3 ms·

I have tried it and it is a pretty cool experience. But I understand the rants, not a matter of age btw. Facebook is for old people for that matter and developi

I have tried it and it is a pretty cool experience. But I understand the rants, not a matter of age btw. Facebook is for old people for that matter and developing against any META hardware would have to take that into consideration. But the closed environments are just majorly repellant. I had an older headset (rift s) and suddenly needed to create a facebook account. Should have bought the more expensive Steam version. But I don't see how VR can really reach the masses. You need the extra funds and a decent system and 2D monitor is the more sensible investment. I will never buy an Occulus device again of course. There were management decisions anyone who really likes technology and wants to dabble with it will very likely and understandably hate with a burning passion. A passion sourced in the love for technology and the ability to share it. And they knew that people would dislike it, just hoped they would comply in switching to their Facebook platform. This is 100% on Facebook and to 0% on grumpy users. Not being grumpy is pretty naive in my opinion.

chaostheory 4y ago
> But I don't see how VR can really reach the masses. The same exact way every technology gets adopted by the masses: it gets cheaper, faster, and better. I really don’t understand why people are suddenly forgetting this tenet of technology. Oh and btw Meta isn’t the only VR company. Despite the name, meta cannot fully own the metaverse since it’s essentially VR over the internet. I still don’t understand how so many technical people can fall for the marketing
- x0x0 4y ago
  Cheaper faster and better is insufficient: it needs compelling use cases. And we keep tuning into Mark waiting for him to demonstrate compelling uses cases and... crickets. And bluntly, instead of talking about compelling, awesome use cases you appear to have nothing to say about that because you assert that HN users haven't tried VR headsets. In my case (and I believe for many readers), that is untrue.
  - chaostheory 4y ago
    There are compelling use cases like being able to play ping pong with your sibling who lives thousands of miles away. The same applies to watching movies and playing board games. It’s next gen zoom at the very least due to the presence it provides. You’d know that if you just tried it instead of dismissing it and coming up with bad assumptions due to a lack of data. Meta isn’t the only VR company and it won’t be the last. Everyone is too fixated on not seeing the forest for the trees immediately in front of you
- Karrot_Kream 4y ago
  > I still don’t understand how so many technical people can fall for the marketing. Because if you're predisposed to hating new technology or generally thinking technology causes more harm than good, then you'll look for the weakest interpretation of a new development and use that to get angry. For all the angry ranters in this thread it's the idea that Meta will be the only company to do VR hardware and software ("I mean it's their name for god's sake!"). In reality Horizon Worlds is definitely the runner-up with stalwarts like VRChat and Second Life that actually have mindshare across multiple platforms and headsets. Immersed is the better app for productivity right now, Workrooms is pretty new. Horizon is playing catch-up. Companies like HP and Apple are making headsets. The market is just getting started. But the idea of a healthy, competitive, VR market with lots of choice doesn't fit the narrative around evil technology so nobody wants to make that point.

chaostheory 4y ago

> But I don't see how VR can really reach the masses. The same exact way every technology gets adopted by the masses: it gets cheaper, faster, and better. I really don’t understand why people are suddenly forgetting this tenet of technology. Oh and btw Meta isn’t the only VR company. Despite the name, meta cannot fully own the metaverse since it’s essentially VR over the internet. I still don’t understand how so many technical people can fall for the marketing

x0x0 4y ago
Cheaper faster and better is insufficient: it needs compelling use cases. And we keep tuning into Mark waiting for him to demonstrate compelling uses cases and... crickets. And bluntly, instead of talking about compelling, awesome use cases you appear to have nothing to say about that because you assert that HN users haven't tried VR headsets. In my case (and I believe for many readers), that is untrue.
- chaostheory 4y ago
  There are compelling use cases like being able to play ping pong with your sibling who lives thousands of miles away. The same applies to watching movies and playing board games. It’s next gen zoom at the very least due to the presence it provides. You’d know that if you just tried it instead of dismissing it and coming up with bad assumptions due to a lack of data. Meta isn’t the only VR company and it won’t be the last. Everyone is too fixated on not seeing the forest for the trees immediately in front of you
Karrot_Kream 4y ago
> I still don’t understand how so many technical people can fall for the marketing. Because if you're predisposed to hating new technology or generally thinking technology causes more harm than good, then you'll look for the weakest interpretation of a new development and use that to get angry. For all the angry ranters in this thread it's the idea that Meta will be the only company to do VR hardware and software ("I mean it's their name for god's sake!"). In reality Horizon Worlds is definitely the runner-up with stalwarts like VRChat and Second Life that actually have mindshare across multiple platforms and headsets. Immersed is the better app for productivity right now, Workrooms is pretty new. Horizon is playing catch-up. Companies like HP and Apple are making headsets. The market is just getting started. But the idea of a healthy, competitive, VR market with lots of choice doesn't fit the narrative around evil technology so nobody wants to make that point.