3 ms·
Yeah I'd like to know. The article keeps framing it as "The metaverse division" and "sink billions of dollars a quarter into developing the metaverse"... but R
by tomxor 3y ago
Yeah I'd like to know.
The article keeps framing it as "The metaverse division" and "sink billions of dollars a quarter into developing the metaverse"... but Reality Labs (basically Oculus) doesn't just do stupid metaverse/horizon-blah, they make the actual Quest. So I expect a decent chunk of this was the cost of developing their two recent hardware upgrades. I believe they may be back to selling at or below cost again, so part of that loss could also be a strategic loss for future market share.
If more of it actually went into the metaverse nonsense then that's truly abominable, but the article presents no evidence for this. It seems like all of the media still doesn't realise the Quest is primarily a gaming platform and horizon is just a stupid side project Zuckerberg has forced upon them, to everyone who actually uses them this framing just seems ridiculous.
- wantsanagent 3y agoSince we're talking about billions of dollars here, I'd like to know how far down the production stack they are investing. The displays, optics, and processors in headsets are hungry for technological advances. So is Meta custom building meta-material grown silicon lenses (or other crazy sci fi stuff), or are they just trying to commercialize other peoples breakthroughs at the lowest levels?
- RealityVoid 3y agoI suspect it's the latter, although I fail to even wrap my head around how the heck fundamental technological advances even happen. I mean you have people far removes from commercialization that pour a lot of time, money, knowledge and material into making this obscure little facet a tiiiny bit better. How do you even get to know what to improve, what needs improving, what _can_ be improved? How the heck do you even get funding for something so so very speculative?