11 ms·

Ok, so a VR version of MS Teams might be “compelling”, but does anybody really think that companies are going to supply their employees with $1k VR goggles just

by tacker2000 4y ago

Ok, so a VR version of MS Teams might be “compelling”, but does anybody really think that companies are going to supply their employees with $1k VR goggles just so that they can do a virtual meetup instead of just a normal phone or video call? I think VR has merit and could be very useful in some spaces like gaming, exploring new worlds (with good graphics) or maybe even prototyping architectural designs etc, but these are too niche for whatever Zuck is trying here… for his billion dollar bet to succeed nearly everyone would have to be using his VR product.

yokoprime 4y ago
If at some point goggles replaces monitors, I can see this taking off... but i don't see that happening anytime soon. VR goggles are way too bulky and uncomfortable now.
- bamboozled 4y ago
  You’d really want to be disconnected entirely from your surroundings while you’re working ? Sounds nauseating to me. I enjoy looking at friends and loved ones, looking out the window occasionally, taking notes, drinking coffee without a headset in the way, not having a sweaty face or being nauseated. AR maybe, VR for hours ? No thanks
  - null_object 4y ago
    I know this may come across as saying "who would want to carry a telephone in their pocket?", but the idea that we would all be required to sit with googles on all day, in a virtual 'office' environment, in order to do our work, is beyond all dystopian imagining, in my view. Today I'm coding by my window, with the sun shining outside - some birdsong audible from the trees in the yard. One of my kids just came home from school, and we chatted for a couple minutes. I had a few (too many) meetings today, but they were all video-calls and for some of the time I could carry on with a current task. I think the receptiveness of the HN crowd overestimates the utility of this technology. It would probably be used to enslave underlings into being 'present' at the virtual office without pee-breaks for 10-hours every day. PS: I see everyone else in this thread questioning the idea that we should sit in a virtual-reality world with goggles strapped to our faces all day is getting downvoted. I think people outside the tech-nerd bubble would probably disagree.
    - Semaphor 4y ago
      > Today I'm coding by my window, with the sun shining outside - some birdsong audible from the trees in the yard. I’m coding by the windows with the blinds down, sometimes birds, or worse, church bells (actually, mostly the damn bells) annoy me. I guess it’s nice when my wife pops in, but I could still interrupt my VR session for that. Not saying I’m in any way into VR, I don’t really see the point yet, but I wanted to give a different POV ;)
      - bamboozled 4y ago
        I guess it’s nice when my wife pops in, but I could still interrupt my VR session for that. This still sounds so bad.
  - blackoil 4y ago
    These goggles have pass through color video, some may enjoy to work in an immersive environment. Also, some may enjoy to work from beach in Bali or Swiss mountains.
  - cush 4y ago
    > You’d really want to be disconnected entirely from your surroundings while you’re working? People take drugs to achieve this level of focus
    - bamboozled 4y ago
      you’d still need to take drugs, a VR headset doesn’t stop you from being distracted .
      - cush 4y ago
        Obviously it depends entirely on the person and situation...
tmikaeld 4y ago
Ok, so a PC version of The Office might be “compelling”, but does anybody really think that companies are going to supply their employees with $1k PC just so that they can do a digital meetup instead of just a normal phone call and a letter? I think PCs has merit and could be very useful in some spaces like development, exploring new productivity (with good keyboards) or maybe even prototyping architectural designs etc, but these are too niche for whatever Gates is trying here… for his billion dollar bet to succeed nearly everyone would have to be using his PC product.
- tacker2000 4y ago
  Yes, of course your argument is valid. But i still think the functionality gained by VR is more of a smaller incremental one, rather than the revolutionary one that the PC was back then.
  - tmikaeld 4y ago
    I think it depend on two things: - It needs to be light enough to wear 8 hours a day and not disconnect too much from reality, like with XR/AR. - Input devices matter a great deal and writing on a keyboard - while in the field - will pose a problem, same goes with mouse input devices. The current controllers are too large and slow for productive input.
    - intrasight 4y ago
      Mostly agree. But on "input devices" I don't think the keyboard will as we know it will make the transition. Anyway, it's a very unnatural input device which only a small percentage of humanity has mastered. Steve Jobs famously told his designers in the 80s that he didn't want the Mac to have a physical keyboard. They said, rightly at the time, that a computer needs one. But in the end Jobs was correct - 99% of computers now have no keyboard. I have not followed research in this area, but I'm sure that some very smart people are trying to figure out the ideal virtual keyboard for VR.
      - 4y ago
bryanlarsen 4y ago
Companies regularly drop $100K+ on Cisco video conferencing gear.
- viraptor 4y ago
  There's a big difference between providing the gear to make the video conference work well and providing VR gear to make the video conference... slightly different?
  - bryanlarsen 4y ago
    In my experience Cisco gear provides marginal benefit over a good Zoom setup, and according to the article a VR meeting using the Quest Pro provides a substantive benefit.
  - cush 4y ago
    It's literally the same thing. The market for hardware in corporate telephony and video conferencing is massive. Think headsets, massive screens, Teams/Zoom rooms, special phones, etc etc.
foobarian 4y ago
I don't know, I think as a user this would be pretty awesome. The main thing that fills me with dread is not everybody having the headset, or having trouble getting it to work. (Remember the days with each meeting starting with 10 minutes of futzing around with external display settings and resolutions and VGA connectors?)
ianbutler 4y ago
If you spend most of your time working in it? I think so. My company provided me a 3.5k laptop, in fact every company I've worked for I've used very nice and expensive macs.
- yamtaddle 4y ago
  Most workers receiving laptops are getting low-tier Dells loaded with so much corporate crapware that they barely work at all. Including lots of developers—just not the ones at fancy tech companies or startups.
  - ianbutler 4y ago
    Between 25 and 55 percent of enterprise use Macs. https://www.computerworld.com/article/3562374/mac-adoption-in-enterprise-grows-survey-says.html https://www.computerworld.com/article/3562374/mac-adoption-i... https://www.computerworld.com/article/3604601/macs-reach-23-share-in-us-enterprises-idc-confirms.html https://www.computerworld.com/article/3604601/macs-reach-23-... And apparently all of the fortune 500 https://appleinsider.com/articles/19/11/12/100-of-fortune-500-companies-are-using-apple-products https://appleinsider.com/articles/19/11/12/100-of-fortune-50... Your model of "just fancy tech companies and startups" is maybe a bit outdated.
    - yamtaddle 4y ago
      > Your model of "just fancy tech companies and startups" is maybe a bit outdated. It's really not. More permit them now or have some departments or (perhaps acquired) sub-units that use them. Your average office drone and old-corp IT person or developer is still issued a Windows machine, and probably a low-end one. [EDIT] Broader point remains either way: issuing $3.5k laptops/desktops is very very far from the norm.
      - ianbutler 4y ago
        Okay, I’ve provided 3 articles to the contrary and you just restated your opinion. Not sure what you want to happen here but I guess we agree to disagree and move on.
onion2k 4y ago
does anybody really think that companies are going to supply their employees with $1k VR goggles just so that they can do a virtual meetup instead of just a normal phone or video call? Yes. Spending $1k (probably a lot less if you're buying a thousand devices at once) is almost insignificant when it comes to kitting out staff to do their job as well as possible. If you can make someone you're paying $100,000/year just 1% more productive then it's already paid for itself. Plus it's a perk "top of the line VR headset for every employee" keeps people onside (I'm reluctant to say 'happy'; that would be too much). If the company I work for decided to get all the staff VR headsets for meetings I'd be really cool with that. If we switched to Teams though, that might undo the happy vibes..
- spywaregorilla 4y ago
  Imagine how dumb you're going to feel if you're the only person in VR in a teams meeting.
  - robertlagrant 4y ago
    Hah yes. 7 people on low-res webcams and one with a 4k Master Chief avatar.
    - spywaregorilla 4y ago
      Or the alternative even. I work in consulting. What would it be like if my team was geared up in VR and the client was not? What would it be like if the client was geared up and we were not? I would imagine... really distracting.
      - anonred 4y ago
        Isn’t that just the definition of network effect? Meta is clearly betting that at a certain critical mass not owning a VR headset in a professional environment will be like not owning a webcam.
        4y ago
jackpeterfletch 4y ago
I agree that the additional value add over a video call might not be there, though the author did seem to speak of Workroom being somewhat compelling. But remember that a single Telepresence room can cost $60k - $600k, plus an ongoing subscription for networking + management, without the capacity or flexibility of a virtual room. Every meeting room in my office has one. This is touched on in the article, but remember theres a difference between how individuals and corporations spend money, especially if it can lead to [percieved?] gains in productivity/team cohesion. https://www.nojitter.com/telepresence-beautiful-and-expensive/page/0/1 https://www.nojitter.com/telepresence-beautiful-and-expensiv...
philote 4y ago
Agreed. With screen sharing, video, and audio, there's nothing more that is really needed for distributed people meeting together. Meeting in a 3d world seems like it would only benefit if you're discussing something that is 3d (some architecture design, car design, 3-d assets, etc.). Plus, it seems almost less personal in some ways since you're using an avatar instead of your actual face.
ttcbj 4y ago
Agreed. I bought a VR headset a few years ago with the idea of using iRacing to practice for actual track days. It was a plausible use case with a lot of significant practical advantages. But in reality, it was just unpleasant to use. I just didn't like having something strapped to my face. Ultimately, 3 monitors provided an adequately immersive experience for learning without the hassle/discomfort of having a headset on. Honestly, it was kind of better anyway. I suspect that what people will quickly find is that although a VR meeting might in certain respects have theoretical advantages, its just not better enough (or maybe even better at all) to overcome the hassle. I don't want to go into a meeting room and strap on a headset, especially not the headset everyone else has been strapping on for the last month. Comparing zoom to a headset, I'd take zoom.
- tmikaeld 4y ago
  I think the key here is the passthrough, making it an XR/AR experience, thus not disconnecting from reality in the same way as full VR is doing. This has already been deployed in industrial complexes like Volvo/SAAB for teaching engineers in car manufacturing.
swalsh 4y ago
As someone who has personally experienced the difference presence makes in VR, yeah I think it's worth it. You'll have far more productive meetings (and frankly, smaller meetings.... one of the downside of zoom meetings I've noticed is because it's so easy to invite everyone.... people invite everyone. You end up with meetings with 10 people on and only 3 people partcipating). But I'll concede that you'll looking at an uphill battle. It's not intuitive to a lot of people what the benefits are until you've experienced it.
w0m 4y ago
90% of of professional/work 'VR' usage will be through a standard interface I think until terminals/IDEs get proper usable/silo'd support. We had one work VR event and i spent half of it launching rockets at coworkers before my kid walked in and i went AFK.
- cush 4y ago
  90% of professional work is done in an IDE...? There are many other professions besides programming.
bsenftner 4y ago
Ask companies how they feel about those expensive conference room setups that are rarely used, and when they are used the experience is buggy as hell. VR has applications, but mainstream consumer use is not one of them. I suspect and predict the killer app is simply greater bandwidth and bigger screens for ordinary video calls. Some marketer will find the right angle and moment to proclaim "telepresence is here!" and the mainstream ambitions of VR will evaporate. All interest will go to "half rooms" where the "other half" of the room is someone else's telepresence half room. On demand, of course. Gaming will always have some type of VR hardware - that's too compelling not to try. However, beyond gaming the ordinary person does not really need 360 degree immersion for anything unless they are learning something complex and VR is used in the profession they are learning about.
- anonred 4y ago
  What tech and/or societal changes would be needed to reach a world where a fair amount of user generated content is spatial (as opposed to 2D)?
  - bsenftner 4y ago
    What's the purpose, and does the purpose make money? Unless the ordinary user can make money using VR somehow, I don't see it having the essential reason for the tech to go mainstream. VR gaming and porn is not that compelling.
marcus_holmes 4y ago
> for whatever Zuck is trying here… Zuck read too much cyberpunk as a kid. The Metaverse is lifted straight out of Snow Crash, they didn't even change the name [0] 0: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snow_Crash https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snow_Crash
- xen2xen1 4y ago
  He's far from alone. Companies have famously dropped Snow Crash on a table and said "make this.". He's just the one with the most money and people.
- Tepix 4y ago
  Neal Stephenson sure makes a compelling case, even if the world he describes is in many aspects a dystopia.
- cush 4y ago
  Most of these designs are an inevitability. Every Sci fi universe has some kind of Metaverse experience - all pointing generally in the same direction as they try to answer, "what would people do in a world with no limits?"
  - jonny_eh 4y ago
    They never consider the cost though. They just use it as a mechanism to tell story. Don't underestimate the story telling value of characters in a virtual space. Consider how much better The Matrix is while they're actually in it.
    - cush 4y ago
      Cost goes down and ROI only goes up, exponentially over time. VR is currently as expensive today as it ever will be.
      - jonny_eh 4y ago
        I was actually considering non-monetary cost. e.g. space to store the headset, time to place it over your face, time to charge it, etc.
marcus_holmes 4y ago
90% of human communication is via body language. Unless I've missed something and Meta have managed to capture the nuances of body language and translate it to the avatars, then this tech is useless for "real" meetings. Anything that could be an email, or a presentation, sure. But if you have to trust what other people in the room are saying, then this won't work.
- cush 4y ago
  In recent interviews with Zuck he talks about important body language is. From their research, they found you can get really far with only face, posture, and hand reproduction (hence why Meta avatars have no legs) It's early days, but having very accurate face and hand tracking will be the next big step
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
2OEH8eoCRo0 4y ago
They already provide $1,000+ laptops. I'd love if the company sent me just a headset that I put on and I'm "at work".
cush 4y ago
$1k goggles is pennies on the dollar compared to office real estate
rippercushions 4y ago
Yes, happily, if that can substitute for the $20k international business trip.
luckydata 4y ago
just to have a boring meeting about spreadsheets? no. Performing select activities around design, prototyping etc? Yes, but it's a small market. IMHO FB is betting too much on a pipe dream, considering nobody thinks "hey let's get my enterprise productivity apps from Facebook". Hard, hard sell.
joshxyz 4y ago
it's like the tesla thing they built sports cars for rich people too before the cheap ones meta is building toys for people with money, until they get to streamline their manufacturing for the cheap ones
wslh 4y ago
Well, I almost stopped reading when the article mentioned MS Teams. The article cannot mention Teams without throwing away. If I were the marketing guy or program manager at Microsoft I would mention a new name for a future product just to avoid MS Teams terrible product (is it a product? Like Movie Maker [1]. Probably Xbox Work 360^3 would help. [1] https://www.google.com/amp/s/boingboing.net/2018/05/23/epic-bill-gates-e-mail-rant-fr.html/amp https://www.google.com/amp/s/boingboing.net/2018/05/23/epic-...

yokoprime 4y ago

If at some point goggles replaces monitors, I can see this taking off... but i don't see that happening anytime soon. VR goggles are way too bulky and uncomfortable now.

bamboozled 4y ago
You’d really want to be disconnected entirely from your surroundings while you’re working ? Sounds nauseating to me. I enjoy looking at friends and loved ones, looking out the window occasionally, taking notes, drinking coffee without a headset in the way, not having a sweaty face or being nauseated. AR maybe, VR for hours ? No thanks
- null_object 4y ago
  I know this may come across as saying "who would want to carry a telephone in their pocket?", but the idea that we would all be required to sit with googles on all day, in a virtual 'office' environment, in order to do our work, is beyond all dystopian imagining, in my view. Today I'm coding by my window, with the sun shining outside - some birdsong audible from the trees in the yard. One of my kids just came home from school, and we chatted for a couple minutes. I had a few (too many) meetings today, but they were all video-calls and for some of the time I could carry on with a current task. I think the receptiveness of the HN crowd overestimates the utility of this technology. It would probably be used to enslave underlings into being 'present' at the virtual office without pee-breaks for 10-hours every day. PS: I see everyone else in this thread questioning the idea that we should sit in a virtual-reality world with goggles strapped to our faces all day is getting downvoted. I think people outside the tech-nerd bubble would probably disagree.
  - Semaphor 4y ago
    > Today I'm coding by my window, with the sun shining outside - some birdsong audible from the trees in the yard. I’m coding by the windows with the blinds down, sometimes birds, or worse, church bells (actually, mostly the damn bells) annoy me. I guess it’s nice when my wife pops in, but I could still interrupt my VR session for that. Not saying I’m in any way into VR, I don’t really see the point yet, but I wanted to give a different POV ;)
    - bamboozled 4y ago
      I guess it’s nice when my wife pops in, but I could still interrupt my VR session for that. This still sounds so bad.
- blackoil 4y ago
  These goggles have pass through color video, some may enjoy to work in an immersive environment. Also, some may enjoy to work from beach in Bali or Swiss mountains.
- cush 4y ago
  > You’d really want to be disconnected entirely from your surroundings while you’re working? People take drugs to achieve this level of focus
  - bamboozled 4y ago
    you’d still need to take drugs, a VR headset doesn’t stop you from being distracted .
    - cush 4y ago
      Obviously it depends entirely on the person and situation...

tmikaeld 4y ago

Ok, so a PC version of The Office might be “compelling”, but does anybody really think that companies are going to supply their employees with $1k PC just so that they can do a digital meetup instead of just a normal phone call and a letter? I think PCs has merit and could be very useful in some spaces like development, exploring new productivity (with good keyboards) or maybe even prototyping architectural designs etc, but these are too niche for whatever Gates is trying here… for his billion dollar bet to succeed nearly everyone would have to be using his PC product.

tacker2000 4y ago
Yes, of course your argument is valid. But i still think the functionality gained by VR is more of a smaller incremental one, rather than the revolutionary one that the PC was back then.
- tmikaeld 4y ago
  I think it depend on two things: - It needs to be light enough to wear 8 hours a day and not disconnect too much from reality, like with XR/AR. - Input devices matter a great deal and writing on a keyboard - while in the field - will pose a problem, same goes with mouse input devices. The current controllers are too large and slow for productive input.
  - intrasight 4y ago
    Mostly agree. But on "input devices" I don't think the keyboard will as we know it will make the transition. Anyway, it's a very unnatural input device which only a small percentage of humanity has mastered. Steve Jobs famously told his designers in the 80s that he didn't want the Mac to have a physical keyboard. They said, rightly at the time, that a computer needs one. But in the end Jobs was correct - 99% of computers now have no keyboard. I have not followed research in this area, but I'm sure that some very smart people are trying to figure out the ideal virtual keyboard for VR.
    - 4y ago

bryanlarsen 4y ago

Companies regularly drop $100K+ on Cisco video conferencing gear.

viraptor 4y ago
There's a big difference between providing the gear to make the video conference work well and providing VR gear to make the video conference... slightly different?
- bryanlarsen 4y ago
  In my experience Cisco gear provides marginal benefit over a good Zoom setup, and according to the article a VR meeting using the Quest Pro provides a substantive benefit.
- cush 4y ago
  It's literally the same thing. The market for hardware in corporate telephony and video conferencing is massive. Think headsets, massive screens, Teams/Zoom rooms, special phones, etc etc.

foobarian 4y ago

I don't know, I think as a user this would be pretty awesome. The main thing that fills me with dread is not everybody having the headset, or having trouble getting it to work. (Remember the days with each meeting starting with 10 minutes of futzing around with external display settings and resolutions and VGA connectors?)

ianbutler 4y ago

If you spend most of your time working in it? I think so. My company provided me a 3.5k laptop, in fact every company I've worked for I've used very nice and expensive macs.

yamtaddle 4y ago
Most workers receiving laptops are getting low-tier Dells loaded with so much corporate crapware that they barely work at all. Including lots of developers—just not the ones at fancy tech companies or startups.
- ianbutler 4y ago
  Between 25 and 55 percent of enterprise use Macs. https://www.computerworld.com/article/3562374/mac-adoption-in-enterprise-grows-survey-says.html https://www.computerworld.com/article/3562374/mac-adoption-i... https://www.computerworld.com/article/3604601/macs-reach-23-share-in-us-enterprises-idc-confirms.html https://www.computerworld.com/article/3604601/macs-reach-23-... And apparently all of the fortune 500 https://appleinsider.com/articles/19/11/12/100-of-fortune-500-companies-are-using-apple-products https://appleinsider.com/articles/19/11/12/100-of-fortune-50... Your model of "just fancy tech companies and startups" is maybe a bit outdated.
  - yamtaddle 4y ago
    > Your model of "just fancy tech companies and startups" is maybe a bit outdated. It's really not. More permit them now or have some departments or (perhaps acquired) sub-units that use them. Your average office drone and old-corp IT person or developer is still issued a Windows machine, and probably a low-end one. [EDIT] Broader point remains either way: issuing $3.5k laptops/desktops is very very far from the norm.
    - ianbutler 4y ago
      Okay, I’ve provided 3 articles to the contrary and you just restated your opinion. Not sure what you want to happen here but I guess we agree to disagree and move on.

onion2k 4y ago

does anybody really think that companies are going to supply their employees with $1k VR goggles just so that they can do a virtual meetup instead of just a normal phone or video call? Yes. Spending $1k (probably a lot less if you're buying a thousand devices at once) is almost insignificant when it comes to kitting out staff to do their job as well as possible. If you can make someone you're paying $100,000/year just 1% more productive then it's already paid for itself. Plus it's a perk "top of the line VR headset for every employee" keeps people onside (I'm reluctant to say 'happy'; that would be too much). If the company I work for decided to get all the staff VR headsets for meetings I'd be really cool with that. If we switched to Teams though, that might undo the happy vibes..

spywaregorilla 4y ago
Imagine how dumb you're going to feel if you're the only person in VR in a teams meeting.
- robertlagrant 4y ago
  Hah yes. 7 people on low-res webcams and one with a 4k Master Chief avatar.
  - spywaregorilla 4y ago
    Or the alternative even. I work in consulting. What would it be like if my team was geared up in VR and the client was not? What would it be like if the client was geared up and we were not? I would imagine... really distracting.
    - anonred 4y ago
      Isn’t that just the definition of network effect? Meta is clearly betting that at a certain critical mass not owning a VR headset in a professional environment will be like not owning a webcam.
      - 4y ago

jackpeterfletch 4y ago

I agree that the additional value add over a video call might not be there, though the author did seem to speak of Workroom being somewhat compelling. But remember that a single Telepresence room can cost $60k - $600k, plus an ongoing subscription for networking + management, without the capacity or flexibility of a virtual room. Every meeting room in my office has one. This is touched on in the article, but remember theres a difference between how individuals and corporations spend money, especially if it can lead to [percieved?] gains in productivity/team cohesion. https://www.nojitter.com/telepresence-beautiful-and-expensive/page/0/1 https://www.nojitter.com/telepresence-beautiful-and-expensiv...

philote 4y ago

Agreed. With screen sharing, video, and audio, there's nothing more that is really needed for distributed people meeting together. Meeting in a 3d world seems like it would only benefit if you're discussing something that is 3d (some architecture design, car design, 3-d assets, etc.). Plus, it seems almost less personal in some ways since you're using an avatar instead of your actual face.

ttcbj 4y ago

Agreed. I bought a VR headset a few years ago with the idea of using iRacing to practice for actual track days. It was a plausible use case with a lot of significant practical advantages. But in reality, it was just unpleasant to use. I just didn't like having something strapped to my face. Ultimately, 3 monitors provided an adequately immersive experience for learning without the hassle/discomfort of having a headset on. Honestly, it was kind of better anyway. I suspect that what people will quickly find is that although a VR meeting might in certain respects have theoretical advantages, its just not better enough (or maybe even better at all) to overcome the hassle. I don't want to go into a meeting room and strap on a headset, especially not the headset everyone else has been strapping on for the last month. Comparing zoom to a headset, I'd take zoom.

tmikaeld 4y ago
I think the key here is the passthrough, making it an XR/AR experience, thus not disconnecting from reality in the same way as full VR is doing. This has already been deployed in industrial complexes like Volvo/SAAB for teaching engineers in car manufacturing.

swalsh 4y ago

As someone who has personally experienced the difference presence makes in VR, yeah I think it's worth it. You'll have far more productive meetings (and frankly, smaller meetings.... one of the downside of zoom meetings I've noticed is because it's so easy to invite everyone.... people invite everyone. You end up with meetings with 10 people on and only 3 people partcipating). But I'll concede that you'll looking at an uphill battle. It's not intuitive to a lot of people what the benefits are until you've experienced it.

w0m 4y ago

90% of of professional/work 'VR' usage will be through a standard interface I think until terminals/IDEs get proper usable/silo'd support. We had one work VR event and i spent half of it launching rockets at coworkers before my kid walked in and i went AFK.

cush 4y ago
90% of professional work is done in an IDE...? There are many other professions besides programming.

bsenftner 4y ago

Ask companies how they feel about those expensive conference room setups that are rarely used, and when they are used the experience is buggy as hell. VR has applications, but mainstream consumer use is not one of them. I suspect and predict the killer app is simply greater bandwidth and bigger screens for ordinary video calls. Some marketer will find the right angle and moment to proclaim "telepresence is here!" and the mainstream ambitions of VR will evaporate. All interest will go to "half rooms" where the "other half" of the room is someone else's telepresence half room. On demand, of course. Gaming will always have some type of VR hardware - that's too compelling not to try. However, beyond gaming the ordinary person does not really need 360 degree immersion for anything unless they are learning something complex and VR is used in the profession they are learning about.

anonred 4y ago
What tech and/or societal changes would be needed to reach a world where a fair amount of user generated content is spatial (as opposed to 2D)?
- bsenftner 4y ago
  What's the purpose, and does the purpose make money? Unless the ordinary user can make money using VR somehow, I don't see it having the essential reason for the tech to go mainstream. VR gaming and porn is not that compelling.

marcus_holmes 4y ago

> for whatever Zuck is trying here… Zuck read too much cyberpunk as a kid. The Metaverse is lifted straight out of Snow Crash, they didn't even change the name [0] 0: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snow_Crash https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snow_Crash

xen2xen1 4y ago
He's far from alone. Companies have famously dropped Snow Crash on a table and said "make this.". He's just the one with the most money and people.
Tepix 4y ago
Neal Stephenson sure makes a compelling case, even if the world he describes is in many aspects a dystopia.
cush 4y ago
Most of these designs are an inevitability. Every Sci fi universe has some kind of Metaverse experience - all pointing generally in the same direction as they try to answer, "what would people do in a world with no limits?"
- jonny_eh 4y ago
  They never consider the cost though. They just use it as a mechanism to tell story. Don't underestimate the story telling value of characters in a virtual space. Consider how much better The Matrix is while they're actually in it.
  - cush 4y ago
    Cost goes down and ROI only goes up, exponentially over time. VR is currently as expensive today as it ever will be.
    - jonny_eh 4y ago
      I was actually considering non-monetary cost. e.g. space to store the headset, time to place it over your face, time to charge it, etc.

marcus_holmes 4y ago

90% of human communication is via body language. Unless I've missed something and Meta have managed to capture the nuances of body language and translate it to the avatars, then this tech is useless for "real" meetings. Anything that could be an email, or a presentation, sure. But if you have to trust what other people in the room are saying, then this won't work.

cush 4y ago
In recent interviews with Zuck he talks about important body language is. From their research, they found you can get really far with only face, posture, and hand reproduction (hence why Meta avatars have no legs) It's early days, but having very accurate face and hand tracking will be the next big step
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]

2OEH8eoCRo0 4y ago

They already provide $1,000+ laptops. I'd love if the company sent me just a headset that I put on and I'm "at work".

cush 4y ago

$1k goggles is pennies on the dollar compared to office real estate

rippercushions 4y ago

Yes, happily, if that can substitute for the $20k international business trip.

luckydata 4y ago

just to have a boring meeting about spreadsheets? no. Performing select activities around design, prototyping etc? Yes, but it's a small market. IMHO FB is betting too much on a pipe dream, considering nobody thinks "hey let's get my enterprise productivity apps from Facebook". Hard, hard sell.

joshxyz 4y ago

it's like the tesla thing they built sports cars for rich people too before the cheap ones meta is building toys for people with money, until they get to streamline their manufacturing for the cheap ones

wslh 4y ago

Well, I almost stopped reading when the article mentioned MS Teams. The article cannot mention Teams without throwing away. If I were the marketing guy or program manager at Microsoft I would mention a new name for a future product just to avoid MS Teams terrible product (is it a product? Like Movie Maker [1]. Probably Xbox Work 360^3 would help. [1] https://www.google.com/amp/s/boingboing.net/2018/05/23/epic-bill-gates-e-mail-rant-fr.html/amp https://www.google.com/amp/s/boingboing.net/2018/05/23/epic-...