31 ms·

Meta Horizon OS

• SEXMCNIGGA24265 2y ago
  [flagged]
• 2genders12206 2y ago
  [flagged]
• 2genders49566 2y ago
  [flagged]
• sexmc35415 2y ago
  [flagged]
• SEXMCNIGGA23601 2y ago
  [flagged]
• SEXMCNIGGA18059 2y ago
  [flagged]
• SEXMCNIGGA35265 2y ago
  [flagged]
• SEXMCNIGGA21919 2y ago
  [flagged]
• SEXMCNIGGA16078 2y ago
  [flagged]
• SEXMCNIGGA5124 2y ago
  [flagged]
• 2genders41551 2y ago
  [dead]
• 2genders8873 2y ago
  [flagged]
• 2genders21391 2y ago
  [flagged]
• 2genders30569 2y ago
  [flagged]
• SEXMCNIGGA22517 2y ago
  [dead]
• jojobas 2y ago
  Hot take of the day: googles don't need a separate OS. Abandon the sell-at-loss-to-recover-on-games model, open up the hardware and we'll talk.
• urza 2y ago
  FOSS everything or go home. I am not buying into closed VR ecosystem. Not Apple, not Meta, not anything else that is trying to lock me in.
• SEXMCNIGGA9678 2y ago
  [flagged]
• SEXMCNIGGA29801 2y ago
  [flagged]
• SEXMCNIGGA12975 2y ago
  [dead]
• SEXMCNIGGA40813 2y ago
  [flagged]
• blensor 2y ago
  It's going to be interesting if Google/Samsung will win out or Meta/etc.
  • notRobot 2y ago
    What category has Google really succeeded in since the initial era of gmail/Android/chrome? I can't think of any recent successes off the top of my head.
    • EVyesnoyesnoyes 2y ago
      'really succeeded' sounds super crazy dismissive. Besides android being gigantic huge, you still have google maps, chrome, gmail, pixel phones, passkey, yubikeypush/2fa, the new cookie aproach, YouTube!!1 etc. Why would Google need a 'recent' success to be able to win ar snail?
      • gryn 2y ago
        the point is probably about whether google still has the ability to go from 0 to 1. instead of 1 to n. from the outside they look like they are not so slowing becoming the bean counting accountant / MBA type of company.
    • vineyardmike 2y ago
      What a weird framing? You say this as if gmail, android and chrome are all dead now. They’re still being used and improved. Even if they didn’t enter new “categories” they’re still in a lot of existing ones and very popular -like hundreds of million of users- even if alternatives exist. First of all, Google Search has maintained dominance and relevance for decades. That’s no easy feat. They have news, patents, books, LLMs all added into it. Google has a hugely popular cloud service. Especially if you include Google Workspace. Obviously YouTube is huge and regularly gets new features. There is a YouTube app for almost every piece of hardware with a screen. They have a pretty impressive mapping product suite. Everything from Google maps to Google earth and all their GIS products and tools (eg solar panels location SaaS). The play store is huge. AND They have a huge variety of extremely popular consumer apps like Photos, Music, Home, etc.
• mckn1ght 2y ago
  > Not an actual product render.
  • OJFord 2y ago
    It's a silly caption isn't it, why would it be third-person view, nobody's going to see those sketches and assume it's an actual product render, surely.
    • NBJack 2y ago
      Some folks stream VR games with a second camera on a green screen, which provides a 3rd person perspective for the audience. It's pretty incredible. I can easily see less tech savvy consumers being confused.
    • zenlikethat 2y ago
      Likely a change requested from legal.
  • deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
• 999900000999 2y ago
  This is awesome, I'm waiting for a VR manufacturer to add an HDMI input. Then I could use it as a monitor without jumping through a bunch of hoops.
  • ShamelessC 2y ago
    > Then I could use it as a monitor without jumping through a bunch of hoops. bold of you to assume your hdmi cable won't naturally form some hoops.
  • jsheard 2y ago
    The XREAL glasses are trying to fill the niche of a headset that just mirrors a HDMI input on a big virtual screen. I don't think anyone is currently making an all-purpose VR headset which can also do HDMI mirroring though.
    • 999900000999 2y ago
      I understand, but it seems trivial to add HDMI input here. Technically you can just remote desktop into a computer from your VR headset, but that won't work in every scenario.
      • jsheard 2y ago
        It's fairly trivial to add a HDMI/DP input which directly drives the panels in the headset through a mux (e.g. the Pico Neo3 Link could run standalone or from DP input), but that's probably not what you want, because in that case the HDMI source has to perform all of the 3D rendering and lens correction, using software that probably only supports Windows. If you want to be able to plug in any random HDMI source and have that rendered on a virtual screen then the headset needs a SoC with a low-latency HDMI receiver built in, so it can ingest the video and process it onboard before displaying it, and HDMI input isn't very common on these mobile SoCs. Maybe you could convert the HDMI input into MIPI and feed that into the SoCs camera interface, but I think headsets like the Quest are already pretty much maxing out the SoCs camera capabilities just to read in all the actual cameras used for inside-out tracking. There's no bandwidth left to shove an extra HD video feed in as well. tl;dr HDMI input that turns the device into a dumb PCVR headset: easy. HDMI input that mirrors arbitrary video: hard.
• modeless 2y ago
  Official blog post: https://about.fb.com/news/2024/04/introducing-our-open-mixed-reality-ecosystem/ https://about.fb.com/news/2024/04/introducing-our-open-mixed... Short video from Zuckerberg: https://twitter.com/NathieVR/status/1782436898654273981 https://twitter.com/NathieVR/status/1782436898654273981 This is an interesting move and feels like a response to complaints that Meta is hypocritical when complaining about closed platforms while running one themselves. But this isn't open source. I don't know why any OEMs would want to compete with Meta's hardware subsidized by app store revenue when they continue to own the store. Maybe there's an app revenue share involved? Wait, at the end of the video he says "We're also as part of this going to be opening up our store to give you even more options to use whatever experiences you want. So whether they're on Steam, Xbox Cloud Gaming, our own App Lab, or even Google Play, if they're up for it." The blog post doesn't mention Steam or Google Play. It's not really clear what that means. Will they allow Steam to sell native Quest apps? Edit: There's a better blog post that has more detail. https://www.meta.com/blog/quest/meta-horizon-os-open-hardware-ecosystem-asus-republic-gamers-lenovo-xbox/ https://www.meta.com/blog/quest/meta-horizon-os-open-hardwar... This one seems to suggest that being "open" to Steam just means allowing game streaming which they already do, while being "open" to Google Play means that they would allow Google to install the actual Play Store app on the headset, for 2D apps only. But Google doesn't want to. In any case it seems like they would specifically not be open to alternative app stores selling native 3D apps directly on the headset itself.
  • ejj28 2y ago
    I think this is at least better than nothing for companies who want to build standalone headsets and not just headsets that are dependent on PCs. Up until now everyone's had to make their own OS and store and hope that people care enough to port over apps and games. At the very least, this could lead to more high-end standalone headsets being available. Not every 3rd party headset has to be competing with the Quest line of headsets, so the lack of revenue from the store might not matter to some companies.
    • Mindwipe 2y ago
      It seems to suggest they're limited to Qualcomm chipsets, and Qualcomm don't make a higher end VR chipset so it's hard to see where a high end headset would come from.
• jerlam 2y ago
  Feels like Microsoft just tried this with their own VR ecosystem not too long ago and it fell flat on its face.
  • dotnet00 2y ago
    MS did the entire VR headset partnership thing, got some very good headsets out (for the time), and then just dropped the project and put it into maintenance mode. If they had kept working on it, it would've done well, as it wasn't falling flat on its face, it was just getting going when they dropped it. They made the weird business decision to drop the products they had third party cooperation and an enthusiastic userbase for, in favor of an experimental product (Hololens) that ended up only being affordable to businesses and which afaik has never really taken off in the same way as WMR had been.
  • staticman2 2y ago
    Microsoft's efforts were pretty half hearted, for example, none of their headsets worked with Xbox.
  • kkielhofner 2y ago
    IMO the issues Microsoft had weren't unexpected. If you look at the disaster that was their US military Hololens project it turns out a fairly significant portion of the population experiences motion sickness and other fundamental issues[0]. This is a hard problem to solve and from what I understand it is similar to issues that are screened for in specialties. For example - fighter pilots and astronauts are screened for all kinds of fundamental things: - Vision - Tolerance to motion sickness - Tolerance to Gs - Tolerance to claustrophobia (for flight suits, tight cockpits, etc) If you don't have 20/20 vision (or better), puke all the time in sims, and freak out when put in a flight suit you're just not a fighter pilot, astronaut, etc. Once you make that cut then you train on improving what you fundamentally have and even then wash-out rates are high. With the Hololens project the goal was to strap a Hololens on pretty much any random soldier. If some fairly large portion of the population just can't make it work the utility and value of the project drops to zero. Imagine standardizing on a gun sight or other key technology that just won't work for even 1/10 of your (already limited recruits), potentially even for otherwise elite soldiers. I think they realized they will have similar fundamental issues in the enterprise - the utility of a Teams meeting with everyone in Hololens drops pretty significantly when a non-zero portion of employees get sick after a few minutes. I'm not sure how these issues with the technology can be overcome. Sure, if some gamers can make it work that's cool but that doesn't provide the overall value to the technology MS was hoping for. [0] - https://www.engadget.com/microsoft-hololens-fails-us-army-tests-135010970.html https://www.engadget.com/microsoft-hololens-fails-us-army-te...
• technotony 2y ago
  "we encourage the Google Play 2D app store to come to Meta Horizon OS, where it can operate with the same economic model it does on other platforms." - I feel like this might be the rub of this. Google is way behind in building the android of spatial computing, and maybe this can play into the trust busting cases where meta can show Google not playing fair?
  • meragrin_ 2y ago
    It sounds to me Meta is terrified of Apple and they needs apps sooner rather than later.
    • gryn 2y ago
      from what I've read on the internet they've been asking for this for a long time but google is blocking it, even before there were rumors of the apple headset. As a user you can already sideload android APKs, I've tried it works great, but you also need to install apps that manage android permissions since you can't grant them through the quest settings. having the android store there + integrations where android app devs can make the app VR ready would be a big plus. But, the blocker is that google still has ambitions of making some sort of big comeback on the android VR space and therefore are in direct competition with meta.
    • TulliusCicero 2y ago
      Maybe. So far, Apple's headset isn't particularly impressive or compelling, but I suppose it's possible they'll fix its issues in a future version.
    • aranelsurion 2y ago
      > they needs apps Meta likely has the most apps and most users of any one VR platform. Sure everyone needs apps, but they needs apps the least, especially from Play Store. Unless you see using phone apps as 90" virtual screens as a killer feature at least.
      • rvba 2y ago
• sidcool 2y ago
  This sounds like a good idea. Love him or hate him, Zuck knows how to ship.
  • tsimionescu 2y ago
    Oh yes, like he shipped the Metaverse.
    • baby 2y ago
      Have you tried vR chat?
    • sidcool 2y ago
      It was a failure, but he hasn't given up yet.
• EVyesnoyesnoyes 2y ago
  I would really love to see proper educational content from Meta but i bet this is not were the 'next money thing' is. Imagine a catalog of proper real life skills you can actually train reasonable good: - cooking - soldering - welding - Tons of woodworking things - ... You could also go to a lot of makers of tools and offer them to digitalize their products for them so someone can actually exercise with a cheap to super high end machine like specific CNCs or table saws etc.
  • OJFord 2y ago
    Where would that fit in between watching others do it on YouTube for entertainment, and doing it for real where you can hold (or eat) the result at the end?
    • graypegg 2y ago
      More hassle than a YouTube video, which is already more hassle than an article, but considering we’re talking about mixed reality, the ability to do the soldering, next to a detailed 3D model of exactly what you should be doing, in your line of sight, is a big selling point to me.
    • slyn 2y ago
      It seems one of the primary tradeoffs in edutainment is between actually learnable teaching and “content porn” where you sub content with food, cars, tech, etc. When I think of truly learnable cooking videos the first thing that comes to mind is Kenji’s POV cooking videos / streams. Seems like something that could be relatively adaptable to a AR / MR format in a way that would differentiate it from other (still valid) content like the relatively educational food porn from Alex / @FrenchGuyCooking.
      • crmd 2y ago
        I'm actually making a version of Kenji's macaroni and cheese (except with shredded baby back rib meat added) for lunch as we speak! His channel is great. I would also be interested in a Chef Jean Pierre simulator, where you learn classic French recipes in a subtly deranged metaverse with a butter-based economy.
• kypro 2y ago
  Meta playing 3d chess here. Opening up the OS to other hardware providers is a great strategic move imo. Excited to see what innovations other hardware manufactures add.
  • drdaeman 2y ago
    Not to devalue their engineering departments, but I really don't remember any innovations in the software space from ASUS, Lenovo or alike hardware vendors. To me they're all essentially the same stuff, with different kind of junkware (or, in case of Lenovo, malware) bundled. What I read is "we reached out to a bunch of vendors who dabbled in VR/AR/XR/whateveryounameit but failed to produce anything outstanding, so we made a deal of licensing them some software so maybe they'll fare better". Meta did the right thing in a sense that they made some sales, but I wouldn't hold my breath as a end-consumer.
    • kypro 2y ago
      I kinda agree. I don't think any of them are likely to be major players in the space, but I think they might be able to build niche products that serve specific markets better than Meta's generalist VR headset. They might try a lightweight, battery free, sitting headset for gamers or media applications, for example. And I think just generally they're more likely to try random things than Meta are to get hype around some unique feature. Take the Asus Zenbook Duo as an example, it's not necessarily a great product but it's interesting and some people will buy it for that. Plus industry learns something from experiments like this. Either way, it's a good move for Meta and it's good for the industry that there is a fully-featured OS available for hardware manufacturers.
• mvkel 2y ago
  > OS by Horizon by Meta Horizon OS by Meta. Why not just call it Horizon OS?
• SEXMCNIGGA28247 2y ago
  [dead]
• mebazaa 2y ago
  Meta has a lot of work to do on DevEx for non-gaming experiences. Say what you want with the Vision Pro, but it comes with a lot of niceities like SwiftUI. When you develop with the Quest, you're stuck with Unity or Unreal Engine -- it's almost too much freedom to develop simple productivity apps.
  • vineyardmike 2y ago
    Don’t they also have a web view wrapper for 2D tools?
    • gryn 2y ago
      for 2D you can also plain old android apps, they work here. the point though is that there's not that much room for 3D stuff without going through either unity or unreal or writing everything yourself from scratch. if your goal is to make some sort of `spatial computing` tool, well there nothing here you can use. each app is it's own little silo that has little room for interaction. I'd love to be able to write my own custom apps that can exist in the home screen/environment and that can interact with each other in non trivial ways. it would make it feel more like a personal space rather than a 3D slideshow that I can use to launch games.
  • pavlov 2y ago
    OpenXR Mobile SDK is the native development option for the Quest devices: https://developer.oculus.com/documentation/native/android/mobile-intro/ https://developer.oculus.com/documentation/native/android/mo...
    • bartvk 2y ago
      I skimmed through it, but can't find the programming language without downloading the whole SDK. Is it Java, or Kotlin? Or something else?
  • _akhe 2y ago
    It's all going to end up in JavaScript anyway. I say this as a joke, yet: https://www.npmjs.com/package/react-unity-webgl https://www.npmjs.com/package/react-unity-webgl Simply rendering your Unity Application within your React Application is just the beginning! The Unity Context exposes a lot more fun functions and properties to play around with such as two way communication or requesting fullscreen or a pointerlock. The possibilities are endless, what's next is up to you! Love it or hate it. Everything ends up in JavaScript!
• nailer 2y ago
  Is this ‘open’ as in ‘we have partners’ or actual open source?
  • OJFord 2y ago
    It says 'to more device makers', not all, and anyway it wouldn't even have to be open source but just public releases? I expect it's a case of applying and meeting whatever standards though.
  • LatticeAnimal 2y ago
    The fact that you still have to apply as a developer is a bit discouraging. (though that might change...). I can't seem to find anything on github. Hoping that this is an oversight and that they will open-source the core platform in the next few months/years. It would be so awesome to hack/build on this platform
• not_your_vase 2y ago
  Is it based on some prior art (BSD, Linux...), or a new proprietary OS written from scratch? The post is not too rich in actual information, beside that now other tech-giants can use it too...
  • seydor 2y ago
    Isn't it based on android?
  • reactordev 2y ago
    A flavor of android
    • flohofwoe 2y ago
      Ooof that's a bummer, I hope that doesn't translate to the typical "Android developer experience".
      • kernal 2y ago
        Would you rather have the typical "iOS developer experience" and XCode? Or are you under the impression that Android development hasn't progressed? Additionally, there is also Flutter which is starting to account for a good percentage of new apps.
        • flohofwoe 2y ago
          Yes I would indeed take the iOS developer experience and Xcode anytime over the mess that is the Android SDK, Android NDK, Gradle (or whatever the current build system flavour of the month is), Android Studio, Java, Kotlin, ... and I bet for VR/AR one needs to fall back to native code to get any sort of performance, and the Android NDK is by far the most user hostile SDK I have seen across all platforms since I started with computing in the mid-80s (followed closely by the Android SDK and Android Studio) and all of that only improves at a glacial pace, if at all.
  • kingforaday 2y ago
• crmd 2y ago
  I wonder if this "opening" of the operating system is their way of putting the metaverse project out to pasture - analogous to donating it to the Apache Foundation - without admitting that the company burned $36 billion on a misadventure.
  • romanhn 2y ago
    I'm guessing it's the opposite. Meta is trying to establish the same OS-level foothold/control that Microsoft, Apple and Google have.
    • nicce 2y ago
      Is there better place to place ads than Metaverse ;)
      • exe34 2y ago
        It's great isn't it! All ads should go there. In fact ads should be banned everywhere else!
    • bevekspldnw 2y ago
      Exactly, at the root a lot of this about ATT.
    • AzzyHN 2y ago
      Having a personal computer at home was a game-changer, though. "The Metaverse" has been around for a couple years now, and yet consumer VR (which has been around for eight years now) is still just a "gimmick", rather than a must-have. The IBM Personal Computer released in 1981. By 1989... yeah. iPhone came out in 2007. By 2015, smartphones ruled the world.
      • rvba 2y ago
        IMHO when you talk about PCs "becoming the big thing" - it is more Windows 95 time. In 1989 market was still fragmented and PCs were weak (286, amiga, mac + old 8bits like atari and commodore).
• seydor 2y ago
  I hope at some point they expand to devices beyond goggles, like i dont know a holodeck or something
• api 2y ago
  With this and Llama I'm starting to wonder if Meta is making a pivot toward openness similar to what Microsoft did under Nadella. It's not altruism of course. It's a strategy. But it's a different strategy from the closed pure walled garden strategy they have executed previously.
  • joshmarinacci 2y ago
    Smells like competition.
  • tracerbulletx 2y ago
    Given React and PyTorch I'd say they've always been doing that. Also they've been releasing open source models for years and pretty much from the beginning.
    • deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
• deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
• smeej 2y ago
  Am I the only weirdo who does not want, under any circumstance, to move to a world where head-mounted computer systems are normal? It's bad enough we have the things in our pockets. I don't want mine mounted in front of my eyes. I can hear the replies already, "If you don't want one, don't use one," but if something becomes normal enough, the outside world does change around it. Why invest in street signs, for example? Who prints maps or encyclopedias now? Or why make anything actually aesthetically pleasing if 98% of the people who are going to interact with it will see it through a digital lens, where you can change your designs on the fly and for so much less cost? It's not just that I don't want to use it. I don't want it to become normal among other people either.
  • parl_match 2y ago
    For what it's worth, we are many decades away from this being the new normal in daily life. It'll more likely start to chip away at iPad and computer sales though. As for your examples, such as maps/encyclopedias, they still do even in the smartphone age. >Or why make anything actually aesthetically pleasing if 98% of the people who are going to interact with it will see it through a digital lens, where you can change your designs on the fly and for so much less cost? There's a great movie called Virtual Nightmare that is basically about this. But I don't think it's such a bad thing, to be honest. We'll have a world where art can be more easily exchanged and public spaces become more collaborative. And the flip side is that hopefully, "offline" will have less ads and there will be a renewed focus on more indie and subversive decoration. Change isn't always bad, and it isn't always good.
    • smeej 2y ago
      I've wondered for a long time what things my grandchildren's generation will take for granted and not be able to live without. I'll consider it a tragedy if it ends up being the case that they can't imagine having grown up actually seeing the real world.
  • Sol- 2y ago
    I fondly remember the times where Glassholes were rightfully mocked. Now it's cool to drive around in your Tesla wearing an Apple Vision. It really seems to have become very normalized.
• swozey 2y ago
  This is interesting, hopefully it gets more HMD options out there, but even better get more developers making ar/vr games. Was the OS a limiting factor in any of this, though? I've only used a Vive and my Oculus 2 and 3 so I'm not sure what other HMDs use, I assumed some Android distro that just connects to steamvr/openxr/whatever. Are Asus, Lenovo and Xbox really trying to get into the vr/ar ecosystem? Are they going to be Oculus clones? Their own r&d? Is this all a pipedream?
  • aprilnya 2y ago
    the advantage of using meta’s OS is that you get the whole Meta Quest Store library (or, i guess, Meta Horizon Store) meanwhile before, you’d have to convince devs to manually publish for your platform
• idle_zealot 2y ago
  "Open platform" my ass. I still have to jump through ridiculous hoops to mod BeatSaber (which is the only way to make it worth playing for more than a few minutes). Quest 3 makes modding even harder. This announcement is trying to frame App Lab as an open app distribution platform; it isn't. Those "basic technical and content requirements" apps have to meet are basically the same ones that Apple or Google or Meta themselves enforce for their app stores. Entire classes of applications, particularly those that undermine platform-owners' business models are not allowed. Additionally, Horizon is generally a terrible operating system. Useless and intrusive "social" features out the wazoo, laden with tracking/spyware, and it isn't even good for anything beyond launching apps that take over the whole environment. Want to use your fancy headset to open up apps in 3d space and do some multitaking work? Well I sure hope you're happy with exactly 3 2d apps (all equally sized) lined up in a row in a fixed location, because that's all you're getting. If you want to do anything real you need to install an app that launches its own environment for multitasking, but of course then you can only pull in windows from a remote PC, so if you want to run any local applications it's back to basics for you. Oh, and of course you can't mix those remote PC windows with local apps. As poor as Apple's Vision OS is in the multitasking department Horizon falls far behind even it.
  • hackcasual 2y ago
    Modded beat saber is the only reason I still have kept my original quest
    • zem 2y ago
      I was half tempted to get a quest after playing beat saber on a friend's device. it's kind of amazing how much better it is than the next best thing you could do on one, some team just knocked it out of the park designing and implementing that game
      • NikolaNovak 2y ago
        Pistol whip is pretty good too. Those two get your light saber sword fight fantasy, and the Matrix Gun-Fu fantasy :) And though I haven't an athletic bone in my body, the fitness / boxing apps are actually a great way to get some exercise in. Generally, quest 2 was one of the things I haven't had any interest whatsoever until after a year's campaign, my friend basically forced me to try it during a visit :-). I have one now, largely for those 3 apps.
• ru552 2y ago
  With this and Llama, looks like Zuck is trying to be the Linux of whatever the next big wave is
  • brevitea 2y ago
    There exists a severe deterioration of trust with respect to Zuckerberg. I don't believe people are as eager to jump on his bandwagon today.
    • mousetree 2y ago
      I think he is working on turning that trend around (see Llama).
      • waynesonfire 2y ago
        Yeah right, he's donating all those GPUs to rebuild his reputation. It has nothing to do with trying to be relevant as a non-market leader.
        • talldayo 2y ago
          Whatever the purpose is behind it, I'm just glad that their work benefits me for once. I could not tell you the last time Tim Cook or Bill Gates sponsored something that genuinely improved my day-to-day life.
          • jayzalowitz 2y ago
            I see the day to day for you, but bill gates is probably gonna get statues made of him for some of the things he is doing, especially in africa.
        • renewiltord 2y ago
          On the podcast with Dwarkesh Patel, he was quite explicit that he believes that open-sourcing has worked out for them in the past and they're interested in it in the future but they'll only do it so long as it helps them. If they make something awesome that it would be worse for them to release he won't release it. And the license is anti-competitor (if you have 700 million users or more, you can't use Llama) so he's quite clear that this is a business decision.
• cairhart 2y ago
  > We’re also developing a new spatial app framework that helps mobile developers create mixed reality experiences. Developers will be able to use the tools they’re already familiar with to bring their mobile apps to Meta Horizon OS or to create entirely new mixed reality apps. Like porting my whole android app + spatial features or...?
  • tasoeur 2y ago
    My guess is that they saw how nicely Apple made basic app development (read 2.5D planes with list views and spatial UX) and they are gonna try their best to shape their “app framework” in a similar fashion.
• deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
• deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
• deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
• pavlov 2y ago
  > “Meta Horizon OS devices will also use the same mobile companion app that Meta Quest owners use today—we’ll rename this as the Meta Horizon app.” Churning through so many VR brands. The app that used to be called Oculus and is now called Meta Quest will soon be called Meta Horizon. If Meta really believes in the Metaverse, why do they need the Horizon brand? Why not just the Meta OS?
  • what_ever 2y ago
    Because their whole company is called Meta?
  • sangnoir 2y ago
    > If Meta really believes in the Metaverse, why do they need the Horizon brand? Why not just the Meta OS? Perhaps for the same reason why Apple OS, Google OS or Microsoft OS don't exist as customer OSes - each OS is scoped to a specific function/device-class, and maybe superceded in the future.
• blululu 2y ago
  This is actually a really cool move. Not sure about the business case, but building an os for AR/VR is challenging. A naive port of Android or Linux will not really work (without inducing massive motion sickness). Having a framework that allows a hardware oem to quickly create a decent AR/VR headset could really open up the market.
• lucideer 2y ago
  pivoting some underlying metaverse tech? scant on detail unfortunately
• spintin 2y ago
  I think linux would be the obvious choice. VR is being gatekept by Valve and Meta. How likely is Valve to use Android?
  • jsheard 2y ago
    > How likely is Valve to use Android? Not likely, unless they make a headset which doesn't do much of anything by itself and is just meant for streaming from a PC. To make a standalone headset which can draw on the Steam catalog they would almost certainly want to use a variant of their SteamOS Linux distro.
  • TulliusCicero 2y ago
    Valve already has its own OS for a mobile device: Steam OS (based on Arch) on the Steam Deck. My bet is that they'd just modify that for a standalone headset.
• amluto 2y ago
  I wonder if this will allow full use of Meta's hardware without an account.
  • pavlov 2y ago
    It’s the other way around: you can get the Quest’s software on hardware not made by Meta.
• ein0p 2y ago
  Doesn’t seem very “open” actually. Open to ASUS and Lenovo != Open.
  • pjmlp 2y ago
    It is open in the sense of POSIX Open Group.
    • boomlinde 2y ago
      So it's publishing standards I can implement to make my own compatible OS?
      • pjmlp 2y ago
        Actually some of the Open Group standards, are pay to play, they are open in the sense they are available, in some form.
        • boomlinde 2y ago
          So are Meta publishing standards, gratis or not, which I can implement to create a compatible operating system? I'm asking because it seems to me from this press release that they're just letting a handful of hardware partners use their software, which is not open in the sense of POSIX Open Group.
          • pjmlp 2y ago
            Open like this? https://www.opengroup.org/membership https://www.opengroup.org/membership
            • boomlinde 2y ago
              Yes, open like that. I thought we'd already established the sense in which Open Group is open, but you still haven't addressed the question how Meta is open in the same sense.
• neural_thing 2y ago
  Very strange how many people are here to dunk on Zuck. He's opening up an OS. THAT'S AWESOME! We should celebrate that in principle, no matter how we feel about him or VR in general.
  • croes 2y ago
    to third-party hardware makers. And it's still based on Android. The reason will be the same as for Android by Google: Control the market.
  • Oras 2y ago
    Oculus still requires a Facebook login; don't you see the conflict?
    • purge 2y ago
      it requires a meta sign-in, which isn't a facebook account.
      • Oras 2y ago
        potato <=> potato (sounds on)
        • aprilnya 2y ago
          no, those are completely different… a facebook account is an account on a social network that requires you to use your real name or else you get banned. a facebook account links you to your real life identity and your real life social circles a meta account is an account that you can optionally link to their social medias, but it isn’t required meta accounts are basically just oculus accounts
          • aeonik 2y ago
            I don't need an account to use my monitor or my TV. Why do I need one for a VR Headset?
• ericflo 2y ago
  [flagged]
• woopsn 2y ago
  I know I'm fighting the overwhelming tide here, but what the hell is "mixed reality"? What is "the metaverse"? For that matter what is "artificial intelligence"? Stop trying to dazzle and just use words, if the technology is revolutionary then it will be. An automobile is not the magic carpet, a cell phone is not a soulmate, etc. Otherwise fuck it -- TV is virtual reality, getting high augmented reality, TI-84 calculators are artificial intelligence, libraries are the metaverse, ...
  • neverokay 2y ago
    We are like gamers that no longer perceive the improvement in graphics across generations. Talk to Siri and then talk to ChatGPT if you are feeling that clueless.
    • woopsn 2y ago
      I do. I've said it before too -- I like that they called it a "generative pretrained transformer" aka GPT.
      • neverokay 2y ago
        You can make gpt be an imaginary friend for children if you want to. The technology is the technology, the application of it is the magic.
  • HL33tibCe7 2y ago
    Meta are trying to dazzle you with words because there is nothing fundamental behind any of this metaverse stuff
  • idle_zealot 2y ago
    These are not complex or dazzling terms. Artificial intelligence is software that seems intelligent. Virtual reality is a simulated environment that you can immerse yourself in through small screens and head tracking. Mixed reality is virtual reality overlayed on your real environment. See also "augmented reality". The metaverse is the web, but replace websites with 3d environments and add some sort of personal avatar, perhaps with some persistent identity.
• lowbloodsugar 2y ago
  [flagged]
• blackeyeblitzar 2y ago
  A new OS will be interesting ONLY if Meta commits to certain policies that Microsoft and Apple have violated. Users should be able to use their devices without any telemetry or phoning home. They should be able to install any software they want from any source. They should not be forced to make payments only through Meta’s services. Etc.
  • willi59549879 2y ago
    wouldn't trust meta with anything for sure not running a whole os.
• Closi 2y ago
  Did they consider the UK market when naming this? Horizon is synonymous with a computing scandal involving buggy IT code.
• pavlov 2y ago
  Shades of Apple licensing the Mac OS to clone hardware vendors in 1995 - 1997. It seems like Meta will be controlling the software experience quite closely, just like Apple did back in the day. There’s an important difference though: Apple made all their money on Mac hardware margins which the nimble clone vendors could undercut. Whereas for Meta, the Quest hardware has always been sold at breakeven or even as a loss leader (a few years ago they actually raised the price of the Quest 2 to cut further losses). So there’s no kind of existential danger to Quest here, but it remains to be seen if the hardware licensees can bring anything relevant to the table either.
  • samspenc 2y ago
    Like other comments have pointed out, I think of this as similar to how Google controls the Android OS. While theoretically open, the real useful stuff on top of Android (Google services etc) require a license from Google along with their Play store, so Google makes revenue from there. Certainly more open (edited) than the Apple ecosystem, but still controlled by one (big) player, with a little bit of flexibility but not a whole lot.
    • ec109685 2y ago
      You’re discounting the huge number of android devices that use it as a base OS. E.g. Amazon and Peloton use android without Google services for consumer devices.
      • babypuncher 2y ago
        These are devices built with a specific use case in mind that need an operating system that is easy to develop for. Non-Google versions of Android have struggled to make much headway in markets like smartphones. Even Amazon's own phone flopped pretty hard.
        • indymike 2y ago
          Kindle tablets on the other hand have done well.
• brink 2y ago
  This all looks incredibly lonely.
  • tfandango 2y ago
    I think it all depends on context. It is lonely if you are the type of person who wants to interact physically. I work at home, and it can get kind of lonely here physically but there are some guys on Horizon I chat with from time to time as a break from work, in that sense it's the opposite of lonely.
• gausswho 2y ago
  I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around the upside-down language that Meta is trying to execute here with the repeated use of 'open' to describe any of this. This is an invitation for other corporations to drink from their social spigot and join their walled-off app store. The word 'open' really is under multiple fronts of diffusionary attack lately. Is the Overton Window now a mobius strip?
  • deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
• b_d98 2y ago
  While good, Meta is likely to attempt to form a walled-garden in the vein of IOS and even Android to an extent. What I’d really hope for is a general-purpose computing platform with root access for the user, As I believe that mixed reality headsets have the potential to overtake both the smartphone and the PC as the default compute device of choice.
  • squigz 2y ago
    Is there any such solution in the VR space, even if not state-of-the-art?
    • b_d98 2y ago
      There's SimulaVR. https://simulavr.com/ https://simulavr.com/
  • xyst 2y ago
    likely this. I fell for Apple once. I definitely won't fall for a Apple clone with one of the most untrustworthy companies since the turn of the century.
• modeless 2y ago
  > And we encourage the Google Play 2D app store to come to Meta Horizon OS, where it can operate with the same economic model it does on other platforms. It sounds like they are specifically not open to third party app stores selling native AR/VR ("3D") apps. I can see why Google might not want to participate if they're not allowed to compete. This feels like a response to complaints that Meta is hypocritical when complaining about closed platforms while running one themselves. But they aren't open sourcing the OS. I don't know why any OEMs would want to compete with Meta's hardware subsidized by app store revenue when they continue to own the exclusive store for native AR/VR apps. Maybe there's an app revenue share to sweeten the deal for hardware partners?
  • bsimpson 2y ago
    I think you're overindexing on "2D." The Play store is full of flat apps, designed for phones and tablets. There are a gajillion of them, and FB wants them in their headsets. It's not about not wanting competition - it's about wanting people to have more than 100 apps available when they use a Meta headset.
    • int_19h 2y ago
      But why would I as a user want to use those flat apps in VR, when I already have a phone and a tablet?
      • modeless 2y ago
        On current headsets, just because it's annoying to have to take the headset off to do things, and also to be able to use those apps in conjunction with other services like meetings in Horizon Workrooms. On future headsets with higher resolution and better comfort, because it would be a legitimately better experience in many cases.
      • chaostheory 2y ago
        Have you seen the Apple Vision demo(s)? Now imagine being able to have wall sized versions of Android apps like Netflix or even word processing apps like Google Docs.
• mattlondon 2y ago
  Notable by it's absence: ML/AI
• wearhere 2y ago
  I was hoping to open this and see screenshots of what the OS looked like—I have never had a sense of what the OS for Meta's headsets is, only what individual games look like. Instead, we get five (5) "Not an actual product render" illustrations.
  • jayd16 2y ago
    Its Android with a VR quick action bar and app launcher grid. You can select an immersive skybox "desktop" or a use passthrough. There's not much to show seeing as the passthrough is still fairly new. There are no built in 3d widgets or anything atm so there's really not much to show besides apps. Anyway, this seems like a licensing deal announcement, not a big software release.
  • deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
• nathan_compton 2y ago
  I don't care what these people do, I'll never use one of their products unless it is to literally save someone's life.
  • zooq_ai 2y ago
    what a sad hill to die on
    • t1c 2y ago
      I don't think it's a particularly sad hill to die on – Meta has proven themselves to be exploitative, invasive, and downright malicious time and time again.
      • zooq_ai 2y ago
        I feel very sorry for people who feel that way and have their identity tied to hating Facebook/Meta
        • t1c 2y ago
          I don't get your point -- you're allowed to not like an invasive company and you're allowed to refuse to use their products if you don't like what they're doing. I don't think anyone in this conversation is making it their personality.
        • gretch 2y ago
          You came into this comment thread without any insight to add or anything interesting to say. You came in just to cast judgement “I feel sorry for people who don’t use Facebook”. In fact it is you who has tied their identity to feeling superior to others. Other guy doesn’t sound like it’s his identity at all.
    • gretch 2y ago
      No one is dead on a hill. If anything, not using VR makes you much more "alive". A real misapplication of this metaphor.
• vonwoodson 2y ago
  I remember when Facebook released an "OS" for the phone (it was really just a skin for Android). While I'm really happy to see that FB is making another stab into the field with the Quest, and I'm very happy that we're finally getting some real development in VR, I'm even more skeptical of them now as I was then: I just don't trust FB with my data. Part of what makes me so skeptical is how "cheap" the Quest 3 is. There's no way they're not loosing [literally billions](https://fortune.com/2023/10/27/mark-zuckerberg-net-worth-metaverse-losses-46-billion-earnings-stock/ https://fortune.com/2023/10/27/mark-zuckerberg-net-worth-met...) of dollars developing VR tech and, given their track record, only have one way they know to make that money back.
• joshmarinacci 2y ago
  "Open" in the same way Android is, with complete control and app store by Meta. I think we have to accept that an 'open hardware platform' the way PCs were was an anomaly. We will never have anything like that again.
  • andygeorge 2y ago
    i think that ship sailed when smartphones became ubiquitous. given how heavily subsidized mobile devices are (especially compared to PCs), there's no incentive to produce an actually-open hardware or software platform. Google and Apple want you re-upping every 2 years and to stay locked into their ecosystems. i agree this is sad, but definitely not new
  • deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  • drdaeman 2y ago
    I don't think it's in the same way. I see "we licensed some software to ASUS, Lenovo and Microsoft (and may license to others - serious inquiries only)", not "we are releasing something under a free software license".
• Aaronstotle 2y ago
  I won't touch VR/AR until the technology progresses to the point where its nealry indistinguishable from regular sunglasses/eye-glasses. I have yet to use any VR device that made me want to purchase it, its all felt insanely gimmicky, so far the only time a headset seems nice is on a plane ride. I can see the potential, still seems a long way off imo.
  • zooq_ai 2y ago
    Feel sorry that you feel that way. There are many experiences (especially ball games that require hand/eye co-ordination) that has made my game / fitness / skill improve at least 80% with very minimal amount of time I spent (compared to real world training). If you are into Fitness, nothing like training in VR for literally no money (compared to Gym / personal trainer)
    • PaulHoule 2y ago
      If "cool" people insist on only wearing Ray Bans that will keep VR fun. It will keep VRChat safe for furries, kemonomini and animekin.
    • trendoid 2y ago
      Any recommendations of games or apps that helped you most?
      • zooq_ai 2y ago
        personally Cricket and Table Tennis. But, you could also pick Baseball, Golf, and Boxing. Cricket, TT and Golf have none of the subscription bullshit.
  • drdaeman 2y ago
    Typically frames are made very light, so they won't make too much pressure on one's ears and nose. Unless someone runs a fiber to a frame, then keep the rest in a backpack or belt bag or something, I doubt it's physically possible to pack all the necessary additional hardware keeping it nearly indistinguishable from a frame without it.
• figassis 2y ago
  [flagged]
  • deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
• ApolloFortyNine 2y ago
  >And we encourage the Google Play 2D app store to come to Meta Horizon OS, where it can operate with the same economic model it does on other platforms. Did they get told to shove it by Google when they asked through back channels? To even come out and essentially say publicly "they can still get their 30% cut" is just wild to me. Also of note, they don't mention any license. Is the hope they can avoid the Google antitrust concerns Google is running into that Apple is somehow avoiding?
  • potatolicious 2y ago
    I'd speculate the two things have a lot to do with each other. It's easier to avoid accusations of monopolizing software distribution on a platform when you've openly invited other parties to participate.
  • traek 2y ago
    Google asked Meta to switch to AndroidXR for their Quest devices. Meta said no and suggested Google offer Play Store on Quest, which Google rejected. Google then went on a PR offensive accusing Meta of fragmenting the VR/AR ecosystem. Meta is including this in the announcement to head off criticism by Google aimed at creating pressure on Meta to consolidate on AndroidXR. https://www.roadtovr.com/meta-google-android-xr-quest-rejected/ https://www.roadtovr.com/meta-google-android-xr-quest-reject...
  • deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
• sheepscreek 2y ago
  Isn’t it built on Android?
• deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
  • deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
• lyu07282 2y ago
  Almost exciting, if the software wasn't just this shitty hacked together proprietary android fork. It's just an app store and game launcher, there is nothing there that I would imagine a metaverse operating system to be, like interoperability between vr apps. This would have to be built from the ground up around the VR paradigm on open standards and hackable. If the Internet started on today's proprietary app stores and nailed-shut operating systems it would've never innovated this quickly. This is what AOL/MSN desperately attempted, but it all failed (thank god). Meta's dream of the metaverse is nothing but laughable, hold back by nothing but terrible software.
• haytamoptika 2y ago
  i love rivals on tech, hope like ios vs android
  • ambichook 2y ago
    i mean, its an android fork and some ios derivative so thats exactly what it is :D
• mwkaufma 2y ago
  [flagged]
• xandrius 2y ago
  Never wished something would quickly fail already at its announcement as much as this.
  • _akhe 2y ago
    Long plane rides and TV before bed - 2 things it would be better at than what we have now. Imagine watching a 27" screen from across the room in the dark vs a screen that moves with your vision... No more awkward pillow adjusting to make a makeshift couch etc. your neck can finally just relax and you can stare at the screen however you're laying. In these cases you're not doing anything else anyway. But yeah, the Tesla Airpod people who talk to themselves all loud outside will no doubt have a full UI of the world 24/7, gesturing like maniacs in the middle of stores, in crosswalks - just a news and stock ticker streaming across the top of their field of vision at all times. And there will of course be junkies in the streets, with - instead of smartphones - goggles on their faces, crumbled up in a brick corner just like the dystopian art showed us. For Pareto's 20%, it's an Apple Watch, or Airpods++.
    • xandrius 2y ago
      For your own health, try to avoid TV before bed, it's not good for your sleep. I still think that watching movies/TV should be a social experience and not akin to scrolling on social media. My neck can be a bit less comfortable for that :D
• DotaFan 2y ago
  Quite dislike Quest 2 dependency on Meta, would probably never buy their hardware again.
  • bee_rider 2y ago
    Yeah my CV1 doesn’t work anymore, I think Meta added some account requirement. I feel like Facebook stole some money from me, in the sense that it wasn’t obvious when I bought the thing that I’d need to buy into their ecosystem. But it is basically first gen hardware, so I guess it isn’t worth anything. I was pretty excited about VR (enough to drop a couple hundred on what was then a top of the line headset) but overall this experience killed all interest for me. Maybe good open source options will come out in a couple years.
    • RainaRelanah 2y ago
      A friend of mine has been working this year on getting the CV1/Rift S running without the Oculus app/Meta account, which also means continued support for these two discontinued headsets. I don't think she has publicly released it yet, but good progress is being made. https://github.com/BnuuySolutions/ReLinked https://github.com/BnuuySolutions/ReLinked https://twitter.com/BunniKaitlyn/status/1756580547768279466 https://twitter.com/BunniKaitlyn/status/1756580547768279466
      • bee_rider 2y ago
        Neat! It will be cool if this works out.
• a13o 2y ago
  The bridge to nowhere doesn't need more features, it needs a somewhere
  • deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
  • DragonMaus 2y ago
    Would this be the logical extrapolation of the "it's not the destination, but the journey to get there" mindset?
• SEXMCNIGGA32218 2y ago
  [flagged]
• spxneo 2y ago
  feels like US tech companies are running on fumes just as the AI bubble starts to fizzle its one last push at AR
  • JKCalhoun 2y ago
    I disagree to an extent. I think AI is the real deal, VR though is indeed an evolutionary dead-end that we've been down and retreated from before.
• RobotToaster 2y ago
  That's a bad name collision, "Horizon" is the name of the OS on the Nintendo 3ds and switch.
  • _joel 2y ago
    And also for people following the UK news, the name of the Fujitsu/Post Office software that led to a not insignificant number of sub-postmasters being falsely convited in the largest miscarriages of British justice ever (maybe anywhere). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Post_Office_scandal https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Post_Office_scandal
  • darkhorse13 2y ago
    Literally nobody knows this though. Even searching for "Horizon OS" only returns Meta stuff already.
    • xcdzvyn 2y ago
      Yeah - while I've never dived too deeply, I have modded my 3DS a fair bit and didn't know what the OS was codenamed. I've always just seen it called 3DS OS, native firm, etc.
  • sb8244 2y ago
    Eh, I don't think this is a bad name collision. Nintendo doesn't really talk about stuff like this publicly, and searching for it is pretty much reddit + hacker news threads. I'm sure there's a lot of internal code name collisions.
  • lsllc 2y ago
    There's precedent, when Apple named iOS, Cisco had (and still has) IOS. They just came to some licensing settlement for Apple's use of the name [0]. Actually, it looks like Apple also licensed the iPhone trademark from Cisco too! [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IOS#:~:text=In%20June%202010%2C%20Apple%20rebranded,IOS%2C%20used%20on%20its%20routers https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IOS#:~:text=In%20June%202010%2....
• superkuh 2y ago
  This entire thing is newspeak. Every headline means the opposite. For example, "A More Open App Ecosystem" means a more closed application ecosystem. By switching to a proprietary OS and setting up a walled garden where they have to approve all software you can run. This is part of the coming war on general computation.
  • tempodox 2y ago
    > This is part of the coming war on general computation. Coming? I'd say it's already full on. Apple's malicious compliance with the DMA is one part of it, for instance. Of course others try to imitate.
• inanutshellus 2y ago
  Does this page even load for y'all in Firefox? For me CORS protection blocks the whole site from loading.
  • asabla 2y ago
    Nah, the same issue here as well
  • deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
• plussed_reader 2y ago
  [flagged]
• SEXMCNIGGA26827 2y ago
  [flagged]
• SEXMCNIGGA3268 2y ago
  [flagged]
• SEXMCNIGGA47640 2y ago
  [flagged]
• SEXMCNIGGA9083 2y ago
  [flagged]
• SEXMCNIGGA35017 2y ago
  [flagged]
• SEXMCNIGGA16887 2y ago
  [flagged]
• SEXMCNIGGA24419 2y ago
  [flagged]
• SEXMCNIGGA42993 2y ago
  [flagged]
• SEXMCNIGGA38276 2y ago
  [flagged]
  • lionkor 2y ago
    @dang
    • deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
• SEXMCNIGGA32579 2y ago
  [flagged]
• SEXMCNIGGA20103 2y ago
  [flagged]
• Vicinity9635 2y ago
  [flagged]
• SEXMCNIGGA42856 2y ago
  [flagged]
• SEXMCNIGGA34843 2y ago
  [flagged]
• librasteve 2y ago
  not sure Horizon is a great name for a software project
  • _akhe 2y ago
    Lol "Sunset your product today on... Horizon"
• SEXMCNIGGA14286 2y ago
  [flagged]
• SEXMCNIGGA13486 2y ago
  [flagged]
  • antoniojtorres 2y ago
    Ugh
• SEXMCNIGGA29833 2y ago
  [dead]
• SEXMCNIGGA10077 2y ago
  [dead]
• coryfklein 2y ago
  Wow that spam bot is quite creative! Looks like they've figured out how to create a green account, and perhaps bypassing the spam detection by having each new account only post one spam message. I'm sure dang is really busy right now.
  • macintux 2y ago
    Yeah, the flood of spam is killing the server’s performance.
  • deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
• SEXMCNIGGA24108 2y ago
  [flagged]
• SEXMCNIGGA24532 2y ago
  [flagged]
• SEXMCNIGGA49332 2y ago
  [dead]
• SEXMCNIGGA26518 2y ago
  [dead]
• SEXMCNIGGA32322 2y ago
  [dead]
• SEXMCNIGGA27048 2y ago
  [dead]
• SEXMCNIGGA20552 2y ago
  [dead]
• riffic 2y ago
  great, another Android.
• taylorbuley 2y ago
  While the web trends away from open, Facebook is zigging where others are zagging and supporting the resistance technology-wise.
  • Andrew_nenakhov 2y ago
    What are you even talking about? Facebook is THE biggest actor who works non-stop against the open web and is the biggest closed-off silo of data on the web.
    • taylorbuley 2y ago
      What makes you say that?
• slim 2y ago
  This will (thankfully) fail because meta will not be able to harness the chinese industrial firehose because 1. US protectionism 2. chinese people are not stupid, they won't let a company whose business model revolves around selling attention, acquire a monoply on attention of human beings
• 29athrowaway 2y ago
  Imagine being banned from Facebook due to not complying with the community guidelines and being unable to use your computer. Community guidelines that can change at any moment at any time and are enforced by random people who can make mistakes. A Facebook OS as a daily driver is an idea that is vomitive in every way. Imagine ads that track you eyes and that you cannot look away from. Ads that track your face muscles so they know exactly how you react to them. Like being connected to a lie detector 24/7. This is pure evil, everyone should reject this.
  • askafriend 2y ago
    What you wrote makes doesn't sense because Horizon OS doesn't require a Facebook account or any account on social media.
    • 29athrowaway 2y ago
      For now
• _akhe 2y ago
  Meta is smartly capturing the MR developer market like they captured the web developer market with React. In terms of Vision vs Quest - I wonder if there will be a "React Native" parallel that allows developers to write React for both Vision and Quest apps. A lot of the developer market comes down to languages: Python for AI/ML, Obj-C (Swift) for iOS, Java (Kotlin) for Android - but JavaScript always seems to weasle its way into these native platforms and a lot of companies end up just writing React for anything front-end.
  • ImHereToVote 2y ago
    Making any multiplatform real-time 3D for Apple is such a pain. Even simply using Xcode is a nightmare.
    • _akhe 2y ago
      Agree with you there! I don't particularly love Facebook and haven't even used it since 2009, but I can't deny how world-changing React has been for not only front-end (in terms of state management etc.) but also for building cross-platform native UIs on various platforms like TVs and mobile devices - and being able to do it with a (mostly) common codebase. I probably would have never built for iOS if I had to use Xcode and their entire ecosystem, luckily in RN you usually just need to install their command line tools and never open the software.
      • forgotmypwlol 2y ago
        If you use Expo, you don’t even have to do that.
        • _akhe 2y ago
          Expo was amazing for my first foray into React Native (https://github.com/bennyschmidt/daily-tarot https://github.com/bennyschmidt/daily-tarot) I eventually ran into some limitations (accessing Camera Roll back then, also in-app purchases back then) that forced me to have to use more native stuff. I bet it's come a long way though since then.
• guiomie 2y ago
  At least I can build VR apps for free on Meta Quest with Unity, as opposed to 200$ a month with Apple Vision Pro.
  • deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
• SEXMCNIGGA26031 2y ago
  [dead]
• SEXMCNIGGA26806 2y ago
  [dead]
• SEXMCNIGGA31198 2y ago
  [dead]
• SEXMCNIGGA26579 2y ago
  [dead]
• SEXMCNIGGA42358 2y ago
  [dead]
• paulspl 2y ago
  I don't think anyone cares.
• SEXMCNIGGA35009 2y ago
  [dead]
• w0mbat 2y ago
  Otherwise known as Linux.
• SEXMCNIGGA28288 2y ago
  [flagged]
• SEXXMCNIGGGA435 2y ago
  [flagged]
• SEXMCNIGGA4935 2y ago
  [dead]
• SEXMCNIGGA9438 2y ago
  [dead]
• SEXMCNIGGA17196 2y ago
  [dead]
• gnuser 2y ago
  fyi I’m working on a GPLv3 competitor and intend to outshine whatever this is
  • nar001 2y ago
    I'd be curious to see but no idea how you intend to get enough people to develop for your platform
• zmmmmm 2y ago
  I've got to hand it to Zuckerberg : when he spouted the "open" vs "closed" rhetoric earlier in the year, I said it was nice words but meaningless unless he put his money where his mouth was and makes Quest OS available to others as well as put firm guarantees around side loading etc. But in the same breath I said I doubted he would do that. And now he has done exactly that. However much antipathy people have towards him and his past, he keeps putting meat behind his words and actually doing the things he says. At the same time, important to recognise here that this is still to some extent "open washing" what is a totally controlled OS. This is not like AOSP where you can go download the source code and compile it yourself. So far it is not even like Windows where you can download an installer and run it on a computer yourself. A manufacturer will have to form a business partnership with Meta to even get access to this "open" OS - I assume. But since I keep under estimating Zuckerberg maybe he will exceed my expectations on that front too. Nonetheless, this is a huge step forward and a genuine challenge now for Google/Samsung. The bar is now very very high for them to deliver something compelling enough that manufacturers will jump on board instead of building on Horizon OS with an existing install base of 25M+ users and thousands of apps. All up, this is pretty exciting news in the XR space and really sets the stage for an epic battle in the next couple of years as these platforms go head to head.
• SEXMCNIGGA16817 2y ago
  [dead]
• SEXMCNIGGA3612 2y ago
  [dead]
• SEXMCNIGGA27909 2y ago
  [dead]
• SEXMCNIGGA44776 2y ago
  [dead]
• SEXMCNIGGA30613 2y ago
  [dead]
• 2genders16037 2y ago
  [dead]
• 2genders2465 2y ago
  [dead]
• 2genders5265 2y ago
  [dead]
• 2genders33343 2y ago
  [dead]
• 2genders1814 2y ago
  [dead]
• 2genders11728 2y ago
  [flagged]
• 2genders17014 2y ago
  [flagged]
• 2genders9623 2y ago
  [flagged]
• 2genders45539 2y ago
  [flagged]
• 2genders9648 2y ago
  [flagged]
• weinberg 2y ago
  Somewhat surprised to not see Valve in there, especially after Steam Link showed up a handful months ago.
  • deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]
• dev1ycan 2y ago
  Dude they already have a new grift, AI, why are they still pouring money in this failed project? Zuckerberg is trying so hard to not be Elon 2.0
• 2genders13032 2y ago
  [flagged]
• webninja 2y ago
  It’s funny that Horizon is named after Horizon in the Amazon Prime TV series “Upload”. Good TV series btw.
• Grimeton 2y ago
  Funny what they call an OS nowadays. I'd say it's another Linux distribution.
  • fragmede 2y ago
    Depends on if you consider Android, ChromeOS, and Ubuntu to be the same OS or not.
  • kernal 2y ago
    If Android was Linux then I should be able to run any GNU/Linux app, without modification or installation of additional software, on Android, right?
• deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
• ThinkBeat 2y ago
  As usual I get quite hopeful when I hear about a new operating system. We so absolutely need paths to move away from what we have today. I didn't even know what "mixed reality operating system" was so that made me hopeful. May include some nifty quantum processing. Alas, it is just stuff built on top of Android, which is built on top of the Linux kernel. Perhaps "Meta Horizon SDK for Android" would be a better label?`
  • snvzz 2y ago
    >Alas, it is just stuff built on top of Android, which is built on top of the Linux kernel. Look into HarmonyOS, Fuchsia, LionsOS, Managarm, Haiku and Genode.
    • fsflover 2y ago
      And Qubes OS.
      • snvzz 2y ago
        Qubes relies on Linux, huge TCB. Refer to Makatea[0] for Qubes reimagined on a less flawed architecture. 0. https://trustworthy.systems/projects/makatea/ https://trustworthy.systems/projects/makatea/
        • fsflover 2y ago
          It doesn't rely on Linux, it relies on Xen and hardware virtualization: https://www.qubes-os.org/faq/#why-does-qubes-use-xen-instead-of-kvm-or-some-other-hypervisor https://www.qubes-os.org/faq/#why-does-qubes-use-xen-instead...
  • jojobas 2y ago
    What we have today is Absolutely Awesome. Even Windows.
  • meiraleal 2y ago
    > Perhaps "Meta Horizon SDK for Android" would be a better label?` Yes, the same as Android SDK for Linux. But it became just Android.
• 2genders33556 2y ago
  [flagged]
• 2genders42803 2y ago
  [flagged]
• hatthew 2y ago
  Joel Spolsky's "Commoditize your Complements" [0] seems relevant here. From that perspective, it seems like Meta is trying to commoditize the hardware and monopolize the OS (and likely the app store and payment system), similar to Android. [0] https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2002/06/12/strategy-letter-v/ https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2002/06/12/strategy-letter-v/
• 2genders20059 2y ago
  [flagged]
• w10-1 2y ago
  If hardware manufacturers actually wanted this, Meta would be announcing a licensing deal. This is a threat to Apple: if Apple doesn't relent on advertising/privacy in VisionOS, then Meta will do to VR what Google did for smartphone's: sell the market to maintain advertising access. Meta doesn't care about money or mindshare on VR. They just want ad access.
  • EchoReflection 2y ago
    they want ad access because they care about money and mindshare (a term I hadn't heard of until reading your comment, so thank you for that!)
  • hooloovoo_zoo 2y ago
    Apple and to a lesser extent Google have high trust. Nobody trusts Meta at all. So who would adopt their OS?
    • threeseed 2y ago
      Not sure why you wouldn't put Google and Meta in the same basket. Both are advertising companies with a history of working to undermine pro-privacy initiatives.
      • hooloovoo_zoo 2y ago
        It's an inherently subjective assessment obviously, but I can justify it with e.g. survey results https://theharrispoll.com/partners/media/axios-harrispoll-100/ https://theharrispoll.com/partners/media/axios-harrispoll-10....
    • ceroxylon 2y ago
      As a Quest user: mostly younger devs. I see 18-22yo developers who do not care about the history of Meta making very impressive games that attract large amounts of their peers, adding micro-transactions along the way to fund their development, and it works, they make a large amount of money and have very active communities on Discord.
• 2genders9277 2y ago
  [dead]
• 2genders20359 2y ago
  [dead]
• 2genders43006 2y ago
  [flagged]
• 2genders6827 2y ago
  [flagged]
• 2genders9727 2y ago
  [flagged]
• 2genders29362 2y ago
  [flagged]
• 2genders14176 2y ago
  [flagged]
• 2genders37574 2y ago
  [flagged]
• 2genders15781 2y ago
  [flagged]
• 2genders49628 2y ago
  [flagged]
• 2genders8008 2y ago
  [flagged]
• 2genders26512 2y ago
  [flagged]
• 2genders91 2y ago
  [flagged]
• 2genders30567 2y ago
  [flagged]
• 2genders9648 2y ago
  [flagged]
• 2genders9958 2y ago
  [flagged]
• 2genders7110 2y ago
  [flagged]
• 2genders21299 2y ago
  [flagged]
• 2genders21299 2y ago
  [flagged]
• SEXMCNIGGA34797 2y ago
  [flagged]
• SEXMCNIGGA16481 2y ago
  [dead]
• SEXMCNIGGA24694 2y ago
  [flagged]
• SEXMCNIGGA44909 2y ago
  [dead]
• SEXMCNIGGA29620 2y ago
  [dead]
• SEXMCNIGGA3291 2y ago
  [dead]
• 2genders486 2y ago
  [dead]
• varispeed 2y ago
  That's a poor name for an operating system, especially in the UK. Google Horizon Post master drama or watch the TV series.
• indianmilf7015 2y ago
  [dead]
• indianmilf11852 2y ago
  [dead]
• indianmilf46082 2y ago
  [dead]
• indianmilf37855 2y ago
  [dead]
• indianmilf16200 2y ago
  [flagged]
• indianmilf33200 2y ago
  [flagged]
• rock_artist 2y ago
  This seems like a great move. Similar to existing Android ecosystem, If this ends up making standardization of AR/VR, meta benefits from being the tone setter just as Google for Android. I wonder if the Qualcomm lock-in would stay or Mediatek and others would also onboard. The biggest test is how much current partners (Asus, Lenovo, etc) will sell. This will verdict the future of this idea.
• sexmc43103 2y ago
  [flagged]
• sexmc27022 2y ago
  [flagged]
• sexmc22563 2y ago
  [flagged]
• vcryan 2y ago
  More "awesome tech" from Meta that few people will ever use. If you do, just be careful they don't share your location with any genocidal occupiers!
• edfletcher_t137 2y ago
  Subtitled "Not an actual product render."
  • mey 2y ago
    There is a Meta earnings call in 2 days, and the annual shareholder meeting at the end of may. The details here seem a little thin. Partner agreements to produce something rather than a concrete thing. Hopefully we will see prototypes, but right now the skeptic in me sees this as a trial balloon for investors more than anything.
• deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
• kernal 2y ago
  >And we encourage the Google Play 2D They just had to stick that 2D in there. Yes, poke the bear.
• bitwize 2y ago
  It's gonna be a live service OS, like Windows, with subscriptions, fees, and developer restrictions. What VR needs is a VR OpenBSD.
• xyst 2y ago
  Unless I have the ability to inspect source code of "Meta Horizon OS". No way in hell am I touching anything from this company. I wonder what types of telemetry garbage is embedded into the OS.
• MrMan 2y ago
  [dead]
• juliendorra 2y ago
  'Pivot to software' has been done several times in computing history: Go Corporation, SGI, Sun, Blackberry, Palm, Sega, and oh, NeXT. These are interesting precedents. I don't know of a 'pivot to software' that actually worked (NeXT ended up going back to hardware, thanks to the reverse acquisition!) There's also the question of the licensees: so they choose Meta’s OS as the base for their hardware, maybe because they don't have anything else? Quest OS is neither a best in class user experience (it's still full of bugs, frictions and is a very inconsistent UI), and it's clearly not a good dev experience at all. So your hardware now inherit all of Meta's tech and UX debts, and you don't even have a guarantee of daily recurring usage or of a killer application user will flock to. Is that the great win for their hardware that they think it is? Of course, as several of us predicted when the number of Vision Pro apps quickly surpassed Quest Store Apps, Meta is now forced to react and change their weird two-tier approach: they are opening a (small) marketing presence for App Lab apps and are creating a "brand new" spatial app framework, to start and get out of the Unity/Unreal game engine third-party pipeline trap. That they only now see that giving developers a native app UI kit is a basic of any OS is… not promising from a supposedly now long term OS owner.
  • jimmySixDOF 2y ago
    The 'pivot to software' is more like a pivot back to software because Meta already disbanded a previous OS team at Reality Labs and indeed platform software was exactly what motivated the thinking behind buying Oculus as expressed in Zucks internal deal memo on the subject [1] where he ranks Apps and Platform OS (eg Android/PlayStore) both above hardware. They also recently passed on an offer from Google who are working on a new XR android build. 6DOF 3D is a unique surface area and so far all we have seen are OS ports from 2D pancake land so these efforts can't come soon enough. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33538742 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33538742
  • bemmu 2y ago
    Promoting App Lab apps was the most exciting part of this announcement. I had been put off porting anything to Quest since I'd need to get official Meta blessing to actually get store presence to have enough users to pay for such an effort, but now if you can publish in App Lab and actually get some in-store promotion, it starts to sound way more compelling. I do agree with their initial approach to keep the perceived quality of the first apps high. But reality is that people want to play what they find fun/funny, even if less polished, and this change might open up some store promotion for such apps that solo devs like me are more likely to be able to make.
• Valerie_Wilson 2y ago
  [dead]
• dkrich 2y ago
  The most interesting thing about this is that everyone just forgot all the anger about the spying from a few years ago during the Cambridge analytica thing. Did that just go away?
  • random_kris 2y ago
    Maybe because it was woke propaganda and now we realized everyone is doing that shit
• nsonha 2y ago
  How does this compare to Microsoft's and Apple's? Is there any other player in AR/VR/MR OS?
• langsoul-com 2y ago
  Not too surprising given how Google has been closing down their Android platform to Meta for a while now
• luma 2y ago
  Sounds like MS ditching Windows MR has left an opportunity in the market for Meta. The OEMs listed all previously made MR headsets and presumably needed a new solution.
• purpleidea 2y ago
  It's nonsense. They're claiming to be "open" but it's all still vendor controlled proprietary nonsense. If they really want to be the dominant VR winner, then release it all under GPLv3+ and let us all get to innovate together.
• trimethylpurine 2y ago
  Are there really "millions of people" using it?
  • tempodox 2y ago
    Just as this detergent washes whiter than white!
• classified 2y ago
  For all those who feel insufficiently tracked by Google. If it has a browser, you might be able to run the JavaScript implementation of Android on top of it, thus being double-tracked.
• deliriumchn 2y ago
  I have a bad feeling that this will break modded beat saber on quest once again :/
• banish-m4 2y ago
  Android tried it and the results were closed-source fiefdoms and crappy hardware. There's not a big enough market for this to sustain itself because VR is a flying car category that no one needs.
• marcus_holmes 2y ago
  Has anyone actually tried the Metaverse yet? As I understood it, this was basically a massively expensive failed experiment so far. No-one is using it for reals (yet?). Who's the market for developing apps for it?
  • esskay 2y ago
    Tried it, was very unimpressed, it feels very much like a tech demo even as recent as this year. Certainly wouldn't waste my money on it.
    • tfandango 2y ago
      It is really hard to find a "world" that has people in it, that you actually want to talk to. I have had some great experiences there though, some regular people that hang out in worlds and talk about stuff. It's kind of cool when it happens but it is hit and miss. And there is something missing with the kinds of things you can do, Super Rumble feels like a real game, but most worlds are aesthetic in nature, a place to sit and look at stuff. It feels like it needs to mature.
• lionkor 2y ago
  Not personally interested in an OS from Meta - the only thing I use from Meta is WhatsApp, and that's just because it is difficult to replace here in central Europe. I don't get excited about new OSs unless they're FOSS. It sounds like an ideological take, but it's not: When an OS is not FOSS, they either succumb to the wrong incentives and lack of care (Windows) or just become a walled garden (MacOS). From what I've seen from, say, Visual Studio Code (FOSS version), or Chromium, or other such projects, is that a large company open-sourcing the core of their product can only yield positives over the alternative (fully closed) solution. Fully FOSS would be sick, partially would be useful. Closed and ad-ridden, driven by wrong incentives and run by a company with zero sense for privacy (see their Facebook product) and a love for hype (see their AI and Metaverse products that just about nobody wanted?), I don't see this becoming very popular.
  • sharkjacobs 2y ago
    I know this is totally tangential to what you're saying and irrelevant to your point but I'm curious. I'm pretty up on MacOS and Linux, not so much on Windows. Is Windows less of a walled garden than MacOS?
    • deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]
    • Longlius 2y ago
      It's functionally the same - code signing is mandated unless you want your users to get a scary pop-up.
      • lionkor 2y ago
        It is definitely a different experience - the Windows warnings are very easy to not take seriously, since they pop up for anything and everything. On MacOS, you have to practically agree to your PC being unsafe to even enable running non-signed code, iirc.
  • chrisweekly 2y ago
• deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]