If you work with Microsoft Power BI, you've almost certainly heard this question over the past year:
"Do we still use Power BI, or are we supposed to move to Microsoft Fabric now?"
The short answer is straightforward: Power BI didn't go away. Fabric didn't replace it. But the context Power BI operates in has changed — and that matters for architecture, governance, and capacity planning.
This article breaks down what actually changed, what's mostly marketing, and how Power BI professionals should think about Fabric in practice today.
Power BI vs Fabric: The Correct Mental Model
Before Fabric, Microsoft analytics was a collection of loosely connected services:
- Power BI
- Azure Data Factory
- Synapse
- Dataflows
- Separate storage layers
Fabric's goal is consolidation:
- One platform
- One storage layer
- One capacity model
Power BI is now one workload inside Fabric, not a separate product line.
What Actually Changed (And Matters)
1. OneLake Is Real — and It's the Biggest Shift
Fabric introduces OneLake, a single, tenant-wide data lake shared across Fabric workloads.
Why this matters in practice:
- Data no longer has to be copied between tools
- Multiple teams can access the same underlying data
- Storage and compute are more clearly separated
Best-practice implications for Power BI:
- Treat OneLake as a centralized data foundation, not a dumping ground
- Keep transformation ownership clear (engineering vs BI)
- Use Power BI semantic models to consume and shape data, not to store it redundantly
This reinforces a long-standing Power BI principle: centralize data, standardize logic, decentralize reporting.
2. Dataflows Didn't Disappear — They Evolved (Carefully)
Power BI Dataflows still exist. Fabric adds Dataflows Gen2, which:
- Write directly to OneLake
- Can be reused by non–Power BI workloads
- Still use Power Query under the hood
What didn't change:
- They're best suited for light to moderate transformations
- They're not a replacement for full-scale data engineering pipelines
- They require careful performance and dependency management
Practical guidance:
- Use Dataflows for reusable, business-owned transformations
- Avoid pushing heavy joins, large-scale fact processing, or complex orchestration into them
- Keep Gen1 dataflows if they're stable and meeting business needs
3. Capacity: Unified, but Less Forgiving
Fabric introduces unified capacity (F-SKUs) that power:
- Power BI
- Data Engineering
- Data Warehousing
- Real-Time Analytics
This replaces multiple disconnected pricing and capacity models.
What's better:
- One shared pool of compute
- Easier architectural alignment across teams
- Fewer platform silos
What's harder in reality:
- Power BI Pro licenses are still required for authors
- BI workloads now compete with engineering workloads
- Poorly designed pipelines can directly impact report performance
- Cost attribution across workloads is still evolving
When Fabric Capacity Makes Sense (And When It Doesn't)
Fabric capacity is a strong fit when:
- Multiple teams share the same data platform
- BI, engineering, and analytics workloads coexist
- You already struggle with Premium constraints
- Centralized governance is a priority
Traditional Power BI Premium still makes sense when:
- Power BI is the primary or only workload
- Fabric engineering features are out of scope
- Cost predictability matters more than flexibility
- The BI team owns most of the data lifecycle
Fabric is not mandatory — it's optional architecture.
What's Mostly Hype (For Now)
"You Must Move Everything to Fabric"
Not true.
- Existing Power BI workspaces continue to work
- Premium capacities still exist
- Microsoft supports gradual, selective adoption
There is no requirement to redesign a functioning Power BI estate just because Fabric exists.
"Power BI Is Just a Front-End Now"
Also not true.
Power BI semantic models still:
- Define business metrics
- Enforce governance and security
- Control performance at query time
Fabric adds upstream options — it does not replace the semantic layer. Business logic still belongs closest to consumption.
Fabric Readiness: An Honest Reality Check
Fabric is directionally strong, but not frictionless:
- Monitoring across workloads is still fragmented
- CI/CD for Fabric assets is evolving
- Cost visibility at workload level can be unclear
- Many organizations lack the engineering maturity Fabric assumes
For some teams, Fabric will feel empowering. For others, it will introduce operational complexity. Both outcomes are valid.
What This Means for Your Power BI Setup Today
If you already follow Power BI best practices, you're not behind.
Keep Doing:
- Star schema modeling
- Thin reports over shared semantic models
- Certified datasets
- Clear Dev/Test/Prod separation
Start Evaluating:
- Centralized data in OneLake
- Dataflows Gen2 where reuse is required
- Capacity planning that accounts for non-BI workloads
Avoid:
- Rebuilding solutions "because Fabric"
- Mixing heavy ETL logic into Power BI models
- Assuming capacity will compensate for poor design
The Bottom Line
Power BI wasn't replaced — it was repositioned.
Fabric is:
- An architectural unification
- A platform-level shift
- A stress test for existing BI practices
For Power BI professionals, the message is simple: Fabric is not a reason to redesign your Power BI estate. It's a reason to validate whether your existing design was sound to begin with.
If your foundation is solid, Fabric isn't something you need to rush into. It's something you can adopt — deliberately, incrementally, and on your terms.