7 ms·

The best thing? There is really no other company you could think of who would be a better partner? Like google? Or Microsoft?

by blhack 13y ago

baby 13y ago
Google ? I don't know, they have so many products that they acquire and then shut down. Also, they have so many products that... it wouldn't have been such a big deal to acquire Oculus Microsoft ? They already have a gaming branch so why not, but for the same reason as Google, people wouldn't have noticed it much. But Facebook ? Everybody around me is going to talk about it, even non-gamers. You have no idea how huge this is for VR.
clarky07 13y ago
Google wouldn't be any better, and I might argue worse. They are more likely than not to just shut it down. Microsoft or Apple would be better though IMO. Alternately Valve might have been nice.
- batiudrami 13y ago
  Valve would have been ideal in terms of 'companies who have lots of money and not a lot of people to justify their spending to', but I imagine that $2Bn is outside their price range. Last I heard they were working on their own VR though.
  - WalterSear 13y ago
    It would be a big step, but I doubt they couldn't afford it. They make more money per employee than Apple does.
    - clarky07 13y ago
      how does that number mean anything when comparing a few hundred to tens of thousands?
cwyers 13y ago
Google would buy Oculus to integrate it with existing product lines, either Android or wearables. Microsoft would buy it for the Xbox. Apple would buy it to make it part of the iOS line. Facebook by far seems like the weirdest of the possible major buyers, because they have by far the fewest obvious complements to Oculus, but by the same token, that makes them the most likely company to be buying Oculus to expand into an entirely new space, in other words to let Oculus set their strategy rather than their strategy dictate the future of Oculus. It's a double-edged sword.
- TaylorAlexander 13y ago
  Yeah, Facebook is one of the few major tech companies who can buy Oculus and let them operate independently, since they don't have a stake in anything much related to gaming or VR. This means they are one of the companies least likely to screw with the Oculus vision, and I see that as a very good thing for virtual reality.
  - ktsmith 13y ago
    Carmack wants to build the Metaverse. Facebook wants to own the Metaverse. I don't see this as a good thing.
    - jessaustin 13y ago
      Eh, there's nothing inherent in the metaverse concept that means it must exist in an FB-style walled garden. Even if it starts out there, if it turns out to be of benefit to humans, eventually the walls will get routed around. FB know this, and intend to recoup their investment in the medium term.
      - ENGNR 13y ago
        The social network hasn't been routed around yet. And yet there's still something hollow about having everything you do shared with everyone you know that leads people to give their most bland, crowd pleasing personality to the crowd. I was hoping for something more personal out of Oculus. Something I wouldn't have to think about sharing with my great aunts and the wider public via the NSA
taurath 13y ago
Valve maybe? Lack of output aside, they know how to "get it right" the first time, whenever that time may come.
- illuminate 13y ago
  They're most certainly not a hardware company, not only from the past, but how they're approaching the Steamboxes.
bentcorner 13y ago
I'd like to think Berkshire Hathaway would have been a good fit. They could expand into an entirely new technology sector, Buffett seems like an insanely smart guy who would get along with Carmack, and BH seems to be focused on making companies succeed in their own fields instead of folding them into existing lines of business.
- Fomite 13y ago
  Buffett is notoriously reluctant to invest in companies he doesn't understand, or which lack existing revenue streams. He's not in the business of funding startups.
  - dragontamer 13y ago
    Buffett is a very good investor for what he does. He understands very down-to-earth businesses, like trash cans, trailer parks, and potato chips. As sad as it sounds, thats what makes business in America
    - jessaustin 13y ago
      That doesn't sound "sad" to me. I appreciate the existence of all of those things.

The best thing? There is really no other company you could think of who would be a better partner? Like google? Or Microsoft?

by blhack 13y ago

The best thing? There is really no other company you could think of who would be a better partner? Like google? Or Microsoft?

baby 13y ago

Google ? I don't know, they have so many products that they acquire and then shut down. Also, they have so many products that... it wouldn't have been such a big deal to acquire Oculus Microsoft ? They already have a gaming branch so why not, but for the same reason as Google, people wouldn't have noticed it much. But Facebook ? Everybody around me is going to talk about it, even non-gamers. You have no idea how huge this is for VR.

clarky07 13y ago

Google wouldn't be any better, and I might argue worse. They are more likely than not to just shut it down. Microsoft or Apple would be better though IMO. Alternately Valve might have been nice.

batiudrami 13y ago
Valve would have been ideal in terms of 'companies who have lots of money and not a lot of people to justify their spending to', but I imagine that $2Bn is outside their price range. Last I heard they were working on their own VR though.
- WalterSear 13y ago
  It would be a big step, but I doubt they couldn't afford it. They make more money per employee than Apple does.
  - clarky07 13y ago
    how does that number mean anything when comparing a few hundred to tens of thousands?

cwyers 13y ago

Google would buy Oculus to integrate it with existing product lines, either Android or wearables. Microsoft would buy it for the Xbox. Apple would buy it to make it part of the iOS line. Facebook by far seems like the weirdest of the possible major buyers, because they have by far the fewest obvious complements to Oculus, but by the same token, that makes them the most likely company to be buying Oculus to expand into an entirely new space, in other words to let Oculus set their strategy rather than their strategy dictate the future of Oculus. It's a double-edged sword.

TaylorAlexander 13y ago
Yeah, Facebook is one of the few major tech companies who can buy Oculus and let them operate independently, since they don't have a stake in anything much related to gaming or VR. This means they are one of the companies least likely to screw with the Oculus vision, and I see that as a very good thing for virtual reality.
- ktsmith 13y ago
  Carmack wants to build the Metaverse. Facebook wants to own the Metaverse. I don't see this as a good thing.
  - jessaustin 13y ago
    Eh, there's nothing inherent in the metaverse concept that means it must exist in an FB-style walled garden. Even if it starts out there, if it turns out to be of benefit to humans, eventually the walls will get routed around. FB know this, and intend to recoup their investment in the medium term.
    - ENGNR 13y ago
      The social network hasn't been routed around yet. And yet there's still something hollow about having everything you do shared with everyone you know that leads people to give their most bland, crowd pleasing personality to the crowd. I was hoping for something more personal out of Oculus. Something I wouldn't have to think about sharing with my great aunts and the wider public via the NSA

taurath 13y ago

Valve maybe? Lack of output aside, they know how to "get it right" the first time, whenever that time may come.

illuminate 13y ago
They're most certainly not a hardware company, not only from the past, but how they're approaching the Steamboxes.

bentcorner 13y ago

I'd like to think Berkshire Hathaway would have been a good fit. They could expand into an entirely new technology sector, Buffett seems like an insanely smart guy who would get along with Carmack, and BH seems to be focused on making companies succeed in their own fields instead of folding them into existing lines of business.

Fomite 13y ago
Buffett is notoriously reluctant to invest in companies he doesn't understand, or which lack existing revenue streams. He's not in the business of funding startups.
- dragontamer 13y ago
  Buffett is a very good investor for what he does. He understands very down-to-earth businesses, like trash cans, trailer parks, and potato chips. As sad as it sounds, thats what makes business in America
  - jessaustin 13y ago
    That doesn't sound "sad" to me. I appreciate the existence of all of those things.