Well there is that saying that goes like this: Rules for thee, not for me!
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 Plans to Take a Nearly 50% Commission on Purchases Made Inside the 'Metaverse' Despite Complaining About Apple's 30% App Store Cut
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I’m still struggling to envision a virtual reality universe replacing the internet or becoming the “new way we internet” or whatever they want to call it. I can’t help but think that a large chunk of “internet experiences” occur precisely because of their convenience. And even if we assume huge leaps in hardware development, so that entering the metaverse is nearly as easy as pulling your phone out of your pocket, I still don’t see myself opting to use the metaverse for simple tasks.
I can go through example after example of how quick, convenient access to the internet makes my life much simpler, giving me more time to do what I most enjoy in life, most of which is completely detached from the internet. The concept of the metaverse seems to hinge upon an assumption that being online is the whole goal.
But then again I’m relatively old. Maybe I just “don’t get it”.
I can go through example after example of how quick, convenient access to the internet makes my life much simpler, giving me more time to do what I most enjoy in life, most of which is completely detached from the internet. The concept of the metaverse seems to hinge upon an assumption that being online is the whole goal.
But then again I’m relatively old. Maybe I just “don’t get it”.
When I browsed the comments in the Sideloading feature it felt like it was filled with Metabots saying Apple was evil, and we must stop them to let forward all the mom and pop developers. Because it would never look like this?
Zuckerberg has always creeped me out. Hope they have invested an insane amount of dollares in this and that it will be the biggest failure since Google+.
Zuckerberg has always creeped me out. Hope they have invested an insane amount of dollares in this and that it will be the biggest failure since Google+.
I wish the media would keep referring to them as Facebook, since that's what they really are. Don't give them the satisfaction.
It’s like being here wasting time commenting on a corporation except in 3D with an anime avatar. Doesn’t seem that different a way to waste time.
You are more likely to see the stock price take a huge hit as investors lose confidence. Then, at some point the board will either double down to stay the course right into the grave or Zuckerberg himself would offer to step down to recover some of the stock price. A decline in stock price is probably the only thing that will limit Facebook's ability to keep doing business as usual as it impacts their ability to retain employees and acquire companies and technology.
Shouldn't have been allowed
(if we had any remote semblance of anti trust enforcement in this country anymore...)
This is a very broad reading of market. Traditional monopoly is if Meta is so much more powerful than all other virtual platforms AND they engage in anti-competitive behavior against them and consumers.
This new way has never been tested … just threatened or enforced by bureaucrats and politicians. Because it is so complicated and messy that it would blow up multiple industries.
Meta is the one pushing VR at the moment, they have the most units out there, the biggest growing user base and in my opinion the best hardware for entry into VR that anyone at just about any tech level can use. Stand alone, wireless VR is HUGE. I have the original rift, bought it as soon as pre-orders came online. I had the beefy computer to run it and was super exciting. It was pretty amazing for a brief time, no hand controllers then, just an xbox controller, but it was still amazing. Comparing my original Rift to the Quest 2 is night and day in terms of experience. Meta is single handedly bringing about the future of VR. I am not a Facebook fan, I have an account only to use the Quest 2 and my account is locked down, no friends, no public anything, simply the base info needed to use my Quest 2.
Well 30% was simply "following the trend", I guess 47.5% is breaking it, just not how the regulators envisioned ????
When I saw the headline for this article I thought “who in their right mind is going to buy something virtual to be used in a virtual world?!” then you reminded me of Second Life, and I suddenly remembered that there were people buying “land” on it and selling it to other users so that they could build “houses” or “businesses“, at one point there were “experts” selling ebooks to “new entrepreneurs“ (a.k.a. fools) with strategies on how to become rich on Second Life (spoiler alert: write an ebook and sell it for 25/50€ to enough fools).
But I think Zuck does have a point, if someone is stupid enough to get all of their news on Facebook, drooling all over instagram all day long, “sharing” every meaningless detail of their lives with “friends” (a.k.a. complete strangers), spend money on games like Farmville, all while being tracked all over the internet by a slew of companies, then why said users would know better when it comes to buying virtual goods in a virtual world?