Meta Cancels High-End Mixed Reality Headset After Apple Vision Pro Struggles

[QquegChristian]

I use my Quest 3 every day and love it. That said, you need an immersive and fun experience to wear a giant device on your head. That’s why I play games on it and rarely ever even watch video content as I can watch my 4K TV with my surround sound system without isolating myself in a heavy headset.

Productivity just makes no sense. A 3 hour session would be max for my eyes and neck. I edit video for social media for my day job and work across a Windows desktop, MacBook Pro, and iPhone with 3 monitors. And I already love VR. I’m the target audience but I’m just not willing to work all day in minor discomfort. It’s already “work” to begin with.

It’s like rollercoasters. Sometimes they can be shaky and you’ll bang your head a few times and get some neck pain, but that’s a trade off most people make because the rest of the experience is so fun. I’m willing to deal with a little neck pain to play some really fun games in VR, but not to do things I can mostly just do without VR.

 

[wigby]

What’s your source that Meta sank billions into the device they just cancelled?

I have as much proof as you and Macrumors does. None. But layoffs and restructuring seem to indicate money was and is being spent and needs to stop.

 

[ThunderSkunk]

Judging by quest 3 sales, people don't want to pay $2-$500 to strap a brick to their face either.

A normally sized pair of glasses or contact lenses for $500, sure.
But I hope they're not counting on us funding that R&D by purchasing bricks for a decade first.

 

[bluespark]

With the caveat that I haven't actually tried one, something like the Viture Pro seems much more compelling to me (at least as I imagine it working): lightweight, unobtrusive, relies on the device it's plugged into for computing power, but serves as a giant virtual screen. I'd love something like that when traveling, for example, especially if there were a companion device that's essentially a headless, battery-powered Mac (like a MacBook Air, for example, but without an attached keyboard/screen).

 

[GrayFlannel]

I have as much proof as you and Macrumors does. None.

I looked for support for your claim but couldn’t find it. Thanks for letting me know.

 

[AeroEd]

I still enjoy my AVP every day no matter what others’ opinions are. The features that are coming with visionOS 2 are awesome.

On the business side, AVP brought in more than $2B in sales (rough estimate). With a very high margin. Tell me of another AR/VR business that brings in this much cash from hardware sales. Meta is at $1B with… wait for it… $16B in LOSSES for the year.

Sure. They stopped working on it because nobody’s buying AVP OR they stopped working on it to lower their operating loss in the hardware division.

How much was the r&d for vp? 2 billion? 5 billion?

 

[Kevin2055]

Meta has canceled work on a high-end mixed reality headset that it was developing to compete with the Apple Vision Pro, reports The Information. Meta this week told employees to quit working on the device following a product review meeting that involved Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg.

The now-canceled device was slated for launch in 2027, and it was meant to be equipped with high-resolution micro OLED displays, which is what Apple used for the Vision Pro. Meta was aiming to sell the device for under $1,000, but that was not going to be possible with the high cost of the displays.

Meta is continuing development on the Quest 4, a successor to the Quest 3, and that headset could come out in 2026. The Quest 3 is priced at $500, which is also the likely target price point for its successor. Meta is also focusing on software rather than hardware, and it announced a Horizon OS platform for third-party hardware makers earlier this year.

When the Vision Pro launched, Meta was hoping that the device would reinvigorate the headset market and validate Zuckerberg's major push into the AR/VR space. Instead, Apple has struggled with consumer appeal, and interest in the Vision Pro has waned over time.

Enthusiasm about the Vision Pro started dying down just a month after it launched, and fewer customers visited Apple retail stores for demonstrations. Apple cut Vision Pro shipments in April, and the company is unlikely to sell even 500,000 of the headsets in 2024. As a result, Apple has stopped work on a second-generation high-cost Vision Pro and is instead focusing on creating a lower-cost model with fewer features and a price closer to high-end iPhones.

Article Link: Meta Cancels High-End Mixed Reality Headset After Apple Vision Pro Struggles

They must realized they don’t have the power to sell at premium price as Apple could.

 

[bgillander]

A top-notch cabbage waxer is still a cabbage waxer, and will always be limited by the amount of people that have any interest whatsoever in a cabbage waxer.

Yeah, but if some developer writes an innovative program to make it wax shoes, it more than doubles its potential marketplace.

We get it, VR doesn't appeal to you. But it does appeal to some. Is it enough to sustain a long term market? Perhaps not, but the appeal to some of those people seems to be enough for companies to keep trying.

Considering people complained about wearing 3D glasses, I expect it will either take a huge shrink of the size of AR glasses or a complete change to the delivery method to really appeal to the mainstream, but the hardcore VR enthusiast market seems to be large enough to sustain a reasonable sized, non-mainstream market if the right company is willing to maintain that with current technology. That size is possibly not large enough to appeal to the huge companies currently competing, though.

 

[mosesvii]

VR gaming doesn't suck, maybe it just sucks on AVP.

I guess it depends what you’re looking for. I had 5 Vr headsets before I got the VP. While I want to like VR games, I’m yet to find one I like as much as a standard A+ title.

 

[mosesvii]

Is this accurate? Has Apple announced the Vision Pro will not have a second generation?

No. They are simply focussing on a cheaper version for the time being. There’s no way we don’t see another Pro version in the future.

 

[mosesvii]

I love the Quest 3, though I rarely use it. So glad I didn't buy a Vision Pro to barely use.

I had the Quest 3. The Vision Pro is so far removed from that experience it’s crazy. I too barely used the Quest 3. Whereas I’ve used the VP every single day since I bought it.

While the Quest 3 is leaps and bounds better than the 2, it’s still bad. The UI is clunky and dated, the pass through less than mediocre, the screen quality is isn’t great, etc. it’s just not a great experience.

 

[entropys]

I wise man who once worked at Apple said “not all our friends are Larry Ellison”
Tim Apple forgot that.

 

[marcozs]

Sure...and if you go back and look at the numbers, the Mac took a long time to establish itself. The iPhone was much quicker, sure. But that doesn't suggest that the AVP has to follow that model exactly. And of course Apple knew that a $3500 product wasn't going to reach global penetration like the iPhone.

I get that you don't like the product. It may never, ever, ever be for you. But your dislike says nothing about the product or the category, other than you don't like it and it's not for you.

Too many pretending to be experts. An N of 1 is not data.

I agree and people tend to forget that highly successful products reach that after several years and iterations.

“[Macintosh] Sales were strong at its initial release on January 24, 1984, at $2,495 (equivalent to $7,300 in 2023), and reached 70,000 units on May 3, 1984. (From Wikipedia)”

The first Macintosh was not cheap and didn’t sell in millions either.
It doesn’t necessarily means Vision Pro will surely be a success, but we definitely need to wait to see if this bet pays off, as it was graphical user interface computers at the time of the Macintosh introduction.

 

[XboxEvolved]

No one wants it now but the tech gets cheaper, better, and possibly subsidized and it will be doing very well, at least compared to other headsets.

 

[coolfactor]

VR sucks. It doesn't really matter who builds it.

Ferraris suck! Because I've never driven one.

 

[coolfactor]

I agree and people tend to forget that highly successful products reach that after several years and iterations.

“[Macintosh] Sales were strong at its initial release on January 24, 1984, at $2,495 (equivalent to $7,300 in 2023), and reached 70,000 units on May 3, 1984. (From Wikipedia)”

The first Macintosh was not cheap and didn’t sell in millions either.
It doesn’t necessarily means Vision Pro will surely be a success, but we definitely need to wait to see if this bet pays off, as it was graphical user interface computers at the time of the Macintosh introduction.

Just like the Apple Car project was a platform for tech evolution, the Vision Pro is Apple's venture into spatial computing. Research and development needs to start somewhere. Everyone calling AVP a wasted effort really can't see the long game, and how technology evolves. 10 years from now, we will look back and thank Apple for pushing forward with spatial computing, because it will become everyday life.

 

[davide_eu]

How many MBA's does it take to realize that nobody wants to pay $3500 to strap a brick to their face

That's the point: MBA and CxO earn too much, for them 3500 are peanuts so they believe the same should be for everybody

 

[Luis Ortega]

VR sucks. It doesn't really matter who builds it.

It’s still a model T. Give it time.

 

[aleksander]

To me the biggest head scratcher was the absolutely zero 3rd party/premium software ready for the launch. There's only a limited appeal of stock apps and the cool theatre mode. If there were a few productivity apps that would dramatically improve how you work, then this could be a winner, because even small companies could justify the cost. And this happens despite their huge experience with the iPhone. A shocker, really.

 

[WarmWinterHat]

Ferraris suck! Because I've never driven one.

I've used multiple variants of the quest and have used an apple vision pro a few times.

Just like the Apple Car project was a platform for tech evolution, the Vision Pro is Apple's venture into spatial computing. Research and development needs to start somewhere. Everyone calling AVP a wasted effort really can't see the long game, and how technology evolves. 10 years from now, we will look back and thank Apple for pushing forward with spatial computing, because it will become everyday life.

I don't believe that spatial computing will ever be anything more than a niche way of interacting with tech.

 

[bondr006]

More like Apple can’t sell this over engineered device and its competitors don’t want to make the same failure. Not every company has a fan base as loyal as Apple that will buy whatever they release.

Yes...This! I really miss Steve Jobs.

 

[lilkwarrior]

How many MBA's does it take to realize that nobody wants to pay $3500 to strap a brick to their face

Portable Prosumer panels and Prosumer monitors cost $3000+.

A headset on par and adjacent with them in screen capabilities must cost that much and more (Vision Pro is obviously more functional as well as an XR headset that can render 3D movies and 5K2k Ultrawide output on-the-go)

Vision Pro isn’t for mainstream audiences just like the Pro Display XDR and iPad Pro its display capabilities and features overlap.

Folding phones with far less functionality effectively cost $1000-$1500 less

 

[lilkwarrior]

$500 for Q3 is bargain. You can share device easy, bunch of VR games, it's great for watching movies (just watched Longlegs in "theatre", it's creepy af). I cannot comment on productivity because my work laptop is locked down.

It’s absolutely not great for movies. It doesn’t even have HDR, let alone Dolby Vision nor HLg HDR that premium content enthusiasts demand and expect.

You can’t create meaningful premium content either accordingly

 

[lilkwarrior]

Everyone forgets this. People instead want to laugh at Balmer for saying a $600 phone wasn't going to work...it didn't! They immediately dropped the price by 33%, and its successor was $400 less expensive than the original.

Meta was hoping that Apple's fans would push VR/AR/Whatever Apple wants to call it R to the masses in a way they haven't just by being Apple. It didn't work, because the core problems that exist with other headsets exist with this one. Thats why Meta is doing this, because they needed to prepare for a possible market opportunity, and then when it became clear it didn't exist, they had to pivot.

Meta also cannot justify selling a prosumer tier headset at a loss which Meta did for its medicore gaming headsets that don’t even enable XR content to be seriously alongside or superior than non-VR gaming hardware.

Apple’s headset is far more complimented by Apple’s well established prosumer ecosystem that Meta does not have towards demanding prices or buy-in Apple can

 

[lilkwarrior]

Tim Apple would have been smarter saying it's a hobby for Apple until they know where the technology is going. It gives plausible deniability that could turn into another Apple TV instead of becoming Tim's Apple Cube moment.

It’s not. Apple has provided the first serious prosumer headset in the market and is far more accommodating and initially useful for such audience than gaming XR headsets have ever been for their niche audiences:

Gaming XR headsets don’t even allow developers and media partners to make their content on par with non-VR quality in core quality not even supporting HDR.

Gaming standalone headsets like the Quest use mobile APIs inappropriate to do meaningful things beyond gaming well.

More importantly standalone gaming headsets alienate AAA-supporting gamers by not having the horsepower for VR games to be as immersive, in-depth, and fun as non-VR games.

You pay more to play worser games. That’s a terrible value proposition.

Vision Pro doesn’t have that problem to anything close to the extent gaming headsets does.

Even as merely a portable screen to non-VR computers it is order of magnitudes superior than budget/gaming headsets