Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Mark Zuckerberg Says Apple Vision Pro Has No 'Magical Solutions'

I'll be honest, I don't get the Quest or the Vision Pro. I'm surprised to hear Quest has sold "tens of millions"; I didn't know it was that many.

I can see VR/AR goggles as being compelling for gaming. I can also seeing them being more immersive for movies, but that strikes me more as something that would be interesting to try, like buying a movie ticket, than owning. A family might gather around their TV to watching something on Netflix or Apple TV+ together, but doing that at home with everyone wearing goggles would not only be extremely expensive, but extremely awkward as well.

So again, I get goggles as a video game console, or an extension to one. But I think Zuck is completely wrong when he describes Quest as "social." Okay, you can play online games with others, but the "metaverse" isn't social. It's fake social at best, and more likely, anti-social.

What I mean by this is social is interacting with real people in real places. Not seeing 3D avatars and fantasy portrayals of people that may have little grounding in reality. It seems to me this whole "metaverse" thing, if it amounts to anything at all (and I'm deeply skeptical it will) is a poor substitute for actual social interaction.

That's not an attack on gaming, or watching a movie by yourself, or anything like that. Sometimes, alone time is good and needed. And it's also not a criticism of Quest in particular; having a FaceTime call where you see others' faces, but they only see an animated image of you because you've got a computer strapped to your face, also seems fake social to me.

I'm not saying that everything we do has to involve real, face-to-face social interaction. I am saying that building or spending time in "metaverses" as a substitute for real social interaction, and believing this is social interaction, could lead to isolation, loneliness, and anti-social behavior.

Fortunately, I think that this entire notion of a metaverse is BS and not going to find a wide audience, so I'm not all that worried about people giving up real social interaction for manufactured experiences behind a face computer.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MacWiz_007, cjgrif and aidler
neuropsychguy said:
Why would he be scared? Apple will help make VR/MR/AR headsets more popular. Apple's headset should only help Meta's efforts.
Click to expand...

Yes is true. Mark is basically admitting that now that Apple has finally entered the ring, it validates their own efforts. It validates VR/AR/MR. As Tim said, this is creating a whole new platform ... as if all previous efforts by their competitors had not yet done that. It takes Apple entering a market to really light it on fire. 🔥
 
huge_apple_fangirl said:
Translation: they haven’t solved any of the issues with the headset form factor either, but the hardware is better.

Funny that’s he’s admitting that he can’t solve any of the issues either, but it seems he thought there was a chance Apple actually could.
Click to expand...
The technology, the software, and the ecosystem are better.

Apple likely has v2 in development and can easily wipe out any pricing advantage in the next two years.
 
  • Disagree
  • Like
Reactions: Channan and SFjohn
zakarhino said:
there's absolutely nothing about it that Meta and others have not already come up with, irrespective of the 'quality' of those experiences.
Click to expand...
Apple has some advantages on the tech side with Apple Silicon and their experience with things like Face ID and Lidar tech. Other companies who’d want to implement a similar experience will have a harder time replicating certain aspects of Apple’s VR tech.
 
  • Like
Reactions: StyxMaker, SFjohn and zakarhino
jcshas said:
The Quest headset is magical in how it makes privacy disappear.
Click to expand...
This is a fair criticism of Facebook in general, but can you show me any evidence of privacy issues with any of Meta’s headsets? Like actual violations of privacy, or any evidence that they are tracking the movements people are making while using the device?

I’m no fan of Facebook. If I liked them or was neutral, I’d probably have a Quest headset.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ToyoCorollaGR
Sebosz said:
As much as I don't like him, he didn't lie and made a few good points.

People in this thread tend to get very defensive, but he didn't criticize Vision Pro, just said that meta had different values and vision when it came to designing such device and that's it...
Click to expand...

except his vision of the Metaverse is something nobody wants. He’s talking about Apple isolating people, but Facebook is arguably responsible for the horrific mob-mentality and increase in cyber-bullying for the last 20 Years. Does Facebook not realize how its products have led to thousands of suicides, tens of thousands with severe depression, etc? The only good to come from Facebook and social media in general has been the attempted revolutions of the Arab Spring.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Greezeg and SFjohn
How is meta “more social” with their Roblox avatar, when Vision literally allows you to speak with real world people and coexist with your technology in the real world. I don’t think he understood the the presentation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SFjohn
Expanding on my previous comment: AR/VR googles like Quest as a video game machine makes sense to me, so I shouldn't be as surprised as I was to learn it's sold tens of millions.

I don't see Vision Pro being a successful video game machine for two reasons: Price, and the fact that most games for iOS and Apple TV are casual titles and not AAA titles for hardcore gamers who might spend thousands on a gaming PC. $3,500 is a lot of money to pay for Angry Birds AR.

Further, I can't see any mass market use for face computers beyond games. Niche markets, sure. "Wow, that's neat" experiences, yes. But I can't imagine googles, at any price point, selling anywhere close to iPhone, MacBook, or even Apple TV numbers.

Time may prove me wrong, but I doubt Vision Pro is going to be a mass market success, even if the second version is dramatically lower in price.
 
  • Like
Reactions: aidler
canadianreader said:
Apple and every big tech is doing it.
https://twitter.com/x/status/1588308341780262912
Click to expand...

Yes in that same vein Apple quietly introduced the ability for apps and in person events to verify your ID using the Wallet app in iOS 17, an evolution of last year's newly introduced ability to import a digital version of your driving/state ID into your phone running iOS 16. The promotion and proliferation of that technology will no doubt lead to more and more platforms and venues requesting an ID check before use/entering. Combine that with the alarming stories about landlords using Apple's "house keys on iPhone" feature to lock people out of their apartments if they're even 30 seconds late on a payment.

But of course because it's cozy, 'privacy respecting' Apple doing it there's nothing to worry about. If that same feature rolled out on WeChat in China everyone here would be calling it a complete dystopian nightmare feature used to lock people's lives down. It's incredible what people will agree to domestically if it's painted with the right marketing brush but completely oppose elsewhere because it's scary Xi Jinping doing it. The proof is in the pudding: Apple already ping their servers with a ton of data but it's completely acceptable because Apple promised they're the good guys.

Tying social media profiles to real IDs: good, important measures to protect against disinformation and threats to 'democracy'

Tying social media profiles to real IDs in China (they don't even do that btw): super evil, dystopian nightmare. we need to nuke them to liberate their people.
 
  • Like
  • Disagree
  • Haha
Reactions: SFjohn, the future, aidler and 1 other person
neuropsychguy said:
Why would he be scared? Apple will help make VR/MR/AR headsets more popular. Apple's headset should only help Meta's efforts.
Click to expand...
In the end: Apple and Google will dominate this market and oculus will be for poor people.
 
IMG_0542.jpeg
 
  • Like
Reactions: MacWiz_007 and trip1ex
solq said:
I don't care about Zuckerberg, he's a weirdo who once had a good money-making idea.
Click to expand...

Did he? I was under the impression that he just borrowed it from those twins.

2 different approaches, neither anywhere near being mass compatible. One offering compromised HW at reasonable prices hoping that they might be able to add feature later.

The other "price be damned" making sure the HW is there today (well next year) to prepare the ground for an VisionAir or VisionSE a few years later.


I'll be watching from the sidelines for the foreseeable future.
 
Rudy69 said:
I’d be more interested in John Carmack’s opinion than Zuck
Click to expand...

Carmack's would be similar because he quit and left behind a written manifesto that basically said he begged Facebook to make EVEN CHEAPER versions of the Quest, to be the cost of a regular console or less to encourage adoption even if the tech wasn't as good. To Carmack to secret to mass adoption is price... to me he isn't wrong *as long as the product is acceptably good which in 2023 at low cost really isn't possible IMHO*.
 
tdar said:
If I made a list of the people whose opinion matters the least to me. Mr. Zuckerberg, would be third from the top. Right behind his new competitor, Elon Musk. Forum rules prevent me from telling you who is number one.
Click to expand...
Is it me? Go on, I can take it. Better than being number two though 🤪
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4odomi
jimothyGator said:
Expanding on my previous comment: AR/VR googles like Quest as a video game machine makes sense to me, so I shouldn't be as surprised as I was to learn it's sold tens of millions.

I don't see Vision Pro being a successful video game machine for two reasons: Price, and the fact that most games for iOS and Apple TV are casual titles and not AAA titles for hardcore gamers who might spend thousands on a gaming PC. $3,500 is a lot of money to pay for Angry Birds AR.

Further, I can't see any mass market use for face computers beyond games. Niche markets, sure. "Wow, that's neat" experiences, yes. But I can't imagine googles, at any price point, selling anywhere close to iPhone, MacBook, or even Apple TV numbers.

Time may prove me wrong, but I doubt Vision Pro is going to be a mass market success, even if the second version is dramatically lower in price.
Click to expand...
I don't know if Quest has sold tens of millions. seems a bit high. But Beat Saber has sold 4 million copies which I think is the best selling VR game on the platform.

I think one issue META has with Quest is user retainment. Internal documents state it gathers dust pretty quickly for a rather large number of users.

which hints to it being a "vacation tech" for most.

I remain skeptical. It seems obvious it provides some new experiences, but also that there is some novelty to it as well.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4odomi
I read his statement as: "We thought about doing this but we're too cheap to use the hardware components, too inexperience to do the human user interface components, and the product will suffer for it"
 
Abobrek said:
And nearly EVERY Apple promotional video for the Vision Pro shows a SINGLE user by his or herself…alone. I suggest using a Quest so you can see how there’s well…SOCIAL apps. What does Apple have…Facetime?! 🤣🤣🤣
Click to expand...
That's for the developers. It isn't even released yet.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back