4 ms·

IMHO Meta's #1 mistake with VR thus far has been presentation. No good press has ever come with screenshots of silly cartoon avatars (with or without legs). T

by ugh123 3y ago

IMHO Meta's #1 mistake with VR thus far has been presentation. No good press has ever come with screenshots of silly cartoon avatars (with or without legs). The focus on games highlighted its lack of utility. AVP only highlighted utility, which draws instant connection to our daily lives.

smoldesu 3y ago
Just speaking for myself here, but owning a Quest I don't entirely agree. The utility of it is kinda crazy - I can browse the web and OpenXR apps from my browser, or tether myself to my PC with the push of a button. Wanna sideload streaming apps and watch movies over SFTP from your homeserver? There are no guardrails in place to stop you. If I try to imagine myself living the same workflow on Apple Vision Pro, I get hung up on the cost. $3,500 is a big ask for a VR iPad with a lot of the same pitfalls as the tablet.
- ugh123 3y ago
  Meta severely underplays those capabilities. I've always known they're "there", but it's not their preferred presentation of the device. It also takes a bit of "power user" to be comfortable doing much of what you're describing. I'm not even sure if AVP can side load apps or watch movies over SFTP, but I don't think it matters at this point: the global mindshare is sold on Apple being the leader now, and personally I don't think it's the hardware driving the difference. Strangely, I think it came down to "look n feel" for a lot of it.
  - smoldesu 3y ago
    They definitely underplay it - Meta is big on services, selling people a quest for sideloading or Blu-Ray streaming probably threatens their bottom line. Hard to blame them when the hardware costs the same as a Switch though. At the price Apple is asking (and the hardware margins they enjoy), I'd expect more capabilities than just spatialized iOS. I'm not sure the Apple customers in my life would buy a Vision Pro even if it was the same price as an iPhone. > the global mindshare is sold on Apple being the leader now Besides Casey Neistat and Mark Gurman, I'm really not hearing much from the "global mindshare" anymore. The Quest didn't really get any fanfare either, but it did move units and get market penetration from the start. Apple is on a slow roll right now, and until they get Half Life: Alyx or MSFS2020-tier system sellers, I'm not sure the in-group will even consider them on-par with PCVR. Given Apple's audience, I half expect their biggest VR competitor to be Sony's PSVR2.
    - ugh123 3y ago
      It's possible Apple isn't truly interested in typical VR/AR gameplay, or at least the way we (and Meta) have been thinking about it. The high price (as of now) and focus on utility leads me to think their long term game here is as a complement to macbooks, and AVP is a Display replacement, rather than a standalone unit. I can see them pushing this on Enterprise customers a lot.
      - smoldesu 3y ago
        Time will tell. I worked at a startup that bought Apple Silicon build servers day-and-date with announcement (despite our stack not building on ARM). There is certainly a demand for anything with the "made in Cupertino" label.
gryn 3y ago
I'm sure they get a lot more people if they just advised: hey you can watch 3D p*rn unlike elsewhere. it's nice for browsing the web, but you have to deal with ads inside their chromium fork. for working with it as a monitor for work though. it's usable but the resolution is not there yet.
mech422 3y ago
The killer for me was requiring a FB/Meta login... No way I'm going to buy a piece of equipment Zuck can brick at any minute... Apple seems to have a bit better reputation in this regard, but I'm still not sure I'd risk getting a device...
zmmmmm 3y ago
Like so much else with VR, it's a real challenge of perception. Because nearly everyone who actually tries it finds that those cartoon avatars are actually surprisingly good in giving you a real sense of co-presence with someone else. Especially when linked with good eye and face tracking. You really quickly just forget it's not the real person you are with. But I totally agree, every time you see a screen shot or even video of it, it just looks totally silly.

by ugh123 3y ago

smoldesu 3y ago

Just speaking for myself here, but owning a Quest I don't entirely agree. The utility of it is kinda crazy - I can browse the web and OpenXR apps from my browser, or tether myself to my PC with the push of a button. Wanna sideload streaming apps and watch movies over SFTP from your homeserver? There are no guardrails in place to stop you. If I try to imagine myself living the same workflow on Apple Vision Pro, I get hung up on the cost. $3,500 is a big ask for a VR iPad with a lot of the same pitfalls as the tablet.

ugh123 3y ago
Meta severely underplays those capabilities. I've always known they're "there", but it's not their preferred presentation of the device. It also takes a bit of "power user" to be comfortable doing much of what you're describing. I'm not even sure if AVP can side load apps or watch movies over SFTP, but I don't think it matters at this point: the global mindshare is sold on Apple being the leader now, and personally I don't think it's the hardware driving the difference. Strangely, I think it came down to "look n feel" for a lot of it.
- smoldesu 3y ago
  They definitely underplay it - Meta is big on services, selling people a quest for sideloading or Blu-Ray streaming probably threatens their bottom line. Hard to blame them when the hardware costs the same as a Switch though. At the price Apple is asking (and the hardware margins they enjoy), I'd expect more capabilities than just spatialized iOS. I'm not sure the Apple customers in my life would buy a Vision Pro even if it was the same price as an iPhone. > the global mindshare is sold on Apple being the leader now Besides Casey Neistat and Mark Gurman, I'm really not hearing much from the "global mindshare" anymore. The Quest didn't really get any fanfare either, but it did move units and get market penetration from the start. Apple is on a slow roll right now, and until they get Half Life: Alyx or MSFS2020-tier system sellers, I'm not sure the in-group will even consider them on-par with PCVR. Given Apple's audience, I half expect their biggest VR competitor to be Sony's PSVR2.
  - ugh123 3y ago
    It's possible Apple isn't truly interested in typical VR/AR gameplay, or at least the way we (and Meta) have been thinking about it. The high price (as of now) and focus on utility leads me to think their long term game here is as a complement to macbooks, and AVP is a Display replacement, rather than a standalone unit. I can see them pushing this on Enterprise customers a lot.
    - smoldesu 3y ago
      Time will tell. I worked at a startup that bought Apple Silicon build servers day-and-date with announcement (despite our stack not building on ARM). There is certainly a demand for anything with the "made in Cupertino" label.

gryn 3y ago

I'm sure they get a lot more people if they just advised: hey you can watch 3D p*rn unlike elsewhere. it's nice for browsing the web, but you have to deal with ads inside their chromium fork. for working with it as a monitor for work though. it's usable but the resolution is not there yet.

mech422 3y ago

The killer for me was requiring a FB/Meta login... No way I'm going to buy a piece of equipment Zuck can brick at any minute... Apple seems to have a bit better reputation in this regard, but I'm still not sure I'd risk getting a device...

zmmmmm 3y ago

Like so much else with VR, it's a real challenge of perception. Because nearly everyone who actually tries it finds that those cartoon avatars are actually surprisingly good in giving you a real sense of co-presence with someone else. Especially when linked with good eye and face tracking. You really quickly just forget it's not the real person you are with. But I totally agree, every time you see a screen shot or even video of it, it just looks totally silly.