I can see the security benefit of a virtualized desktop, and in some industries I understand that that's enough to justify this kind of solution. Aside from th

I can see the security benefit of a virtualized desktop, and in some industries I understand that that's enough to justify this kind of solution. Aside from that, I don't see so many benefits. The company still needs to provide to each employee a device, and training. I don't see many savings on this side. Companies going for cheap devices will still go for cheap devices, while those looking for higher end devices won't settle for cheap alternatives. Besides, SSD and CPU are now very cheap, so you can get very good configurations for cheap. On the other hand, batteries are still expensive, and virtualization might drain them more than using the local CPU depending on the use case. If the added value is the easier configuration phase and maintenance for IT (software side, as devices still need maintenance), then ChromeOS seems like a much better approach. Instead of delegating to a third party the whole OS (virtualized), the customer only transfers the management of the services. And to be fair, if security here is the main concern, then ChromeOS seems still better positioned, both because data is on the cloud, and because of how the OS is "restricted". At the end of the day, WVD seems like a way to sell (also) azure services on top of windows. So I wouldn't be surprised if companies evaluating this option will see an increment in costs. At this point I wonder if it's really worth, especially considering that if for any reason the company cannot keep paying Microsoft for the service, or it's cut off from the service (e.g. non us company -> sanctions), basically the whole company is back to paper in a matter of minutes, while with non-virtualized solutions there's a much bigger safety net.