5 ms·

> If they can make a massive success of the project, they will easily be the new Apple. In what way? If Facebook wanted to replace the iPhone with some "metave

> If they can make a massive success of the project, they will easily be the new Apple. In what way? If Facebook wanted to replace the iPhone with some "metaverse" device they would need to be able to build a device way more advanced than their current offerings at a price point equal to or less than the iPhone. That means they would need to make up for thousands of person years of engineering, manufacturing, and operations expertise that Apple currently has. You're basically saying "If Facebook could build a copy of Apple from scratch and make some compelling products, they could be the next Apple". Samsung is an industrial behemoth and just keeps up with Apple. Not only is that unlikely it doesn't even sound possible.

threeseed 4y ago
Might want to watch this as it’s quite clear Meta knows exactly what’s required to make the Metaverse a reality. And if they achieve it then it will be a game changer as big as the internet or smart phone. https://youtu.be/2zHDkdkqd1I https://youtu.be/2zHDkdkqd1I
- deltree7 4y ago
  Bingo! I'm always astonished by the amount of cluelessness displayed by HN crowd -- supposedly at the cutting edge of things. Like all other platforms, about 5% of the posters at HN provide extremely valuable content. The rest just parrot current popular pitchfork (anti-capitalism, anti-corporate, anti-advertisments -- stuff that I can get from TikTok in a more entertaining format).
  - chihuahua 4y ago
    I could not have said it better myself. What makes it worse is that the same crowd likes to congratulate themselves on how smart they are.
  - FullStackAda 4y ago
    And yet you're reading HN? It's not an anti-capitalism stance to call Metaverse idea for what it is - trying to sell an elephant. Capitalism is not about going all in on the craziest ideas ever. What is their bet anyway? What users' need are they trying to address or create? Is this a new and better video game platform? Even if they are successful, VG are still very niche, especially compared to their social network user base. Is this a new way to consume content? Sounds a bit fussy to me to have an extra device or two just so you cannot turn away when they run ads. People still are not that eager to put on 3D glasses to watch a movie. Are they betting that in the nearest future the reality is going to suck so bad that people would want to escape it? That's just bleak. What else? Realistic porn? Virtual learning? That's peanuts. Is this going to be augmented reality instead? Some kind of wearable device? We already played with google glass, did not catch on. Plus regulation in many countries already caught up, so you cannot just wear video recording device whenever for example. Who are the end users? Who has hours of time to consume uninterruptedly whatever content they can provide in their Metaverse? Certainly not the people who has money to spend. In the end it's an adversarial design to capture all users' attention for prolonged periods of time, the pay off for the user has to be astronomical.
    - UncleMeat 4y ago
      I'm not on board with VR, but I think that the sales pitch is very clear and you are missing it. It is Roblox. It is a collaborative building environment where the content that people create and share for one another is the interactive world rather than text, photos, or videos, done through VR rather than traditional computing.
      - FullStackAda 4y ago
        I guess I am missing it. This is the first time I am hearing about Roblox, looks video games adjacent to me. Meta would not be able to convert their billions of users to a similar platform. They have to convince users to give up the time they spend now elsewhere on this experience. I suppose it has to be insanely addictive and rewarding, and also it has to have no barriers of entry. I am just not seeing it in the Metaverse. I mean people gave up the horizontal video format in order to easier consume media, and Meta is trying to convince everybody that people would wear or implant (?!) a devices to have better fidelity video experience? The entertainment value is just not in the resolution and collaborative content creation is already possible without Metaverse and is niche. At this point I consider the Metaverse idea just smoke and mirrors to convince investors that they have the next best thing with 30% year to year revenue growth. I don't think Meta would go anywhere soon, they're just hitting the ceiling of easy money they were making and now it's getting harder to have such margins.
    - rsynnott 4y ago
      > What users' need are they trying to address or create? They're essentially trying to _create_ a new need in the minds of consumers, I think. The trouble for them is, this rarely works. This is quite different to, say, the iPhone; when the iPhone showed up, the market was already inclined to think "it would be nice if there was a good phone that could do more stuff than my Nokia"; it wasn't specifically demanding an iPhone, but an iPhone was a good solution for what it was demanding. It's not clear that anyone is demanding a 'metaverse'.
    - deltree7 4y ago
      I'm reading HN because of the top 5%ile original thought leaders and ideas that I still get out from them. The FB discussion isn't about anti-capitalism. It is the general theme of HN. Like most HNers you are lacking imagination in what VR will do. Just like everyone who poo-poo'ed what is possible from Computers, Internet, Mobile Phones. Yeah before iPhones, we already played with Palm Pilots and Microsoft CE hand held devices. End users are all of humanity (minus some stubborn Luddites. But you never invest / build strategy around luddites) If VR helps you master skills better, help firms to be more productive, that in itself is a good enough use case for everyone to use VR The fact that VR systems can provide experiences closer to reality means the applications are boundless.
  - TheRealNGenius 4y ago
    Psh, hacker news is chock-full of clueless nincompoops. The original post saying “au Revoir” to facebook, lol. They actually think that facebook will be gone.
- giantrobot 4y ago
  The word "if" is going to throw a disc with all the heavy lifting it is doing in that statement. If Facebook can solve all these huge technical hurdles they need to do so in an affordable device. Then they need to develop the operations capacity to actually build and support them. Then they need to make a compelling experience that normal users would actually want. Facebook does not have a history of executing on those things. They also don't look like they're making any moves to be able to execute on those things.
  - threeseed 4y ago
    As of last year Quest 2 was outselling the Xbox. So clearly Meta does know to ship a popular device at scale.
    - giantrobot 4y ago
      The best numbers I can find for the Quest 2 are five million sold last year with 4 million recalled. The current XBox is estimated to have sold around 13 million units. Even if the Quest's sales have kept pace this year so has the XBox. So your claim sounds suspect. You'll also note 5 million is a twentieth of Apple's iPhone sales. So even if Facebook solves all of their other problems they have to ramp up production 2000% to "replace" Apple. That is a heavy fucking lift from where they are right now. When the iPhone was released it did what dumb phones did and then some. It's killer apps were the media playback and the Internet. Facebook has yet to demonstrate a killer app for their VR.
pclmulqdq 4y ago
It seems like they need about 5-10 big fundamental improvements in technology to make the headsets work well enough for consumers. In the next 5-10 years, it's very possible that this bet will pay off.
georgeecollins 4y ago
>> If Facebook wanted to replace the iPhone with some "metaverse" device they would need to be able to build a device way more advanced than their current offerings at a price point equal to or less than the iPhone. Once upon a time Apple was a much smaller company. They strategized to one day have something they called a "dynabook". Their first attempt, the Newton was not good at all and much too expensive.

threeseed 4y ago

Might want to watch this as it’s quite clear Meta knows exactly what’s required to make the Metaverse a reality. And if they achieve it then it will be a game changer as big as the internet or smart phone. https://youtu.be/2zHDkdkqd1I https://youtu.be/2zHDkdkqd1I

deltree7 4y ago
Bingo! I'm always astonished by the amount of cluelessness displayed by HN crowd -- supposedly at the cutting edge of things. Like all other platforms, about 5% of the posters at HN provide extremely valuable content. The rest just parrot current popular pitchfork (anti-capitalism, anti-corporate, anti-advertisments -- stuff that I can get from TikTok in a more entertaining format).
- chihuahua 4y ago
  I could not have said it better myself. What makes it worse is that the same crowd likes to congratulate themselves on how smart they are.
- FullStackAda 4y ago
  And yet you're reading HN? It's not an anti-capitalism stance to call Metaverse idea for what it is - trying to sell an elephant. Capitalism is not about going all in on the craziest ideas ever. What is their bet anyway? What users' need are they trying to address or create? Is this a new and better video game platform? Even if they are successful, VG are still very niche, especially compared to their social network user base. Is this a new way to consume content? Sounds a bit fussy to me to have an extra device or two just so you cannot turn away when they run ads. People still are not that eager to put on 3D glasses to watch a movie. Are they betting that in the nearest future the reality is going to suck so bad that people would want to escape it? That's just bleak. What else? Realistic porn? Virtual learning? That's peanuts. Is this going to be augmented reality instead? Some kind of wearable device? We already played with google glass, did not catch on. Plus regulation in many countries already caught up, so you cannot just wear video recording device whenever for example. Who are the end users? Who has hours of time to consume uninterruptedly whatever content they can provide in their Metaverse? Certainly not the people who has money to spend. In the end it's an adversarial design to capture all users' attention for prolonged periods of time, the pay off for the user has to be astronomical.
  - UncleMeat 4y ago
    I'm not on board with VR, but I think that the sales pitch is very clear and you are missing it. It is Roblox. It is a collaborative building environment where the content that people create and share for one another is the interactive world rather than text, photos, or videos, done through VR rather than traditional computing.
    - FullStackAda 4y ago
      I guess I am missing it. This is the first time I am hearing about Roblox, looks video games adjacent to me. Meta would not be able to convert their billions of users to a similar platform. They have to convince users to give up the time they spend now elsewhere on this experience. I suppose it has to be insanely addictive and rewarding, and also it has to have no barriers of entry. I am just not seeing it in the Metaverse. I mean people gave up the horizontal video format in order to easier consume media, and Meta is trying to convince everybody that people would wear or implant (?!) a devices to have better fidelity video experience? The entertainment value is just not in the resolution and collaborative content creation is already possible without Metaverse and is niche. At this point I consider the Metaverse idea just smoke and mirrors to convince investors that they have the next best thing with 30% year to year revenue growth. I don't think Meta would go anywhere soon, they're just hitting the ceiling of easy money they were making and now it's getting harder to have such margins.
  - rsynnott 4y ago
    > What users' need are they trying to address or create? They're essentially trying to _create_ a new need in the minds of consumers, I think. The trouble for them is, this rarely works. This is quite different to, say, the iPhone; when the iPhone showed up, the market was already inclined to think "it would be nice if there was a good phone that could do more stuff than my Nokia"; it wasn't specifically demanding an iPhone, but an iPhone was a good solution for what it was demanding. It's not clear that anyone is demanding a 'metaverse'.
  - deltree7 4y ago
    I'm reading HN because of the top 5%ile original thought leaders and ideas that I still get out from them. The FB discussion isn't about anti-capitalism. It is the general theme of HN. Like most HNers you are lacking imagination in what VR will do. Just like everyone who poo-poo'ed what is possible from Computers, Internet, Mobile Phones. Yeah before iPhones, we already played with Palm Pilots and Microsoft CE hand held devices. End users are all of humanity (minus some stubborn Luddites. But you never invest / build strategy around luddites) If VR helps you master skills better, help firms to be more productive, that in itself is a good enough use case for everyone to use VR The fact that VR systems can provide experiences closer to reality means the applications are boundless.
- TheRealNGenius 4y ago
  Psh, hacker news is chock-full of clueless nincompoops. The original post saying “au Revoir” to facebook, lol. They actually think that facebook will be gone.
giantrobot 4y ago
The word "if" is going to throw a disc with all the heavy lifting it is doing in that statement. If Facebook can solve all these huge technical hurdles they need to do so in an affordable device. Then they need to develop the operations capacity to actually build and support them. Then they need to make a compelling experience that normal users would actually want. Facebook does not have a history of executing on those things. They also don't look like they're making any moves to be able to execute on those things.
- threeseed 4y ago
  As of last year Quest 2 was outselling the Xbox. So clearly Meta does know to ship a popular device at scale.
  - giantrobot 4y ago
    The best numbers I can find for the Quest 2 are five million sold last year with 4 million recalled. The current XBox is estimated to have sold around 13 million units. Even if the Quest's sales have kept pace this year so has the XBox. So your claim sounds suspect. You'll also note 5 million is a twentieth of Apple's iPhone sales. So even if Facebook solves all of their other problems they have to ramp up production 2000% to "replace" Apple. That is a heavy fucking lift from where they are right now. When the iPhone was released it did what dumb phones did and then some. It's killer apps were the media playback and the Internet. Facebook has yet to demonstrate a killer app for their VR.

pclmulqdq 4y ago

It seems like they need about 5-10 big fundamental improvements in technology to make the headsets work well enough for consumers. In the next 5-10 years, it's very possible that this bet will pay off.

georgeecollins 4y ago

>> If Facebook wanted to replace the iPhone with some "metaverse" device they would need to be able to build a device way more advanced than their current offerings at a price point equal to or less than the iPhone. Once upon a time Apple was a much smaller company. They strategized to one day have something they called a "dynabook". Their first attempt, the Newton was not good at all and much too expensive.