The headset wars: Why it's Apple's to lose
Summary
TLDRApple and Meta (formerly Facebook) offer contrasting visions for the future of virtual reality headsets. Meta bets on an immersive 'metaverse' where users can live and work via avatars. But critics pan the poor graphics and expectation that friends/colleagues also buy in. Apple offers a more personal, incremental vision building on existing devices. Though far pricier, its headset boasts superior hardware and polish. Yet it faces hurdles - no key streaming apps at launch, and the same developer gripes as Macs v PCs. As headsets evolve, it's unclear if either tech titan's bet will pay off or if consumers will embrace wearing screens on their faces.
Takeaways
- 😊 Meta's vision for VR focuses on an immersive metaverse for social interactions, work, entertainment, etc.
- 😕 But the metaverse vision relies on widespread consumer adoption and compatible hardware, which are still major challenges.
- 🤔 Apple has a different, more incremental vision for VR as an extension of existing personal computing.
- 👍🏻 Apple VR offers crisper visuals and tighter integration with Apple devices due to custom hardware and software.
- 💰 But Apple's VR headset costs far more than Meta's - $3,500 vs $500.
- 🤨 It's unclear if consumers want/will adopt wearing headsets regularly, so neither metaverse vision is guaranteed to win out.
- 😡 Major platforms like YouTube, Netflix & Spotify won't offer dedicated Apple VR apps at launch due to disputes over App Store policies.
- 😎 While flawed, Apple & Meta's headsets represent important early movers in a potential next platform shift - like early smartphones.
- 😮 Key improvements needed for mass adoption: lower cost, longer battery, lighter/normal looking design.
- ❓ The big outstanding question is whether VR/AR headsets become the next dominant personal computing platform over time.
Q & A
What are the key differences between Meta's and Apple's visions for VR headsets?
-Meta envisions the metaverse for social interactions, work, and entertainment. Apple sees VR headsets as a personal device for media consumption and productivity tools. Meta focuses on shared virtual spaces while Apple promotes individual use cases.
Why does Apple have an advantage in hardware and supply chain?
-Apple has decades of hardware experience and strong supplier relationships. It owns proprietary chips and software. Meta relies on Qualcomm and Google's Android. Apple's vertical integration gives it an edge.
How do the Meta Quest 3 and Apple Vision Pro compare in terms of quality and price?
-The Vision Pro has superior quality but costs $3,500, 7x more than the $500 Quest 3. Reviewers say the Vision Pro is a big leap ahead in quality, but not quite 7x better. The price gap could limit adoption for Apple.
Why don't some streaming apps support the Vision Pro at launch?
-Apps like YouTube, Netflix and Spotify won't offer dedicated Vision Pro apps due to Apple's 30% cut on in-app purchases. This could limit the headset's appeal.
Could developers' issues with Apple's control hurt the Vision Pro?
-Developers have complained about Apple's strict app standards and control. This could restrict apps and creativity on the headset if not addressed.
What are the key limitations of current VR headsets?
-Early headsets are bulky, expensive, have short battery life, and comfort issues for long-term wear. But these are expected to improve over time.
What is a possible alternative outcome to VR headsets?
-Neither meta nor Apple wins. Consumers may prefer other wearables like smart glasses or rely more on phones. VR may remain a niche market.
How does the current VR market compare to early smartphones?
-Like bulky, expensive early phones, VR headsets are early in development. As the technology matures, comfort, price and capabilities will likely improve.
Could Meta and Apple both succeed with different approaches?
-Yes, like Microsoft and Apple both succeeded by appealing to different markets in PCs. The market is likely big enough for both companies.
What developments are needed for VR headsets to gain mainstream adoption?
-Lower prices, better comfort for long-term wear, compelling use cases beyond gaming/metaverse, and a critical mass of user adoption.
Outlines
😄 Tech titans Meta and Apple offer different VR headsets
Paragraph 1 introduces the video topic about the competition between Meta's Quest 3 and Apple's Vision Pro virtual reality headsets. It describes Meta's focus on building the metaverse and providing a whole new virtual world. In contrast, Apple's vision is more focused on personal use cases that extend phone capabilities.
😎 Apple has advantages with better hardware, ecosystem, and supply chain
Paragraph 2 explains Apple's advantages over Meta including better hardware design, established ecosystem of Apple devices, and control over the supply chain. However, Apple's headset is much more expensive at $3500 versus Meta's $500 Quest 3. There are also issues with lack of key streaming apps at launch.
Mindmap
Keywords
💡Virtual reality headsets
💡Metaverse
💡Augmented reality
💡Immersive experiences
💡Ecosystem
💡Consumer adoption
💡Developer support
💡Retail strategy
💡Computing platforms
💡Early stage technology
Highlights
Meta's vision is centered on the metaverse, while Apple sees headsets as a personal device and extension of the iPhone
Meta's graphics and experience have been criticized as ugly and lacking, while Apple's hardware and design is seen as far superior
Apple has tight integration with its existing ecosystem of devices, while Meta lacks this hardware advantage
Key streaming apps like YouTube and Spotify will not launch dedicated apps for Apple's headset at release
Apple's strict control over its platform causes issues for some developers and limits accessibility/affordability
The Vision Pro costs $3,500, 7 times more than Meta's $500 Quest 3 headset
Early VR/AR headsets are likely the first step in a transition to more personalized, tailored computing experiences
It's uncertain if consumers will embrace wearing headsets for extended periods as part of daily life
Apple and Meta have taken different approaches, but both could succeed by appealing to different markets
Another possibility is that neither approach succeeds and consumers reject headsets in favor of other formats
Apple and Meta are early movers in attempting a major platform shift, similar to early smartphones
Headsets are likely to improve over time and eventually resemble normal glasses
The big investor question is whether any company can turn niche AR/VR into a mainstream computing platform
Apple has tight supply chain control and a retail presence for customers to try headsets
Meta relies on Qualcomm chips and Google's Android OS instead of proprietary hardware/software
Transcripts
[Music]
two Tech Titans offering different price
points different specs and most
importantly different versions of the
future of virtual reality Quest 3 is
it's the most powerful headset that we
have ever shipped an entirely new AR
platform with a revolutionary new
product call them headsets ski goggles
face computers 2024 is turning out to be
the year of virtual reality with apple
and meta duking it out
[Music]
what don't look down don't look
down now this is an office this is
incredible this week on Tech check why
the headset battle is apples to
lose apple and meta see their headsets
as having way different functions in
society meta's big bet is on the
metaverse even changing its name to
reflect that back in 2021 I am proud to
announce that starting today our company
is now meta mark zuer ber envisions a
whole new world one where we could live
our entire lives in the metaverse you'll
probably have a photorealistic avatar
for work a stylized one for hanging out
and maybe even a fantasy one for gaming
you're going to be able to bring things
from the physical world into the
metamers almost any type of media that
can be represented digitally photos
videos art music movies books games you
name it so that's really where he
centered his virtual reality headset The
Meta Quest and maybe because this was
during Co he also tried to pitch it as a
substitute for inperson interactions the
feeling of presence this is the defining
quality of the metaverse you're going to
really feel like you're there with other
people you'll see their facial
expressions you'll see their body
language after party
passes yes you'd put one on to watch a
concert with friends play
pingpong like a shop workout even his
vision of work was about being in a
virtual office imagine if you could be
at the office without the commute and
when you're ready to share what you've
been working on you can present it as if
you're right there with the team but
that kind of lifestyle change is a huge
ask for consumers especially when being
in the metaverse it still isn't actually
that great he's getting dragged on the
internet for how ugly the graphics of
this game are Fortune calling it an
international laughing stock slate
labeling the look so stupid and Forbes
asking does Mark Zuckerberg not
understand how bad his metaverse is and
wearing the headsets for long periods
might even make you feel sick that was
so much time in Avatar meetings my eyes
hurt and my head hurts plus the
metaverse only works if your network of
friends and co-workers also Buys in so
if you want to play poker with your
friends in virtual reality all of them
also need meta headsets so that's meta
pitch let's compare it to Apples they
show someone sitting alone in a room
looking at photos watching watching a
movie meditating a much more personal
Vision that is essentially an extension
of things that you already do on your
phone Apple's vision of the future of
work it's just a higher resolution
laptop with more screens the web comes
to life at Fantastic scale text is crisp
and easy to read social interactions
they also seem to have less friction you
can FaceTime with someone who joins on
their phone hi hey hi could you rece
instead of needing another headset
someone start talking to you you can
look at them and they'll kind of just
fade into view so that was also
something that was just kind of
unbelievable easier integration into a
normal routine versus A Whole New World
in the metaverse Apple also knows that
it's introducing a technology that is in
its first iterations that consumers are
just getting used to and that difference
in messaging is being felt by consumers
also I thought it was pretty cool where
they showed the lady on the on the on
the plane who put these on and put the
the earphones in and and right and I
said well you can already do that on on
The Meta thing and I said well the meta
sucks because they don't Market this the
right way if you can actually do that
Apple has two other important advantages
over meta the first is its ecosystem
even connect your Mac simply by looking
at it turning a 13-in
screen into a giant display most people
who buy the vision Pro they will already
own Apple devices adding another just
lets all of them work together meta
doesn't have that same Hardware Edge
second Apple owns its supply chain The
Vision Pro uses Apple's proprietary
software in custom silicon whereas meta
relies on Google's Android system and
Qualcomm chips Apple has spent a lot of
time you know finessing the hardware the
semiconductors the the entire like
physical device looks much more polished
and elevated compared to what meta has
put out in the Market Apple has been in
hardware for decades it's built up
crucial relationships with manufacturers
up and down the supply chain and it has
a retail footprint of more than 500
stores for users to actually try out the
headset for themselves but perhaps the
most telling most reviewers who have
tried both they say apple is Leaps and
Bounds ahead by far this is the best
virtual or augmented reality headset out
there this is something that has not
been seen in in headsets that I've used
and I've used all of them it was unlike
anything I had experienced inside of any
type of VR AR headset because it's like
just the apple
way of course that all comes with a huge
caveat The Vision Pro is seven times
more expensive than the latest meta
headset $3,500 compared to just 500 for
the quest 3 so is it seven times better
you can buy an iPhone an iPad and a a
laptop for that 3500 some say no the
camera quality is obviously not at the
level of reality but it wasn't with the
Apple Pro either if reality is a 10 out
of 10 The Vision Pro is an 8.5 out of 10
and The Meta Quest is a 7 out of 10 it's
amazingly good there's another big
hurdle for Apple that has become clear
for a device that is all about media
consumption The Vision Pro will not have
some of the most popular streaming apps
when it launches YouTube and Spotify are
joining Netflix saying they will not
offer dedicated apps for Apple's Vision
Pro headset and instead are directing
customers to use their websites instead
Apple has long had a fraught
relationship with some developers who
take issue with a 30% cut that Apple
takes on inapp transactions the reason
this is coming out or at least getting
announced so early but it's not coming
out till next year is to give this
window for developers to start
developing their own apps and making
cool things for this headset to do that
are way more interesting and way more
functional at a time when users are
still deciding whether to Shell out for
such an expensive device the lack of key
app that could spell trouble especially
if it's YouTube and Netflix but
developers issues with apple goes even
deeper than App Store policies an
age-old tug-of war between Macs versus
PCS hello I'm a Mac and I'm a PC iOS
versus Android the gatekeeper issue
Apple likes to have total control over
the apps that are allowed on their
systems with strict standards and
guidelines for users that might mean
using an iPhone or an iPad is simple
clean and intuitive but for for
developers it's been called a set of
handcuffs that limits creativity and
learning potential when critic asks of
the Vision Pro how great would it be for
this to fail one Bloomberg columnist
puts it this way it feels like the Mac
versus PC battles of the 1990s and the
2000s Steve Jobs offered Sleek hardware
and software but it was Bill Gates who
taught the world how to use a computer
by making it accessible and
affordable so if we're comparing Steve
Jobs and apple to Bill Gates and
Microsoft who won well the question
answers itself both did they're the two
most valuable companies in the world
both worth more than $3 trillion they
just appeal to different markets so
could the same fate be true for these
headsets could both meta and apple win
but another possible outcome here
neither win what if consumers never get
used to wearing something on their face
all the time instead the age of AI gives
way to pocket sized devices with the
syst like the Humane pin rabbit R1 or
just an app on your phone what is
undeniably true though apple and meta
are some of the first movers attempting
this next platform shift when the first
smartphone came out it weighed 2 and 1
12 lbs it was 8 in long it cost
$4,000 and it took 10 hours to charge
for 30 minutes of talk time and we see
how that evolve they're all part of this
transition to a more personalized you
know computing
experience which is tailored for us
headsets are likely to get lighter
cheaper have longer battery life and
maybe look more like normal glasses the
big question for investors is the
investment worth it is Apple meta or
some other company able to turn this
Niche quirky product into the next
Computing
[Music]
platform
[Music]
تصفح المزيد من مقاطع الفيديو ذات الصلة
Apple Vision Pro is FAILED already
A Guided Tour of Apple Vision Pro
Vision Pro's Arrival Echoes Mac's Launch 40 Years Ago
Apple Vision Pro Review - Why does this EXIST?
XReal Air 2 Pro VS Meta Quest 3 - Can VR/AR enhance your productivity?
Meta Quest 3 Unboxing + Accessories - The Ultimate VR Bundle!
Facebook's Metaverse: Peluang atau Ancaman?
5.0 / 5 (0 votes)