We need to move our Windows and Linux development teams from on-premises provisioned virtual machines to Azure, and I'm looking for practical experience with interactive development workloads.
For Windows developers, the workloads include large builds, compiling, and resource-intensive IDEs. I'm considering dedicated Personal Azure Virtual Desktop (AVD) machines because they offer more flexibility with VM sizing, GPU options, and cost controls such as shutting hosts down when idle or using reservations. How does Personal AVD compare with Windows 365 for this type of workload? Are there trade-offs or regrets to consider, and would Microsoft Dev Box be relevant?
For Linux developers, I'm considering dedicated Ubuntu VMs accessed through VS Code Remote or SSH, possibly with RDP where needed. Another option is Windows AVD with WSL2 enabled. Which approach has worked best for interactive Linux development?
I'd especially appreciate advice on build and IDE performance, storage and caching, user profiles, usability, and anything you would design differently after operating the environment in production.
5 Answers
Personal AVD is a reasonable starting point for demanding Windows developers, especially when users need different VM sizes or occasional GPU capacity. The ability to shut personal hosts down outside working hours can also reduce costs. Windows 365 is simpler and gives you a more predictable monthly price, but it provides less control over sizing and lifecycle management. For equal VM specifications, the underlying performance should be broadly comparable; the main differences are management and billing.
Don’t decide based only on how quickly the desktop logs in. Prototype with one of your largest repositories and measure clean build times, incremental builds, IDE indexing, dependency restores, and disk usage. Storage latency and build-cache behavior can matter more than simply adding vCPUs or memory. Test the actual developer workflow before committing to a standard VM size.
For Linux development, native Ubuntu VMs accessed with SSH or VS Code Remote would generally be my first choice. They avoid the extra compatibility and troubleshooting layer that comes with WSL2. WSL2 on Windows AVD can work well when developers also need Windows-only tools, but it adds another operating system layer to patch, monitor, and support. I’d reserve it for mixed Windows/Linux workflows rather than making it the default for every Linux developer.
The best AVD design depends heavily on usage patterns. If developers are active for a normal full workday, personal hosts may be appropriate. If usage is intermittent and the workloads are reasonably standardized, pooled or shared configurations could reduce costs. Check whether users can work from a common image and whether hosts are interchangeable before choosing dedicated machines. Also plan user profiles and persistent storage early, since oversized profiles and poorly managed caches become painful later.
Microsoft Dev Box should be checked against its current availability and roadmap before treating it as an option. In practice, the main decision is usually between AVD and Windows 365: AVD offers more control over host pools, scaling, profiles, and shutdown behavior, while Windows 365 is easier to operate with more predictable per-user pricing. A small pilot covering both Windows and Linux workflows should reveal which trade-off matters most.

Related Questions
Can't Load PhpMyadmin On After Server Update
Redirect www to non-www in Apache Conf
How To Check If Your SSL Cert Is SHA 1
Windows TrackPad Gestures