Navigating the VMware by Broadcom acquisition

In November 2023, the technology landscape witnessed a monumental shift with Broadcom's acquisition of VMware for $69 billion.

What started as a licensing restructure has become something more significant. Two and a half years on, the picture is clearer: Broadcom has systematically dismantled the partner ecosystem, moved customers onto subscription terms at substantially higher rates, and pushed the enterprise market towards a decision it had been deferring for years. For many organizations, the question is no longer whether to evaluate alternatives — it's how to migrate without disruption.

This post covers where things stand, what the Kubernetes-based path looks like in practice, and how to think about the transition.

Broadcom/VMware takeover overview

Below are essential milestones in the transition timeline from VMware to VMware by Broadcom, featuring important dates and necessary actions for businesses during this period of transformation.

Why this has accelerated

When this post was first written in 2024, many organizations were in a wait-and-see mode. That period is largely over. Several forces have combined to make the evaluation active rather than theoretical.

• Renewal pressure is real: Customers approaching the end of their Enterprise License Agreements are finding the new subscription terms materially more expensive. The pricing model change from RAM to CPU core has hit organizations with large memory-to-core ratios particularly hard. Renewal conversations that would have been routine three years ago are now surfacing alternatives seriously.
• The technical path has matured: In 2024, running VMs on Kubernetes was a reasonable proposition for the technically adventurous. In 2026, it's a production-ready deployment pattern with mature tooling, direct migration support, and platforms built specifically around this architecture. The risk profile has changed.
• Cloud-native architecture has won: Applications are increasingly containerized. Kubernetes has become the dominant orchestration platform. Infrastructure optimized for VM-first workloads is becoming less well-aligned with the application estate organizations actually run. The direction of travel is consistent.
• AI infrastructure requirements don't fit the VMware model: GPU workloads increasingly common in enterprises align more directly with Kubernetes-native scheduling than with VMware's traditional VM-based model. Organizations investing in AI infrastructure are building on Kubernetes regardless, which makes a unified platform more attractive.

What VMware teams need to know before running VMs on Kubernetes

VMware teams increasingly find themselves evaluating Kubernetes-based alternatives, whether as full replacements for VMware or as parallel platforms hosting specific workloads. The evaluation typically surfaces a specific question: can Kubernetes actually run VMs the way VMware does, and if so, what does the migration involve?

The short answer is yes, through KubeVirt and related tooling. The longer answer involves architectural differences that VMware teams need to understand before committing. Kubernetes-based virtualization isn't a direct replacement for vSphere; it's a different approach to the same problem with its own trade-offs. Understanding those trade-offs before starting a migration prevents the frustration of discovering them mid-project.

The context: why VMware teams are looking

Several forces have combined to make this evaluation something VMware teams are actively pursuing rather than speculating about.

• Post-Broadcom licensing changes: The Broadcom acquisition of VMware in late 2023 restructured licensing terms. Multi-year enterprise agreements were replaced with shorter terms at higher rates. Bundled products were consolidated. Pricing certainty eroded. Renewal conversations that would have been routine three years ago now surface alternatives.
• Cloud-native application architecture: Applications are increasingly containerized. Kubernetes has become the dominant orchestration platform. Infrastructure optimized for VM-first workloads is becoming less well-aligned with the application architecture organizations actually run.
• Edge and cloud convergence: Modern enterprises run workloads across public cloud, private data centers, and edge locations. Kubernetes-based platforms operate more consistently across these environments than VMware-based platforms.
• AI infrastructure requirements: GPU workloads increasingly common in enterprises align more directly with Kubernetes-native scheduling than with VMware's traditional VM-based model.

None of these individually forces the evaluation. Combined, they're producing a sustained shift in enterprise infrastructure strategy.

What VMware teams should evaluate

Before committing to a Kubernetes-based platform, VMware teams should evaluate several specific dimensions:

• KubeVirt maturity and support: Not all Kubernetes distributions support KubeVirt equally well. Evaluate the specific platform's KubeVirt version, support model, and operational track record for VM workloads. Platforms like CivoStack Enterprise that treat KubeVirt as a first-class citizen typically produce better outcomes than platforms that treat it as an add-on.
• Feature parity for essential VMware capabilities: Live migration, high availability, resource pools (or equivalent), backup/restore, and networking policies all have equivalents in the Kubernetes-based model. Evaluate whether the specific capabilities the VMware environment depends on have working equivalents.
• Storage architecture: Storage is often the trickiest part of the migration. Evaluate the CSI drivers available, performance characteristics, and how well existing storage patterns translate.
• Networking model: If the VMware environment uses NSX heavily, the migration to Kubernetes CNI-based networking involves substantial work. Evaluate the specific networking patterns needed and how they map onto the target platform.
• Operational tooling gaps: Identify which of the team's current tools carry over and which need replacement. Budget for the tooling replacement, not just the platform migration.
• Third-party integrations: Backup solutions, monitoring tools, security tools, and DR products all need equivalents in the Kubernetes-based environment. Evaluate which existing tools support the new platform and which don't.
• Skills and training requirements: The team's existing VMware skills don't directly translate. Budget for training, and expect the operational maturity to develop over time.

The commercial dimension

The commercial case for Kubernetes-based alternatives varies by workload and by specific licensing terms. The pattern that's driving many current evaluations:

• VMware Cloud Foundation licensing under Broadcom's restructured pricing has substantially increased the per-VM cost for many enterprises
• Kubernetes-based platforms typically use different pricing models - per-node consumption, per-resource pricing, or vRAM-based licensing

Civo's CivoStack Enterprise, for instance, uses a per-GB vRAM licensing model at $3.50 per GB vRAM per month for the base bundle. The company's VMware alternative positioning notes savings of up to 80% compared to Broadcom's rates for equivalent workloads. The structural advantage is predictability: multi-year fixed pricing removes the renewal uncertainty that's now baked into VMware customers' expectations.

For most enterprises evaluating this seriously, the honest commercial comparison requires modeling actual workloads and specific licensing terms. Both sides can produce misleading numbers by choosing which components to include or exclude. Careful TCO modeling supports better decisions than headline comparisons.

The migration patterns that work

Several patterns recur in successful VMware-to-Kubernetes migrations:

• Workload-by-workload rather than big-bang: Migrate specific workloads to Kubernetes as they naturally warrant it (renewal, refactoring, growth), rather than trying to move everything at once. The parallel operation period during migration is normal.
• Greenfield Kubernetes for new deployments: New workloads land on Kubernetes; existing VMware workloads continue running until they're specifically migrated. Reduces the pressure on the migration timeline.
• Prioritize workloads by strategic value: Migrate the workloads where Kubernetes-based infrastructure delivers the clearest benefits first. AI/ML workloads, modern container-based applications, and workloads with significant growth pressure often produce the strongest early wins.
• Retain team on VMware while others learn Kubernetes: Not every team member needs to become a Kubernetes expert simultaneously. A subset of the team can lead Kubernetes adoption while others maintain VMware; both groups can develop over time.
• Full strategic transition when renewal forces it: For enterprises approaching major VMware renewal decisions, a full strategic transition on a defined timeline may be the appropriate response. This requires more investment but produces cleaner outcomes.

What can Civo do for you?

Whether you are a customer or a partner, Civo offers an easy path off VMware.

A VMware alternative with feature rich support, our CivoStack Enterprise service delivers cutting-edge features and tools, focusing on ease-of-use, smooth migration, and 24x7 advanced support.

• On-prem support (keep using your own hardware)
• Up to 80% cheaper than Broadcom
• Simple license model based on VRAM
• Long term commitment on pricing
• Free migration support
• Support for multiple storage vendors
• Live migration support for VMs
• High availability deployment options
• Multi-tenancy support
• Windows/ Linux support
• Simple end user management UI
• Hybrid cloud support
• Support for AWS, Azure, GCP
• Infrastructure-as-code tools (CLI, API, Terraform)
• Self-service portal with billing API
• 24x7 Enterprise customer support

CivoStack Enterprise is a future-proof cloud-native platform that integrates Kubernetes, laaS, PaaS, DBaaS, Object Storage, WASM, GPUs, and Al/ML capabilities, providing a comprehensive and scalable environment for cutting-edge computing needs.

The strategic takeaway

Running VMs on Kubernetes is a mature capability, supported by well-developed tooling and increasingly by platforms designed around this architecture. For VMware teams evaluating alternatives in the post-Broadcom era, the technical question is not whether it's possible but whether it fits the organization's specific requirements.

The right platforms - those with mature KubeVirt support, feature parity for essential capabilities, VM migration tooling, and cloud-native architecture underneath - produce sustainable migration outcomes. Platforms like Civo's CivoStack Enterprise and FlexCore illustrate this pattern; other Kubernetes-based enterprise platforms occupy similar positions in the market. The specific evaluation should focus on which platform actually supports the workloads being migrated and the operational requirements the team has, rather than on generic Kubernetes claims.

For most enterprises, the decision is workload-by-workload rather than platform-wide. The workloads where Kubernetes-based infrastructure delivers clear benefits migrate first; the workloads that don't yet warrant migration continue on VMware. The direction of travel is consistent across the enterprise market; the specific pace varies by organization.

FAQs