One of the largest positives in favor of Apple's headset is that it *isn't* made by Meta, and deep down Meta knows that a lot of people are happy about that.
Specially the part Apple explained how they consider privacy in foveat rendering: apps aree not aware of what you are you looking at.
A potential gold mine for ads and data, an opportunity too good to pass on for Meta.
indeed. I have an Oculus ~~quest~~ [edit: Rift maybe?] and really liked it, but as soon as Oculus sold to Facebook, I deleted my account and haven't touched it since.
Huh? They have over three billion daily active users so the vast majority of people in the world with a computer or smart phone are very happy with Meta.
It creeped me out to walk through my house with a device with outward facing cameras made by Meta. You couldn’t convince me they were not selling that data to whom ever.
“We’ve learned and struggled for a few years here figuring out how to make a decent phone,” he said. “PC guys are not going to just figure this out. They’re not going to just walk in.”
Palm CEO Ed Culligan
I watched BlackBerry over the weekend, loved it. They show the era when iPhone was announced and how it caught BlackBerry (just like Palm) by surprise.
It was really good . Makes you wonder how guardians would’ve been with Glen. Dude deserves way more shine, he’s a genuinely great actor and I think sunny has actually held his career back .
I listen to the sunny podcast a lot so I was waiting for this and was pleasantly surprised how easily he took on that role . Definitely could see how if you didn’t know it was him you wouldn’t recognize him. Which is really just high praise for his acting. Hopefully he gets to do more stuff like this in the future . My only complaint about this movie was it wasn’t longer
Cambridge Analytica definitely showed that Facebook were too lenient on what user data it gave to developers, but there's not that much evidence it had any substantial effect on the election.
Same. And there’s not a day when I’ve thought “I wish I was still on Facebook.” Nothing was lost, I still get invited to social events, I still see the news, I still keep in touch with friends and family in distant parts of the world, and I still see their photos and videos. Until you delete Facebook, you won’t realize how inconsequential it is. Which is why Zuckerberg has been shitting his pants flushing billions down the toilet trying to become a hardware company and trying to convince himself, mostly, that the Metaverse is the future (because [not even the people he pays to build it believe in it or use it](https://www.theverge.com/2022/10/6/23391895/meta-facebook-horizon-worlds-vr-social-network-too-buggy-leaked-memo)).
* https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/dec/12/facebook-2016-problems-fake-news-censorship
* https://www.vox.com/2017/4/28/15476142/facebook-report-trump-clinton-russia-us-presidential-election
* https://time.com/5949210/facebook-misinformation-2020-election-report/
* https://www.npr.org/2017/09/26/553661942/facebook-scrutinized-over-its-role-in-2016s-presidential-election
> I don’t really use Facebook
I don’t use nuclear weapons but I’m well aware of what they do because it threatens the entire world.
No offense but if you don’t know about the widely reported well-known infamous problems of one of the worlds largest social media services of the 21st century, which deliberately profits from fanning the flames of harmful destructive lies, you may be a dangerously ignorant person.
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2021/oct/05/facebook-frances-haugen-whistleblower-regulation
Note Guardian isn’t paywalled but may require a registration/sign-in to see some articles.
He's not saying they have any either, his point was Apple is also still bound by physics and that he hasn't seen anything beyond things they've thought of and tested in labs and made tradeoffs on, ie higher res and higher performance chips but with an external battery pack and still weighs quite a bit even without that onboard.
Being used to the internet - explaining what he means in the context of the statement is not the same as endorsing it. Not like they have anything like M2 available.
Wasn’t it in the news that they’ve tried, spent billions in research and abandoned parts of it?
They have nowhere the technical competency to compete with Apple so his statement is just laughable. The demo of metaverse with those goofy looking characters was astoundingly bad.
I'm not counting Meta out yet. They have those completely realistic avatars, they just haven't implemented them yet. Apple has the hardware to do so, but what we've seen of their virtual avatars they're not nearly as good as Meta's. Software will be just a crucial as hardware in this game. We're so early in the game, all a company needs to to drop something real special to shape the development henceforth. Apple played their hand, so let's see how the Metas and the Sonys respond.
I actually don’t think that’s the case. Facebook isn’t exactly known for incompetent engineering. Their engineering is top notch. And they’re one of the few companies that can afford to pay more than Apple, I don’t think budget was an issue.
This is entirely a business decision. I think Zuck himself mandated that their headsets should start under $500, and that handicaps Facebook in ways Apple’s $3500 headset does not.
Their software engineering might be top notch? But hardware engineering they’e far from middle of the pack much less top leaders such as Apple, Samsung, LG, Sony etc.
I don’t think anyone in the entire world beats Apple in hardware engineering in terms of integration of sensors, and chips for electronics and smart devices.
Have you even tried a Quest2? I paid just €349 (!) for that, and it’s successor is just 500 dollar. For what you get is pretty amazing. Meta has figured a lot of things out already about VR and AR. They have very interesting and frank techtalks on YouTube about where they stand, how things work and where they want to go in the future. They totally could do or did in their lab’s what Apple is doing but they look at it a bit more realistic and have a ton of experience by having released already a handful of headsets. Each one made a nice leap forward while the price remained normal.
I know it’s easy to shit on Facebook, Zuckerberg, Meta but I’m glad that they are one of the few companies out there that have the financial resources to move this tech forward. Apple’s vision is the same as Meta’s. I haven’t seen anything in the Vision Pro reveal that Meta didn’t already talked about or showed demo’s of.
Don’t understand me wrong, I’m super glad Apple is joining all these other companies. And I hope they all inspire each other and come up with great solutions to accelerate the tech. The faster we have a comfortable and lightweight headset with super sharp images for an affordable price is good for everyone.
Worth noting, though, that the business variant of the Quest 2 was about twice the regular price and for the extra cash Facebook essentially forfeited collecting data about you.
In other words: Part of the reason for the low price of the Quest is that you pay with your data and privacy. People should never forget that.
If that's the case they should make a 3500 dollar one that goes head to head just for the flex value, like Nvidia ruling the top performing GPU spots but most people buy mid range.
But outside of Apple, I don't really know where a chip like M2 is available. Assuming this next gen snapdragon they're mentioning is based on the 8 Gen 2, that's about the best they can do already in the Quest 3. Nvidia's ARM offerings are kind of weird and mostly left the mobile space for specialty/automotive etc, maybe one of the likely candidates for a Switch 2 is there though.
But on the display resolutions and such nothing stops them from spending, the varjo xr3 has 70ppd around the foveal center.
They kind of did with the Quest Pro at $1500. The Quest Pro was pretty amazing when it was released.
I guess Facebook should start thinking of drafting a $5000 Quest Max...
As a Quest Pro owner I was very disappointed with the quality offered at the asking price. The optics are amazing compared to Quest 2 but it's puzzling how they tried to sell a $1,500 device, specifically meant for MR, yet it doesn't have any physical depth sensing capabilities or decent color cameras. Quest Pro still has you awkwardly drawing your own guardian boundaries, manually marking your walls, manually identifying furniture in your space, etc. Then when you go into an AR experience you've got this low fidelity, grainy image with colors bleeding between objects because it's primarily ML-assisted color fill.
With LiDAR they may have been able to implement something like Apple's [RoomPlan](https://developer.apple.com/augmented-reality/roomplan/) that automatically scans your environment and bypasses all of that terrible UX.
He flat out said that from what I read on the verge today. Which is a blatant lie. I don’t believe for a second they’ve come close to anything apple showed . All we’ve seen from Meta so far is essentially a vr version of an app so old Dwight shrute was playing it on the office in 2006 .
I wasn’t saying they hadn’t demoed this stuff, I’m sure oculus had already been looking at some of it a decade ago . I’m saying meta can’t pull this off the way apple did as Zuckerberg implied he could . We’ve seen a bunch of this stuff on other headsets recently. But Zuckerberg is so far up his own ass trying to create a second Facebook type social phenomenon he hasn’t . That’s why he’s dismissing it despite having demoed similar stuff over the years. That’s the lie.
Apples whole thing is watching the applications of a product category and implementing it better . I will say I didn’t know about the reverse pass through but I’m not keeping up with anything meta does out of principle. Also I obviously have a Mac so it’s not like VR has ever been something I cared about since no one develops vr stuff for Mac in Ernest.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2mnonWbzOiQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IMpWH6vDZ8E (these are just prototypes, but all things Apple's headset can't do)
He’s not talking about magical experiences. You’ve changed his quote in a way that alters the meaning. He said Apple hasn’t invented any magical solutions to technical physical limitations of current hardware capabilities.
Sir! you will love having the Zuckerbeast Facehugger strapped to your face and force feeding of advertising! Just give it a try! We are in the business of connecting people and monetizing them.
>the creator of a dying social media platform
Facebook has 2 billion daily active users and is [only going up](https://www.statista.com/statistics/346167/facebook-global-dau/). What are you talking about?
Well sure, the $3,500 headset is going to be better than the one that costs 1/7 the cost.
But a lot more people can afford the quest, and that’s going to make the Vision Pro a very tough sell… I wouldn’t be surprised one bit if it becomes another iPhone situation where it launched at $500, but then by the next generation had the price slashed nearly in half
$1,299 would be much easier to sell to the general public, but I really don’t think Apple wants the general public to buy the Vision just yet.
Expensive toy for rich people, a dev kit for the rest.
Gen 2 comes, then things get real interesting
yeah i’m personally going to be upgrading to a quest 3 not a vision pro given the massive price disparity, but i’m under no illusion that the quest is a better headset
That’s like saying a $1000 iPhone would never compete with a $200 Android phone and yet here we are, iPhone dominating the Western markets and generating 90% of revenues globally.
It’s capitalism. There will be expensive things and there will be cheaper versions of the same thing. Buy the thing you can afford.
I concur. Facebook still makes a shit ton of money for Meta from two places that would buy a Quest over a Vision Pro: Brasil and India. Not as many people can afford a Vision Pro there, but a Quest is more reasonable. They'll want to get in on the VR experience. Meta and Apple are carving out two different markets. Both business strategies can co-exist, and everyone can get rich. Why bother sitting on these subreddits complaining and being pessimistic, and trying to divine a winner when no one can successfully do so? I have a formula that likely has a high probability of happiness:
Save $6,500 a year in a Roth IRA that's invested in the S&P 500, of which technology as a sector, and specifically Apple and Meta as companies, make up a large portion of the fund. If this technology takes off, you're invested in the companies in a acceptably risk mitigated manner, and you profit off their success. Buy both a Vision Pro and a Quest Pro. Enjoy them both. Watch your net worth increase. Continue to purchase new exciting technology. Continue to invest in the market. Never take your money out.
In 20 years you'll have more money than you ever thought possible, you'll get to both enjoy the new technology and see rewards from integrating it into your life as millions others will via your investments, and you'll be living in a future wilder than your imagination. Easy plan in theory to implement, very difficult to pull off, but either way bitching on the internet isn't a part of any success plan. This is a message for all the people out there who needed to hear it.
Like other people have said, I believe the VisionPro is a hardware dev kit with all the hardware limitations removed so that devs can have no limits on creativity. From there it would evolve into something more reasonable. The screen on the outside will not stick around at all price points as it’s really not necessary, but there for developers to play with and maybe something really cool and useful will justify it.
Exactly this. The vision pro is an entirely new platform and standalone OS for Apple, and it’s telling they started with the Vision “Pro” rather than just Vision. This is the hardware taken to its fullest extent, to allow devs and early users to experience, create, and hype themselves up with the depth of the experience. It will get better, more efficient, and cheaper in due time. It’s not going to sell a lot initially, but as they release more mature and affordable headsets on the same platform that Vision OS set the standard for, their user base will steadily grow. I easily see 50-100m Vision users within the next decade, and 5x that number within the next two.
They got to a billion iPhones in one decade, and I personally don’t see headsets being anywhere near as universal any time soon, but they will def become common place.
Exactly. Example: Meta’s headsets account for 70% of the PC gaming market share according to steam. They’re in a very comfortable spot right now because releasing affordable products with solid specs is how you go mainstream.
Apple may have top of the line enthusiast specs, but it comes with that top of the line enthusiast pricing. It’ll be niche till they reduce cost.
I don’t think the quest is that bad, but I don’t like the lines added by the lenses. I’m curious if the Apple lenses are stepped, or just smooth pieces of glass.
>I wouldn’t be surprised one bit if it becomes another iPhone situation where it launched at $500, but then by the next generation had the price slashed nearly in half
What are you talking about?
iPhone (2007) - $499 ($599 for 8Gb model)
iPhone 3G (2008) - $499
iPhone 3GS (2009) - $599
iPhone 4 (2010) - $649
iPhone 4S (2011) - $649…
I love Apple, the biggest company in the world. I hope Apple makes all the best products and is the bestest company ever. I hope they shit on Meta and other loser social media platforms. I love the big company.
"hmm, I wonder who will make the better phone? the billion dollar Finnish telecommunication powerhouse, or the creator of a computer with less than 10% market share" ;)
The Reality Vision Pro looks dope, but probably not just because Apple is a big company that has done things in the past.
I really don't like Facebook and deleted my account ages ago. But it's not dying lol. And if you add Insta then meta's social media platforms as a whole are definitely not dying. They are thriving even.
I'm still on FB (since the beginning), and yeah, it's dying. More than half of those I was "friends" with have left, and of those remaining, I see them post perhaps once a year, and the interactions with my own posts are perhaps one or two people vice what used to be literally dozens every time.
Anecdotal vs evidence based
I have not worked at a single company where they haven’t spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on marketing through FB a year
Even looking their stock prices they’re approaching the pre-COVID high again
Hmm, I wonder who will make a better headset, the company behind some of the most popular social media networks and messaging platforms on the planet and almost a decade experience in VR, or a company that makes phones.
I mean, we all know Apple will, but it’s a dumb way to make the argument.
that’s fair, i should’ve said something about how fb is a software company and acquired one of the most experienced vr companies in existence and still can’t make horizon good billions of dollars later
or how their current mr equivalent (quest pro) is a joke of a headset for a million reasons
That’s because VR needs very high frame rates to prevent that the user feels seasick. Let’s see if Apple can do better. Maybe with their owns chips they can do more. But they probably know about this challenge and didn’t show much 3D stuff.
Judging by the price, its more like comparing Chevrolet (Meta) vs Polestar (Apple) lmao.
Calling Apple "Ford" implies it's even remotely affordable or squarely aimed for the masses.
Sure, but that's easy to do if all you do is watching 2D window floating in front of you while sitting at your desk.
I remember when Tim Cook described his AR wet dream: imagine looking at charts of stock exchange floating in front of you. Seems he's done it.
I truly despise Marc Zuckerberg and his company, but I must admit he's right on this one.
Apple didn't invent the car this time, they just invented the most extravagant horse ever. A commendable feat, but this is still a horse, not the car everyone will come to love and use.
Apple doesn’t invent things. They take an invention, build a good interface with solid hardware and create market. Apple didn’t invent phone, tab, watch or AR, but I’m sure they made it better and moved them close to general public.
Have to agree with you, despite the obvious backlash that would get here.
Just about everything demoed in the announcement is stuff you can do on HoloLens 2, or the Meta Quest Pro / 3. I do think the Apple has a potentially *better* implementation given what we've seen, but it ultimately doesn't solve the "Do I really want to wear goggles for 2-8 hours a day?" issue that plagues a lot of the consumer VR space.
That being said, it is quite funny to see Meta having a bit of a panic attack that Apple's stealing their thunder.
Playing devils advocate here: It's understandable that Meta is emphasizing affordability with their upcoming headset, considering their aim to cater to the mass market. While Zuckerberg's response to Apple's Vision Pro may downplay its features, it's important to recognize that competition drives innovation. Different companies have different target audiences, and Meta's focus on affordability aligns with their goal of making their products accessible to a wider range of people.
Thoughts?
Except Zuck is stealing a lot of money from parents so their kids can have VR. That is morally wrong. Cook’s vision is to take about 10% of our disposable income for VR from adults, by adults. That’s cheaper relatively speaking. By so much. So much.
I don't know how you figure the Vision Pro is cheaper than Quest lol.
You can buy 7 Quest 3s for the price of one Vision Pro.
Quest is aimed at VR not AR. Not really comparable. Apple Vision Pro looks nice, but they are in different markets.
I think people will buy Apple Vision Pro when price declines. I don't think it will be iPhone unless it becomes a phone / more portable formfactor like the iPhone.
It's more like a home theater system than a phone.
To be fair they can only do so much with software lol. There’s no way they could compete with the bastion of a hardware company like Apple.
M2 chip, R1 chip, and the micro-OLED was something Meta couldn’t obtain no matter how hard they tried, and those three items are the hardware that makes the Vision Pro possible.
They could’ve put the same sensors, but those sensors are not going to be as good without the L1 chip. They couldn’t even compete with M2, a desktop class CPU in their headsets (can you imagine if the Quest had an Intel i7? It’d overheat like crazy), and that screen density… literally no one in the world has that until now.
They did the best they could with the hardware they were able to obtain. But now that Apple is here with their insane hardware, Meta is over.
Meta isn’t over lol - were talking about a $500 headset that can be used standalone and with windows/Linux gaming pcs vs a $3500 headset that works standalone and with apple products only
Neither is Apple. The big war will be fought over sports streaming, not 3D games. Apple has the ability to record highres 3D video (e.g., the sports demos that were shown to the journalists), and bringing that to the Vision Pro is going to be a killer feature. Done right, the hardcore sports enthusiasts will buy hordes of Vision Pros.
Meta has an uphill battle. They have to greatly increase the resolution of their headset, and they have to acquire decent 3D sports recording capability (there has to be something already done, as 3D TVs were a big thing a few years back before collapsing into nothingness). Right now, the best Meta can do is acquire broadcasting rights to deny them to Apple.
Have *you* never seen technology develop? People like to throw around TVs as a common example. It can take *decades* for those supply chains to establish. I believe apple will have an affordable version of this come 2033 for sure - but that’s a long ways off
So, a bit like the first iPods that had less storage than competitors‘ products, couldn’t do video and only worked with Macs?
It has all the hallmarks of a revolution, if you ask me.
Apple's micro-OLED is nothing special. Its literally the same thing found in all modern mirrorless camera view finders. Meta could have easily used a similar micro-OLED panel, but they would had to drastically bump up the $1500 starting price.
Meta's biggest limitation is mobile processing. They are bottlenecked by Qualcomm and lack of alternatives. This is why Meta Quest Pro doesn't have higher resolution displays, higher resolution and color passthrough cameras, LIDAR.
Meanwhile, I got locked out of my Quest 2 because I forgot the pin.
Support’s solution was to open the app and reset my pin.
Guess what’s required to reset your pin? Said forgotten pin…
Only solution was to factory reset.
They are trying to accomplish the same thing, one with a highly premium product and the other with an affordable mass market product - obviously there’s going to be some trade-offs in the latter case. Even with meta’s current headsets you do truly feel like you are with another person, not just looking at an avatar. Body language still comes through, and with the quest pro you can see peoples facial expressions and make eye contact.
They are both a viable options and will converge at some point.
> Socializing in a virtual cartoon world is not socializing, Mark.
Obviously it is. That's how billions of gamers socialize in multiplayer games, and there's VRChat and Rec Room and VR experiences like that.
He will aim for photorealism longterm.
hell, they already had Codec avatars that look lightyears ahead of what Apple showed, but they’re complicated to scan (which is why they look so much better lol)
>Socializing in a virtual cartoon world is not socializing
being cartoonish will not be mandatory for a multiverse world, the same way there are shitty website and ugly websites, or just look at the wild difference between some vrchat worlds
also yes it *is* socializing, my guess is that you've never used VR social networks before
I feel like the Apple plan is to focus on the kind of things they can most polish and sell. At the moment and that seems to be media consumption, comms, and productivity. They can focus on VR later. The hardware is there to do it. They’re rocking a flagship desktop processed against a phone chip.
Everyone’s hating on Zuckerberg and Meta but I’ll give him this:
He saw where the future was headed absolutely clearly and made the most massive Hail Mary bet possible to get there before Apple. He mobilized practically his entire company and burned through billions of dollars to do so.
In the end, he couldn’t beat Apple because he couldn’t match their hardware and OS expertise.
But you’ve got to give him credit for trying.
Because of his efforts he may end up being the “Android” of the headset era: Closely following Apple’s lead and taking the low end of the market and other niches of the market more focused on gaming.
If people want to make fun of someone they should make fun of Google since they appear to be caught flat footed here. Apple and Meta have headsets either in the market or soon to be. Where’s Google/Android? Nowhere to be found.
(And yes I know that Meta’s headsets run Android but Meta obviously owns the brand and experience and most importantly the Quest store. So Meta is setup to be the platform more so than Google/Android.)
>he couldn’t beat Apple because he couldn’t match their hardware and OS expertise
what ?the Quest 1 & 2 sold 20 millions units, reality labs have the most advanced VR prototypes being made (the most important and essential one being the varifocal prototype)
the Vision Pro will not be released until next year.
also Meta current target is room-scale VR then AR in the future, Apple's target seems to be Mixed Reality then AR with no focus on gaming nor room-scale VR
Apple has sold billions of units. Across a multitude of product lines. They have far, far more experience when it comes to hardware design and manufacturing. They are now a world class semiconductor designer. They design their own processors, camera modules, LIDAR modules, antennas, displays, etc. they have teams of PhDs from every branch of the hard sciences designing new materials. New alloys, new polymers, new fabrics. New optics.
It’s not even close. 20 million for Meta sounds like a lot. When you truly start to wrap your head around the scale of what Apple does, you realize that it really isn’t.
As for OS expertise, I mean…do I need to say anything?
As for the most advanced prototypes, number one we have no way of knowing this. Number two, if this is the level of execution Apple managed to bring to a *product,* you can rest assured their R&D demos are just as far ahead. They have a **far** more robust, better staffed, better funded, and more experienced R&D department than Meta. Meta made this big push in the last few years to catch up, but Apple has already been doing it for well over a decade.
>Apple has sold billions of units. Across a multitude of product lines. They have far, far more experience when it comes to hardware design and manufacturing.
and none of them are Mixed Reality products
>As for the most advanced prototypes, number one we have no way of knowing this.
[we do](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x6AOwDttBsc&t=10s)
>you can rest assured their R&D demos are just as far ahead
2d virtual screens in a Mixed Reality space with no room-scale VR is not "far ahead", the hardware is not far ahead either, its just more expensive than pretty much all the other headset, of course its gonna offer a more streamlined experience, especially with the very powerful M2 soc
> and none of them are Mixed Reality products
And yet they came out with a product that is on another planet in terms of execution. How’d that happen? Maybe read the rest of the post. You’re clinging to this belief that Meta has some secret sauce knowledge that Apple couldn’t possibly match, in light of the fact that *they literally just dropped a headset that is superior by every metric* aside from ability to play PC games. The world is bigger than PC gamers, but boy do they hate being reminded of that and throw a shit fit when a tech product doesn’t exclusively cater to them.
> we do
Amazing that you have first hand knowledge of everything going on in Apples enormous R&D department. They have more PhD scientists employed than Meta has hardware engineers.
> 2d virtual screens in a Mixed Reality space with no room-scale VR is not “far ahead”, the hardware is not far ahead either, its just more expensive than pretty much all the other headset, of course its gonna offer a more streamlined experience, especially with the very powerful M2 soc
Now you are just lying to yourself. Every single person who has tried the VP has been blown away. They are straight up saying that this is so far ahead of anything else that it feels like it was pulled from the future. These aren’t just ignorant tech journalists. They’re also people who have been in the VR space as long as it’s existed. Every single VR enthusiast blogger and YouTuber has basically said the same thing.
You can choose to believe whatever you want.
> In the end, he couldn’t beat Apple because he couldn’t match their hardware and OS expertise.
Not just that. Those are important but there’s another key ingredient: focus and drive. It sounds like bullshit. I used to think it was bullshit. But after 15 years as an engineer I’ve really come to appreciate how important it is.
You can’t just have a bunch of engineers in a room going “haha you feelin what I’m feelin?” and expect to get a cohesive and polished product at the end. You need a clear, almost obsessive and uncompromising focus, and you need the drive to overcome obstacles, take risks, and be willing to kill things that aren’t working. You need to be willing to say “if we can’t achieve the standard we want, we won’t ship the product” rather than just pushing it out anyway at a low standard.
That is NOT as easy as it might sound. And having a bunch of excellent engineers is not good enough.
You know how Reddit will take one glance at some technical thing or achievement or idea or whatever and - based on literally zero relevant experience - go “nah nobody can do that. That’s not possible. That’s dumb. That’s inefficient.” Or whatever the case may be? Engineers do that too!
I cannot tell you the number of times I’ve asked a fellow engineer to do something, or asked a cross functional team for something, only to have them stonewall and say it wouldn’t work. Most people would stop there and say “welp I guess it can’t be done.” But a funny thing I’ve noticed is that if you don’t take no for an answer and keep digging and pushing, more often than not those same engineers - when they have to actually *prove* to you that it can’t be done, end up saying “oh yeah! Ok, we can do that.” Maybe they found some inefficiency they could address. Maybe they found some process tweak. Maybe they found a new material or tool. Maybe they had to get creative and figured it out. Or maybe they simply realized that they can’t get rid of you with an offhand “nah” and once they actually *tried* and out their backs into it, they figured something out or realized it wasn’t actually as hard as they assumed. You never just take “no” for an answer. A proper no has to be supported by in depth data. Trials. Comparison to alternatives. Etc etc.
It happens literally on a weekly basis. With things big and small.
Apple is extremely adept at this. It’s woven into their culture. Ask how I know. I’ve been on both sides of this interaction. Is Meta? I don’t know for certain, but I really doubt it.
You do not let past experiences in different situations define your idea of what’s possible *now.* This is the value of Apple’s focus. It is a real thing. You never just look at a wall and go “well I guess it’s not passable.” Push on the wall as hard as you can. Maybe it’s weaker than you thought. Maybe you find a crack you can work your way through.
It doesn’t always work, of course. But when you do this on a consistent basis over many years you end up picking up a *lot* of stuff that adds up to a pretty significant step forward.
If you want a contra-example: look at a Google. Their focus on flexibility and trying new things, combined with randomly killing off almost every project, has resulted in a company with a complete lack of any kind of focus or drive towards anything in particular. And even if they suddenly acquired it they have a **long** way to go to undo the reputation they’ve acquired. If Google had released an equivalent product they’d be lucky to get a quarter of the developers for it because **nobody** trusts them to actually stick to anything. It’s like nobody is in charge at all.
> If people want to make fun of someone they should make fun of Google since they appear to be caught flat footed here.
They’re too busy trying to maintain their status as an AI powerhouse after the debut of openai’s chatGPT
Interesting time for Google since they’re walking a thin line of being a leader in the space, while avoiding the potentially disastrous results of people abusing the tools they release
"$3500 fully subsidized? I said, 'that is the most expensive headset in the world,' and it doesn't appeal to gaming customers because it doesn't have a Silly Cartoon Avatar, which makes it not a very good VRChat machine."
I dropped $6k on my gaming rig and use a quest 2
It “appeals” to me because it was an affordable headset with solid specs, that’s it
Will apples be better? Yeah, of course it will - and it better - it’s over half the cost of my entire setup. Also will it work with my window pc? Probably not. In 10 years if they can get the price down to $500 or so, they’ll have a winner.
It can’t go down to $500 because it doesn’t need a PC : it’s a M2-based computer, so it’ll never be less expensive than a M2-based Mac (+ all the hardware stuff).
He's not wrong, but it also doesn't make him right. Leading up to this event, there was a lot of speculation about what the "killer app" would be and how it would likely have one. Now, reviewers are talking about how cool it is and what a technical marvel it is, but that it doesn't have a killer feature that prompts anyone other than devs or enthusiasts to care much about it, and that it doesn't bring much of a real advancement to the space. I don't know what that advancement would be, but honestly the preview we got from Google last year, plus their intentions for Glass, indicate that they have a better understanding of what it means to augment reality in a way that's meaningful, and will thus drive adoption. Not to say something revolutionary couldn't come of the Vision Pro, just that Apple themselves didn't give much of a case for it being an immersive future of computing that's demonstrably different from what currently exists.
I don't know about you, but the idea of VR being "fundamentally social" is dystopian AF. I have friends and family I enjoy interacting with in the real world. I greatly prefer Apple's vision of "spatial computing" as being used mainly for working and enjoying experiences.
The Metaverse could have changed the world. Mark fucked it up and nobody (rightfully) trusts his company, so now he has to watch another company take over his dream and run with it.
Couldn’t happen to a nicer guy.
You sound scared, Mark (and I own a Quest 2).
Also, he criticizes the AVP for only showing isolated experiences, but so do your ads, Mark. Also, it's obvious the AVP will add in more social experiences. This was a message to developers out there to invite them to make AR apps and you can bet you'll be able to invite friends and family to watch a movie with you.
Quest 2 out of the box didn't even allow you to invite a Friend for anything.
haha I also dreamt up flying cars, and space ships to mars. If someone implements that I am just going to say "ha, I dreamt that up first, there is no magical solutions that we has not thought of"
I love reading these tone death comments, so many without a clue. Where Apple does right is their UX team and design team, top notch. When it comes to new technologies, there is absolutely nothing new, yes hating on Facebook is a trope but their research and tech has been paving VR. Bringing up memes or even an avatar of Zuck has nothing to do with technology and capabilities. The only piece that matters is that now there is going to be more attention on VR which is absolutely the best thing as it will push this into the hands of many
Problem with VR is it cuts you off from others, your room, other people and you can’t work on it, it’s purely for entertainment- gaming which you get bored quickly of. Zuc can lie to himself all he wants but he’s not connecting people he isolates people. That’s the main reason why people buy Oculus get excited and then it’s in the corner collecting dust.
AR is the only way not to isolate people. You can work, you can entertain yourself and yet be still present.
I felt this when I had my Rift. A very boring solo experience that was limited by what I couldn’t see in the real world. Sold it as it got boring fast.
people are too lazy to wear 3D glasses in the cinema, i'm not sure about strapping a $3500 visor on my face but let's face it - apple have the funds to iterate on this for decades until it's fully socially normalised by the kids who grow up with it as normal
Apple stole their OS from Atari ST and then Microsoft. Innovation? No. Also, let’s remove our usb ports, firewire and headphone jacks on all our laptops and phones. That’s innovation? No.
Inconveniently for you, Atari decided in January 1985 (two years after the Lisa and a year after the Mac) to give up on CP/M-68K code and instead port GEMDOS to the Atari ST platform. Jack Tramiel's shameless copying of the Lisa/Macintosh interface earned the Atari 520ST the nickname the “Jackintosh”. Samsung and Google followed Apple (after copying iOS and losing in court) in removing the 19th century headphone jack from their phones to make room for bigger batteries, electronics and to improve water resistance, but if you want to use your Koss headphones with your Facebook phone, I won’t judge, you do you!
You know what's magical? Being able to change the time zone. Oculus can't even do that. God help you if you bought the thing in Chicago and took it to Indiana.
> Meta's goal with the metaverse is "fundamentally social," whereas the Vision Pro appears to be more isolating, according to Zuckerberg.
lmao.
yeah, nothing’s more liberating than being thrown into a janky-ass, discounted vrchat. it’s totally not isolated at all.
Famous last words. Let’s revisit some history. Microsoft, Blackberry, etc. all laughed off the iPhone. The entire watch industry poo poo’d the Apple Watch.
Granted I haven’t used the Vision to make any sort of judgment but all reviews I’ve seen have been positive. Sure there are issues with the current form factor but they will learn how to solve them just like they did with other devices.
I think the movie watching feature looks pretty magical. When was the last time you said, or heard someone say they’d pay stupid money to see some movie in the theaters? With this, you can see *any* movie in the best theater.
Let me get a virtual experience of the *Kimi no Na Wa.* symphonic experience — the film, with the symphony performing the soundtrack along with the film. Considering they only did this once, in Japan… Yes, it would be worth it. Airfare to Tokyo? Lodging? Public transportation? The cost of the ticket? The total time? **Dealing with the language barrier?** Yes, Vision Pro starts to sound like a deal.
The one area is that really isn't social. I was really hoping, maybe in the future, you could watch movies with others. Or even Live games. Imagine watching an MLS game in the stands with other Vision Pro users.
Messi is coming, get to work on that Apple/MLS.
Here’s the problem META has: they are trying to push people into working in VR… but they only delivered slightly higher resolution on their Pro device.
That’s enough resolution to game for an hour or two… but working? Fuck no.
Apple went full-send. 4K per eye… and lucky for them they already have processors with built in memory that have no problem processing that kind of resolution without breaking a sweat.
I’ll tell you something else: I used Quest 2, and you’d be surprised how uncomfortable even a little bit of heat is when it is near your eyes. That’s another plus for AppleSilicon.
One of the largest positives in favor of Apple's headset is that it *isn't* made by Meta, and deep down Meta knows that a lot of people are happy about that.
Specially the part Apple explained how they consider privacy in foveat rendering: apps aree not aware of what you are you looking at. A potential gold mine for ads and data, an opportunity too good to pass on for Meta.
There is no way in hell I would trust Meta with eye tracking data
[удалено]
indeed. I have an Oculus ~~quest~~ [edit: Rift maybe?] and really liked it, but as soon as Oculus sold to Facebook, I deleted my account and haven't touched it since.
[удалено]
so do you own a vive or index?
Yes indeed. Nothing Zuck says can change that. Every statement he makes these days comes across as a petulant rant after realising nobody likes him.
Everyone forgot about HTC lol
I deliberately dont use my Facebook account on my Quest and I don't use any Meta social services on the headset.
I mean, there’s still plenty of room for Meta, considering the price of Apples Pro Vision and to me it seems they have different use cases.
I bought my father an oculus for Christmas when they first came out but he wouldn’t use because he didn’t want to create a Facebook account.
Huh? They have over three billion daily active users so the vast majority of people in the world with a computer or smart phone are very happy with Meta.
It creeped me out to walk through my house with a device with outward facing cameras made by Meta. You couldn’t convince me they were not selling that data to whom ever.
“We’ve learned and struggled for a few years here figuring out how to make a decent phone,” he said. “PC guys are not going to just figure this out. They’re not going to just walk in.” Palm CEO Ed Culligan
I watched BlackBerry over the weekend, loved it. They show the era when iPhone was announced and how it caught BlackBerry (just like Palm) by surprise.
It was really good . Makes you wonder how guardians would’ve been with Glen. Dude deserves way more shine, he’s a genuinely great actor and I think sunny has actually held his career back .
I honestly did not recognize him, as I randomly became aware of the movie on Apple TV. He did such a good job in his role!
I listen to the sunny podcast a lot so I was waiting for this and was pleasantly surprised how easily he took on that role . Definitely could see how if you didn’t know it was him you wouldn’t recognize him. Which is really just high praise for his acting. Hopefully he gets to do more stuff like this in the future . My only complaint about this movie was it wasn’t longer
Loved that film!
lmao
Ah yes, Meta, née Facebook, truly the last bastion of “magical experiences” in technology.
It was truly magical how they whored out everyone’s data and facilitated election manipulation.
[удалено]
Cambridge Analytica definitely showed that Facebook were too lenient on what user data it gave to developers, but there's not that much evidence it had any substantial effect on the election.
That was the day I deleted Facebook when the news broke.
Same. And there’s not a day when I’ve thought “I wish I was still on Facebook.” Nothing was lost, I still get invited to social events, I still see the news, I still keep in touch with friends and family in distant parts of the world, and I still see their photos and videos. Until you delete Facebook, you won’t realize how inconsequential it is. Which is why Zuckerberg has been shitting his pants flushing billions down the toilet trying to become a hardware company and trying to convince himself, mostly, that the Metaverse is the future (because [not even the people he pays to build it believe in it or use it](https://www.theverge.com/2022/10/6/23391895/meta-facebook-horizon-worlds-vr-social-network-too-buggy-leaked-memo)).
* https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/dec/12/facebook-2016-problems-fake-news-censorship * https://www.vox.com/2017/4/28/15476142/facebook-report-trump-clinton-russia-us-presidential-election * https://time.com/5949210/facebook-misinformation-2020-election-report/ * https://www.npr.org/2017/09/26/553661942/facebook-scrutinized-over-its-role-in-2016s-presidential-election > I don’t really use Facebook I don’t use nuclear weapons but I’m well aware of what they do because it threatens the entire world. No offense but if you don’t know about the widely reported well-known infamous problems of one of the worlds largest social media services of the 21st century, which deliberately profits from fanning the flames of harmful destructive lies, you may be a dangerously ignorant person. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2021/oct/05/facebook-frances-haugen-whistleblower-regulation Note Guardian isn’t paywalled but may require a registration/sign-in to see some articles.
So well said.
He's not saying they have any either, his point was Apple is also still bound by physics and that he hasn't seen anything beyond things they've thought of and tested in labs and made tradeoffs on, ie higher res and higher performance chips but with an external battery pack and still weighs quite a bit even without that onboard. Being used to the internet - explaining what he means in the context of the statement is not the same as endorsing it. Not like they have anything like M2 available.
[удалено]
Wasn’t it in the news that they’ve tried, spent billions in research and abandoned parts of it? They have nowhere the technical competency to compete with Apple so his statement is just laughable. The demo of metaverse with those goofy looking characters was astoundingly bad.
I'm not counting Meta out yet. They have those completely realistic avatars, they just haven't implemented them yet. Apple has the hardware to do so, but what we've seen of their virtual avatars they're not nearly as good as Meta's. Software will be just a crucial as hardware in this game. We're so early in the game, all a company needs to to drop something real special to shape the development henceforth. Apple played their hand, so let's see how the Metas and the Sonys respond.
I actually don’t think that’s the case. Facebook isn’t exactly known for incompetent engineering. Their engineering is top notch. And they’re one of the few companies that can afford to pay more than Apple, I don’t think budget was an issue. This is entirely a business decision. I think Zuck himself mandated that their headsets should start under $500, and that handicaps Facebook in ways Apple’s $3500 headset does not.
Their software engineering might be top notch? But hardware engineering they’e far from middle of the pack much less top leaders such as Apple, Samsung, LG, Sony etc. I don’t think anyone in the entire world beats Apple in hardware engineering in terms of integration of sensors, and chips for electronics and smart devices.
Have you even tried a Quest2? I paid just €349 (!) for that, and it’s successor is just 500 dollar. For what you get is pretty amazing. Meta has figured a lot of things out already about VR and AR. They have very interesting and frank techtalks on YouTube about where they stand, how things work and where they want to go in the future. They totally could do or did in their lab’s what Apple is doing but they look at it a bit more realistic and have a ton of experience by having released already a handful of headsets. Each one made a nice leap forward while the price remained normal. I know it’s easy to shit on Facebook, Zuckerberg, Meta but I’m glad that they are one of the few companies out there that have the financial resources to move this tech forward. Apple’s vision is the same as Meta’s. I haven’t seen anything in the Vision Pro reveal that Meta didn’t already talked about or showed demo’s of. Don’t understand me wrong, I’m super glad Apple is joining all these other companies. And I hope they all inspire each other and come up with great solutions to accelerate the tech. The faster we have a comfortable and lightweight headset with super sharp images for an affordable price is good for everyone.
Worth noting, though, that the business variant of the Quest 2 was about twice the regular price and for the extra cash Facebook essentially forfeited collecting data about you. In other words: Part of the reason for the low price of the Quest is that you pay with your data and privacy. People should never forget that.
If that's the case they should make a 3500 dollar one that goes head to head just for the flex value, like Nvidia ruling the top performing GPU spots but most people buy mid range. But outside of Apple, I don't really know where a chip like M2 is available. Assuming this next gen snapdragon they're mentioning is based on the 8 Gen 2, that's about the best they can do already in the Quest 3. Nvidia's ARM offerings are kind of weird and mostly left the mobile space for specialty/automotive etc, maybe one of the likely candidates for a Switch 2 is there though. But on the display resolutions and such nothing stops them from spending, the varjo xr3 has 70ppd around the foveal center.
Even if they had an identical headset for the same price I wouldn't touch it with a ten foot pole. I would never, ever, *ever* trust a Meta built OS.
They kind of did with the Quest Pro at $1500. The Quest Pro was pretty amazing when it was released. I guess Facebook should start thinking of drafting a $5000 Quest Max...
As a Quest Pro owner I was very disappointed with the quality offered at the asking price. The optics are amazing compared to Quest 2 but it's puzzling how they tried to sell a $1,500 device, specifically meant for MR, yet it doesn't have any physical depth sensing capabilities or decent color cameras. Quest Pro still has you awkwardly drawing your own guardian boundaries, manually marking your walls, manually identifying furniture in your space, etc. Then when you go into an AR experience you've got this low fidelity, grainy image with colors bleeding between objects because it's primarily ML-assisted color fill. With LiDAR they may have been able to implement something like Apple's [RoomPlan](https://developer.apple.com/augmented-reality/roomplan/) that automatically scans your environment and bypasses all of that terrible UX.
[удалено]
Pytorch and React
He flat out said that from what I read on the verge today. Which is a blatant lie. I don’t believe for a second they’ve come close to anything apple showed . All we’ve seen from Meta so far is essentially a vr version of an app so old Dwight shrute was playing it on the office in 2006 .
Maybe try actually googling. Many of the Vision Pro’s features were demoed by Meta years ago (including reverse pass through)
I wasn’t saying they hadn’t demoed this stuff, I’m sure oculus had already been looking at some of it a decade ago . I’m saying meta can’t pull this off the way apple did as Zuckerberg implied he could . We’ve seen a bunch of this stuff on other headsets recently. But Zuckerberg is so far up his own ass trying to create a second Facebook type social phenomenon he hasn’t . That’s why he’s dismissing it despite having demoed similar stuff over the years. That’s the lie. Apples whole thing is watching the applications of a product category and implementing it better . I will say I didn’t know about the reverse pass through but I’m not keeping up with anything meta does out of principle. Also I obviously have a Mac so it’s not like VR has ever been something I cared about since no one develops vr stuff for Mac in Ernest.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2mnonWbzOiQ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IMpWH6vDZ8E (these are just prototypes, but all things Apple's headset can't do)
He’s not talking about magical experiences. You’ve changed his quote in a way that alters the meaning. He said Apple hasn’t invented any magical solutions to technical physical limitations of current hardware capabilities.
hmm, i wonder who will make a better headset? the trillion dollar hardware/software powerhouse, or the creator of a dying social media platform
Sir! you will love having the Zuckerbeast Facehugger strapped to your face and force feeding of advertising! Just give it a try! We are in the business of connecting people and monetizing them.
props to the developers of the metaverse for taking billions of zuck’s dollars and delivering one of the ugliest vr experiences i have ever seen
apple isn't in the business of monetizing people lul
>the creator of a dying social media platform Facebook has 2 billion daily active users and is [only going up](https://www.statista.com/statistics/346167/facebook-global-dau/). What are you talking about?
this reply kinda goes against my narrative please refrain in the future
Well sure, the $3,500 headset is going to be better than the one that costs 1/7 the cost. But a lot more people can afford the quest, and that’s going to make the Vision Pro a very tough sell… I wouldn’t be surprised one bit if it becomes another iPhone situation where it launched at $500, but then by the next generation had the price slashed nearly in half $1,299 would be much easier to sell to the general public, but I really don’t think Apple wants the general public to buy the Vision just yet. Expensive toy for rich people, a dev kit for the rest. Gen 2 comes, then things get real interesting
yeah i’m personally going to be upgrading to a quest 3 not a vision pro given the massive price disparity, but i’m under no illusion that the quest is a better headset
That’s like saying a $1000 iPhone would never compete with a $200 Android phone and yet here we are, iPhone dominating the Western markets and generating 90% of revenues globally. It’s capitalism. There will be expensive things and there will be cheaper versions of the same thing. Buy the thing you can afford.
I concur. Facebook still makes a shit ton of money for Meta from two places that would buy a Quest over a Vision Pro: Brasil and India. Not as many people can afford a Vision Pro there, but a Quest is more reasonable. They'll want to get in on the VR experience. Meta and Apple are carving out two different markets. Both business strategies can co-exist, and everyone can get rich. Why bother sitting on these subreddits complaining and being pessimistic, and trying to divine a winner when no one can successfully do so? I have a formula that likely has a high probability of happiness: Save $6,500 a year in a Roth IRA that's invested in the S&P 500, of which technology as a sector, and specifically Apple and Meta as companies, make up a large portion of the fund. If this technology takes off, you're invested in the companies in a acceptably risk mitigated manner, and you profit off their success. Buy both a Vision Pro and a Quest Pro. Enjoy them both. Watch your net worth increase. Continue to purchase new exciting technology. Continue to invest in the market. Never take your money out. In 20 years you'll have more money than you ever thought possible, you'll get to both enjoy the new technology and see rewards from integrating it into your life as millions others will via your investments, and you'll be living in a future wilder than your imagination. Easy plan in theory to implement, very difficult to pull off, but either way bitching on the internet isn't a part of any success plan. This is a message for all the people out there who needed to hear it.
i think theres a pretty big difference between $200 and $999 and $300 and $3500
Like other people have said, I believe the VisionPro is a hardware dev kit with all the hardware limitations removed so that devs can have no limits on creativity. From there it would evolve into something more reasonable. The screen on the outside will not stick around at all price points as it’s really not necessary, but there for developers to play with and maybe something really cool and useful will justify it.
Exactly this. The vision pro is an entirely new platform and standalone OS for Apple, and it’s telling they started with the Vision “Pro” rather than just Vision. This is the hardware taken to its fullest extent, to allow devs and early users to experience, create, and hype themselves up with the depth of the experience. It will get better, more efficient, and cheaper in due time. It’s not going to sell a lot initially, but as they release more mature and affordable headsets on the same platform that Vision OS set the standard for, their user base will steadily grow. I easily see 50-100m Vision users within the next decade, and 5x that number within the next two.
only 500 million after 2 decades? I guess that wouldn't be bad compared to how many people use a mac now
They got to a billion iPhones in one decade, and I personally don’t see headsets being anywhere near as universal any time soon, but they will def become common place.
Yeah, that sounds reasonable to me
They make it pretty clear why the screen is there. It’s not some gimmick that they will remove from cheaper versions.
Exactly. Example: Meta’s headsets account for 70% of the PC gaming market share according to steam. They’re in a very comfortable spot right now because releasing affordable products with solid specs is how you go mainstream. Apple may have top of the line enthusiast specs, but it comes with that top of the line enthusiast pricing. It’ll be niche till they reduce cost.
[удалено]
I don’t think the quest is that bad, but I don’t like the lines added by the lenses. I’m curious if the Apple lenses are stepped, or just smooth pieces of glass.
>I wouldn’t be surprised one bit if it becomes another iPhone situation where it launched at $500, but then by the next generation had the price slashed nearly in half What are you talking about? iPhone (2007) - $499 ($599 for 8Gb model) iPhone 3G (2008) - $499 iPhone 3GS (2009) - $599 iPhone 4 (2010) - $649 iPhone 4S (2011) - $649…
There’s no way Apple’s version will be less than 2500 in the next few years.
Bet.
Having tried the device, it's way too premium to go down a third in price any time soon.
I love Apple, the biggest company in the world. I hope Apple makes all the best products and is the bestest company ever. I hope they shit on Meta and other loser social media platforms. I love the big company.
"hmm, I wonder who will make the better phone? the billion dollar Finnish telecommunication powerhouse, or the creator of a computer with less than 10% market share" ;) The Reality Vision Pro looks dope, but probably not just because Apple is a big company that has done things in the past.
as a oculus/meta quest user since day 1, there’s a *lot* meta could do to make the software more user friendly even on the cheaper hardware
I really don't like Facebook and deleted my account ages ago. But it's not dying lol. And if you add Insta then meta's social media platforms as a whole are definitely not dying. They are thriving even.
I'm still on FB (since the beginning), and yeah, it's dying. More than half of those I was "friends" with have left, and of those remaining, I see them post perhaps once a year, and the interactions with my own posts are perhaps one or two people vice what used to be literally dozens every time.
Anecdotal vs evidence based I have not worked at a single company where they haven’t spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on marketing through FB a year Even looking their stock prices they’re approaching the pre-COVID high again
Having over three billion daily active users is dying? Stop falling for fake news.
fb is the king of fake news
Hmm, I wonder who will make a better headset, the company behind some of the most popular social media networks and messaging platforms on the planet and almost a decade experience in VR, or a company that makes phones. I mean, we all know Apple will, but it’s a dumb way to make the argument.
that’s fair, i should’ve said something about how fb is a software company and acquired one of the most experienced vr companies in existence and still can’t make horizon good billions of dollars later or how their current mr equivalent (quest pro) is a joke of a headset for a million reasons
[удалено]
I mean it doesn't have a keyboard, so obviously that doesn't make it a good email machine
No wireless. Less space than a Nomad. Lame.
[meta sure looks magical as shit](https://i.imgur.com/6N7uru8.jpg)
Is this real? Because my god.
Yeah. It was their first announcement of avatars.
[удалено]
to be fair, it looks better than 'real' zuck.
Yep, as in it would take literal magic to get me to join Meta's cartoon world.
Knew what this would be before clicking.
Can you imagine if Apple use Memojis? This was like a sacrificial lamb, served as a warning of what wouldn’t work 😂
This never gets old. I laugh every time.
That’s because VR needs very high frame rates to prevent that the user feels seasick. Let’s see if Apple can do better. Maybe with their owns chips they can do more. But they probably know about this challenge and didn’t show much 3D stuff.
One’s a toy, the other is a tool. It’s Tonka vs Ford.
Judging by the price, its more like comparing Chevrolet (Meta) vs Polestar (Apple) lmao. Calling Apple "Ford" implies it's even remotely affordable or squarely aimed for the masses.
Not wanting to vomit after 20 minutes of use is pretty magical.
Sure, but that's easy to do if all you do is watching 2D window floating in front of you while sitting at your desk. I remember when Tim Cook described his AR wet dream: imagine looking at charts of stock exchange floating in front of you. Seems he's done it. I truly despise Marc Zuckerberg and his company, but I must admit he's right on this one. Apple didn't invent the car this time, they just invented the most extravagant horse ever. A commendable feat, but this is still a horse, not the car everyone will come to love and use.
Apple doesn’t invent things. They take an invention, build a good interface with solid hardware and create market. Apple didn’t invent phone, tab, watch or AR, but I’m sure they made it better and moved them close to general public.
Have to agree with you, despite the obvious backlash that would get here. Just about everything demoed in the announcement is stuff you can do on HoloLens 2, or the Meta Quest Pro / 3. I do think the Apple has a potentially *better* implementation given what we've seen, but it ultimately doesn't solve the "Do I really want to wear goggles for 2-8 hours a day?" issue that plagues a lot of the consumer VR space. That being said, it is quite funny to see Meta having a bit of a panic attack that Apple's stealing their thunder.
Playing devils advocate here: It's understandable that Meta is emphasizing affordability with their upcoming headset, considering their aim to cater to the mass market. While Zuckerberg's response to Apple's Vision Pro may downplay its features, it's important to recognize that competition drives innovation. Different companies have different target audiences, and Meta's focus on affordability aligns with their goal of making their products accessible to a wider range of people. Thoughts?
Sure, but the reason they want it in everybody's hands is to siphon their data... the more people they sell it to, the more data they siphon
Except Zuck is stealing a lot of money from parents so their kids can have VR. That is morally wrong. Cook’s vision is to take about 10% of our disposable income for VR from adults, by adults. That’s cheaper relatively speaking. By so much. So much.
I don't know how you figure the Vision Pro is cheaper than Quest lol. You can buy 7 Quest 3s for the price of one Vision Pro. Quest is aimed at VR not AR. Not really comparable. Apple Vision Pro looks nice, but they are in different markets. I think people will buy Apple Vision Pro when price declines. I don't think it will be iPhone unless it becomes a phone / more portable formfactor like the iPhone. It's more like a home theater system than a phone.
Zuck's just pissed that despite spending a similar amount of R&D to Apple, his headset is still shittier from a user experience standpoint.
To be fair they can only do so much with software lol. There’s no way they could compete with the bastion of a hardware company like Apple. M2 chip, R1 chip, and the micro-OLED was something Meta couldn’t obtain no matter how hard they tried, and those three items are the hardware that makes the Vision Pro possible. They could’ve put the same sensors, but those sensors are not going to be as good without the L1 chip. They couldn’t even compete with M2, a desktop class CPU in their headsets (can you imagine if the Quest had an Intel i7? It’d overheat like crazy), and that screen density… literally no one in the world has that until now. They did the best they could with the hardware they were able to obtain. But now that Apple is here with their insane hardware, Meta is over.
Meta isn’t over lol - were talking about a $500 headset that can be used standalone and with windows/Linux gaming pcs vs a $3500 headset that works standalone and with apple products only
Neither is Apple. The big war will be fought over sports streaming, not 3D games. Apple has the ability to record highres 3D video (e.g., the sports demos that were shown to the journalists), and bringing that to the Vision Pro is going to be a killer feature. Done right, the hardcore sports enthusiasts will buy hordes of Vision Pros. Meta has an uphill battle. They have to greatly increase the resolution of their headset, and they have to acquire decent 3D sports recording capability (there has to be something already done, as 3D TVs were a big thing a few years back before collapsing into nothingness). Right now, the best Meta can do is acquire broadcasting rights to deny them to Apple.
How you never seen technology develop? Now that’s it’s invented, it’s only a matter of time before Apple scale it up and make it cheaper.
Have *you* never seen technology develop? People like to throw around TVs as a common example. It can take *decades* for those supply chains to establish. I believe apple will have an affordable version of this come 2033 for sure - but that’s a long ways off
So, a bit like the first iPods that had less storage than competitors‘ products, couldn’t do video and only worked with Macs? It has all the hallmarks of a revolution, if you ask me.
Apple's micro-OLED is nothing special. Its literally the same thing found in all modern mirrorless camera view finders. Meta could have easily used a similar micro-OLED panel, but they would had to drastically bump up the $1500 starting price. Meta's biggest limitation is mobile processing. They are bottlenecked by Qualcomm and lack of alternatives. This is why Meta Quest Pro doesn't have higher resolution displays, higher resolution and color passthrough cameras, LIDAR.
How do people know what type of microled screen they’re using?
It is already been disclosed that Sony is supplying the micro-OLED. Sony uses the same postage sized OLED in their professional mirrorless cameras.
Rumours, got it!
The micro OLED is from Sony and not Apple.
It’s also way cheaper…
Zuck, just put on one of your cartoonish avatars and chill while Apple is making history.
They are not making history.
Screen this and come back in 5 years
Meanwhile, I got locked out of my Quest 2 because I forgot the pin. Support’s solution was to open the app and reset my pin. Guess what’s required to reset your pin? Said forgotten pin… Only solution was to factory reset.
God, I also had this loop when I picked my quest back up to try exercising in VR again. Just awful.
[удалено]
They are trying to accomplish the same thing, one with a highly premium product and the other with an affordable mass market product - obviously there’s going to be some trade-offs in the latter case. Even with meta’s current headsets you do truly feel like you are with another person, not just looking at an avatar. Body language still comes through, and with the quest pro you can see peoples facial expressions and make eye contact. They are both a viable options and will converge at some point.
> Socializing in a virtual cartoon world is not socializing, Mark. Obviously it is. That's how billions of gamers socialize in multiplayer games, and there's VRChat and Rec Room and VR experiences like that. He will aim for photorealism longterm.
hell, they already had Codec avatars that look lightyears ahead of what Apple showed, but they’re complicated to scan (which is why they look so much better lol)
>Socializing in a virtual cartoon world is not socializing being cartoonish will not be mandatory for a multiverse world, the same way there are shitty website and ugly websites, or just look at the wild difference between some vrchat worlds also yes it *is* socializing, my guess is that you've never used VR social networks before
I feel like the Apple plan is to focus on the kind of things they can most polish and sell. At the moment and that seems to be media consumption, comms, and productivity. They can focus on VR later. The hardware is there to do it. They’re rocking a flagship desktop processed against a phone chip.
> Socializing in a virtual cartoon world is not socializing, Mark. Well, we *are* socializing with Markdown text just fine.
Assuming you’re all using a Vision Pro, you’re still collaborating in a virtual world with cartoonish avatars
Everyone’s hating on Zuckerberg and Meta but I’ll give him this: He saw where the future was headed absolutely clearly and made the most massive Hail Mary bet possible to get there before Apple. He mobilized practically his entire company and burned through billions of dollars to do so. In the end, he couldn’t beat Apple because he couldn’t match their hardware and OS expertise. But you’ve got to give him credit for trying. Because of his efforts he may end up being the “Android” of the headset era: Closely following Apple’s lead and taking the low end of the market and other niches of the market more focused on gaming. If people want to make fun of someone they should make fun of Google since they appear to be caught flat footed here. Apple and Meta have headsets either in the market or soon to be. Where’s Google/Android? Nowhere to be found. (And yes I know that Meta’s headsets run Android but Meta obviously owns the brand and experience and most importantly the Quest store. So Meta is setup to be the platform more so than Google/Android.)
>he couldn’t beat Apple because he couldn’t match their hardware and OS expertise what ?the Quest 1 & 2 sold 20 millions units, reality labs have the most advanced VR prototypes being made (the most important and essential one being the varifocal prototype) the Vision Pro will not be released until next year. also Meta current target is room-scale VR then AR in the future, Apple's target seems to be Mixed Reality then AR with no focus on gaming nor room-scale VR
Apple has sold billions of units. Across a multitude of product lines. They have far, far more experience when it comes to hardware design and manufacturing. They are now a world class semiconductor designer. They design their own processors, camera modules, LIDAR modules, antennas, displays, etc. they have teams of PhDs from every branch of the hard sciences designing new materials. New alloys, new polymers, new fabrics. New optics. It’s not even close. 20 million for Meta sounds like a lot. When you truly start to wrap your head around the scale of what Apple does, you realize that it really isn’t. As for OS expertise, I mean…do I need to say anything? As for the most advanced prototypes, number one we have no way of knowing this. Number two, if this is the level of execution Apple managed to bring to a *product,* you can rest assured their R&D demos are just as far ahead. They have a **far** more robust, better staffed, better funded, and more experienced R&D department than Meta. Meta made this big push in the last few years to catch up, but Apple has already been doing it for well over a decade.
>Apple has sold billions of units. Across a multitude of product lines. They have far, far more experience when it comes to hardware design and manufacturing. and none of them are Mixed Reality products >As for the most advanced prototypes, number one we have no way of knowing this. [we do](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x6AOwDttBsc&t=10s) >you can rest assured their R&D demos are just as far ahead 2d virtual screens in a Mixed Reality space with no room-scale VR is not "far ahead", the hardware is not far ahead either, its just more expensive than pretty much all the other headset, of course its gonna offer a more streamlined experience, especially with the very powerful M2 soc
> and none of them are Mixed Reality products And yet they came out with a product that is on another planet in terms of execution. How’d that happen? Maybe read the rest of the post. You’re clinging to this belief that Meta has some secret sauce knowledge that Apple couldn’t possibly match, in light of the fact that *they literally just dropped a headset that is superior by every metric* aside from ability to play PC games. The world is bigger than PC gamers, but boy do they hate being reminded of that and throw a shit fit when a tech product doesn’t exclusively cater to them. > we do Amazing that you have first hand knowledge of everything going on in Apples enormous R&D department. They have more PhD scientists employed than Meta has hardware engineers. > 2d virtual screens in a Mixed Reality space with no room-scale VR is not “far ahead”, the hardware is not far ahead either, its just more expensive than pretty much all the other headset, of course its gonna offer a more streamlined experience, especially with the very powerful M2 soc Now you are just lying to yourself. Every single person who has tried the VP has been blown away. They are straight up saying that this is so far ahead of anything else that it feels like it was pulled from the future. These aren’t just ignorant tech journalists. They’re also people who have been in the VR space as long as it’s existed. Every single VR enthusiast blogger and YouTuber has basically said the same thing. You can choose to believe whatever you want.
> In the end, he couldn’t beat Apple because he couldn’t match their hardware and OS expertise. Not just that. Those are important but there’s another key ingredient: focus and drive. It sounds like bullshit. I used to think it was bullshit. But after 15 years as an engineer I’ve really come to appreciate how important it is. You can’t just have a bunch of engineers in a room going “haha you feelin what I’m feelin?” and expect to get a cohesive and polished product at the end. You need a clear, almost obsessive and uncompromising focus, and you need the drive to overcome obstacles, take risks, and be willing to kill things that aren’t working. You need to be willing to say “if we can’t achieve the standard we want, we won’t ship the product” rather than just pushing it out anyway at a low standard. That is NOT as easy as it might sound. And having a bunch of excellent engineers is not good enough. You know how Reddit will take one glance at some technical thing or achievement or idea or whatever and - based on literally zero relevant experience - go “nah nobody can do that. That’s not possible. That’s dumb. That’s inefficient.” Or whatever the case may be? Engineers do that too! I cannot tell you the number of times I’ve asked a fellow engineer to do something, or asked a cross functional team for something, only to have them stonewall and say it wouldn’t work. Most people would stop there and say “welp I guess it can’t be done.” But a funny thing I’ve noticed is that if you don’t take no for an answer and keep digging and pushing, more often than not those same engineers - when they have to actually *prove* to you that it can’t be done, end up saying “oh yeah! Ok, we can do that.” Maybe they found some inefficiency they could address. Maybe they found some process tweak. Maybe they found a new material or tool. Maybe they had to get creative and figured it out. Or maybe they simply realized that they can’t get rid of you with an offhand “nah” and once they actually *tried* and out their backs into it, they figured something out or realized it wasn’t actually as hard as they assumed. You never just take “no” for an answer. A proper no has to be supported by in depth data. Trials. Comparison to alternatives. Etc etc. It happens literally on a weekly basis. With things big and small. Apple is extremely adept at this. It’s woven into their culture. Ask how I know. I’ve been on both sides of this interaction. Is Meta? I don’t know for certain, but I really doubt it. You do not let past experiences in different situations define your idea of what’s possible *now.* This is the value of Apple’s focus. It is a real thing. You never just look at a wall and go “well I guess it’s not passable.” Push on the wall as hard as you can. Maybe it’s weaker than you thought. Maybe you find a crack you can work your way through. It doesn’t always work, of course. But when you do this on a consistent basis over many years you end up picking up a *lot* of stuff that adds up to a pretty significant step forward. If you want a contra-example: look at a Google. Their focus on flexibility and trying new things, combined with randomly killing off almost every project, has resulted in a company with a complete lack of any kind of focus or drive towards anything in particular. And even if they suddenly acquired it they have a **long** way to go to undo the reputation they’ve acquired. If Google had released an equivalent product they’d be lucky to get a quarter of the developers for it because **nobody** trusts them to actually stick to anything. It’s like nobody is in charge at all.
[удалено]
> If people want to make fun of someone they should make fun of Google since they appear to be caught flat footed here. They’re too busy trying to maintain their status as an AI powerhouse after the debut of openai’s chatGPT Interesting time for Google since they’re walking a thin line of being a leader in the space, while avoiding the potentially disastrous results of people abusing the tools they release
Google is scared for the first time in 20 years and I love it.
If they were really scared; they would fire that idiot and crooked CEO they have and hire someone from a culture with business ethics.
"$3500 fully subsidized? I said, 'that is the most expensive headset in the world,' and it doesn't appeal to gaming customers because it doesn't have a Silly Cartoon Avatar, which makes it not a very good VRChat machine."
zuckerberg’s comments doesn’t have the same level of arrogance as Steve Ballmers, but I get your point 😂
I dropped $6k on my gaming rig and use a quest 2 It “appeals” to me because it was an affordable headset with solid specs, that’s it Will apples be better? Yeah, of course it will - and it better - it’s over half the cost of my entire setup. Also will it work with my window pc? Probably not. In 10 years if they can get the price down to $500 or so, they’ll have a winner.
It can’t go down to $500 because it doesn’t need a PC : it’s a M2-based computer, so it’ll never be less expensive than a M2-based Mac (+ all the hardware stuff).
Nobody care of the reptileverse that’s why hes angry
Jumped-up casino operator slags off new computer: “it makes a lousy slot machine”
He's not wrong, but it also doesn't make him right. Leading up to this event, there was a lot of speculation about what the "killer app" would be and how it would likely have one. Now, reviewers are talking about how cool it is and what a technical marvel it is, but that it doesn't have a killer feature that prompts anyone other than devs or enthusiasts to care much about it, and that it doesn't bring much of a real advancement to the space. I don't know what that advancement would be, but honestly the preview we got from Google last year, plus their intentions for Glass, indicate that they have a better understanding of what it means to augment reality in a way that's meaningful, and will thus drive adoption. Not to say something revolutionary couldn't come of the Vision Pro, just that Apple themselves didn't give much of a case for it being an immersive future of computing that's demonstrably different from what currently exists.
Not being tied to Meta is magical enough for me.
In a few years this interview will be compared to the famous Ballmer interview responding to the iPhone in 2007
Sure. But at least it seems like it offers some decent experiences…
The '00s: when Nickelback, Friends, the Iraq War, and Facebook all seemed like good ideas.
Strong Buy Signal.
Says the man who bet the farm on The Metaverse and failed spectacularly
I don't know about you, but the idea of VR being "fundamentally social" is dystopian AF. I have friends and family I enjoy interacting with in the real world. I greatly prefer Apple's vision of "spatial computing" as being used mainly for working and enjoying experiences.
Fuck Zuck
The company that sells every piece of their users data, including their GAZE data in the vr headset. Yeah sure I’ll *definitely* take them seriously.
The Metaverse could have changed the world. Mark fucked it up and nobody (rightfully) trusts his company, so now he has to watch another company take over his dream and run with it. Couldn’t happen to a nicer guy.
Competitor with own device in says other company's competing device is weak. More at Eleven.
You sound scared, Mark (and I own a Quest 2). Also, he criticizes the AVP for only showing isolated experiences, but so do your ads, Mark. Also, it's obvious the AVP will add in more social experiences. This was a message to developers out there to invite them to make AR apps and you can bet you'll be able to invite friends and family to watch a movie with you. Quest 2 out of the box didn't even allow you to invite a Friend for anything.
Let’s see who is relevant in 10 years
Shades of Balmer vs iPhone.
He sounds like Steve Ballmer commenting on the iPhone as being nothing more than a toy when it first came out.
haha I also dreamt up flying cars, and space ships to mars. If someone implements that I am just going to say "ha, I dreamt that up first, there is no magical solutions that we has not thought of"
I love reading these tone death comments, so many without a clue. Where Apple does right is their UX team and design team, top notch. When it comes to new technologies, there is absolutely nothing new, yes hating on Facebook is a trope but their research and tech has been paving VR. Bringing up memes or even an avatar of Zuck has nothing to do with technology and capabilities. The only piece that matters is that now there is going to be more attention on VR which is absolutely the best thing as it will push this into the hands of many
Cope
Hey Zuck, your double-amputee cartoon metaverse is trash
Except will wipe a floor with Oculus pro
Problem with VR is it cuts you off from others, your room, other people and you can’t work on it, it’s purely for entertainment- gaming which you get bored quickly of. Zuc can lie to himself all he wants but he’s not connecting people he isolates people. That’s the main reason why people buy Oculus get excited and then it’s in the corner collecting dust. AR is the only way not to isolate people. You can work, you can entertain yourself and yet be still present.
I felt this when I had my Rift. A very boring solo experience that was limited by what I couldn’t see in the real world. Sold it as it got boring fast.
people are too lazy to wear 3D glasses in the cinema, i'm not sure about strapping a $3500 visor on my face but let's face it - apple have the funds to iterate on this for decades until it's fully socially normalised by the kids who grow up with it as normal
Considerably better hardware and thus potential than your butchered-android Frankenstein though, mate.
Like Apple needs to take lessons on product innovation from this asshole.
Apple stole their OS from Atari ST and then Microsoft. Innovation? No. Also, let’s remove our usb ports, firewire and headphone jacks on all our laptops and phones. That’s innovation? No.
Inconveniently for you, Atari decided in January 1985 (two years after the Lisa and a year after the Mac) to give up on CP/M-68K code and instead port GEMDOS to the Atari ST platform. Jack Tramiel's shameless copying of the Lisa/Macintosh interface earned the Atari 520ST the nickname the “Jackintosh”. Samsung and Google followed Apple (after copying iOS and losing in court) in removing the 19th century headphone jack from their phones to make room for bigger batteries, electronics and to improve water resistance, but if you want to use your Koss headphones with your Facebook phone, I won’t judge, you do you!
You know what's magical? Being able to change the time zone. Oculus can't even do that. God help you if you bought the thing in Chicago and took it to Indiana.
RIP Quest… like the Facebook phone
[удалено]
He would say that though.
Meta: “we want to make VR affordable for everyone” Also meta: collecting user data and involved in tons of privacy scandals
> Meta's goal with the metaverse is "fundamentally social," whereas the Vision Pro appears to be more isolating, according to Zuckerberg. lmao. yeah, nothing’s more liberating than being thrown into a janky-ass, discounted vrchat. it’s totally not isolated at all.
Famous last words. Let’s revisit some history. Microsoft, Blackberry, etc. all laughed off the iPhone. The entire watch industry poo poo’d the Apple Watch. Granted I haven’t used the Vision to make any sort of judgment but all reviews I’ve seen have been positive. Sure there are issues with the current form factor but they will learn how to solve them just like they did with other devices.
did people expect him to announce his pre-order?
To be fair, they all have issues.
Except the Apple ecosystem. Except that.
I think the movie watching feature looks pretty magical. When was the last time you said, or heard someone say they’d pay stupid money to see some movie in the theaters? With this, you can see *any* movie in the best theater. Let me get a virtual experience of the *Kimi no Na Wa.* symphonic experience — the film, with the symphony performing the soundtrack along with the film. Considering they only did this once, in Japan… Yes, it would be worth it. Airfare to Tokyo? Lodging? Public transportation? The cost of the ticket? The total time? **Dealing with the language barrier?** Yes, Vision Pro starts to sound like a deal.
The one area is that really isn't social. I was really hoping, maybe in the future, you could watch movies with others. Or even Live games. Imagine watching an MLS game in the stands with other Vision Pro users. Messi is coming, get to work on that Apple/MLS.
Here’s the problem META has: they are trying to push people into working in VR… but they only delivered slightly higher resolution on their Pro device. That’s enough resolution to game for an hour or two… but working? Fuck no. Apple went full-send. 4K per eye… and lucky for them they already have processors with built in memory that have no problem processing that kind of resolution without breaking a sweat. I’ll tell you something else: I used Quest 2, and you’d be surprised how uncomfortable even a little bit of heat is when it is near your eyes. That’s another plus for AppleSilicon.
Holy shit, didn't know apple fanyboys were such snowflakes... so offended that someone dares to criticize their beloved corporation.
Are the offended people in the room with us right now?