11 ms·

Report may suggest that login requirement for Oculus Quest 2 is anticompetitive

370 points by vrfinal 6y ago

annadane 6y ago
Of course it is. And so is their purchase of Instagram, Whatsapp, Giphy, and the entire way they've cornered the market with abusive and coercive practices
- rektide 6y ago
  I'm way less concerned about those software platforms being with Facebook. there's plenty of room for competition. gdpr grants decent citizens rights to take their data away. there is zero escape from this nightmare platform however. hardware we end up forever hard locked into.
  - rektide 6y ago
    one place I am not sure how I feel is game consoles. microsoft & sony both require accounts to use the mandatory platforms their consoles come with. is this ok? how us this different from Facebook demanding users use the Facebook platform with the Facebook face console?
    - mbreese 6y ago
      I think the difference is that the Microsoft and Sony accounts are only used for authentication/account purposes. Facebook accounts are for much more than ensuring you have access to a game or Office, etc. plus, as others have said — you can have different Microsoft/Sony accounts. So you can split your professional and personal lives. This isn’t possible with Facebook. The Facebook/oculus situation would be like if Microsoft required you to use a LinkedIn account to play the newest version of Halo. That would be equally strange.
    - bigbubba 6y ago
      Are those online platforms now mandatory for consoles? They weren't a few years ago when last I had one.
    - imtringued 6y ago
      The problem is that Facebook isn't a platform, it is a product. They could have changed that but they didn't.
  - annadane 6y ago
    GDPR might but if such a thing didn't exist Facebook absolutely would dominate the world, which is exactly what they want, sick fucks
- corysama 6y ago
  "The House Antitrust Subcommittee determined Facebook wields monopoly powers in social network and has maintained its position by acquiring, copying or killing its competitors, according to a report released by the subcommittee on Tuesday. " https://www.cnbc.com/2020/10/06/house-antitrust-committee-facebook-monopoly-buys-kills-competitors.html https://www.cnbc.com/2020/10/06/house-antitrust-committee-fa...
- annadane 6y ago
  Downvotes from shills
  - drstewart 6y ago
    Keep these kind of low quality comments on reddit, please
    - annadane 6y ago
      They're not low quality (certainly not compared to other ones here). It's a very real possibility HN is astroturfed
rektide 6y ago
agreed. captive computing platforms are captivating.
- rektide 6y ago
  fwiw this was a dig on apple & anyone else building "app consoles". i'm not ready for the post-general-purpose-computing nightmare-era.
graeme 6y ago
> conditioning access to a product or service in which a firm has market power to the use of a separate product or service is anticompetitive Is the house committee arguing Facebook is a monopoly in....VR? From the stats I found Oculus has a 20-30% share. I don’t like the Facebook requirement for Oculus, but not everything I don’t lime constitutes a monopoly. Other have commented that the house assumes what it sets out to prove. You’d first have to show market power to make this kind of analysis.
- augstein 6y ago
  Which standalone VR headset would you recommend, if one can‘t use a Facebook login?
  - millstone 6y ago
    "Standalone" is a nice feature but not a separate product category. Facebook rightly considers Sony, Microsoft, HTC as competing with Oculus.
    - ericflo 6y ago
      Standalone absolutely is a separate product cateogory. It's the difference between a computer monitor and an iPad: even though they both have screens, they are different in kind. They target different market segments, have completely different software ecosystems both for end-users and developers, orders of magnitude more R&D requirements, higher switching costs, etc.
      - millstone 6y ago
        It's the difference between a smart TV and a dumb TV. They have different guts but the market is the same. Major titles like Beat Saber or Half Life Alyx can be played on either standalone or tethered headsets. Facebook offers both under the Oculus brand and positions them together: https://www.oculus.com/compare/ https://www.oculus.com/compare/
shajznnckfke 6y ago
The Xbox requires that you have a Microsoft account, right? This seems like an inconvenience but I have a hard time understanding why it’s worth Congress’s time. Isn’t the world full of products that have to be registered by making an account in some system or another? I guess I could understand if somebody didn’t have internet access and wants to use Oculus, but they wouldn’t be able to download any games either even if no account was required. The complaint seems like more of an ideological thing against Facebook, but I’m attempting to take it at face value.
- r3drock 6y ago
  In principle I would say you are right, but it is actually a far greater hassle to make (or keep) a facebook account than some generic account.
  - millstone 6y ago
    Have you actually had problems making/keeping a Facebook account? I have several throwaways which continue to work fine.
    - Polylactic_acid 6y ago
      I have had mine locked in the past. Obviously facebook has some system that is locking accounts because so many people have faced this issue
    - coding123 6y ago
      I have created accounts that got immediately locked the same day. I have also had accounts that got locked about 2 months in.
      - shajznnckfke 6y ago
        I had an experience with Facebook locking my account once, and I came to suspect that they were doing it to punish me for logging in on a mobile browser to promote the app. The UX really seemed to be designed to be painful - interfaces where the buttons were just out of reach unless you scrolled a particular way, scary language implying it was unsafe to use the site that way. I felt like someone was getting a bonus based on how many people they could push off the browser into using the app.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
save_ferris 6y ago
> The report states that, “conditioning access to a product or service in which a firm has market power to the use of a separate product or service is anticompetitive.” I agree with this. I shouldn’t have to have a social media account in order to use a product that isn’t directly related to social media. Accounts like Microsoft aren’t the same as Facebook IMO because they tie products and services I’ve purchased to my account, which I believe is a reasonable and relevant use of an online account in this context. Facebook doesn’t do any of that, nor does it exist to manage purchases of products or services I’ve made. It exists to siphon personal data about me to serve me ads. If we’re serious about things like privacy, then we have to be equally serious about corporate attempts to coerce consumers into handing over data to use completely unrelated products. This is absolutely anti-privacy and should be dealt with.
- save_ferris 6y ago
  Tangentially related: newly-created Facebook accounts are a whole lot harder to keep up these days if you’re just using them for a single purpose, like following events. I created an account last year to get more socially involved in my community but I didn’t want to post any personal information and my account kept getting disabled unless I added pictures and filled out certain sections of my profile. Not sure if it was anti-automation technology or what, but I wound up giving up after trying twice because I didn’t want to give them what they asked for. Knowing that this is required to use a product like Oculus is unacceptable.
  - freddie_mercury 6y ago
    I had this same experience yesterday. Tried to create a new account and it was insta-locked until I started providing personal information. I hadn't even used it.
  - culturestate 6y ago
    I don't use FB personally, but I needed access to Business Manager for some client work so I created an account using my work email and tried to sign up for BM. They immediately locked the account, asked for a copy of my ID, and then permanently banned that account after I provided it. I have no idea why, there's no mechanism for appeal, and I can't even submit a request to have the image of my ID removed because that form is gated behind the account. Their "KYC" system has no problem with the 10-year-old alt that I created in college using a fake name which has never done anything but manage some ancient meme pages, though...
softwaredoug 6y ago
The problem with antitrust enforcement w/ Big Tech will be users actually want vertical integration in a lot of contexts. And this vertical integration aligns consumers with the large tech companies in a way that hasn't been true with previous antitrust cases. Yes we could have more open standards, but the cartesian product of every integration eventually doesn't scale. What Microsoft did with Windows in this regard in the PC ecosystem is actually quite phenomenal But I know my Airpods will integrate seamlessly with my iPhone, which integrates seamlessly with my Apple Watch, etc in a way that's clearly very intentional, works, and saves endless headaches. I also know that there's entire companies going out of business because a company like Apple will gobble up prominent accessory markets.
- harry8 6y ago
  I think you're conflating "able to do" vertical integration with "must do" there, fwiw.
  - chillacy 6y ago
    If you want to use the apple watch you must have an iphone, which somehow seems worse: https://www.imore.com/can-you-use-your-apple-watch-your-android-phone https://www.imore.com/can-you-use-your-apple-watch-your-andr...
    - tomjakubowski 6y ago
      It doesn't seem worse to me. Apple is free to make and sell accessories for its own hardware products. It would be a problem if Apple sold its smart watch while also breaking iPhone's compatibility with third party smart watches.
      - anoncake 6y ago
        It's also a problem that Apple sells its own phones while breaking the Apple Watch's compatibility with other phones.
perryizgr8 6y ago
While sign in with apple is totally fine. I hate Facebook like any normal person but this is ridiculous.
- bigbubba 6y ago
  Does the report say that? The article doesn't mention it and the report is 449 pages long, so I haven't read it.
- intellirogue 6y ago
  You can create a throwaway Apple account that has no connection to the rest of your life. You can't do that with Facebook.
andrelayer 6y ago
How is this any different than the iPhone and Apple Id?
- notsuoh 6y ago
  I think one of the key differentiators is that an Apple ID isn’t required to use an iPhone. There are other differences, but I believe this is the main relevant one.
  - LexGray 6y ago
    Only to use non-Apple apps on an iPhone since you can only install things tied to the Apple App Store.
    - fomine3 6y ago
      Quest 2 is just a brick without FB account meanwhile iPhone has Safari and other apps.
- MBCook 6y ago
  The Apple ID isn’t a separate business that you are being forced to use if you want to use your iPhone. Imagine Apple owned Comcast and required you to have a Comcast account to use your iPhone. That’s what they’re mad about here.
arsome 6y ago
Hmm, Xbox/Microsoft, Google/Android, even Apple/iOS... this will be interesting if courts actually back this up at all.
- hombre_fatal 6y ago
  Windows/Microsoft
- grumple 6y ago
  There is a fundamental difference which is that none of those auth methods require you to provide photos, government id, real names, real birthdays, etc. Facebook does. If they spun out their auth as a separate service and didn’t require handing over all your private information, things might be different. But generally the tide is turning against vertical integration, as it should. Companies using their vast wealth from one industry to then provide free products in another (just until competitors go under) is far too common, as is chaining people to products because they have a product from another category.
tmsh 6y ago
I think not forcing Facebook login will speed up adoption of VR and will benefit Facebook in the long run anyway. Source: my brother in law this weekend was going to buy an Oculus Quest 2 after I showed him my Oculus Quest 1. But the Facebook login requirement gave him pause. There’s a lot of intersection between early adopters and people consciously not on Facebook (maybe on other Facebook properties but not Facebook itself).
- zmmmmm 6y ago
  The biggest reason imho is that the entire enterprise market is going to eschew these since they cannot ask their employees to log into personal Facebook accounts. Throwing out the whole enterprise business market for this is insanity in my view. Facebook has a real chance here to be the owner of the next, possibly last great computing platform - but not if they hobble themselves like that.
  - danbmil99 6y ago
    "the Oculus for Business platform uses a separate login process that will remain unchanged."
hombre_fatal 6y ago
If you enable wifi during Win10 installation (haven't tested otherwise), it requires you to provide a valid Microsoft account (Outlook, Skype, ...) to install Windows. I don't see how this is different from OP. Windows even tells you it supports local logins, but to put in a valid Skype account first or whatever so you can complete the installation before opting into a local logic. I shouldn't need to give my Skype or Outlook credentials to install an OS.
- kminehart 6y ago
  You can install windows 10 without signing in.
  - briffle 6y ago
    Only if network is disabled in new images
- myself248 6y ago
  Really? I just clicked "skip".
- bmarquez 6y ago
  I can confirm this, I recently (within the last month) had to reinstall Windows 10 and was forced to create an account. But I was able to bypass by putting obviously fake credentials (like admin@outlook.com or something similar) and only when it didn't work got the option to create a local account.
- briffle 6y ago
  Hilariously, if it's a work computer, and your employer uses office365 for email, etc, those accounts don't work.
- tomc1985 6y ago
  Not true. You can still skip it. Apps are getting sneakier about switching that on behind your back though.
sprite 6y ago
I pre ordered one then realized the fb login requirement and cancelled it. Wonder how many are in the same boat.
- ericd 6y ago
  I'm sure there are a bunch in the same boat. I owned Oculus' DK1 and DK2, but when I thought through what FB owning Oculus meant, I cancelled my original Rift preorder and bought a Vive instead. More recently, my resolve against letting FB get their data proboscis into my life was weakening with the Quest 2 launch. Fortunately, they came up with that forceful reminder of why I made that decision in the first place.
  - Digit-Al 6y ago
    I know what you mean. I have no problem owning and using a Facebook account, but that's my choice and I choose what to share. I don't know about you but when I first heard that Facebook had acquired Oculus my first thought was something along the lines of "Oh FFS". In my opinion, if I pay money for a product I don't expect to have my privacy violated so I can be further monetised. The point of a Facebook account is I have made a deal that I will allow information about my use of the product to be used as payment for the product. That is not the case for something I have already paid for.
- oe 6y ago
  I'm in the market for a VR headset and Oculus tech seems to be the best right now but because of this I'll be waiting for whatever upgrades other companies release next year.
  - woutr_be 6y ago
    Same here, I was really excited for this. But the FB requirement is stupid, now I’ll wait for other players to catch up.
  - cannedslime 6y ago
    It is by no stretch "the best" in a technical sense. Its just the cheapest, mainly because you do not pay all the price up front. You ARE the product! The hardware of standalone VR is so limited that you are better off going with PCVR for at least 5 years.
engineer_22 6y ago
Will facebook censure my political speech on VR between now and the election?
KingOfCoders 6y ago
As an Oculus Rift S user I disagree, Facebook (not longer a user for a long time) should be able to require FB login. I would/will no longer buy an Oculus though.
jcrawfordor 6y ago
It seems to me that the fundamental difference between this and other platforms that require login is this: for Facebook, having an account is the product. Facebook has designed everything about the Facebook experience to funnel users from registration to "engagement," and this is their main line of business and revenue source. Anything Facebook does to require someone to have an account is also forcing them to be a customer of their principle product. The same situation doesn't really apply to Microsoft or Apple. No doubt there are examples of both trying to monetize account holders (e.g. cross-promotion of products) but neither of them views the "having an account experience" as being the product. You don't "sign up for Microsoft" in the sense that you sign up for Facebook, the account is not a feature but just a tool for providing identity to various products. This lets Microsoft and Apple make a far stronger argument that requiring an account to use a product is just a technical aspect of the working of the product. Facebook would find it extremely challenging to make this same argument. Google might find itself in a position that is more of an awkward in-between, except for basically all of their attempts at either generalized social media or meaningfully unifying the social aspects of their products have failed, so if they're trying to funnel Google Docs users into being YouTube users they're at least miserably bad at it.
- jobigoud 6y ago
  There is already a concept of Oculus account that works well, created mine in 2013. Linking this Oculus account to a Facebook account should be an option for people that are interested in using social aspects of VR, access to that link should be a permission grantable on a per-application basis. Since there is already an account system that works it's impossible and bad faith for them to pretend it's mandatory to use a different product accounts. Why can't they keep their hands away like for Instagram and Whatsapp?
nodamage 6y ago
I expect a class action lawsuit will be filed over this if it hasn't already. Requiring the use of a Facebook account in order to access a VR headset is a pretty clear case of tying, especially since this policy changed after Oculus customers had already bought their headsets.
renewiltord 6y ago
Interesting. I wonder what this means for requiring Login with Apple for things sold on the App Store.
bloody-crow 6y ago
Hahaha, it sure is. In the sense that a lot of ppl will not even consider picking up Oculus because of this requirement, which would make it the opposite of competitive — anticompetitive. it's a joke
ryandrake 6y ago
Let's just be glad Facebook didn't buy NVIDIA or something. Imagine having to have a social media account in order to get display drivers working so you can see your screen. This is absolutely bonkers and should not be acceptable.
zmmmmm 6y ago
All they had to do was grandfather in existing accounts and most of this would not be happening. Not that I am suggesting that would not be evil, but honestly, I do not understand why they did not just say, "if you bought your headset under our original terms and conditions, you can use it forever that way".
- jobigoud 6y ago
  That would be the minimum but why should I create a Facebook account to use new Oculus VR headsets? You can use the device without installing any social applications. Nothing mandates anything more than a basic Oculus account.
Oricle 6y ago
Jews again! https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=xc9msnvRyJ0 https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=xc9msnvRyJ0 Educate yourself, this war has raged for 2020 years now! And guess who's losing? Yup, gentiles!
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
franciscop 6y ago
I was very excited about the Oculus Quest, was considering buying it and suddenly the Oculus Quest 2 came up. Then I dug deeper and I saw I needed a facebook account (which I don't have nor want). So because I don't have a FB account Oculus/Facebook has lost hundreds of dollars for me. How does that even make sense?
- sdfkkksdfsdff 6y ago
  Because you don't want a FB account, you missed out on an incredible VR experience. How does that even make sense?
  - raxxorrax 6y ago
    It is fun but not worth integrating Facebook into your life. Better use the alternatives. Sadly I own 2 devices from oculus. Will use them until they don't work anymore and then they are headed to scrap. Would have a bad conscience selling the devices and maybe that doesn't even work.
    - jmiskovic 6y ago
      I'm also looking forward to alternatives. Pico VR seems to be the only standalone headset? Don't worry about selling them, there were no reported problems with switching Quest/Rift to a different account. I still expect existing devices will continue to work with Oculus account. The FB account will be required for slew of upcoming social features, like using same avatar across different games, group of people moving between games, the Horizon and other social content... If they make existing HW unusable without switching to FB account, they would face class-action lawsuit and media backlash. I think they want to self-regulate as much as possible so they'll try to avoid those pesky court rulings. As for your original question, FB doesn't care about few hundered dollars across few tens of thousand users that are reluctant to switch to FB accounts. They are playing the long game of becoming the only relevant player in VR/AR market.
  - TigeriusKirk 6y ago
    They need users more than users need them. That's how it makes sense.
cannedslime 6y ago
My love for Carmack is only over shadowed by my disdain for facebook.
supernova87a 6y ago
I'm not a fan of Facebook, and I don't really have a lot of interest in VR. But I will opine that it's getting a little ridiculous how every other story these days seems to fall back to the argument that everything you don't like must be "anticompetitive". You don't have to use Facebook. You don't have to use VR technology. These are all voluntary activities that people actively choose to engage in, and are not public utilities. Feel free to walk away from either or both. It's as if people are complaining that because they bought tickets to their favorite live sports event, they were forced to pay to park their car there too. You don't have to do any of those things. And aside from that, on the actual anticompetitive argument, does this prevent anyone from coming in to offer their own version of these technologies? Not to my outsider's view. Just switch it off. Don't let it so dominate your life that you rely on it becoming a federal court case. It's all voluntary. The more we participate in things that others have the opportunity to exert control over, the more it materializes.
- anoncake 6y ago
  > You don't have to use Facebook. You don't understand what a social network is. It's a natural monopoly.
- klmadfejno 6y ago
  > It's as if people are complaining that because they bought tickets to their favorite live sports event, they were forced to pay to park their car there too. You don't have to do any of those things. A better example would be people bought tickets to their favorite live sports event, and then were forced to login to facebook before entry.
sdfkkksdfsdff 6y ago
I don't understand why Oculus, being owned by Facebook, should not be allowed to require a Facebook login. I don't like it much, but it is their company. They invested shitloads of money in it, too. It's also not the only VR headset in town.
- ryukafalz 6y ago
  > It's also not the only VR headset in town. It is the only standalone VR headset in town that’s 1) currently supported and 2) available/affordable for individuals.
  - sdfkkksdfsdff 6y ago
    Affordable because Facebook is subsidizing it with a shitload of money. I don't think that is a good case for demanding independence from Facebook. Also, then don't go standalone. Yeah it's a nice feature. Facebook paid for it.
jmiskovic 6y ago
I think Quest 2 will be extremely influential device and this decision will shape the market for years to come. The Quest 2 is important because it's being mass-produced at very affordable retail price. It will be the first and most impactfull VR experience for huge amount of people. I only have experience with Quest 1, but it's already apparent that Q2 is improvement in every way while being noticeably cheaper. Q1 was out of stock for most of it's product lifetime. BTW I'm enjoying Q1 quite a lot. It is an open Android platform with no DRM and good support for independent developers. The VR is merely a playground for AR. A really tiny market that's brewing technology for the post-smartphone revolution. The AR hardware might be some years from now but there are already huge investments in software platform and social features. There are only two relevant competitors: FB with cheap and excellent consumer headset you can buy today, and Apple working on next big thing in shroud of mystery. FB vision is obvious. They want to collect more of your data and also control what you constantly see in AR. Part of this is forcing you to use the FB account that was verified to belong to you, forcing you to give up on your privacy right from start. This translates to enormous amount of marketing money, but also to shaping opinions and controlling emotions. Next generation will likely have eye tracking which will make privacy invasion so much worse, as our eye movement is mostly subconscious and reveals our interests and affinities. Many of us are sceptical of our smartphones working against us, tracking location and actions. Imagine a device mere centimetres from your brain doing the same, but having also access to eye movements and maybe EEG readings. If FB manages to convince general population that lack of privacy is in best of their interest, we'll have some dire times ahead of us.
- raxxorrax 6y ago
  VR has been a nice toy but the acceptance and content was underwhelming. I own a quest 1 since I impulse bought it in retail. After finding out what it was I ordered a rift s which I use more frequently. The software package is actually decent, but the lock-in is repulsive. With facebooks decision both devices will certainly be scraped soon. I probably need to make sure my oculus account isn't automatically migrated... To be honest I think the current VR trend died like the last ones, maybe it was a bit more successful. The devices and the experience are nice at first, but not suitable for prolonged use. I think AR is a complete separate technology that has some overlapping problems, but are still too different to make a prediction. I think VR would have been more successful if we had a common base for different devices. My believe in tech dystopia is severely dampened if it relies on VR.

370 points by vrfinal 6y ago

Of course it is. And so is their purchase of Instagram, Whatsapp, Giphy, and the entire way they've cornered the market with abusive and coercive practices

rektide 6y ago
I'm way less concerned about those software platforms being with Facebook. there's plenty of room for competition. gdpr grants decent citizens rights to take their data away. there is zero escape from this nightmare platform however. hardware we end up forever hard locked into.
- rektide 6y ago
  one place I am not sure how I feel is game consoles. microsoft & sony both require accounts to use the mandatory platforms their consoles come with. is this ok? how us this different from Facebook demanding users use the Facebook platform with the Facebook face console?
  - mbreese 6y ago
    I think the difference is that the Microsoft and Sony accounts are only used for authentication/account purposes. Facebook accounts are for much more than ensuring you have access to a game or Office, etc. plus, as others have said — you can have different Microsoft/Sony accounts. So you can split your professional and personal lives. This isn’t possible with Facebook. The Facebook/oculus situation would be like if Microsoft required you to use a LinkedIn account to play the newest version of Halo. That would be equally strange.
  - bigbubba 6y ago
    Are those online platforms now mandatory for consoles? They weren't a few years ago when last I had one.
  - imtringued 6y ago
    The problem is that Facebook isn't a platform, it is a product. They could have changed that but they didn't.
- annadane 6y ago
  GDPR might but if such a thing didn't exist Facebook absolutely would dominate the world, which is exactly what they want, sick fucks
corysama 6y ago
"The House Antitrust Subcommittee determined Facebook wields monopoly powers in social network and has maintained its position by acquiring, copying or killing its competitors, according to a report released by the subcommittee on Tuesday. " https://www.cnbc.com/2020/10/06/house-antitrust-committee-facebook-monopoly-buys-kills-competitors.html https://www.cnbc.com/2020/10/06/house-antitrust-committee-fa...
annadane 6y ago
Downvotes from shills
- drstewart 6y ago
  Keep these kind of low quality comments on reddit, please
  - annadane 6y ago
    They're not low quality (certainly not compared to other ones here). It's a very real possibility HN is astroturfed

rektide 6y ago

agreed. captive computing platforms are captivating.

rektide 6y ago
fwiw this was a dig on apple & anyone else building "app consoles". i'm not ready for the post-general-purpose-computing nightmare-era.

graeme 6y ago

> conditioning access to a product or service in which a firm has market power to the use of a separate product or service is anticompetitive Is the house committee arguing Facebook is a monopoly in....VR? From the stats I found Oculus has a 20-30% share. I don’t like the Facebook requirement for Oculus, but not everything I don’t lime constitutes a monopoly. Other have commented that the house assumes what it sets out to prove. You’d first have to show market power to make this kind of analysis.

augstein 6y ago
Which standalone VR headset would you recommend, if one can‘t use a Facebook login?
- millstone 6y ago
  "Standalone" is a nice feature but not a separate product category. Facebook rightly considers Sony, Microsoft, HTC as competing with Oculus.
  - ericflo 6y ago
    Standalone absolutely is a separate product cateogory. It's the difference between a computer monitor and an iPad: even though they both have screens, they are different in kind. They target different market segments, have completely different software ecosystems both for end-users and developers, orders of magnitude more R&D requirements, higher switching costs, etc.
    - millstone 6y ago
      It's the difference between a smart TV and a dumb TV. They have different guts but the market is the same. Major titles like Beat Saber or Half Life Alyx can be played on either standalone or tethered headsets. Facebook offers both under the Oculus brand and positions them together: https://www.oculus.com/compare/ https://www.oculus.com/compare/

shajznnckfke 6y ago

The Xbox requires that you have a Microsoft account, right? This seems like an inconvenience but I have a hard time understanding why it’s worth Congress’s time. Isn’t the world full of products that have to be registered by making an account in some system or another? I guess I could understand if somebody didn’t have internet access and wants to use Oculus, but they wouldn’t be able to download any games either even if no account was required. The complaint seems like more of an ideological thing against Facebook, but I’m attempting to take it at face value.

r3drock 6y ago
In principle I would say you are right, but it is actually a far greater hassle to make (or keep) a facebook account than some generic account.
- millstone 6y ago
  Have you actually had problems making/keeping a Facebook account? I have several throwaways which continue to work fine.
  - Polylactic_acid 6y ago
    I have had mine locked in the past. Obviously facebook has some system that is locking accounts because so many people have faced this issue
  - coding123 6y ago
    I have created accounts that got immediately locked the same day. I have also had accounts that got locked about 2 months in.
    - shajznnckfke 6y ago
      I had an experience with Facebook locking my account once, and I came to suspect that they were doing it to punish me for logging in on a mobile browser to promote the app. The UX really seemed to be designed to be painful - interfaces where the buttons were just out of reach unless you scrolled a particular way, scary language implying it was unsafe to use the site that way. I felt like someone was getting a bonus based on how many people they could push off the browser into using the app.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

save_ferris 6y ago

> The report states that, “conditioning access to a product or service in which a firm has market power to the use of a separate product or service is anticompetitive.” I agree with this. I shouldn’t have to have a social media account in order to use a product that isn’t directly related to social media. Accounts like Microsoft aren’t the same as Facebook IMO because they tie products and services I’ve purchased to my account, which I believe is a reasonable and relevant use of an online account in this context. Facebook doesn’t do any of that, nor does it exist to manage purchases of products or services I’ve made. It exists to siphon personal data about me to serve me ads. If we’re serious about things like privacy, then we have to be equally serious about corporate attempts to coerce consumers into handing over data to use completely unrelated products. This is absolutely anti-privacy and should be dealt with.

save_ferris 6y ago
Tangentially related: newly-created Facebook accounts are a whole lot harder to keep up these days if you’re just using them for a single purpose, like following events. I created an account last year to get more socially involved in my community but I didn’t want to post any personal information and my account kept getting disabled unless I added pictures and filled out certain sections of my profile. Not sure if it was anti-automation technology or what, but I wound up giving up after trying twice because I didn’t want to give them what they asked for. Knowing that this is required to use a product like Oculus is unacceptable.
- freddie_mercury 6y ago
  I had this same experience yesterday. Tried to create a new account and it was insta-locked until I started providing personal information. I hadn't even used it.
- culturestate 6y ago
  I don't use FB personally, but I needed access to Business Manager for some client work so I created an account using my work email and tried to sign up for BM. They immediately locked the account, asked for a copy of my ID, and then permanently banned that account after I provided it. I have no idea why, there's no mechanism for appeal, and I can't even submit a request to have the image of my ID removed because that form is gated behind the account. Their "KYC" system has no problem with the 10-year-old alt that I created in college using a fake name which has never done anything but manage some ancient meme pages, though...

softwaredoug 6y ago

The problem with antitrust enforcement w/ Big Tech will be users actually want vertical integration in a lot of contexts. And this vertical integration aligns consumers with the large tech companies in a way that hasn't been true with previous antitrust cases. Yes we could have more open standards, but the cartesian product of every integration eventually doesn't scale. What Microsoft did with Windows in this regard in the PC ecosystem is actually quite phenomenal But I know my Airpods will integrate seamlessly with my iPhone, which integrates seamlessly with my Apple Watch, etc in a way that's clearly very intentional, works, and saves endless headaches. I also know that there's entire companies going out of business because a company like Apple will gobble up prominent accessory markets.

harry8 6y ago
I think you're conflating "able to do" vertical integration with "must do" there, fwiw.
- chillacy 6y ago
  If you want to use the apple watch you must have an iphone, which somehow seems worse: https://www.imore.com/can-you-use-your-apple-watch-your-android-phone https://www.imore.com/can-you-use-your-apple-watch-your-andr...
  - tomjakubowski 6y ago
    It doesn't seem worse to me. Apple is free to make and sell accessories for its own hardware products. It would be a problem if Apple sold its smart watch while also breaking iPhone's compatibility with third party smart watches.
    - anoncake 6y ago
      It's also a problem that Apple sells its own phones while breaking the Apple Watch's compatibility with other phones.

perryizgr8 6y ago

While sign in with apple is totally fine. I hate Facebook like any normal person but this is ridiculous.

bigbubba 6y ago
Does the report say that? The article doesn't mention it and the report is 449 pages long, so I haven't read it.
intellirogue 6y ago
You can create a throwaway Apple account that has no connection to the rest of your life. You can't do that with Facebook.

andrelayer 6y ago

How is this any different than the iPhone and Apple Id?

notsuoh 6y ago
I think one of the key differentiators is that an Apple ID isn’t required to use an iPhone. There are other differences, but I believe this is the main relevant one.
- LexGray 6y ago
  Only to use non-Apple apps on an iPhone since you can only install things tied to the Apple App Store.
  - fomine3 6y ago
    Quest 2 is just a brick without FB account meanwhile iPhone has Safari and other apps.
MBCook 6y ago
The Apple ID isn’t a separate business that you are being forced to use if you want to use your iPhone. Imagine Apple owned Comcast and required you to have a Comcast account to use your iPhone. That’s what they’re mad about here.

arsome 6y ago

Hmm, Xbox/Microsoft, Google/Android, even Apple/iOS... this will be interesting if courts actually back this up at all.

hombre_fatal 6y ago
Windows/Microsoft
grumple 6y ago
There is a fundamental difference which is that none of those auth methods require you to provide photos, government id, real names, real birthdays, etc. Facebook does. If they spun out their auth as a separate service and didn’t require handing over all your private information, things might be different. But generally the tide is turning against vertical integration, as it should. Companies using their vast wealth from one industry to then provide free products in another (just until competitors go under) is far too common, as is chaining people to products because they have a product from another category.

tmsh 6y ago

I think not forcing Facebook login will speed up adoption of VR and will benefit Facebook in the long run anyway. Source: my brother in law this weekend was going to buy an Oculus Quest 2 after I showed him my Oculus Quest 1. But the Facebook login requirement gave him pause. There’s a lot of intersection between early adopters and people consciously not on Facebook (maybe on other Facebook properties but not Facebook itself).

zmmmmm 6y ago
The biggest reason imho is that the entire enterprise market is going to eschew these since they cannot ask their employees to log into personal Facebook accounts. Throwing out the whole enterprise business market for this is insanity in my view. Facebook has a real chance here to be the owner of the next, possibly last great computing platform - but not if they hobble themselves like that.
- danbmil99 6y ago
  "the Oculus for Business platform uses a separate login process that will remain unchanged."

hombre_fatal 6y ago

If you enable wifi during Win10 installation (haven't tested otherwise), it requires you to provide a valid Microsoft account (Outlook, Skype, ...) to install Windows. I don't see how this is different from OP. Windows even tells you it supports local logins, but to put in a valid Skype account first or whatever so you can complete the installation before opting into a local logic. I shouldn't need to give my Skype or Outlook credentials to install an OS.

kminehart 6y ago
You can install windows 10 without signing in.
- briffle 6y ago
  Only if network is disabled in new images
myself248 6y ago
Really? I just clicked "skip".
bmarquez 6y ago
I can confirm this, I recently (within the last month) had to reinstall Windows 10 and was forced to create an account. But I was able to bypass by putting obviously fake credentials (like admin@outlook.com or something similar) and only when it didn't work got the option to create a local account.
briffle 6y ago
Hilariously, if it's a work computer, and your employer uses office365 for email, etc, those accounts don't work.
tomc1985 6y ago
Not true. You can still skip it. Apps are getting sneakier about switching that on behind your back though.

sprite 6y ago

I pre ordered one then realized the fb login requirement and cancelled it. Wonder how many are in the same boat.

ericd 6y ago
I'm sure there are a bunch in the same boat. I owned Oculus' DK1 and DK2, but when I thought through what FB owning Oculus meant, I cancelled my original Rift preorder and bought a Vive instead. More recently, my resolve against letting FB get their data proboscis into my life was weakening with the Quest 2 launch. Fortunately, they came up with that forceful reminder of why I made that decision in the first place.
- Digit-Al 6y ago
  I know what you mean. I have no problem owning and using a Facebook account, but that's my choice and I choose what to share. I don't know about you but when I first heard that Facebook had acquired Oculus my first thought was something along the lines of "Oh FFS". In my opinion, if I pay money for a product I don't expect to have my privacy violated so I can be further monetised. The point of a Facebook account is I have made a deal that I will allow information about my use of the product to be used as payment for the product. That is not the case for something I have already paid for.
oe 6y ago
I'm in the market for a VR headset and Oculus tech seems to be the best right now but because of this I'll be waiting for whatever upgrades other companies release next year.
- woutr_be 6y ago
  Same here, I was really excited for this. But the FB requirement is stupid, now I’ll wait for other players to catch up.
- cannedslime 6y ago
  It is by no stretch "the best" in a technical sense. Its just the cheapest, mainly because you do not pay all the price up front. You ARE the product! The hardware of standalone VR is so limited that you are better off going with PCVR for at least 5 years.

engineer_22 6y ago

Will facebook censure my political speech on VR between now and the election?

KingOfCoders 6y ago

As an Oculus Rift S user I disagree, Facebook (not longer a user for a long time) should be able to require FB login. I would/will no longer buy an Oculus though.

jcrawfordor 6y ago

It seems to me that the fundamental difference between this and other platforms that require login is this: for Facebook, having an account is the product. Facebook has designed everything about the Facebook experience to funnel users from registration to "engagement," and this is their main line of business and revenue source. Anything Facebook does to require someone to have an account is also forcing them to be a customer of their principle product. The same situation doesn't really apply to Microsoft or Apple. No doubt there are examples of both trying to monetize account holders (e.g. cross-promotion of products) but neither of them views the "having an account experience" as being the product. You don't "sign up for Microsoft" in the sense that you sign up for Facebook, the account is not a feature but just a tool for providing identity to various products. This lets Microsoft and Apple make a far stronger argument that requiring an account to use a product is just a technical aspect of the working of the product. Facebook would find it extremely challenging to make this same argument. Google might find itself in a position that is more of an awkward in-between, except for basically all of their attempts at either generalized social media or meaningfully unifying the social aspects of their products have failed, so if they're trying to funnel Google Docs users into being YouTube users they're at least miserably bad at it.

jobigoud 6y ago
There is already a concept of Oculus account that works well, created mine in 2013. Linking this Oculus account to a Facebook account should be an option for people that are interested in using social aspects of VR, access to that link should be a permission grantable on a per-application basis. Since there is already an account system that works it's impossible and bad faith for them to pretend it's mandatory to use a different product accounts. Why can't they keep their hands away like for Instagram and Whatsapp?

nodamage 6y ago

I expect a class action lawsuit will be filed over this if it hasn't already. Requiring the use of a Facebook account in order to access a VR headset is a pretty clear case of tying, especially since this policy changed after Oculus customers had already bought their headsets.

renewiltord 6y ago

Interesting. I wonder what this means for requiring Login with Apple for things sold on the App Store.

bloody-crow 6y ago

Hahaha, it sure is. In the sense that a lot of ppl will not even consider picking up Oculus because of this requirement, which would make it the opposite of competitive — anticompetitive. it's a joke

ryandrake 6y ago

Let's just be glad Facebook didn't buy NVIDIA or something. Imagine having to have a social media account in order to get display drivers working so you can see your screen. This is absolutely bonkers and should not be acceptable.

zmmmmm 6y ago

All they had to do was grandfather in existing accounts and most of this would not be happening. Not that I am suggesting that would not be evil, but honestly, I do not understand why they did not just say, "if you bought your headset under our original terms and conditions, you can use it forever that way".

jobigoud 6y ago
That would be the minimum but why should I create a Facebook account to use new Oculus VR headsets? You can use the device without installing any social applications. Nothing mandates anything more than a basic Oculus account.

Oricle 6y ago

Jews again! https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=xc9msnvRyJ0 https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=xc9msnvRyJ0 Educate yourself, this war has raged for 2020 years now! And guess who's losing? Yup, gentiles!

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

franciscop 6y ago

I was very excited about the Oculus Quest, was considering buying it and suddenly the Oculus Quest 2 came up. Then I dug deeper and I saw I needed a facebook account (which I don't have nor want). So because I don't have a FB account Oculus/Facebook has lost hundreds of dollars for me. How does that even make sense?

sdfkkksdfsdff 6y ago
Because you don't want a FB account, you missed out on an incredible VR experience. How does that even make sense?
- raxxorrax 6y ago
  It is fun but not worth integrating Facebook into your life. Better use the alternatives. Sadly I own 2 devices from oculus. Will use them until they don't work anymore and then they are headed to scrap. Would have a bad conscience selling the devices and maybe that doesn't even work.
  - jmiskovic 6y ago
    I'm also looking forward to alternatives. Pico VR seems to be the only standalone headset? Don't worry about selling them, there were no reported problems with switching Quest/Rift to a different account. I still expect existing devices will continue to work with Oculus account. The FB account will be required for slew of upcoming social features, like using same avatar across different games, group of people moving between games, the Horizon and other social content... If they make existing HW unusable without switching to FB account, they would face class-action lawsuit and media backlash. I think they want to self-regulate as much as possible so they'll try to avoid those pesky court rulings. As for your original question, FB doesn't care about few hundered dollars across few tens of thousand users that are reluctant to switch to FB accounts. They are playing the long game of becoming the only relevant player in VR/AR market.
- TigeriusKirk 6y ago
  They need users more than users need them. That's how it makes sense.

cannedslime 6y ago

My love for Carmack is only over shadowed by my disdain for facebook.

supernova87a 6y ago

I'm not a fan of Facebook, and I don't really have a lot of interest in VR. But I will opine that it's getting a little ridiculous how every other story these days seems to fall back to the argument that everything you don't like must be "anticompetitive". You don't have to use Facebook. You don't have to use VR technology. These are all voluntary activities that people actively choose to engage in, and are not public utilities. Feel free to walk away from either or both. It's as if people are complaining that because they bought tickets to their favorite live sports event, they were forced to pay to park their car there too. You don't have to do any of those things. And aside from that, on the actual anticompetitive argument, does this prevent anyone from coming in to offer their own version of these technologies? Not to my outsider's view. Just switch it off. Don't let it so dominate your life that you rely on it becoming a federal court case. It's all voluntary. The more we participate in things that others have the opportunity to exert control over, the more it materializes.

anoncake 6y ago
> You don't have to use Facebook. You don't understand what a social network is. It's a natural monopoly.
klmadfejno 6y ago
> It's as if people are complaining that because they bought tickets to their favorite live sports event, they were forced to pay to park their car there too. You don't have to do any of those things. A better example would be people bought tickets to their favorite live sports event, and then were forced to login to facebook before entry.

sdfkkksdfsdff 6y ago

I don't understand why Oculus, being owned by Facebook, should not be allowed to require a Facebook login. I don't like it much, but it is their company. They invested shitloads of money in it, too. It's also not the only VR headset in town.

ryukafalz 6y ago
> It's also not the only VR headset in town. It is the only standalone VR headset in town that’s 1) currently supported and 2) available/affordable for individuals.
- sdfkkksdfsdff 6y ago
  Affordable because Facebook is subsidizing it with a shitload of money. I don't think that is a good case for demanding independence from Facebook. Also, then don't go standalone. Yeah it's a nice feature. Facebook paid for it.

jmiskovic 6y ago

I think Quest 2 will be extremely influential device and this decision will shape the market for years to come. The Quest 2 is important because it's being mass-produced at very affordable retail price. It will be the first and most impactfull VR experience for huge amount of people. I only have experience with Quest 1, but it's already apparent that Q2 is improvement in every way while being noticeably cheaper. Q1 was out of stock for most of it's product lifetime. BTW I'm enjoying Q1 quite a lot. It is an open Android platform with no DRM and good support for independent developers. The VR is merely a playground for AR. A really tiny market that's brewing technology for the post-smartphone revolution. The AR hardware might be some years from now but there are already huge investments in software platform and social features. There are only two relevant competitors: FB with cheap and excellent consumer headset you can buy today, and Apple working on next big thing in shroud of mystery. FB vision is obvious. They want to collect more of your data and also control what you constantly see in AR. Part of this is forcing you to use the FB account that was verified to belong to you, forcing you to give up on your privacy right from start. This translates to enormous amount of marketing money, but also to shaping opinions and controlling emotions. Next generation will likely have eye tracking which will make privacy invasion so much worse, as our eye movement is mostly subconscious and reveals our interests and affinities. Many of us are sceptical of our smartphones working against us, tracking location and actions. Imagine a device mere centimetres from your brain doing the same, but having also access to eye movements and maybe EEG readings. If FB manages to convince general population that lack of privacy is in best of their interest, we'll have some dire times ahead of us.

raxxorrax 6y ago
VR has been a nice toy but the acceptance and content was underwhelming. I own a quest 1 since I impulse bought it in retail. After finding out what it was I ordered a rift s which I use more frequently. The software package is actually decent, but the lock-in is repulsive. With facebooks decision both devices will certainly be scraped soon. I probably need to make sure my oculus account isn't automatically migrated... To be honest I think the current VR trend died like the last ones, maybe it was a bit more successful. The devices and the experience are nice at first, but not suitable for prolonged use. I think AR is a complete separate technology that has some overlapping problems, but are still too different to make a prediction. I think VR would have been more successful if we had a common base for different devices. My believe in tech dystopia is severely dampened if it relies on VR.