[HN Gopher] Meta stops ordering new parts for Quest Pro
___________________________________________________________________
Meta stops ordering new parts for Quest Pro
Author : miiiiiike
Score : 61 points
Date : 2023-07-21 21:16 UTC (1 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.zdnet.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.zdnet.com)
| BigglesB wrote:
| I'm still pretty convinced that the only compelling use case for
| VR in the short-to-medium term is gaming despite both Apple &
| Meta apparently trying their hardest to pretend otherwise!
|
| Having said that, perhaps this move indicates that Meta are
| finally acknowledging that's where they should have been focusing
| their efforts all along?
| mellosouls wrote:
| Plenty of great non-game apps already very popular in the Quest
| and other stores, that gaming-only argument has pretty much
| been and gone.
| willsmith72 wrote:
| i still want use-anywhere sunglasses that plug into my laptop
| and give me monitors at an ergonomic height to use in
| libraries/cafes/parks. Like sightful without the weird computer
| pzo wrote:
| Xreal come close but for this use case not ready yet but if
| they ever release v2 with 4k resolution per eye +
| programmatically dimmable shades + better software then that
| would be better then vision pro or oculus for this use case
| mellosouls wrote:
| Those are already available from several brands (XReal the
| most well-known at the moment), though probably still in
| alpha mode as regards what people will actually buy and feel
| happy with.
| NBJack wrote:
| If there is one, single redeeming really cool feature of the
| Quest Pro (possibly the 2 as well, I haven't tried this), it's
| using your controller "upside down" as a virtual dry erase
| marker in Workrooms.
|
| I just wished that was available in other apps too.
| zmmmmm wrote:
| This isn't correct as far as I understand.
|
| The only part based on actual information is they aren't ordering
| new parts. They are still producing new headsets, and continuing
| to sell those based on the existing stock of parts. We don't know
| what stock they have, it's quite possible that given the reduced
| rate of sales after Quest 3 is released they fully expect to be
| able to satisfy production requirements for the full lifetime of
| the device. Which may actually be an indication they are _pulling
| forward_ a successor as much as that they are stopping further
| development.
|
| The "stops development of Quest Pro 2" is not new information, it
| is based on information from months ago that said they had
| decided to "skip" the Quest Pro's immediate successor in favor of
| focusing on the one that would come after it.
|
| To cap it all off, Andrew Bosworth directly contradicted this
| information today.
| dang wrote:
| Ok, we've changed the title above to say that. Thanks!
| Multiplayer wrote:
| I have a Quest Pro, after having had many of the predecessors -
| Vive, etc. I think that A/R needs to succeed before VR can really
| take off. And I think AR is going to really succeed.
|
| By VR I mean being totally cutoff from the rest of the world into
| this new world. It's exhausting in a way and feels like you are
| at a disadvantage if other people are around.
|
| The Pro has some limited AR and it's actually really exciting.
| Being in both worlds at the same time feels really really
| interesting.
|
| Apple is so far ahead, conceptually, that it makes sense to me
| for Meta/quest to recalibrate here.
| jayd16 wrote:
| > Apple is so far ahead, conceptually
|
| I'm curious what you mean by this.
| ponyous wrote:
| Quest Pro supposedly being a pro device cannot replace my
| desktop screens. Resolution is just not there. With Apple
| Vision seems to be actually capable of doing this. I am
| looking forward to ditching my screens.
|
| My _napkin math_ and some googling (with the information I
| could find at the time of release, so probably inaccurate in
| multiple ways):
|
| Quest 2= ~18PPD
|
| Quest pro = ~20PPD
|
| Quest 3 = ~25PPD
|
| Apple Vision = ~36PPD
|
| Real life vision 60-120PPD
|
| 1920x1080 27" screen from a "normal" distance is roughly
| 36PPD.
|
| So I think Apple vision will feel like previous generation of
| screens (pre "retina"), and it makes sense why they pushed it
| so far. I wouldn't want to look at anything with worse
| quality (720p for example). And this is just talking about
| "pro" developers that use multiple screens.
| jayd16 wrote:
| Well sure. It's 10x the price of a Quest 2 and has a good
| spec bump for it, but is that a _conceptual_ leap? It feels
| like it 's just focusing on the high end of the market. Is
| it even a moat? Won't Meta have a similar device in a few
| years?
| mellosouls wrote:
| Vision Pro has at least grasped the idea that serious effort
| and specs need to be put into bringing AR to the world, and
| has made a valiant, priced-to-match first effort.
|
| Quest Pro doesn't seem to know what it is; its an over-priced
| Quest tottering about in Professional Heels, showing a leg at
| the productivity types as they walk by scratching their
| heads.
| jsemrau wrote:
| I suppose Apple's product is not a VR product but "Spatial
| Computing"
|
| Quote "Vision Pro, on the other hand, is primarily an AR
| device that just happens to have a few VR features"
|
| https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2023/06/hands-on-with-
| apple-...
| zmmmmm wrote:
| "Spatial computing" is 95% just a marketing term.
| Understandably Apple wants to project the perception they
| are doing something new here. So they invented a new term.
| There are a few novel aspects to it, but it's honestly just
| VR/AR like everyone else has been doing in terms of all of
| its fundamental features. Which isn't to say I'm curious
| about what novel things they will introduce. However what's
| visible so far is actually behind status quo in terms of
| true "spatial computing" eg: shared spatial anchors API [0]
| has been out for a while and lets multiple users
| collaborate in the same mixed reality space. So far Vision
| Pro doesn't seem to even support this fundamental use case
| that you would expect to see from a "spatial computing"
| device.
|
| [0] https://developer.oculus.com/documentation/unity/unity-
| share...
| jayd16 wrote:
| In the same way "retina display" is not fundamentally
| unique, the Quest line is just as capable of "spatial
| computing."
|
| I'll argue that the one major difference in Apple's
| approach is they're going with multi-app support out of the
| gate. It positions the device as a low friction compute
| device instead of an engrossing entertainment device.
|
| ...but that's just software and I think it's within Meta's
| reach. It'll be interesting to see when Meta decides to
| make the pivot themselves and how much of Apple's custom
| stack will need to be replicated and how far ahead they
| actually are.
| CBarkleyU wrote:
| I find myself having thoughts that I usually look very down on:
| What a waste X is because we could've done Y instead (think space
| exploration vs fixing famine type arguments). But honestly, what
| a huge waste of talent, including Carmack's, VR at Meta was.
|
| It's been over a decade, with three out of five the FAANG letters
| trying their luck with VR/AR and honestly I still havent seen a
| use case that would justify pumping in billions in the tech.
| seydor wrote:
| quest 2 is the most interesting gadget i got the past decade.
| honestly space rockets are ok at current tech , but too much
| work just to see the blue planet from above, everything else
| looks pretty much the same as a clear night sky
| maskedinvader wrote:
| I agree (for quest 2 being the most interesting gadget in
| this space), quest 2 sold 10s of millions of devices and
| arguably came closest to making VR mainstream although they
| have much more ground to cover. Would be interesting to see
| the sales figures for their upcoming quest 3 , if it can sell
| as much or more units than quest 2 , I think there is a
| chance all this investment would be worth it. Ofcourse a
| cheaper consumer apple vision headset could easily come in
| and eat metas lunch.
|
| Edit: copies-> devices
| detourdog wrote:
| I feel the same. Refocusing resources from space to earth
| seems like the magnanimous thing to be doing with extra
| billions.
|
| Anything off earth that needs exploring can be dome remotely.
| yamazakiwi wrote:
| Thank god for that, VR is one of the only spaces people are
| having fun developing in. Once it goes full corporate it will
| be just like everything else in software.
| rwc wrote:
| Two possibilities, both can be true: 1. It's recognition that in
| a match up of "Pro v. Pro" products, Apple Vision Pro trounces
| Quest Pro and it's not feasible to make that gap up at this
| point; and
|
| 2. If Apple is going to mainstream the AR/VR market, it's not bad
| to position as the de facto low-cost alternative (see also
| Android/iPhone).
| edmundsauto wrote:
| To be fair, the Quest Pro has been in market for almost a year,
| and I'm betting it's another year before Apple Vision Pro hits
| the market. So a 2 year gap makes a bunch of sense that Apple's
| design would be far ahead.
|
| The fairer comparison would be Quest 3 (~$500) to AVP (~$3500).
| Let's see how those two stack up when they are both available.
| bagels wrote:
| Or, they have come to the realization that there is no real
| future market for "pro" VR
| cheschire wrote:
| I was wondering if they are doing this as a move to undercut
| Apple by shrinking the pro XR market.
| mellosouls wrote:
| This seems like a comment made wearing Apple-tinted glasses.
|
| _1. It 's recognition that in a match up of "Pro v. Pro"
| products, Apple Vision Pro trounces Quest Pro_
|
| Uh, Vision Pro hasn't been released yet. Its definitely miles
| ahead in concept (and priced to match); and seems to have got a
| better idea of the high-end possibilities. Its clearly not a
| consumer product at that price though.
|
| _2. If Apple is going to mainstream the AR /VR market_
|
| This is silly. Apple is way behind here. Meta has sold millions
| of headsets - no way is Apple mainstreaming anything in
| comparison. We can review the situation in a few years, but
| lets not get ahead of ourselves.
|
| I'm very pro Apple's vision (ha) here, the Vision Pro is an
| exciting concept - but could really do without the framing that
| seems to not see that Apple is a laggard at the moment
| (possibly for sound strategic reasons though I suspect its a
| bit of both).
| jedberg wrote:
| There were other smart devices on the market when the first
| iPhone was released. Yet Apple is credited with mainstreaming
| the idea of smartphones.
| seydor wrote:
| Why would FB give up to an unreleased, unproven product? Apple
| goes for their ecosystem anyway. It s more likely there is a
| shortage of cheap components and they are focusing on what's
| most likely to sell
| MBCook wrote:
| Well the existing Quest Pro wasn't exactly setting the sales
| charts on fire.
|
| The Quest 2 is doing great (as VR sales go). Does anyone know
| how well the Pro did? I imagine very poorly.
| axg11 wrote:
| This is a sensible strategy. Apple finally revealed their cards
| after 5+ years of rumours surrounding the Apple Vision Pro. Meta
| doesn't have the brand strength to launch a true high-end XR
| headset that can compete with the Vision Pro. Instead, they're
| trying to capture the lower end of the market.
| NBJack wrote:
| Eh, I may eat my words later, but unless they are hiding some
| really big features somewhere, I don't think there's much to
| worry about with the Vision Pro. It is stylish and neat, but it
| seems to be shockingly limited both in VR and AR. If anything
| it seems like just an accessory for an iPhone or a Mac.
|
| Apple definitely has brand strength here, and I think Meta is
| even counting on it, but the utility of their device is
| underwhelming.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-07-21 23:01 UTC)