Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
The thing is Apple and Facebook aren't even competitors. One is a hardware company with software and services on top. The other is a pure internet social networking company (Facebook with feed, instagram for pictures and copying others (tik tok, Snap) and Whatsapp/Messenger for messaging in EU/Asia and US).
Facebook's services run on top of Apple, not in competition with.
I agree with you - but Zuck is trying to make Meta be the de facto VR environment regardless of what hardware is used. He wants to be what AOL tried to do to the internet to VR.

I put his chances extremely low at that but Android has shown there is a huge appetite for a non-Apple option. So perhaps Meta can play that role in the likely duopoly of VR.

If Apple doesn’t tie their VR hardware to their own software it would break with literally the entire history of the ~50 year old company. I assume Zuck knows this but has to act like he’s high on his own supply to get as much buy-in as possible and pin Apple as the bad guy responsible for why you can’t play games or whatever with your friend that bought into the other ecosystem than you.
 
This virtual reality stuff to me is nonsense . We already live in a reality why do we need a virtual one ? People want to pay silly SILLY money to put on a headset and pretend to be an alien or have illustrious sex with models but for me I do that on a daily basis and it’s free. I don’t need a headset for that , plus there have already been numerous studies on virtual reality worlds and they are all full of strip clubs and perverts so I’ll give it a few months before the metaverse is infested with men from India asking if you know who bobs and vagene are
 
It’s not overstaying it to say that social
media, and FB especially, have irreversibly changed the world for the worse.
There is SO much crap that social has brought, even more that has coincided with it. But it's a comfy view from a position of social privilege to ignore the experience of all the people who had no community beforehand and who now have found a lifeline with others like them they could never find before social media.
 
I’ve never understood the appeal of VR meeting rooms over conventional video. Granted, conventional video doesn’t exactly do a great job of allowing for eye contact, but then again, VR isn’t quite real eye contact, either. Plus, you don’t need a real 3D space to move around in, you can just do it from your desk or phone. And I think there’s more to be gained from actually seeing the person and their body language cues than there is from seeing a cartoon-y avatar in a 3D space.

Maybe in some things there’s value to VR meetings, but it feels a bit like overly skewmorphic GUIs in most situations. And honestly, I fear that VR meetings are gonna get used for the sorts of lame mark-everyone-as-“required”-even-if-there’s-no-good-reason-for-them-to-be-there meetings. If video isn’t required for them and we’re on mute, I usually prefer the ability to do other things. Not really an option when you have a VR headset on your head and people can “see” your avatar in the room.
There are pros and cons to both meeting in VR and meeting on FaceTime. The big thing I have noticed is VR meeting/socializing is way more natural when communicating, rarely are people tripping over each other when speaking or waiting to jump in. Spacial audio also makes it more natural as you hear where they are and the avatar face is actually looking directly at those being spoken to. Of course you miss the natural look of a face, but you are getting the inflection in the voice which is super important. For long distance I prefer VR over a video chat. Much closer to the real thing for me.
 
Lol. In the next 6 months, Apple will ship a category-defining AR product (glasses). Facebook has a vaporware concept video that they believe will take a decade plus to realize. In reality, it will never come to fruition or gain traction, because it is based a on huge assumption that people even want the future they have conceptualized. Facebook has also shown no ability to innovate internally. Every new product or service they have built (not bought as in IG and WhatsApp) has flopped. Zuckerberg is playing a PR game, but Apple will run away with the market. Same as phones. Same as tablets. Same as wearables. Etc.
 
Zuck's convinced VR/AR is gonna be a platform. What if it isn't and it's just an extension? You know what would be more valuable is if you could bring all your digital goods from your iPhone into the metaverse....
 
This is the issue right here: ”Can we get a billion people into the metaverse doing hundreds of dollars a piece in digital commerce by the end of the decade?

Meta’s focus is on what a Metaverse (ugh, I hate that term) can do for Meta, not on how being part of a Metaverse can be beneficial for users. And that is why, even if I haven’t been able to escape Facebook and Instagram completely, I do what I can to limit my usage of Meta’s platforms.

Facebook’s measure of success is how many users they can exploit by the end of the decade. But what is the actual benefit of using a Metaverse to the users? I have yet to see a real answer to that question. And what is the potential harm that can be caused by this? Because we all know Zuckerberg and Co. are just sooooooo good at determining the amount of damage their decisions cause and taking responsibility for that damage.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sevoneone
Nobody is clamoring for their vision of the world where we live in VR, own nothing and eat bugs. Mark and Bill think that, but nobody actually wants this.
 
Lol. In the next 6 months, Apple will ship a category-defining AR product (glasses). Facebook has a vaporware concept video that they believe will take a decade plus to realize. In reality, it will never come to fruition or gain traction, because it is based a on huge assumption that people even want the future they have conceptualized. Facebook has also shown no ability to innovate internally. Every new product or service they have built (not bought as in IG and WhatsApp) has flopped. Zuckerberg is playing a PR game, but Apple will run away with the market. Same as phones. Same as tablets. Same as wearables. Etc.
And this is why Apple has a cult like following. Apple does plenty of stupid things, they just have people who worship them in such mass numbers it makes failing difficult, and it is not because of how good they are, hence the Apple cult.

Facebook has actual products on the market, production models of future releases, and a team that have been growing the VR business. They have been outselling Xbox and Playstation the last couple of years and offer a great VR experience for a really affordable price. They have even listened to the consumer by removing the Facebook requirement to ouse the product. I am not Facebook fan, I don't use the service or any other social media service. I do have a Quest 2 and am an actual user of the product so I have first hand knowledge of the device and generally what is going on as I follow casually the VR arc as it grows.

In order for Apple to "run away" in this market they will need to do something so far beyond what anyone else is doing, not just Facebook. Apple VR/AR will be expensive, if you think they will have a sub $500 VR option I think it is safe to say that will not happen, especially considering the cost of their micro fibre clothes that they would need to include to keep the lenses clean. Better quality lenses and resolution simply will not cut it and I don't believe a closed off app store from Apple would be enough to bring about something that would sway the almost 15 million Quest 2 users, or get a whole segment of people who have never invested in VR to go and buy an Apple device. I could be wrong of course, but I can't see it.
 
  • Disagree
Reactions: DC Wallaby
And this is why Apple has a cult like following. Apple does plenty of stupid things, they just have people who worship them in such mass numbers it makes failing difficult, and it is not because of how good they are, hence the Apple cult.
"It makes failing difficult"

Ah, the "cult" nonsense.

When Apple fails, it fails big -- and then fixes it.

When the butterfly keyboard came through, Apple users didn't say "Oh how w lov having a kyboard without th lttr '' on it, this is our nw lifstyl!" they said "Appl, fix it now!"

I don't think Apple's aiming for the same market as the Zuckwit. Apple's going for a professional 3D visualization tool. Meta's going for a toy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DC Wallaby
"It makes failing difficult"

Ah, the "cult" nonsense.

When Apple fails, it fails big -- and then fixes it.

When the butterfly keyboard came through, Apple users didn't say "Oh how w lov having a kyboard without the lttr '' on it, this is our nw lifstyl!" they said "Appl, fix it now!"

I don't think Apple's aiming for the same market as the Zuckwit. Apple's going for a professional 3D visualization tool. Meta's going for a toy.
Explain the price of the fibre clothes themselves and why they were selling out? You need to drink a certain kind of kool aid for that.

People still bought the laptops even after the bad press came out, they sold and sold and sold. Did Apple ever admit it was a bad design? (maybe they did, not a rohotircal question). They made a new keyboard and professed how great it is (I like it, have the M1 Max), but I don't remember hearing any "we heard you did not like this so we changed it". Everything is speculation with Apple in VR, it is more vapour wear then what Meta is doing. I think a pro use is a very small market. Not sure why you think the Quest 2 is a toy, have you used one? Do you own one? It is as much a toy as an iPhone is because it plays games.
 
I think Mark has some points on platforms being open, but that’s not the true difference here. Mark wants an open system where Facebook has all the keys, tracks all the traffic, and makes money off of selling the user data and advertising to users. Apple on the other hand is focused on privacy.
I will choose privacy… not that I actually see any value this far in the metaverse
 
People still bought the laptops even after the bad press came out, they sold and sold and sold. Did Apple ever admit it was a bad design? (maybe they did, not a rohotircal question). They made a new keyboard and professed how great it is (I like it, have the M1 Max), but I don't remember hearing any "we heard you did not like this so we changed it".
Yes, the laptops sold and sold -- a lot of customers said "I'd rather roll the Apple dice on getting a turkey than buy a Windows laptop which is *guaranteed* to be a turkey because it's Windows." But there were other customers, some of them vocal here, who said "no more Apple for me until they take out the butterfly keyboard."

If Apple users were all cult drones, Apple wouldn't have felt any need to get rid of the butterfly keyboard, would they? If Apple users swallow anything, because of brainwashing or whatever, why wouldn't they swallow a bad keyboard too?

Also, when was the last time *any* corporation said, "Yes, what we did really sucked, really really sucked, and we totally screwed you over, dear customer, so now we're going to make a change so that we don't screw you over that way anymore, aren't we great?"
 
  • Like
Reactions: DC Wallaby
The thing is Apple and Facebook aren't even competitors. One is a hardware company with software and services on top. The other is a pure internet social networking company (Facebook with feed, instagram for pictures and copying others (tik tok, Snap) and Whatsapp/Messenger for messaging in EU/Asia and US).
Facebook's services run on top of Apple, not in competition with.

‘The other is a pure advertising company’ would be more accurate.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DC Wallaby
Yes, the laptops sold and sold -- a lot of customers said "I'd rather roll the Apple dice on getting a turkey than buy a Windows laptop which is *guaranteed* to be a turkey because it's Windows." But there were other customers, some of them vocal here, who said "no more Apple for me until they take out the butterfly keyboard."

If Apple users were all cult drones, Apple wouldn't have felt any need to get rid of the butterfly keyboard, would they? If Apple users swallow anything, because of brainwashing or whatever, why wouldn't they swallow a bad keyboard too?

Also, when was the last time *any* corporation said, "Yes, what we did really sucked, really really sucked, and we totally screwed you over, dear customer, so now we're going to make a change so that we don't screw you over that way anymore, aren't we great?"

Not much to discuss obviously, when you can't see the merits of Windows and are completely blinded that anyone but Apple is doing something good out there.
 
Not much to discuss obviously, when you can't see the merits of Windows and are completely blinded that anyone but Apple is doing something good out there.
You came out flailing with dumb stereotypes about the "Apple cult." What did you expect as a response?

I'm typing this on a Windows computer right now, and I'm about two feet from my Oculus Rift headset -- which I haven't used in years. But you go ahead and project whatever you need to project.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DC Wallaby
"It makes failing difficult"

Ah, the "cult" nonsense.

When Apple fails, it fails big -- and then fixes it.

When the butterfly keyboard came through, Apple users didn't say "Oh how w lov having a kyboard without th lttr '' on it, this is our nw lifstyl!" they said "Appl, fix it now!"

I don't think Apple's aiming for the same market as the Zuckwit. Apple's going for a professional 3D visualization tool. Meta's going for a toy.
You doubt it exists: How do you explain people purchasing the following then?

7D9940D9-2D18-4D57-AD41-6F330818456C.jpeg
 
I miss the days when I was in college and I was able to join this thing called "The Facebook" and it was so boring I forgot about it for 2 years until random people I knew started using it and I went on it to see why they would go on that boring ass website. I've been able to use Facebook in a way more akin to how I used it in the past especially since Facebook has been kind of reined in some.
 
So the competition is "philosophical", as in theoretical rather than literal, because on the literal level it is no competition at all 😅
 
"Meta is in a 'very deep, philosophical competition' with Apple..."

Only in your tiny little mind, Mark. Only in your mind.
LOL "philosophical" meaning theoretical rather than literal as there is no competition at all 😅
 
If the metaverse can simulate the exact pleasures of real sex, food, exercise, touch, etc, then I'm interested. If not, I'll spend most of my time in the real world.

Girls aren't going to be impressed by your virtual house.
What about my virtual 'chubby'?
 
The thing is Apple and Facebook aren't even competitors. One is a hardware company with software and services on top. The other is a pure internet social networking company (Facebook with feed, instagram for pictures and copying others (tik tok, Snap) and Whatsapp/Messenger for messaging in EU/Asia and US).
Facebook's services run on top of Apple, not in competition with.
For the reason you state, Apple doesn't really see Facebook as a competitor (yet), but Facebook most certainly sees Apple as a competitor.

In the immediate term, Facebook's entire business model and reason for existing is to extract as much personal information as technologically possible from its users then sell it and also abuse it to increase addiction to their products. Apple has made part of its business platform not letting companies do that--making it harder for them to harvest information from you and about your behavior, and encouraging users ever more strongly to reduce the amount of notifications that pointlessly monopolize their attention.

And since Facebook runs on top of Apple, Apple's vision of computing interaction--private and not incessant--is an existential attack on Facebook. Everything that makes Facebook profitable, addictive, and evil is what Apple is trying to hamstring.

In the longer term, Meta/Facebook absolutely wants them to be competitors--Meta's "live life with your VR headset on" vision for the future cuts Apple out of the picture entirely and replaces it with the OS the Occulus hardware uses, and eventually replaces even the open web with a Metaverse they have complete control over.

Taken to its logical conclusion, in the Meta future (and Zuckerberg's most lurid data-harvesting fantasy), they own everything--the hardware, the OS, and even the means of interacting with the rest of the world.

I love how Zuck thinks he's some giant tech genius. He got lucky with a product and is now trying to sell an ad/microtransaction riddled version of a hell that countless cyberpunk novels, sci-fi authors, and computer scientists predicted long before.
To be fair to Zuckerberg, he got lucky with a product, but his real skill--which I'm not sure he has the self-awareness to realize as such--is designing, marketing, and continuing to aggressively push what is essentially a highly addictive, generally harmful, legal drug that doesn't require intake of any chemicals. He frames it as "more connected = good" but what he's really selling is "more addicted = profit", whatever the cost to society.
 
  • Like
Reactions: richinaus
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.