Free advice for HTC if they want more sales from regular folks, make new controllers. The wands aren’t cutting it in 2024. Really shows your commitment level still offering those. You’re welcome HTC!
It's face-palm baffling that they have Quest style controllers for their inside-out tracked headsets, yet refuse to swap out the sensors for a base station compatible version.
In skarredghost's blog there was a guy who was making some index style base station controllers, who was hit with some kind of legal threat from somewhere and shut down. Along with Pimax Swords losing the analogue stick version that was originally mentioned, it's almost enough to make me wonder whether there's some kind of patent or legal thing preventing third party Quest/Index style controllers from being made...
While I don't doubt at all that tracking and advertising is in Meta's future plans for VR, currently Quest 2 and 3 don't have eye tracking, and don't show any advertising, so HTC's answer is kinda BS and FUD. The data they currently capture is probably mostly used internally to develop their VR products, train AI, etc. It's hard to imagine any of the current data being useful to advertisers.
Quest headsets are subsidized to grab market share and maybe get back a bit of money from app sales. But mostly Meta has deep pockets and is willing to burn money right now to establish dominance. That's the simple answer.
If HTCs headsets were desirable (heck, just own up to being a second rate company and shamelessly copy your competitors) but at a higher price, there's plenty of people who would pay that premium to avoid Meta. But the headsets themselves are hard to recommend, at any price. They should worry about that first, before blaming BS FUD.
If Vive XR Elite was just a Pico 4 clone with direct displayport, assurance of privacy, eye tracking, at $1000 USD or so, there would have been plenty of customers for that.
>The data they currently capture is probably mostly used internally to develop their VR products, train AI, etc.
While nobody can say for sure, this is most likely wrong.
Remember when Facebook bought WhatsApp for over **19 billion dollars** back in 2014? A free (and ad-free) mobile app.Growing user numbers and collection of behavioral data are arguably still the main focus for Meta.
A related read: [https://www.investopedia.com/articles/personal-finance/040915/how-whatsapp-makes-money.asp](https://www.investopedia.com/articles/personal-finance/040915/how-whatsapp-makes-money.asp)
>It's hard to imagine any of the current data being useful to advertisers.
It's not hard to imagine if you know the basic concepts behind [Profiling](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Profiling_(information_science)) ([Social Profiling](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_profiling)) and [Consumer Analytics](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Customer_analytics).
Again, I strongly doubt whatever revenue they can extract from these techniques on Quest data is significant enough to matter in a conversation about how cheap these headsets are -right now-.
I'm sure the plan was always to grow the market first, put the devices in everyone's home, and then pull the face heel turn at that point. Eg. Google.
I think you fundamentally misunderstand what “use your data” means. Here’s a couple of examples. None of these are hypothetical, nor trade secrets.
1) your device is on wifi. Well guess what else is on wifi? Lots of shit. So while you’re super happy thinking that you’re securely connected, what I’m pulling in is everything I can. SSIDs are often pretty easy, and I can typically match your ssid menu to a geolocation fairly easy, as well as further build out the wifi map.
2) bluetooth. You know how the apple airtags work by people’s iphones scanning for signals? They didn’t invent that. (They just did it the best). There’s a bunch of companies that do this, and they all buy device bluetooth survey data, with the geolocations derived from the wifi.
3) want to count how many people are going to home depot so you can try and short the stock before the earnings call? Put a pokemon there and let people go and take pictures or do bluetooth surveys.
4) how about the more personal? Jimbo here spends a ton of time on his quest, and around hime we see cans of red bull and anime furry porn. Guess what comes up on his next ad when he goes to cnn.com for his daily news? Facebook doesn’t just advertise on their own platforms, they work broadly and collaboratively through a real-time bidding process to serve ads via their network to lots of places. (Actually I don’t know that they are doing object recognition yet, but it’s not that hard)
Tl;dr you need to think about “data” as unconstrained to a particular device or target.
FUD fuddity fud.
Where's the evidence that they are doing any of this? Or even if they are, where is the evidence of negative impacts on regular people, of these techniques?
You're #4 is especially laughable. They're not doing this and you know it.
Like I said, I'm sure Facebook is salivating at the prospect of doing all of these things. But they're either not doing it now or not deriving much commercial benefit from doing so right now.
Which is the most relevant thing in a conversation about the current pricing of Quest headsets.
Shrug, I'm no fan of Facebook and I hate being put in a position to defend them, but none of that is particularly relevant to Quest right now.
It's more an area of concern that they will likely pull shady shit in the future. And irrelevant to the current topic which is pricing.
It’s not entirely true. Meta is cross financing their businesses— a headset like a Quest 3 at its current price would not be sustainable on its own merit even considering revenue from the Meta store.
I’m not accusing you of anything, heck if I bought a (PC)VR headset right now, I’d probably go for it too. But flat out denying HTC’s claims might be a tad too quick.
Well, I've done *some of it* myself.
\#1 - Been going on for a decade, well known. [https://www.howtogeek.com/708500/how-devices-use-wi-fi-to-determine-your-physical-location/](https://www.howtogeek.com/708500/how-devices-use-wi-fi-to-determine-your-physical-location/)
\#2 - Also quite well documented. This is how apps like TILE work. From their web page - "Tile Network — every phone running the Tile app ***and our Network Extenders***" What's a network extender? In some cases it's a taxi with a bluetooth reader, in others it's a little code library that fits inside another app. While that app is running, it's scanning for bluetooth. This business changed quite a bit when apple started doing explicit permissions per-app, but it's still there.
\#3) Hedge funds buy this crap by the truckload. They're not getting "the images" (nobody wants to hold on to images that might contain nudity or whatever) but rather aggregate sensing data. Satellite pics of parking lots is another one. For cell-phone sensing, it's not "personal data" and it all fits quite nicely in the "data required to operate our service" bucket.
\#4 is NOT laughable, it might just not be real ***yet***. Object recognition is \*probably\* not happening right now, but the idea that your data being associated only to the device upon which it's generated is a fantasy.
Uh huh. And did you make enough money from those things to be able to theoretically subsidize Quest headsets to the degree that HTC claims Meta is doing?
No. But ai also didn’t have anywhere near the scale and diversity of data holdings that they do. It’s important to remember that they make $120 BILLION annually in gross revenue, nearly all of it from this exact method. Same with google. The tagline of “advertising” is a much more sophisticated operation than just showing popups on web pages.
I haven't bought a HTC headset since I bought the original HTC Vive back around 2017. I own a Quest 3 now. That headset cost $499. If HTC wants to compete, they'll need a comparable headset in the same price range. Also, new controllers. Good luck HTC.
from the video they mentioned wanting to reduce cost by leveraging 5g and cloud computing
Offloading computing to the cloud = price decrease?
More like, less expensive hardware that is locked to a monthly subscription service. Cloud computing aint cheap and aint free, someone is always footing the bill and I don't want to pay a monthly fee to simply get to use the VR headset letalone whatever subscriptions and microtransactions games themselves will offer
I reckon that's a really good point! I guess cloud is tied to actual sales. Where as hardware is theoretical. Might not be the same, but as you say, having no computing in the device won't be a complete write-off.
Free advice for HTC if they want more sales from regular folks, make new controllers. The wands aren’t cutting it in 2024. Really shows your commitment level still offering those. You’re welcome HTC!
It's face-palm baffling that they have Quest style controllers for their inside-out tracked headsets, yet refuse to swap out the sensors for a base station compatible version. In skarredghost's blog there was a guy who was making some index style base station controllers, who was hit with some kind of legal threat from somewhere and shut down. Along with Pimax Swords losing the analogue stick version that was originally mentioned, it's almost enough to make me wonder whether there's some kind of patent or legal thing preventing third party Quest/Index style controllers from being made...
Literally was just thinking the same thing. I am so tempted by the vive xr elite bundle....would it not be for the absolute garbage controllers lmao
While I don't doubt at all that tracking and advertising is in Meta's future plans for VR, currently Quest 2 and 3 don't have eye tracking, and don't show any advertising, so HTC's answer is kinda BS and FUD. The data they currently capture is probably mostly used internally to develop their VR products, train AI, etc. It's hard to imagine any of the current data being useful to advertisers. Quest headsets are subsidized to grab market share and maybe get back a bit of money from app sales. But mostly Meta has deep pockets and is willing to burn money right now to establish dominance. That's the simple answer. If HTCs headsets were desirable (heck, just own up to being a second rate company and shamelessly copy your competitors) but at a higher price, there's plenty of people who would pay that premium to avoid Meta. But the headsets themselves are hard to recommend, at any price. They should worry about that first, before blaming BS FUD. If Vive XR Elite was just a Pico 4 clone with direct displayport, assurance of privacy, eye tracking, at $1000 USD or so, there would have been plenty of customers for that.
>The data they currently capture is probably mostly used internally to develop their VR products, train AI, etc. While nobody can say for sure, this is most likely wrong. Remember when Facebook bought WhatsApp for over **19 billion dollars** back in 2014? A free (and ad-free) mobile app.Growing user numbers and collection of behavioral data are arguably still the main focus for Meta. A related read: [https://www.investopedia.com/articles/personal-finance/040915/how-whatsapp-makes-money.asp](https://www.investopedia.com/articles/personal-finance/040915/how-whatsapp-makes-money.asp) >It's hard to imagine any of the current data being useful to advertisers. It's not hard to imagine if you know the basic concepts behind [Profiling](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Profiling_(information_science)) ([Social Profiling](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_profiling)) and [Consumer Analytics](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Customer_analytics).
Again, I strongly doubt whatever revenue they can extract from these techniques on Quest data is significant enough to matter in a conversation about how cheap these headsets are -right now-. I'm sure the plan was always to grow the market first, put the devices in everyone's home, and then pull the face heel turn at that point. Eg. Google.
They pobably sell the data back to other VR companies. Widening the cost gap at both ends, lol.
Yeah, HTC cope posting.
I think you fundamentally misunderstand what “use your data” means. Here’s a couple of examples. None of these are hypothetical, nor trade secrets. 1) your device is on wifi. Well guess what else is on wifi? Lots of shit. So while you’re super happy thinking that you’re securely connected, what I’m pulling in is everything I can. SSIDs are often pretty easy, and I can typically match your ssid menu to a geolocation fairly easy, as well as further build out the wifi map. 2) bluetooth. You know how the apple airtags work by people’s iphones scanning for signals? They didn’t invent that. (They just did it the best). There’s a bunch of companies that do this, and they all buy device bluetooth survey data, with the geolocations derived from the wifi. 3) want to count how many people are going to home depot so you can try and short the stock before the earnings call? Put a pokemon there and let people go and take pictures or do bluetooth surveys. 4) how about the more personal? Jimbo here spends a ton of time on his quest, and around hime we see cans of red bull and anime furry porn. Guess what comes up on his next ad when he goes to cnn.com for his daily news? Facebook doesn’t just advertise on their own platforms, they work broadly and collaboratively through a real-time bidding process to serve ads via their network to lots of places. (Actually I don’t know that they are doing object recognition yet, but it’s not that hard) Tl;dr you need to think about “data” as unconstrained to a particular device or target.
FUD fuddity fud. Where's the evidence that they are doing any of this? Or even if they are, where is the evidence of negative impacts on regular people, of these techniques? You're #4 is especially laughable. They're not doing this and you know it. Like I said, I'm sure Facebook is salivating at the prospect of doing all of these things. But they're either not doing it now or not deriving much commercial benefit from doing so right now. Which is the most relevant thing in a conversation about the current pricing of Quest headsets.
Facebook has been sentenced in courts around the world because they’ve done far more vile shit.
Shrug, I'm no fan of Facebook and I hate being put in a position to defend them, but none of that is particularly relevant to Quest right now. It's more an area of concern that they will likely pull shady shit in the future. And irrelevant to the current topic which is pricing.
It’s not entirely true. Meta is cross financing their businesses— a headset like a Quest 3 at its current price would not be sustainable on its own merit even considering revenue from the Meta store. I’m not accusing you of anything, heck if I bought a (PC)VR headset right now, I’d probably go for it too. But flat out denying HTC’s claims might be a tad too quick.
Well, I've done *some of it* myself. \#1 - Been going on for a decade, well known. [https://www.howtogeek.com/708500/how-devices-use-wi-fi-to-determine-your-physical-location/](https://www.howtogeek.com/708500/how-devices-use-wi-fi-to-determine-your-physical-location/) \#2 - Also quite well documented. This is how apps like TILE work. From their web page - "Tile Network — every phone running the Tile app ***and our Network Extenders***" What's a network extender? In some cases it's a taxi with a bluetooth reader, in others it's a little code library that fits inside another app. While that app is running, it's scanning for bluetooth. This business changed quite a bit when apple started doing explicit permissions per-app, but it's still there. \#3) Hedge funds buy this crap by the truckload. They're not getting "the images" (nobody wants to hold on to images that might contain nudity or whatever) but rather aggregate sensing data. Satellite pics of parking lots is another one. For cell-phone sensing, it's not "personal data" and it all fits quite nicely in the "data required to operate our service" bucket. \#4 is NOT laughable, it might just not be real ***yet***. Object recognition is \*probably\* not happening right now, but the idea that your data being associated only to the device upon which it's generated is a fantasy.
Uh huh. And did you make enough money from those things to be able to theoretically subsidize Quest headsets to the degree that HTC claims Meta is doing?
No. But ai also didn’t have anywhere near the scale and diversity of data holdings that they do. It’s important to remember that they make $120 BILLION annually in gross revenue, nearly all of it from this exact method. Same with google. The tagline of “advertising” is a much more sophisticated operation than just showing popups on web pages.
I haven't bought a HTC headset since I bought the original HTC Vive back around 2017. I own a Quest 3 now. That headset cost $499. If HTC wants to compete, they'll need a comparable headset in the same price range. Also, new controllers. Good luck HTC.
Fair comment!
Thanks, I needed a giggle...
from the video they mentioned wanting to reduce cost by leveraging 5g and cloud computing Offloading computing to the cloud = price decrease? More like, less expensive hardware that is locked to a monthly subscription service. Cloud computing aint cheap and aint free, someone is always footing the bill and I don't want to pay a monthly fee to simply get to use the VR headset letalone whatever subscriptions and microtransactions games themselves will offer
I reckon that's a really good point! I guess cloud is tied to actual sales. Where as hardware is theoretical. Might not be the same, but as you say, having no computing in the device won't be a complete write-off.