4 ms·

Impressive how much processing power you can fit into such a svelte headset in 2022. The price, while steep, is not outrageous compared to something like an iP

Impressive how much processing power you can fit into such a svelte headset in 2022. The price, while steep, is not outrageous compared to something like an iPhone. But I still haven't seen a "killer app" for VR so it's not a "daily driver" like a phone would be. The association with Meta is also a huge downside for me personally.

danpalmer 4y ago
> The association with Meta is also a huge downside for me personally. Agreed. Whether you agree with how Meta does things or not (I don't), they have made it very clear that they see the Quest as a locked down, Meta-controlled ecosystem. I happen to use an iPhone, which arguably pioneered this sort of thing, but I feel like Meta are taking it to the next level. They have much higher rev-shares, (I think it's 40-60%), they have tighter control, require a Facebook account to use it (quite different to an Apple account to access cloud features), and while an iPhone is quite functional without the AppStore and iCloud with the web and built-in functionality, I think the Quest is basically useless without a Facebook account setup. All that lock-in worries me.
- camdat 4y ago
  So much misinfo in one post. > They have much higher rev-shares The current revshare for App Lab is 70/30 in favor of the developer. Much* lower than Apple. > they have tighter control Than the iPhone? The Quest can be used in SteamVR like any other headset. Third-party apps can be sideloaded, and the bootloader is (semi) unlocked. Not sure how they're even comparable. > require a Facebook account to use it A Meta account now, disconnected from the social network. How is this different than an Apple account? > I think the Quest is basically useless without a Facebook account setup Do you have a Quest? I've used mine entirely as a PCVR setup, I don't think I've used a FB service in years besides the store. * EDIT: Discussed below, "much" is maybe a bit too far. Seems like the final split is roughly the same, though AppLab doesn't take a cut of IAP.
  - joshstrange 4y ago
    > The current revshare for App Lab is 70/30 in favor of the developer. Much lower than Apple. How is that much lower than Apple? If you do under a million a year on the App Store or in the second year of an iOS subscription it's 85/15, else it's 70/30 (unless you have a better backroom deal).
    - camdat 4y ago
      This is a recent change no? Previously it was 70/30 across the board and this also includes in-app subscriptions/payments. I say much because (afaik) the majority of developer income comes from recurring payments, which AppLab doesn't take any of.
      - artificial 4y ago
        Looks like implemented as of 2016. https://www.theverge.com/2016/6/8/11880730/apple-app-store-subscription-update-phil-schiller-interview https://www.theverge.com/2016/6/8/11880730/apple-app-store-s...
        camdat 4y ago
        Err, maybe I'm mistaken, but this seems different than the above discussion. From what I know, Apple takes 30% of paid app sales in the app store. In-app purchases, though, drop to a 15% take after the first year (or that's my read from the article). Contrast this with AppLab, which takes 30% of paid app sales, but doesn't take a cut of in-app purchases. I'll retract the "much" lower point since I assume this results in roughly the same final take. Games on non-mobile have a higher initial cost, which probably balances the lack of post-sale revenue. Regardless, I don't think this makes the Oculus more locked down than an iPhone, since you can always bypass their store and sideload or run apps directly from your PC, which Apple isn't offering.
- MertsA 4y ago
  You can sideload apps for free on the Quest and Apple requires a dev account for $99 a year to sideload anything more than a trivial app or two. The Quest definitely feels objectively less locked down than iOS IMHO.
  - jhatemyjob 4y ago
    Yep, plus Zuck himself has publicly criticized Apple and said they aren't gonna go down that route. Look at all of the mainstream consoles, PS5, Nintendo Switch, etc: none of them allow you to sideload anything. And Meta even went a step further than that with the semi-unlocked bootloader. That is unprecedented, most Android phones don't even have that. People tend to conflate FAANGs with each other. One bad Apple ruins the bunch.
    - wincy 4y ago
      It also gives you a nice warning saying your Facebook account might get banned for using a pirate copy of Beat Saber.
      - Eisenstein 4y ago
        Maybe this is a way to rid the world of Facebook? Android virus that puts pirated software on Quest devices...
      - jhatemyjob 4y ago
        Why join the navy when you can be a pirate?
  - cwkoss 4y ago
    > sideload apps for free on the Quest only if you value your time at $0. the amount of time to keep sidequest working and fight official updates breaking it is not trivial.
    - MacsHeadroom 4y ago
      You don't need sidequest to sideload to a meta headset. You just need the bog standard android adb shell program. >adb install-multiple one.apk two.apk three.apk Done.

danpalmer 4y ago

> The association with Meta is also a huge downside for me personally. Agreed. Whether you agree with how Meta does things or not (I don't), they have made it very clear that they see the Quest as a locked down, Meta-controlled ecosystem. I happen to use an iPhone, which arguably pioneered this sort of thing, but I feel like Meta are taking it to the next level. They have much higher rev-shares, (I think it's 40-60%), they have tighter control, require a Facebook account to use it (quite different to an Apple account to access cloud features), and while an iPhone is quite functional without the AppStore and iCloud with the web and built-in functionality, I think the Quest is basically useless without a Facebook account setup. All that lock-in worries me.

camdat 4y ago
So much misinfo in one post. > They have much higher rev-shares The current revshare for App Lab is 70/30 in favor of the developer. Much* lower than Apple. > they have tighter control Than the iPhone? The Quest can be used in SteamVR like any other headset. Third-party apps can be sideloaded, and the bootloader is (semi) unlocked. Not sure how they're even comparable. > require a Facebook account to use it A Meta account now, disconnected from the social network. How is this different than an Apple account? > I think the Quest is basically useless without a Facebook account setup Do you have a Quest? I've used mine entirely as a PCVR setup, I don't think I've used a FB service in years besides the store. * EDIT: Discussed below, "much" is maybe a bit too far. Seems like the final split is roughly the same, though AppLab doesn't take a cut of IAP.
- joshstrange 4y ago
  > The current revshare for App Lab is 70/30 in favor of the developer. Much lower than Apple. How is that much lower than Apple? If you do under a million a year on the App Store or in the second year of an iOS subscription it's 85/15, else it's 70/30 (unless you have a better backroom deal).
  - camdat 4y ago
    This is a recent change no? Previously it was 70/30 across the board and this also includes in-app subscriptions/payments. I say much because (afaik) the majority of developer income comes from recurring payments, which AppLab doesn't take any of.
    - artificial 4y ago
      Looks like implemented as of 2016. https://www.theverge.com/2016/6/8/11880730/apple-app-store-subscription-update-phil-schiller-interview https://www.theverge.com/2016/6/8/11880730/apple-app-store-s...
      - camdat 4y ago
        Err, maybe I'm mistaken, but this seems different than the above discussion. From what I know, Apple takes 30% of paid app sales in the app store. In-app purchases, though, drop to a 15% take after the first year (or that's my read from the article). Contrast this with AppLab, which takes 30% of paid app sales, but doesn't take a cut of in-app purchases. I'll retract the "much" lower point since I assume this results in roughly the same final take. Games on non-mobile have a higher initial cost, which probably balances the lack of post-sale revenue. Regardless, I don't think this makes the Oculus more locked down than an iPhone, since you can always bypass their store and sideload or run apps directly from your PC, which Apple isn't offering.
MertsA 4y ago
You can sideload apps for free on the Quest and Apple requires a dev account for $99 a year to sideload anything more than a trivial app or two. The Quest definitely feels objectively less locked down than iOS IMHO.
- jhatemyjob 4y ago
  Yep, plus Zuck himself has publicly criticized Apple and said they aren't gonna go down that route. Look at all of the mainstream consoles, PS5, Nintendo Switch, etc: none of them allow you to sideload anything. And Meta even went a step further than that with the semi-unlocked bootloader. That is unprecedented, most Android phones don't even have that. People tend to conflate FAANGs with each other. One bad Apple ruins the bunch.
  - wincy 4y ago
    It also gives you a nice warning saying your Facebook account might get banned for using a pirate copy of Beat Saber.
    - Eisenstein 4y ago
      Maybe this is a way to rid the world of Facebook? Android virus that puts pirated software on Quest devices...
    - jhatemyjob 4y ago
      Why join the navy when you can be a pirate?
- cwkoss 4y ago
  > sideload apps for free on the Quest only if you value your time at $0. the amount of time to keep sidequest working and fight official updates breaking it is not trivial.
  - MacsHeadroom 4y ago
    You don't need sidequest to sideload to a meta headset. You just need the bog standard android adb shell program. >adb install-multiple one.apk two.apk three.apk Done.