15 ms·

>We're don't view ourselves in competition with Meta >...Meta sells reasonably good gaming headsets to customers who want to be entertained in VR; we're sellin

>We're don't view ourselves in competition with Meta >...Meta sells reasonably good gaming headsets to customers who want to be entertained in VR; we're selling general-purpose productivity devices which are aimed at replacing PCs and laptops. Hate to break it to you, but if you don't think that Mark Zuckerberg is actively trying to create VR devices that are general-purpose productivity devices aimed at replacing PCs and laptops, you haven't been watching some of their recent videos about the new headsets and prototype headsets they're working on. He very much is aiming for that market with future devices (not the Quest 2). Here's a couple: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IMpWH6vDZ8E https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IMpWH6vDZ8E https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2zHDkdkqd1I https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2zHDkdkqd1I Also he's described their Project Cambria headset as intended for productivity, as in the following article: "What’s different about Project Cambria? The most important description we’ve received about Project Cambria comes from The Information; according to the publication, Meta employees have alternately described the headset as a “laptop for the face” or a “Chromebook for the face.” It’s a device Zuckerberg hopes people will use to get work done rather than being aimed primarily at gamers as with previous headsets." https://thenextweb.com/news/meta-project-cambria-what-we-know https://thenextweb.com/news/meta-project-cambria-what-we-kno...

Raed667 4y ago
Mark wants to be able to sell apps and ads on his end-to-end controlled platform, that is it. He missed the boat on browsers and smartphones, so he is aiming for total monopoly of what he believes is the next-big-thing™.
- JKCalhoun 4y ago
  I'm still skeptical that it is The Next Big Thing. I wonder if Zuckerberg suspects it might not be as well but, hey, Hail Mary!
  - sam1r 4y ago
    Then again, however, a 100b size company — like meta —inevitably has to go for moonshots when their primary source of revenue is steadily declining. Seems like he has no choice. Even if it doesn’t work or we’re all skeptical — he better play along and go for it.
    - JKCalhoun 4y ago
      I think you're right, but I disagree that he has no choice — he can find some other “moonshot”. Pushing VR (or AR) seems like something he thinks will play well with the stock holders; and if he is as skeptical as some of us then he's kind of playing them for rubes. Hearing them describe their own product as “Chromebook for the face” just reconfirms my suspicious that this is a doomed product.
  - bamboozled 4y ago
    Even if it’s the next big thing you know a better iHeadset will follow months later and be a much better product with less privacy and data theft built in.
    - towaway15463 4y ago
      Except it will have no games, cost $4k and will probably be difficult to port anything to. Great for Apple’s current mbpro market but ignored by everyone else.
      - mlajtos 4y ago
        Apple shipped support for WebXR in iOS 16. OpenXR is pretty good standarď and they would greatly benefit from supporting it. Which I think will happen. (My guess is that Unity (& Blender) will have an on-stage demo when the headset comes out. Unity: “just tick this box and your game will run on Reality Pro”)
      - bamboozled 4y ago
        People will still line up to buy it, probably me included, I'm a super keen Linux user too.
  - wongarsu 4y ago
    My bet would be more on AR than VR, and maybe it's not the next big thing but the big thing after the next one. But that's fine for Meta. Facebook, Instagram and Whatsapp might all be running out of growth, but they are all big enough that Meta can afford to invest in something that will only pay off in a decade or two, as long as the payoff is big enough. Gaming-VR headsets are just a good way to get the technology into people's hands right now, and iterate on it.
    - rngname22 4y ago
      You can argue that Meta is at the very head of the pack with AR. See this demo of Quest Pro pass-through AR: https://www.reddit.com/r/oculus/comments/xvzxj2/new_footage_of_the_quest_pro_and_major_pass/ https://www.reddit.com/r/oculus/comments/xvzxj2/new_footage_...
  - vkou 4y ago
    It doesn't matter if it is the next big thing, or a large flop. Meta is in trouble, and it needs to do something to retain relevance. This is something, and Meta is doing it.
  - ehnto 4y ago
    It's a very different experience to how we currently consume media, and I am not really sure it has mass appeal even with some kind of perfect execution. I am prepared to be totally wrong mind you. It's an incredible tool and way to engage with virtual worlds, but the question we should be asking isn't "Is VR technology good enough" which I think people get stuck on. Really the question is "Does everyone want to be in a virtual world regularly?" and my intuition having spent a good amount of time in VR is that the answer to that is actually no. I love video games, so much so that I even try to make them. I spend many hours playing in virtual worlds, but I very, very rarely want to use VR. I'm the perfect candidate for the technology, and it's honestly mindblowing when I do use it, but it's just not a casual experience. Even if we had the perfect, unobtrusive and lightweight technology, you are still choosing to disconnect from your current environment and spend time fully engaged with a different world in a way that games and TV don't. That can be really exhausting.
    - towaway15463 4y ago
      Personally, I think that both TV and movies are going to be driving VR adoption. The Netflix of VR movies could be huge if they were able to offer the right content. A fully virtual theatre that gets new releases could also be big. The edge that VR had in these areas is that it essentially gives you a private theatre that you can enjoy with your friends and family. Leveraging a social network so that you can deliver notifications like “X is currently watching Y. Click to join” would be big. People already kind of do this with watch parties and discord.
      - Eisenstein 4y ago
        I love VR, but it is terrible for things like watching movies. Imagine sitting on your couch and putting on a movie. How often do you do that? If it is more often than 'once in a while', are you actually sitting and watching it intently the entire timee? Are you eating, or drinking anything, or petting your cat or dog, or snuggling on the couch with your SO or kids? You can't do that with a VR headset on because you can't see anything else at all. If you grab for a glass you have to switch to pass-through mode and back again, or take off the headset. You also can't do anything but look at the screen. It isn't really something that people want to do. Exceptions of course would be to do it with someone remotely, like a friend or a family member -- it is a good way to potentially 'hang out' with people who aren't physically there. But the same caveats apply.
  - squeaky-clean 4y ago
    He probably believes he has the unique ability to make it the next big thing.
- bigmealbigmeal 4y ago
  I think this is mixing up the mythology of Zuckerberg with the reality. There's no indication that he is exclusively or even primarily driven by money or power. Go watch any long-form interview with him, such as with Lex Fridman. It becomes rather clear that he wants to be more like how Steve Jobs is seen by the wider public: as an innovator and pioneer, not as a power-hungry moneymaker.
  - prox 4y ago
    He isn’t doing a great job at that. I see him as a rather analytical CEO. Nothing of the charisma or clarity of ideas that Steve Jobs had. Steve Jobs was rather ruthless when it came to quality (source : Guy Kawasaki) and no idea how Zuckerberg is irl, but my impression it isn’t favorable. What I am trying to say is, with how Facebook is managed isn’t at all like Apple.
  - Raed667 4y ago
    I think you're mixing up the reality of Zuckerberg and his PR.
- robertlagrant 4y ago
  If we're defining "missed" as "things released by companies while Facebook was growing to 500k MAUs" :D
georgewsinger 4y ago
We understand Meta sometimes future projects that their devices will have broad office applications, but we're skeptical it has any teeth. Consider that Atari tried to compete with office PCs in the early 80s with their 8-bit family, and failed: https://images.fastcompany.net/image/upload/w_596,c_limit,q_auto:best,f_auto/wp-cms/uploads/2019/12/i-atari-ad.jpg https://images.fastcompany.net/image/upload/w_596,c_limit,q_... It's hard to focus on multiple things at once, and we're skeptical that the bureaucratic forces in play at a large company like Meta will allow them to do a good job at making their gaming platform also one that people actually want to work in.
- cableshaft 4y ago
  And there are plenty of instances of companies that have gone under when a big parent company decides to incorporate your business as a 'feature' in part of their big monster product. I'm not saying it's going to definitely happen and the company is doomed or anything, it's certainly possible that SimulaVR will come out on top for productivity devices (or peacefully coexist as an alternative alongside Meta's offering). But it shouldn't ignore what Meta is doing either, especially when they're actively saying they're moving into their turf. At the very least, it looks like Meta will put up a helluva fight.
  - kanetw 4y ago
    Of course anything Meta does is a bit worrisome. I just don't think we're in the same niche-- IMO Meta is fundamentally built on data collection, and VR is just a side effect. Unless Meta decides to abandon that, I think we'll have a niche.
    - romanhn 4y ago
      This is similar to saying "Facebook is fundamentally built on data collection, and social networking is just a side effect." Technically true, but not much consolation for all the social networks that didn't go all in on advertising and perished. Wish you the best of luck either way, this is an exciting area and more competition is great. They definitely are competition though.
SCLeo 4y ago
If I am not wrong, this is an antitrust suit, meaning it is about what they are selling, not what they are developing. If the product has been launched, there literally cannot be a monopoly.
- bradyd 4y ago
  They are both selling VR headsets. Claiming they are not competitors is like trying to claim electric cars are not in competition with gas powered cars because they are different technology.
  - taeric 4y ago
    Well.... I mean... we do consider trucks and cars to be different markets. And they are often the same technology. Same for passenger trucks to long haul trucks. Fundamentally same technology, but very different markets.
saghm 4y ago
>> >...Meta sells reasonably good gaming headsets to customers who want to be entertained in VR; we're selling general-purpose productivity devices which are aimed at replacing PCs and laptops. > Hate to break it to you, but if you don't think that Mark Zuckerberg is actively trying to create VR devices that are general-purpose productivity devices aimed at replacing PCs and laptops, you haven't been watching some of their recent videos about the new headsets and prototype headsets they're working on. He very much is aiming for that market with future devices (not the Quest 2). It sounds like they're saying that Meta doesn't currently sell anything that competes with what they're currently selling, and the info you give doesn't seem to contradict that. I'd question the premise that releasing a marketing video for a product that doesn't exist counts as being "in competition". They might be in competition in the future, but it doesn't seem like they are right now.
- novok 4y ago
  There is a segment that uses the virtual desktop with the oculus quest 2 quite extensively, so you still have that argument with their current lineup of devices IMO.
- elcomet 4y ago
  This is a weird take considering that simulavr is still taking preorders and doesn't plan to ship until 2023. They both have non-existent products right now Or maybe I'm wrong and they are already selling a product? I didn't see it on the website.
truemotive 4y ago
You can also build mountains made out of dogshit, but as it turns out the target market for that is zero. Zuck can’t make it.

Raed667 4y ago

Mark wants to be able to sell apps and ads on his end-to-end controlled platform, that is it. He missed the boat on browsers and smartphones, so he is aiming for total monopoly of what he believes is the next-big-thing™.

JKCalhoun 4y ago
I'm still skeptical that it is The Next Big Thing. I wonder if Zuckerberg suspects it might not be as well but, hey, Hail Mary!
- sam1r 4y ago
  Then again, however, a 100b size company — like meta —inevitably has to go for moonshots when their primary source of revenue is steadily declining. Seems like he has no choice. Even if it doesn’t work or we’re all skeptical — he better play along and go for it.
  - JKCalhoun 4y ago
    I think you're right, but I disagree that he has no choice — he can find some other “moonshot”. Pushing VR (or AR) seems like something he thinks will play well with the stock holders; and if he is as skeptical as some of us then he's kind of playing them for rubes. Hearing them describe their own product as “Chromebook for the face” just reconfirms my suspicious that this is a doomed product.
- bamboozled 4y ago
  Even if it’s the next big thing you know a better iHeadset will follow months later and be a much better product with less privacy and data theft built in.
  - towaway15463 4y ago
    Except it will have no games, cost $4k and will probably be difficult to port anything to. Great for Apple’s current mbpro market but ignored by everyone else.
    - mlajtos 4y ago
      Apple shipped support for WebXR in iOS 16. OpenXR is pretty good standarď and they would greatly benefit from supporting it. Which I think will happen. (My guess is that Unity (& Blender) will have an on-stage demo when the headset comes out. Unity: “just tick this box and your game will run on Reality Pro”)
    - bamboozled 4y ago
      People will still line up to buy it, probably me included, I'm a super keen Linux user too.
- wongarsu 4y ago
  My bet would be more on AR than VR, and maybe it's not the next big thing but the big thing after the next one. But that's fine for Meta. Facebook, Instagram and Whatsapp might all be running out of growth, but they are all big enough that Meta can afford to invest in something that will only pay off in a decade or two, as long as the payoff is big enough. Gaming-VR headsets are just a good way to get the technology into people's hands right now, and iterate on it.
  - rngname22 4y ago
    You can argue that Meta is at the very head of the pack with AR. See this demo of Quest Pro pass-through AR: https://www.reddit.com/r/oculus/comments/xvzxj2/new_footage_of_the_quest_pro_and_major_pass/ https://www.reddit.com/r/oculus/comments/xvzxj2/new_footage_...
- vkou 4y ago
  It doesn't matter if it is the next big thing, or a large flop. Meta is in trouble, and it needs to do something to retain relevance. This is something, and Meta is doing it.
- ehnto 4y ago
  It's a very different experience to how we currently consume media, and I am not really sure it has mass appeal even with some kind of perfect execution. I am prepared to be totally wrong mind you. It's an incredible tool and way to engage with virtual worlds, but the question we should be asking isn't "Is VR technology good enough" which I think people get stuck on. Really the question is "Does everyone want to be in a virtual world regularly?" and my intuition having spent a good amount of time in VR is that the answer to that is actually no. I love video games, so much so that I even try to make them. I spend many hours playing in virtual worlds, but I very, very rarely want to use VR. I'm the perfect candidate for the technology, and it's honestly mindblowing when I do use it, but it's just not a casual experience. Even if we had the perfect, unobtrusive and lightweight technology, you are still choosing to disconnect from your current environment and spend time fully engaged with a different world in a way that games and TV don't. That can be really exhausting.
  - towaway15463 4y ago
    Personally, I think that both TV and movies are going to be driving VR adoption. The Netflix of VR movies could be huge if they were able to offer the right content. A fully virtual theatre that gets new releases could also be big. The edge that VR had in these areas is that it essentially gives you a private theatre that you can enjoy with your friends and family. Leveraging a social network so that you can deliver notifications like “X is currently watching Y. Click to join” would be big. People already kind of do this with watch parties and discord.
    - Eisenstein 4y ago
      I love VR, but it is terrible for things like watching movies. Imagine sitting on your couch and putting on a movie. How often do you do that? If it is more often than 'once in a while', are you actually sitting and watching it intently the entire timee? Are you eating, or drinking anything, or petting your cat or dog, or snuggling on the couch with your SO or kids? You can't do that with a VR headset on because you can't see anything else at all. If you grab for a glass you have to switch to pass-through mode and back again, or take off the headset. You also can't do anything but look at the screen. It isn't really something that people want to do. Exceptions of course would be to do it with someone remotely, like a friend or a family member -- it is a good way to potentially 'hang out' with people who aren't physically there. But the same caveats apply.
- squeaky-clean 4y ago
  He probably believes he has the unique ability to make it the next big thing.
bigmealbigmeal 4y ago
I think this is mixing up the mythology of Zuckerberg with the reality. There's no indication that he is exclusively or even primarily driven by money or power. Go watch any long-form interview with him, such as with Lex Fridman. It becomes rather clear that he wants to be more like how Steve Jobs is seen by the wider public: as an innovator and pioneer, not as a power-hungry moneymaker.
- prox 4y ago
  He isn’t doing a great job at that. I see him as a rather analytical CEO. Nothing of the charisma or clarity of ideas that Steve Jobs had. Steve Jobs was rather ruthless when it came to quality (source : Guy Kawasaki) and no idea how Zuckerberg is irl, but my impression it isn’t favorable. What I am trying to say is, with how Facebook is managed isn’t at all like Apple.
- Raed667 4y ago
  I think you're mixing up the reality of Zuckerberg and his PR.
robertlagrant 4y ago
If we're defining "missed" as "things released by companies while Facebook was growing to 500k MAUs" :D

georgewsinger 4y ago

We understand Meta sometimes future projects that their devices will have broad office applications, but we're skeptical it has any teeth. Consider that Atari tried to compete with office PCs in the early 80s with their 8-bit family, and failed: https://images.fastcompany.net/image/upload/w_596,c_limit,q_auto:best,f_auto/wp-cms/uploads/2019/12/i-atari-ad.jpg https://images.fastcompany.net/image/upload/w_596,c_limit,q_... It's hard to focus on multiple things at once, and we're skeptical that the bureaucratic forces in play at a large company like Meta will allow them to do a good job at making their gaming platform also one that people actually want to work in.

cableshaft 4y ago
And there are plenty of instances of companies that have gone under when a big parent company decides to incorporate your business as a 'feature' in part of their big monster product. I'm not saying it's going to definitely happen and the company is doomed or anything, it's certainly possible that SimulaVR will come out on top for productivity devices (or peacefully coexist as an alternative alongside Meta's offering). But it shouldn't ignore what Meta is doing either, especially when they're actively saying they're moving into their turf. At the very least, it looks like Meta will put up a helluva fight.
- kanetw 4y ago
  Of course anything Meta does is a bit worrisome. I just don't think we're in the same niche-- IMO Meta is fundamentally built on data collection, and VR is just a side effect. Unless Meta decides to abandon that, I think we'll have a niche.
  - romanhn 4y ago
    This is similar to saying "Facebook is fundamentally built on data collection, and social networking is just a side effect." Technically true, but not much consolation for all the social networks that didn't go all in on advertising and perished. Wish you the best of luck either way, this is an exciting area and more competition is great. They definitely are competition though.

SCLeo 4y ago

If I am not wrong, this is an antitrust suit, meaning it is about what they are selling, not what they are developing. If the product has been launched, there literally cannot be a monopoly.

bradyd 4y ago
They are both selling VR headsets. Claiming they are not competitors is like trying to claim electric cars are not in competition with gas powered cars because they are different technology.
- taeric 4y ago
  Well.... I mean... we do consider trucks and cars to be different markets. And they are often the same technology. Same for passenger trucks to long haul trucks. Fundamentally same technology, but very different markets.

saghm 4y ago

>> >...Meta sells reasonably good gaming headsets to customers who want to be entertained in VR; we're selling general-purpose productivity devices which are aimed at replacing PCs and laptops. > Hate to break it to you, but if you don't think that Mark Zuckerberg is actively trying to create VR devices that are general-purpose productivity devices aimed at replacing PCs and laptops, you haven't been watching some of their recent videos about the new headsets and prototype headsets they're working on. He very much is aiming for that market with future devices (not the Quest 2). It sounds like they're saying that Meta doesn't currently sell anything that competes with what they're currently selling, and the info you give doesn't seem to contradict that. I'd question the premise that releasing a marketing video for a product that doesn't exist counts as being "in competition". They might be in competition in the future, but it doesn't seem like they are right now.

novok 4y ago
There is a segment that uses the virtual desktop with the oculus quest 2 quite extensively, so you still have that argument with their current lineup of devices IMO.
elcomet 4y ago
This is a weird take considering that simulavr is still taking preorders and doesn't plan to ship until 2023. They both have non-existent products right now Or maybe I'm wrong and they are already selling a product? I didn't see it on the website.

truemotive 4y ago

You can also build mountains made out of dogshit, but as it turns out the target market for that is zero. Zuck can’t make it.