but more of a platform-as-a-service (PaaS), since it runs as Azure VMs with an agent that users connect to rather than a fully managed desktop service.
Net-new desktop virtualization deployments are now almost exclusively DaaS, with on-premises VDI either migrating to the cloud or adopting a cloud control plane. In that market-category framing, Azure Virtual Desktop is the most commonly used "DaaS" tool at 62% of survey respondents, ahead of Citrix DaaS at 46% and VMware Horizon Cloud at 38%.
The cost pressure that's making you read this is the same pressure your peers are acting on. The architecture is the next constraint, because Horizon and Azure Virtual Desktop don't translate one-to-one.
What changes architecturally from Connection Servers to host pools
According to Microsoft's Cloud Adoption Framework, there is no direct migration path from Horizon to Azure Virtual Desktop. They state: "because Azure Virtual Desktop uses a PaaS control plane that differs architecturally from traditional VDI solutions, there's no direct migration path from other VDI platforms."
You provision new resources in parallel and move users into them. That parallel-build reality is easier to plan once you map the components you're leaving to the components you're building.
The control plane and broker
Horizon centers on the Connection Server, the broker that authenticates users, verifies entitlements, and assigns desktops from pools. Unified Access Gateway appliances handle secure external access.
In Azure Virtual Desktop, that brokering is a managed service. There's no Connection Server to size at 10 GB memory and 4 vCPU per instance, and no appliance to patch. The Azure Virtual Desktop service handles load distribution across session hosts natively. You define host pools and application groups instead of desktop pools and entitlements.
Profiles, provisioning, and display
Horizon's Instant Clones, App Volumes, and Dynamic Environment Manager map to a different set of Microsoft primitives. Profiles move to FSLogix profile containers, the recommended user profile solution for Azure Virtual Desktop. Display shifts from Blast Extreme to RDP.
Crucially, Azure Virtual Desktop offers Windows 11 Enterprise multi-session, a shared client OS option that isn't available in on-premises Horizon environments and that drives per-user density up for pooled multi-session workloads.
Application delivery
Horizon's App Volumes model doesn't lift directly into Azure Virtual Desktop, but it does work and is a supported delivery model.
Microsoft's current native application-delivery option is App Attach, which delivers applications dynamically from a file share without local installation. It has the capacity for per-user assignment, package reuse across host pools, and running two versions of an app concurrently on the same session host. Some applications package cleanly; some need repackaging work you should scope early.
This is a rebuild with a cost profile you can model before you commit. The next section runs that math, starting with the licensing layer, where eligible Microsoft 365 entitlements often tip the access-rights case toward Azure Virtual Desktop before infrastructure costs even enter the equation.
Running the TCO comparison that survives a CFO review
Azure Virtual Desktop wins on access-rights licensing for many enterprises because you likely already own the entitlement. Azure Virtual Desktop access rights are included at no additional cost for organizations holding eligible per-user licenses: Microsoft 365 E3, E5, E7, F3, Business Premium, A3/A5, and Windows Enterprise E3/E5. If you're a mid-to-large enterprise already on Microsoft 365 E3 or E5, you pay zero incremental licensing fees for Azure Virtual Desktop access rights.
A full cost comparison should include three layers: Model Azure infrastructure consumption, Microsoft OS and access licensing, and any third-party management layer like Nerdio Manager, Citrix, or Omnissa.
Blend those layers together, and segment by delivery model so consumption-based, subscription, and on-premises capital costs don't get averaged into a single misleading number. Teams building a business case can pressure-test their assumptions with an Azure Virtual Desktop TCO model before committing to the migration plan.
| Cost factor | Azure Virtual Desktop | Omnissa Horizon |
| Access rights (internal users) | $0 additional if eligible Microsoft 365 or Windows Enterprise licenses are held | Subscription terms apply |
| License model | Bundled with eligible Microsoft 365 / Windows Enterprise; consumption for infrastructure | Subscription-only SaaS or Term model; named-user or concurrent-connection options |
| Infrastructure | Azure VMs (consumption compute rates) + storage + networking, billed separately | Server hardware + Windows Server/RDS + SQL Server + Horizon subscription |
| Hypervisor | Azure infrastructure, no separate hypervisor SKU, or Azure Local (Azure Virtual Desktop Hybrid is in preview as of June 2026) | VMware ESX/vSphere hypervisor layer (Nutanix AHV has limited support as of June 2026) |
Procurement teams no longer need to model Horizon as a perpetual-license estate. Omnissa Horizon is sold through subscription-based editions, with SaaS cloud and Term on-premises license types and named-user or concurrent-connection options. For on-premises Horizon, the business case should include hardware, Windows Server/RDS, SQL Server, and the Horizon subscription; exact commercial terms vary by contract.
What the analyst reports forecast
Microsoft commissioned a 2025 Forrester TEI study that modeled a composite 2,000-employee organization moving to Windows 365 and Azure Virtual Desktop. The headline numbers were a 94% to 217% ROI over three years, $3.2M to $7.4M NPV, and $722,000 to $1.5M in infrastructure cost avoidance. Treat those as modeled outcomes for a composite, not guarantees, and note that Forrester explicitly says the study isn't competitive analysis.
The operational signals are more useful for planning. New-user and contractor provisioning dropped from five days to two hours according to one interviewee, and end users saved 6 to 12 minutes per day from fewer outages and lower latency than their previous environments.
Those are the kinds of numbers a CFO can map to headcount capacity and productivity loss, atop a TCO model.
Where the consumption model needs management
Azure infrastructure is consumption-based, which is the source of both the savings and the risk. Virtual machine instances are the largest cost component in any Azure Virtual Desktop deployment.
Effective right-sizing, idle-time reduction, and auto-scaling can cut costs 30% to 50% or more depending on workload. Reserved VM instances yield up to 72% savings against 24/7 pay-as-you-go pricing, but two qualifiers matter: that baseline assumes always-on, and if you're already auto-scaling to deallocate off-hours capacity, the reserved-instance delta shrinks significantly. Reserved instances fit stable, predictable workloads.
That consumption model is exactly why the operational layer determines whether your cost case holds up after cutover. A clean TCO model on paper means nothing if the team can't keep VMs deallocated and images current at scale, which is where the migration risk concentrates.
For that reason, many teams evaluate Nerdio Manager for Enterprise before cutover. Nerdio Manager can apply patented auto-scaling, right-sizing, and desktop orchestration across Windows Cloud (Microsoft's umbrella for both Windows 365 and Azure Virtual Desktop) so the modeled cost controls become day-to-day operating workflows.
Migration risks that are worth planning around
Migration can block VDI decisions, and the risk isn't evenly distributed. Plan around five areas first.
- Profile integrity depends on a clean FSLogix conversion
VMware UEM/Persona profiles must be converted to FSLogix containers, and Azure Virtual Desktop doesn't support other user profile disk formats. Microsoft provides a PowerShell Migration Preview Module for conversion. After profiles are converted to FSLogix containers, FSLogix Cloud Cache can support a zero-downtime FSLogix storage cutover by replicating profiles in real time to the new storage target, then switching with a registry change.
Profile containers are portable between Windows 10 and Windows 11 only if both run the same FSLogix release, and concurrent logins to both old and new pools aren't supported. - Cost control after cutover requires more than a schedule
Native Azure Virtual Desktop autoscale uses schedules to start, drain, and stop hosts. It can't combine with Azure Automation or third-party scaling tools on the same host pool, and it requires at least two session hosts to drain one safely. For dynamic shift-based environments, schedule-based scaling alone often leaves money on the table.
A dedicated Azure Virtual Desktop cost management guide can help teams turn these cost levers into an operating model. - Application compatibility work starts before migration
App Volumes has no native equivalent. Application compatibility work should start with an audit before migration, followed by delivery via App Attach or installation in the golden image. Repackaging time should be planned for anything that won't package as MSIX or App-V. - License timing shapes the coexistence window
Your Horizon licenses don't transfer to Azure Virtual Desktop. The migration timeline should be built around renewal dates so you're not paying for both platforms longer than necessary while still covering Azure Virtual Desktop OS access rights with your existing Microsoft 365 entitlements. - The expertise gap needs an owner
Many organizations have a decade of VMware muscle memory and no Azure Virtual Desktop operational model. Golden image sprawl and day-to-day VDI management work need explicit ownership in the migration plan.
These risks make a phased approach mandatory, because the way you sequence the work is what keeps cutover from becoming an outage.
Phasing the move so cutover doesn't become an outage
The recommended approach is a hybrid coexistence model. Migrate users in controlled waves while the existing Omnissa Horizon environment stays fully functional. A phased migration with rollback capability is what keeps cutover risk manageable. The work breaks into five phases.
Phase 1: assessment and discovery
Azure Migrate is the central hub for discovering, assessing, and migrating workloads. Microsoft migration guidance also describes Lakeside integration for VDI-specific assessment that informs image composition.
Inventory the current Horizon environment, review authentication flows and conditional access, and map Horizon licensing renewal timing. The assessment and planning phase often takes the longest. It can range from a few weeks for a small environment to several months for a large, complex enterprise.
Phase 2: Azure foundation and host pools
Teams typically build the Azure foundation first (e.g., governance, networking, identity services, and storage). This is followed by the core resources such as host pools and application groups, plus the golden image.
Infrastructure-as-code with ARM templates or Terraform makes host pool, VM SKU, NSG, and FSLogix storage configuration repeatable.
Existing host pools with a session host configuration require a managed identity to create session hosts. Compliance is a design-time decision here. Data residency for Azure Virtual Desktop metadata is supported in the United States, Europe, the United Kingdom, and Canada, so residency constraints should be resolved before host pools land, not after.
Phase 3: profile migration
Profiles typically move to FSLogix on Azure Files or Azure NetApp Files. For FSLogix profiles on Azure Files, Microsoft's supported authentication options are on-premises AD DS, Microsoft Entra Kerberos, and Microsoft Entra Domain Services.
For Entra ID-joined scenarios without domain-controller line-of-sight, teams should validate whether Microsoft Entra Kerberos fits the identity model. Cloud Cache supports the zero-downtime pattern.
Phase 4: application delivery
Applications can be delivered via App Attach from a file share in the same region as your session hosts, keeping that share separate from your FSLogix profile share.
Home drives and user data typically move to OneDrive, Azure Files, or SharePoint Online, with GPO settings replicated in Entra ID or Microsoft Intune.
Phase 5: pilot, parallel run, cutover, rollback
The pilot should include the three hardest user personas. Validation should cover FSLogix containers, auto-scaling behavior during simulated shift transitions, and peripheral redirection (scanners, label printers, badge readers) against acceptance criteria you define before the pilot starts.
Then run gradual user cutover, validate, decommission Horizon, and apply auto-scaling to optimize costs. For persistent VMs, Azure Migrate replicates disk data continuously until cutover across preparation, testing, and completion stages.
Each phase narrows risk, and each phase adds operational surface area across Azure Portal, PowerShell, Microsoft Intune, Entra ID, image management, profile management, sizing, scaling, and identity workflows.
How Nerdio Manager reduces migration and day-to-day management work after cutover
The previous section ended on operational surface area expanding across Azure Portal, PowerShell, Intune, Entra ID, and a half-dozen workflow domains. Nerdio Manager collapses that surface into a single console and automates the work underneath it.
For the cutover itself, Nerdio Migrate provides guided workflows for moving Horizon profiles and workloads into Azure Virtual Desktop.
After cutover, the same console handles desktop orchestration, profile workflows, auto-scaling, policy backup and restore, and Auto-Heal across both Windows 365 and Azure Virtual Desktop.
Many enterprises run both, with knowledge workers on Windows 365 and power users on Azure Virtual Desktop, and Nerdio Manager keeps the operating model consistent across them.
- Image, application, and policy workflows move into one console
Desktop orchestration handles golden image creation, versioning, and distribution through point-and-click instead of PowerShell. A study by independent IT consultant Dr. Benny Tritsch found reimaging session hosts took 89% fewer admin inputs and 85% less time versus the native console, resulting in fewer manual steps that directly reduce configuration-error probability. Unified application management deploys applications to Cloud PCs in roughly 30 seconds versus native Intune delivery that can take up to 3 hours. Admins also manage compliance and configuration policies through Nerdio Manager, and the platform can back up and restore Intune policies, which native Intune can't do for deleted policies. - Auto-scaling and right-sizing keep consumption aligned to usage
Patented auto-scaling triggers on CPU, RAM, session load, and schedules, draining users from VMs to deallocate them faster. Advisor for Windows 365 flags oversized and underused Cloud PCs for right-sizing and recommends Flex (formerly Frontline) license conversion for users who never overlap in time, where three enterprise licenses can collapse into one shared Flex license. - Health monitoring and repair are separate but complementary capabilities
Auto-Heal detects and repairs broken session hosts automatically. Agentless monitoring provides near real-time visibility across Windows Cloud, polling interval configurable down to one minute with a default of every five minutes, all without installing agents in customer environments. The platform deploys into your own Azure tenant. - Named proof anchors the cost and operations case
Equitable Bank reported 74% compute savings per month after deploying Nerdio auto-scaling, and Penn State reported a 71% reduction in Azure Virtual Desktop spend while adding 1,000+ users. TechTarget's Enterprise Strategy Group, found Nerdio Manager lowered Azure Virtual Desktop costs in every customer scenario studied and reduced IT admin hours by up to 50%.
Deallocating idle VMs, right-sizing hosts, and automating image and application updates is what keeps the TCO model close to the bill after cutover. Deallocating off-hours capacity and keeping images, applications, and policies current is the difference between the TCO you projected and the bill you actually get.
What this means for your Horizon-to-AVD timeline
A large enterprise migration can run several months, driven mostly by the parallel-build requirement and profile conversion work. With tooling, that compresses meaningfully. Carvana reported a 14-day Nerdio deployment with 40% to 50% cost reduction compared to their previous platform.
Align the schedule to your Horizon renewal date. Resolve data residency before the Azure foundation goes in, put your hardest personas in the pilot, and hold coexistence until the production environment matches the business case you modeled.
The management layer you pick shapes both the cutover and the years after it, because parallel-build means you're committing to how the new environment runs.
Get a demo to see how Nerdio Manager works across your Windows 365 and Azure Virtual Desktop environment, or try it free in your own Azure tenant.
Frequently asked questions about Omnissa Horizon VDI
Resources
Learn more about Nerdio Manager