Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg Again Disparages Apple Vision Pro
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Oh I didn’t know. Well let’s wait until iPhone 16 pro max. I’ll upgrade if there’s a huge improvement in the “3d” shooting capabilities. Maybe 1080p 60 fps HDR. The clips so far look decent when played back on my meta quest 3
If you have to bring up how bad the competition is so often.....it isn't the competition that is bad.
No, it is not a system seller because it is already outdated, and soon people will talk about it. I’ll explain why.
Ultimately, the spatial video as implemented by Apple is based on Stereo Vision 3D, i.e., the basis for whatever the spatial video player does are recordings from 2 cameras.
The new version of Enhance-X App soon available not only for Galaxy S24 series but also for all recent Samsung Galaxy flagships allows you to shift the camera of any taken picture. Now apply the same level of shifting to left and right to every single frame of a video and you have your Stereo Vision 3D camera streams.
I predict you will be able to convert any video taken in the last 100 years into 3D videos or Spatial Video on your Galaxy phones (running in the cloud of course) by latest next year. Apple just did not see this coming but others did.
Btw., Apple did a similar mistake with their Next Generation Portrait Mode. It converts any photo taken with iPhone 15 Pro/Pro Max afterwards to a portrait photo. But if you have an older photo, you must go to your friend with a Galaxy Flagship and ask him/her to apply the portrait effect on-device (not even in the cloud).
Apple made a career on Mac vs PC. The only major difference is the founder is comparing them. I don’t know for sure, but I expect somewhere along the way, Steve or Tim compared one or more products to a competitor in a keynote.
The thing that made this seem weirder, at least for me, was the overall comparison of most of the features by the founder. He obviously spent a lot developing it, so I am not surprised he wanted to ride along on the Apple hype train. I have seen several videos comparing them since his review, so at least that part worked. As I said before, no idea about whether that generated sales to the curious that can afford $500, but not willing to risk $3500 on a brand new device from Apple. Time will tell.
I think people understate just how important Vision Pro’s front facing eyes are. Do they look a little goofy? Sure. But it sure beats not having any out front. You can kinda make eye contact with people when wearing the Vision Pro (or rather, you, the wearer certainly can, and people can kinda make eye contact with you), while Meta Quest 3 completely obscures your eyes. Quest 3 has passthrough, sure, but Vision Pro can actually convey information about where your attention is, while Quest 3 provides no information about your current state. Also, the lack of eyes is just weird. If people are going to be walking around in public or semi-public with headsets on, I’d prefer to see eyes instead of stark white plastic. So even current beta Personas eyes are better than most headsets for non-headset users.
The lady doth protest too much, methinks
Shortly after the Vision Pro launched, Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg made it clear that he believes the Quest 3 is the better VR headset, and over the weekend, he again took to Threads to reiterate his belief that the $3,500 Vision Pro is inferior to the $500 Quest 3 (via 9to5Mac).
Analyst Benedict Evans said that the Vision Pro is the "device Meta wants to reach in 3-5 years," and that it is confusing that Meta VR engineers have suggested the Vision Pro is "basically just the same thing" as the Quest. In response, Zuckerberg said that the Quest "is better" than the Vision Pro now, and that if the Meta Quest has the "motion blur," weight, or "lack of precision inputs" as the Vision Pro in the future, then Meta will have "regressed significantly."
Zuckerberg also took offense to the Meta Quest being called "a games device," and clarified that some of the top apps on the Quest are social, browser, and video player apps.
Device weight and "motion blur" have been two points that Zuckerberg has focused on in his criticism of the Vision Pro, and he has dismissed the higher resolution of Apple's headset as unnecessary given the "tradeoffs" that he sees.
Zuckerberg in February said that the Quest 3 is superior because it is 7x less expensive than the Vision Pro, it's more comfortable, the Quest is "crisper," there are "precision controllers," and there's a "deeper" immersive content library.
Compared to the Apple Vision Pro's 4K microLED displays, the Quest 3 has two 2K LCD panels. It also weighs in at 515 grams, while the Vision Pro weighs 600 to 650 grams depending on the Light Seal combination used, and the Quest does not have a separate battery pack.
Article Link: Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg Again Disparages Apple Vision Pro
I have heard the eyes currently look unconvincing and dumb ( seen it myself in numerous videos). You would think they can fix that a bit in software. I do think the glass front looks more aesthetically pleasing compared to the big hunk of plastic on the Quest, even without the eyeballs. That being said, I am also seeing stories about that glass front cracking even after this short amount of time, so we will see how the device holds up… could have been a bad batch or something.
People are used to having conversations with people wearing sunglasses where they can’t see the eyes. I think the bigger issue is the goggle form factor. It’s something you don’t see every day on the street unless you live on a ski slope. It just isn’t relatable to most people.
The problem Zuck faces is that his company has marketed and branded the Meta Quest line as game consoles... The hardware sell at near break-even pricing, like an XBox and consumers find it in Target, Best Buy or Walmart between the Nintendo Switch and the XBox in the gaming section of these retailers... The official Meta store has been tightly curated to be over 85% games, probably closer to 95% if you count the social apps which are themselves games or contain games or sorts... As a developer I can publish to Vision Pro like I can a computing platform, I have to meet criteria around security and content standards, but Apple doesn't care otherwise... Meta has to give a developer "pitch approval", it's essentially the same process as getting a major book publisher to publish your novel. It's insane how difficult it is... and they very rarely let non-gaming apps through the gate... So considering all of this, Zuckerberg is full of it.... In his mind he can just say "the narrative is out of date" and wish the Meta Quest product line to be reclassified as general computing devices, but that's not the road his marketing team have taken. He's delusional.
I don’t disagree with you IF Apple gets a price point that hits 1699. It would make sense as my next iPad ( keeping my m1 for pencil and other reasons I mentioned before). However, that’s a huge cut from the $3500 base model they have now. I have a hard time believing they can cut this down enough without losing their core features to hit 1699 or $1000 price point others have mentioned.
The stuff Apple is selling at +2000 are aimed at pros that can get the money back from spending this money. With it being a cool spin on the iPad, seems that it is more of a recreation device for most users. We will see where it goes. At $1699 or less, it would be much easier to justify as a part time media consumption device than at the current price point… I just have a hard time seeing that becoming a reality in the near future, but would be pleasantly surprised.
Yah nobody wants that Enhance-X. They want Stereo Vision 3D. That's far more immersive than the fake 3D of enhance-X.
The fake 3-D won't let you see the sides of an object the way stereoscopic 3-D can. It always looks flat.
If it doesn't have 2 cameras side-by-side then it's not real 3-D.
You need 2 cameras side-by-side to get the immersive experience, as that's literally what your eyes see. Pseudo-3D with depth mapping isn't going to cut it, since pseudo 3d based on depth map isn't going to show you detail on the left and right side of an object that you'd see with stereoscopic 3-D.
Stereoscopic 3-D is MUCH better than depth-mapped 3-D.
Tend to agree with you here. The poster to whom you are replying is also failing to miss that while Apple does great in premium markets, they do poorly (and that's being kind) in the enterprise market. I can't imagine that luxury headsets will be a volume sell in the near future.
Spacial Media Toolkit Pro on the VP app store is an application that does just that. For some things it works great but it can give weird results.