New open-access research reframes native MSIX vs App Attach for Azure Virtual Desktop as a capability decision, not a performance benchmark.
Most AVD teams still argue native MSIX versus App Attach as a performance question. It is not. App Attach is an image-based delivery and assignment model. Native MSIX is a package install and provisioning model.
I have published a preprint that compares both on Azure Virtual Desktop. The study covers native MSIX across per-user install, provisioned availability, image-baked baselines, and a desired-state rollout loop, and App Attach across the full image-attach lifecycle in VHDX and CimFS, including AVD control-plane and host-pool assignment pilots. Bounded lifecycle timing on a single Windows 11 host supports the framework; it is not a general benchmark.
The output is a route-selection rule, not a winner: native MSIX when install, provision, or desired-state rollout meets the requirement; App Attach when the requirement is image externalisation and dynamic assignment on shared pooled hosts.
📄 Read the full preprint (open access, CC BY 4.0): Native MSIX or App Attach for Azure Virtual Desktop?
