6 ms·

>So what’s the killer app? I feel like the answer to that question will come next year, when Apple's Vision Pro is out.

by supernikio2 3y ago

epolanski 3y ago
Which won't release applications for the quest?
- teaearlgraycold 3y ago
  Yes, but competition
- MBCook 3y ago
  What if they can’t? What if whatever it is that makes the app so compelling automatically rules it out on the Quest 3 for some reason? What if it demands a better input method or higher resolution?
  - smoldesu 3y ago
    Then I'd be impressed, frankly. I've got the original Quest, and features you'd expect to be broken or missing (eg. hand tracking, multitasking, game streaming, web browsing, sideloading, et. al) all work fine. It's honestly quite sad that the core line of rhetoric here is a laconic "what if" statement around theoretical apps. The Quest exists and has sold tens of millions of units; the Vision Pro has yet to prove itself. Unless you have a specific example, this can only be interpreted as wishcasting.
    - MBCook 3y ago
      The quest sold millions at the beginning of a pandemic when people were trapped at home and needed an escape. How many people still use it? How many regret the purchase, how many would have bought it without the pandemic? I see that as Meta’s big opportunity to grab success in VR. And it didn’t happen. They’re trying to market this like the next thing everyone needs and after multiple tries I just don’t see it. I don’t even see how they get there, this is the same strategy as the Quest, Quest 2, PSVR, PSVR2, etc. Games are great but that pitch just isn’t working at really moving the needle. But that’s all they have.
      - smoldesu 3y ago
        Games moved 20+ million units. That's 'the needle', unless your goal is to depose the iPhone. And clearly Meta is content to leave it alone, since the Quest even has an iOS companion app. They're complimentary products, not cannibalistic. On the other hand, I can guarantee that most people who already own an iPhone will regret buying a Vision Pro. It's too expensive and too redundant to matter as a piece of hardware. It's not a market-redefining release like the Quest was, nor is it a proprietary solution to unfixable problems. It's an expensive thing, and for most people the Quest value proposition will align long before the Vision Pro value proposition does. The Hololens already tried this avenue too; merely offering a premium version of mixed reality doesn't work (even when the military is your customer). It'll be years before the dust settles, but the Quest has gotten undeniably far on it's own. You can rationalize that success however you want, but you'll consistently be confused if you hold it to unproven standards like "spatial computing". For me, the Quest is the first Facebook product I've used where I can understand the vision at a consumer level and from a top-down level.
MBCook 3y ago
But that won’t help Meta. This really feels like a Quest 2 + 1, which is fine. Same but better specs. But the site appears to me like it’s positioning it as a Vision Pro competitor when it’s not even in the same league. “We have AR too so it’s the same!” The Vision Pro seems very clearly marketed at a different segment and primary use case to me. The problem is that if Apple (or a 3rd party on the platform) figures it out I think there’s a good chance it can’t work well on a significantly cheaper headset like the Quest 3. Then the Quest 3 may be the cheap thing that doesn’t do what people want. Like when you didn’t get an XBox 360 at Christmas because mom/dad got you a $25 TV plug-in Pac-Man game because “it’s the same thing”. But Meta wants in on the party. And I feel like they’re trying to get their sales before the Vision Pro comes out and immediately becomes the thing that they get very unfavorably compared to (except price). Just like they rushed out a pre-announcement this was coming around the Vision Pro announcement. Even if Apple face plants or never finds “it”and the Vision Pro isn’t successful I don’t see Meta being either. All these years and it’s still kind of “eh”.
- throwanem 3y ago
  Shooting to be the Android to Apple's Apple in this market doesn't seem like the least sensible strategy.
- supernikio2 3y ago
  I feel like the "killer app problem" is not unique to the Quest, but the whole VR ecosystem. I'm being cautiously optimistic Apple will finally break through and find an app that will appeal to the masses, and even though the price is not attainable for 95% of the population, that will trickle down and find it's way to the broader market.
  - MBCook 3y ago
    I agree fully. It’s not unique to the Quest. They’re just the most successful player so far (I think). Apple isn’t target VR (though it works), they’re trying something different. So I’m curious if it succeeds.
  - gabereiser 3y ago
cultofmetatron 3y ago
when teh apple vision comes out? CAD software!!

>So what’s the killer app? I feel like the answer to that question will come next year, when Apple's Vision Pro is out.

epolanski 3y ago

Which won't release applications for the quest?

teaearlgraycold 3y ago
Yes, but competition
MBCook 3y ago
What if they can’t? What if whatever it is that makes the app so compelling automatically rules it out on the Quest 3 for some reason? What if it demands a better input method or higher resolution?
- smoldesu 3y ago
  Then I'd be impressed, frankly. I've got the original Quest, and features you'd expect to be broken or missing (eg. hand tracking, multitasking, game streaming, web browsing, sideloading, et. al) all work fine. It's honestly quite sad that the core line of rhetoric here is a laconic "what if" statement around theoretical apps. The Quest exists and has sold tens of millions of units; the Vision Pro has yet to prove itself. Unless you have a specific example, this can only be interpreted as wishcasting.
  - MBCook 3y ago
    The quest sold millions at the beginning of a pandemic when people were trapped at home and needed an escape. How many people still use it? How many regret the purchase, how many would have bought it without the pandemic? I see that as Meta’s big opportunity to grab success in VR. And it didn’t happen. They’re trying to market this like the next thing everyone needs and after multiple tries I just don’t see it. I don’t even see how they get there, this is the same strategy as the Quest, Quest 2, PSVR, PSVR2, etc. Games are great but that pitch just isn’t working at really moving the needle. But that’s all they have.
    - smoldesu 3y ago
      Games moved 20+ million units. That's 'the needle', unless your goal is to depose the iPhone. And clearly Meta is content to leave it alone, since the Quest even has an iOS companion app. They're complimentary products, not cannibalistic. On the other hand, I can guarantee that most people who already own an iPhone will regret buying a Vision Pro. It's too expensive and too redundant to matter as a piece of hardware. It's not a market-redefining release like the Quest was, nor is it a proprietary solution to unfixable problems. It's an expensive thing, and for most people the Quest value proposition will align long before the Vision Pro value proposition does. The Hololens already tried this avenue too; merely offering a premium version of mixed reality doesn't work (even when the military is your customer). It'll be years before the dust settles, but the Quest has gotten undeniably far on it's own. You can rationalize that success however you want, but you'll consistently be confused if you hold it to unproven standards like "spatial computing". For me, the Quest is the first Facebook product I've used where I can understand the vision at a consumer level and from a top-down level.

MBCook 3y ago

But that won’t help Meta. This really feels like a Quest 2 + 1, which is fine. Same but better specs. But the site appears to me like it’s positioning it as a Vision Pro competitor when it’s not even in the same league. “We have AR too so it’s the same!” The Vision Pro seems very clearly marketed at a different segment and primary use case to me. The problem is that if Apple (or a 3rd party on the platform) figures it out I think there’s a good chance it can’t work well on a significantly cheaper headset like the Quest 3. Then the Quest 3 may be the cheap thing that doesn’t do what people want. Like when you didn’t get an XBox 360 at Christmas because mom/dad got you a $25 TV plug-in Pac-Man game because “it’s the same thing”. But Meta wants in on the party. And I feel like they’re trying to get their sales before the Vision Pro comes out and immediately becomes the thing that they get very unfavorably compared to (except price). Just like they rushed out a pre-announcement this was coming around the Vision Pro announcement. Even if Apple face plants or never finds “it”and the Vision Pro isn’t successful I don’t see Meta being either. All these years and it’s still kind of “eh”.

throwanem 3y ago
Shooting to be the Android to Apple's Apple in this market doesn't seem like the least sensible strategy.
supernikio2 3y ago
I feel like the "killer app problem" is not unique to the Quest, but the whole VR ecosystem. I'm being cautiously optimistic Apple will finally break through and find an app that will appeal to the masses, and even though the price is not attainable for 95% of the population, that will trickle down and find it's way to the broader market.
- MBCook 3y ago
  I agree fully. It’s not unique to the Quest. They’re just the most successful player so far (I think). Apple isn’t target VR (though it works), they’re trying something different. So I’m curious if it succeeds.
- gabereiser 3y ago

cultofmetatron 3y ago

when teh apple vision comes out? CAD software!!