Meta needs other companies & developers to challenge Apple Vision Pro

Posted:
in Apple Vision Pro edited April 22

Apple's Vision Pro headset is gaining traction, so Meta has opened up its VR operating system to other manufacturers to maintain its lead in a market it previously dominated.

Meta Quest 3 on a table with a blurred background
Meta Quest 3



As a newcomer in the virtual reality space, Apple's Vision Pro brings with it the formidable reputation of its creator. Established companies like Meta have been on high alert to compete with Apple.

The latest move from Meta is the Monday announcement of Meta Horizon OS. It's an attempt to open the Meta Quest platform to third-party hardware makers.

In that announcement, Meta made it clear that it has teamed up with major tech players like ASUS, Lenovo, and Xbox to bolster its hardware offerings. These collaborations are set to produce a range of devices tailored to different user needs, from gaming to productivity and entertainment.

A person wearing VR glasses crouches, interacting with virtual objects in a futuristic room with sky and cloud views.



For instance, ASUS's Republic of Gamers is crafting a performance gaming headset. Lenovo will leverage its expertise to create mixed-reality devices.

Microsoft is expected to release a Xbox-branded headset through the program as well.

Moreover, Qualcomm Technologies plays a crucial role in this ecosystem, providing the Snapdragon processors that power the Meta Quest devices. These processors are integral to delivering the high performance necessary for the sophisticated VR experiences that users demand.

Meta is also changing its app ecosystem to support the hardware expansion. Integrating the Meta Horizon Store and App Lab allows developers more freedom to market their apps and reach a broader audience.

Apple Vision Pro represents a significant challenge for Meta, even though Mark Zuckerberg doesn't seem to think so. With the Vision Pro, Apple not only enters the VR space but does so with the potential to capture a substantial market share quickly, given its brand cachet and name recognition.

Some of the images that Meta included in its announcement are a call back to the Apple Vision Pro announcement. They feature multiple VR screens for productivity and immersive gaming experiences.

A person wearing AR glasses at a desk with holographic displays, interacting with a virtual meeting and 3D architectural model.



"Along with a more open app store, Meta Horizon OS will continue to give people more choice in how to access apps," the announcement says.

The release also takes a dig at Apple's App Store, and points out that popular gaming services like Xbox Game Pass Ultimate and Steam Link are usable. It also notes that the company's own Air Link works for wirelessly streaming PC software to headsets.

While not Microsoft's Game Pass or Steam Link, third parties are working now on SteamVR streaming to Apple Vision Pro. And, a Mac's main screen streams to Apple Vision Pro just fine.

One thing Meta has not done in the interest of openness, though, is open its bootloader.



Read on AppleInsider

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 18
    This will end well, *not*! Let's give up control of an enclosed ecosystem to provide a "better" customer experience?
    watto_cobratmayssfe11
  • Reply 2 of 18
    ssfe11ssfe11 Posts: 32member
    A social media company competing with Apple on hardware/software is just silly.
    edited April 22 watto_cobralolliverMisterKittmaydanoxwilliamlondon
  • Reply 3 of 18
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 7,769member
    ssfe11 said:
    A social media company competing with Apple on hardware/software is just silly.
    In this case, isn't it the other way around? 

    Meta is the established and dominant player and Apple is the one stepping in. 
    byronl
  • Reply 4 of 18
    AppleZuluAppleZulu Posts: 2,046member
    It's truly odd that other companies keep looking at Apple and conclude that they must resort to the MS Windows model to compete with them.

    Apple's business model is all about building the hardware and operating system software together at the same time, and exclusively as a unit. As a result their hardware and software engineering teams deal with a tiny fraction of the variables that they must accommodate as they build out the system, and they control all of them. The OS must only accommodate a handful of models (at the most) with a handful of feature variations over a few years' upgrade iterations. Over time, they know how many past model years the current OS will support, and they have a pretty good idea what future OS upgrades are in the pipeline that the current year's hardware model will support in the future.

    A company like Meta opening its OS to other companies' hardware may broaden their potential install base without having to invest in hardware R&D and manufacturing capital, but it also involves vastly expanding the variables the OS must try to anticipate, while controlling or even predicting very few of them. Likewise, future OS development must either be communicated to endless manufacturers (assuring their future plans are not particularly secure), or must be kept on a tight leash, limiting manufacturers' capacity to plan and ramp up production for new models with new features. Likewise, it means Meta must deal with hardware manufactures competing with each other to add new bells and whistles, generating both OS bloat as well as OS conflicts and instability.

    With all that, it's hard to understand why no one, in some category or another, has ever adopted Apple's "in house" design paradigm as the best way to compete with Apple. It's certainly a harder uphill climb to get there, but the other way always ends up being a race to the low-margin bottom.
    badmonkwatto_cobralollivertmayssfe11byronlwilliamlondonappleinsideruserdanox
  • Reply 5 of 18
    davidwdavidw Posts: 2,073member
    avon b7 said:
    ssfe11 said:
    A social media company competing with Apple on hardware/software is just silly.
    In this case, isn't it the other way around? 

    Meta is the established and dominant player and Apple is the one stepping in. 

    Once again you have miss understood the nuance of what ssfe11 was saying about competition. He is commenting on how Meta (a social media company) is now trying to compete with Apple (a hardware/software company) by trying to create better hardware/software integration for their VR glasses. Which they seem to only be able to do by having others create Meta VR glasses with better hardware/software integration, for them. While Apple can do that all in-house and have a long successful history of creating devices with strong hardware/software integration that consumers wants to use and are willing to pay extra for.

    That doesn't mean that Meta can't still compete with Apple on price. Selling low cost devices that makes little profit or at a loss, just to gain market share, is not one of Apple's strong points when it comes to competing. Just like how creating devices with strong hardware/software integration is not one of Meta strong points.
    edited April 22 ssfe11williamlondon
  • Reply 6 of 18
    XedXed Posts: 2,626member
    avon b7 said:
    ssfe11 said:
    A social media company competing with Apple on hardware/software is just silly.
    In this case, isn't it the other way around? 

    Meta is the established and dominant player and Apple is the one stepping in. 
    Nice try, but he didn't say on VR, he said hardware/software which Apple has been doing since their inception.
    tmayssfe11williamlondon
  • Reply 7 of 18
    charlesncharlesn Posts: 889member
    Well, that didn't take long, did it? Not even three months after the Vision Pro delivered and Meta -- which had an 8 year head start on Apple in headsets -- just flew the white flag of surrender, err, I mean, "opened the Meta Quest platform to third party hardware manufacturers." Translation: "We've been at this 8 years and our headset still sucks compared to Vision Pro 1.0, so maybe some other company can bail us out." Yeah, this should work well... maybe Lenovo can make a Yoga version of the headset that turns into a jockstrap with cup? 
    tmayssfe11byronlwatto_cobradanox
  • Reply 8 of 18
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 7,769member
    davidw said:
    avon b7 said:
    ssfe11 said:
    A social media company competing with Apple on hardware/software is just silly.
    In this case, isn't it the other way around? 

    Meta is the established and dominant player and Apple is the one stepping in. 

    Once again you have miss understood the nuance of what ssfe11 was saying about competition. He is commenting on how Meta (a social media company) is now trying to compete with Apple (a hardware/software company) by trying to create better hardware/software integration for their VR glasses. Which they seem to only be able to do by having others create Meta VR glasses with better hardware/software integration, for them. While Apple can do that all in-house and have a long successful history of creating devices with strong hardware/software integration that consumers wants to use and are willing to pay extra for.

    That doesn't mean that Meta can't still compete with Apple on price. Selling low cost devices that makes little profit or at a loss, just to gain market share, is not one of Apple's strong points when it comes to competing. Just like how creating devices with strong hardware/software integration is not one of Meta strong points.
    The OP is commenting on this article and, independently of what Meta may be classified as in terms of type of company, in this case, Apple is moving into Meta territory.

    On price, which is irrelevant in this context, yes Meta is cheaper but not 'low cost' but the point is it remains the dominant player. 

    It's also worth mentioning that Facebook was basically never just a software company. It has had massive backend self developed hardware that the public is often unaware of. The same applies to Microsoft, Google and Amazon.

    Even way back in 2016 it completed what was then one of the most advanced undersea cables linking the US to Europe. It was a three way effort between Microsoft, Facebook and Telxius. That project (Marea) involved hardware from all three companies. 
  • Reply 9 of 18
    tmaytmay Posts: 6,378member
    avon b7 said:
    davidw said:
    avon b7 said:
    ssfe11 said:
    A social media company competing with Apple on hardware/software is just silly.
    In this case, isn't it the other way around? 

    Meta is the established and dominant player and Apple is the one stepping in. 

    Once again you have miss understood the nuance of what ssfe11 was saying about competition. He is commenting on how Meta (a social media company) is now trying to compete with Apple (a hardware/software company) by trying to create better hardware/software integration for their VR glasses. Which they seem to only be able to do by having others create Meta VR glasses with better hardware/software integration, for them. While Apple can do that all in-house and have a long successful history of creating devices with strong hardware/software integration that consumers wants to use and are willing to pay extra for.

    That doesn't mean that Meta can't still compete with Apple on price. Selling low cost devices that makes little profit or at a loss, just to gain market share, is not one of Apple's strong points when it comes to competing. Just like how creating devices with strong hardware/software integration is not one of Meta strong points.
    The OP is commenting on this article and, independently of what Meta may be classified as in terms of type of company, in this case, Apple is moving into Meta territory.

    On price, which is irrelevant in this context, yes Meta is cheaper but not 'low cost' but the point is it remains the dominant player. 

    It's also worth mentioning that Facebook was basically never just a software company. It has had massive backend self developed hardware that the public is often unaware of. The same applies to Microsoft, Google and Amazon.

    Even way back in 2016 it completed what was then one of the most advanced undersea cables linking the US to Europe. It was a three way effort between Microsoft, Facebook and Telxius. That project (Marea) involved hardware from all three companies. 
    Meta doesn't "own" any territory; Zuckerberg just put up a "sign" to that effect because he thought that he and Meta are special.

    Now he finds that he and Meta;

    1) aren't special, and;

    2) won't find any friends

    But sure, telegraphing to the world that you are in deep trouble is a great move...
    ssfe11williamlondonwatto_cobra
  • Reply 10 of 18
    sirdirsirdir Posts: 188member
    This will end well, *not*! Let's give up control of an enclosed ecosystem to provide a "better" customer experience?
    The way Apple controls the vision pro it’s doa 
    williamlondon
  • Reply 11 of 18
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 7,769member
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    davidw said:
    avon b7 said:
    ssfe11 said:
    A social media company competing with Apple on hardware/software is just silly.
    In this case, isn't it the other way around? 

    Meta is the established and dominant player and Apple is the one stepping in. 

    Once again you have miss understood the nuance of what ssfe11 was saying about competition. He is commenting on how Meta (a social media company) is now trying to compete with Apple (a hardware/software company) by trying to create better hardware/software integration for their VR glasses. Which they seem to only be able to do by having others create Meta VR glasses with better hardware/software integration, for them. While Apple can do that all in-house and have a long successful history of creating devices with strong hardware/software integration that consumers wants to use and are willing to pay extra for.

    That doesn't mean that Meta can't still compete with Apple on price. Selling low cost devices that makes little profit or at a loss, just to gain market share, is not one of Apple's strong points when it comes to competing. Just like how creating devices with strong hardware/software integration is not one of Meta strong points.
    The OP is commenting on this article and, independently of what Meta may be classified as in terms of type of company, in this case, Apple is moving into Meta territory.

    On price, which is irrelevant in this context, yes Meta is cheaper but not 'low cost' but the point is it remains the dominant player. 

    It's also worth mentioning that Facebook was basically never just a software company. It has had massive backend self developed hardware that the public is often unaware of. The same applies to Microsoft, Google and Amazon.

    Even way back in 2016 it completed what was then one of the most advanced undersea cables linking the US to Europe. It was a three way effort between Microsoft, Facebook and Telxius. That project (Marea) involved hardware from all three companies. 
    Meta doesn't "own" any territory; Zuckerberg just put up a "sign" to that effect because he thought that he and Meta are special.

    Now he finds that he and Meta;

    1) aren't special, and;

    2) won't find any friends

    But sure, telegraphing to the world that you are in deep trouble is a great move...
    "own"? 

    The facts remain the same. 

    Apple is moving into Meta territory. 

    Meta is the dominant player. 

    As for the value of the move to 'opening up', only time will tell. 
  • Reply 12 of 18
    tmaytmay Posts: 6,378member
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    davidw said:
    avon b7 said:
    ssfe11 said:
    A social media company competing with Apple on hardware/software is just silly.
    In this case, isn't it the other way around? 

    Meta is the established and dominant player and Apple is the one stepping in. 

    Once again you have miss understood the nuance of what ssfe11 was saying about competition. He is commenting on how Meta (a social media company) is now trying to compete with Apple (a hardware/software company) by trying to create better hardware/software integration for their VR glasses. Which they seem to only be able to do by having others create Meta VR glasses with better hardware/software integration, for them. While Apple can do that all in-house and have a long successful history of creating devices with strong hardware/software integration that consumers wants to use and are willing to pay extra for.

    That doesn't mean that Meta can't still compete with Apple on price. Selling low cost devices that makes little profit or at a loss, just to gain market share, is not one of Apple's strong points when it comes to competing. Just like how creating devices with strong hardware/software integration is not one of Meta strong points.
    The OP is commenting on this article and, independently of what Meta may be classified as in terms of type of company, in this case, Apple is moving into Meta territory.

    On price, which is irrelevant in this context, yes Meta is cheaper but not 'low cost' but the point is it remains the dominant player. 

    It's also worth mentioning that Facebook was basically never just a software company. It has had massive backend self developed hardware that the public is often unaware of. The same applies to Microsoft, Google and Amazon.

    Even way back in 2016 it completed what was then one of the most advanced undersea cables linking the US to Europe. It was a three way effort between Microsoft, Facebook and Telxius. That project (Marea) involved hardware from all three companies. 
    Meta doesn't "own" any territory; Zuckerberg just put up a "sign" to that effect because he thought that he and Meta are special.

    Now he finds that he and Meta;

    1) aren't special, and;

    2) won't find any friends

    But sure, telegraphing to the world that you are in deep trouble is a great move...
    "own"? 

    The facts remain the same. 

    Apple is moving into Meta territory. 

    Meta is the dominant player. 

    As for the value of the move to 'opening up', only time will tell. 
    https://www.cnbc.com/2023/12/19/vr-market-shrinking-as-meta-pours-billions-of-dollars-into-metaverse.html

    • Sales of VR headsets and AR glasses in the U.S. have plummeted nearly 40% in 2023, as of Nov. 25, according to data shared with CNBC by research firm Circana.
    • Meta has continued to burn through billions of dollars a quarter developing the metaverse, which CEO Mark Zuckerberg says is the future for his company.
    • The debut in October of Meta’s Quest 3 headset helped lift the VR market over the holiday period but wasn’t enough to make up for the rest of 2023.
    Meta is an ad company. 

    https://qz.com/meta-q4-2023-earnings-metaverse-ai-1851218383#:~:text=To%20be%20sure%2C%20the%20VR,by%20the%20company's%20ad%20business.

    Mark Zuckerberg is on a mission to make the metaverse happen. In the last three months ending Dec. 31, Meta’s Reality Labs division hit $1 billion for the first time — while also recording $4.65 billion in losses. To be sure, the VR headsets still make up a sliver of Meta’s overall revenue, which continues to be driven by the company’s ad business.

    “It was a good quarter,” Zuckerberg said on a conference call with analysts and investors. “We’ve made a lot of progress on our vision for advancing AI and the metaverse.” Meta’s stock is up 14.92% in after-hours trading.


    watto_cobra
  • Reply 13 of 18
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 7,769member
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    tmay said:
    avon b7 said:
    davidw said:
    avon b7 said:
    ssfe11 said:
    A social media company competing with Apple on hardware/software is just silly.
    In this case, isn't it the other way around? 

    Meta is the established and dominant player and Apple is the one stepping in. 

    Once again you have miss understood the nuance of what ssfe11 was saying about competition. He is commenting on how Meta (a social media company) is now trying to compete with Apple (a hardware/software company) by trying to create better hardware/software integration for their VR glasses. Which they seem to only be able to do by having others create Meta VR glasses with better hardware/software integration, for them. While Apple can do that all in-house and have a long successful history of creating devices with strong hardware/software integration that consumers wants to use and are willing to pay extra for.

    That doesn't mean that Meta can't still compete with Apple on price. Selling low cost devices that makes little profit or at a loss, just to gain market share, is not one of Apple's strong points when it comes to competing. Just like how creating devices with strong hardware/software integration is not one of Meta strong points.
    The OP is commenting on this article and, independently of what Meta may be classified as in terms of type of company, in this case, Apple is moving into Meta territory.

    On price, which is irrelevant in this context, yes Meta is cheaper but not 'low cost' but the point is it remains the dominant player. 

    It's also worth mentioning that Facebook was basically never just a software company. It has had massive backend self developed hardware that the public is often unaware of. The same applies to Microsoft, Google and Amazon.

    Even way back in 2016 it completed what was then one of the most advanced undersea cables linking the US to Europe. It was a three way effort between Microsoft, Facebook and Telxius. That project (Marea) involved hardware from all three companies. 
    Meta doesn't "own" any territory; Zuckerberg just put up a "sign" to that effect because he thought that he and Meta are special.

    Now he finds that he and Meta;

    1) aren't special, and;

    2) won't find any friends

    But sure, telegraphing to the world that you are in deep trouble is a great move...
    "own"? 

    The facts remain the same. 

    Apple is moving into Meta territory. 

    Meta is the dominant player. 

    As for the value of the move to 'opening up', only time will tell. 
    https://www.cnbc.com/2023/12/19/vr-market-shrinking-as-meta-pours-billions-of-dollars-into-metaverse.html

    • Sales of VR headsets and AR glasses in the U.S. have plummeted nearly 40% in 2023, as of Nov. 25, according to data shared with CNBC by research firm Circana.
    • Meta has continued to burn through billions of dollars a quarter developing the metaverse, which CEO Mark Zuckerberg says is the future for his company.
    • The debut in October of Meta’s Quest 3 headset helped lift the VR market over the holiday period but wasn’t enough to make up for the rest of 2023.
    Meta is an ad company. 

    https://qz.com/meta-q4-2023-earnings-metaverse-ai-1851218383#:~:text=To%20be%20sure%2C%20the%20VR,by%20the%20company's%20ad%20business.

    Mark Zuckerberg is on a mission to make the metaverse happen. In the last three months ending Dec. 31, Meta’s Reality Labs division hit $1 billion for the first time — while also recording $4.65 billion in losses. To be sure, the VR headsets still make up a sliver of Meta’s overall revenue, which continues to be driven by the company’s ad business.

    “It was a good quarter,” Zuckerberg said on a conference call with analysts and investors. “We’ve made a lot of progress on our vision for advancing AI and the metaverse.” Meta’s stock is up 14.92% in after-hours trading.


    Meta is many things. Not unlike Apple. 

    Doesn't change the facts as stated above. 
  • Reply 14 of 18
    charlesncharlesn Posts: 889member
    AppleZulu said:
    With all that, it's hard to understand why no one, in some category or another, has ever adopted Apple's "in house" design paradigm as the best way to compete with Apple. It's certainly a harder uphill climb to get there, but the other way always ends up being a race to the low-margin bottom.
    Not "no one." There's a little company called Google that now has a pretty wide and expanding array of devices for which it also designs the OS. So you can have an "all Google" experience. Of course, unlike Apple, it also licenses its various OSes to third parties, which can make the customer experience of say, Android, very inconsistent. Where Google doesn't compete with Apple, in terms of offering its own hardware/OS solution, is computers. Fair disclosure: I despise Google for its wanton abuse of consumer privacy and won't use any of their hardware or software products, but there's no denying their continued creep into Apple's arena of designing both hardware and the OS that operates it. 
    williamlondonwatto_cobra
  • Reply 15 of 18
    XedXed Posts: 2,626member
    charlesn said:
    AppleZulu said:
    With all that, it's hard to understand why no one, in some category or another, has ever adopted Apple's "in house" design paradigm as the best way to compete with Apple. It's certainly a harder uphill climb to get there, but the other way always ends up being a race to the low-margin bottom.
    Not "no one." There's a little company called Google that now has a pretty wide and expanding array of devices for which it also designs the OS. So you can have an "all Google" experience. Of course, unlike Apple, it also licenses its various OSes to third parties, which can make the customer experience of say, Android, very inconsistent. Where Google doesn't compete with Apple, in terms of offering its own hardware/OS solution, is computers. Fair disclosure: I despise Google for its wanton abuse of consumer privacy and won't use any of their hardware or software products, but there's no denying their continued creep into Apple's arena of designing both hardware and the OS that operates it. 
    What processors do they design for Pixel phones and Chromebooks?
    williamlondonwatto_cobra
  • Reply 16 of 18
    danoxdanox Posts: 2,984member
    avon b7 said:
    ssfe11 said:
    A social media company competing with Apple on hardware/software is just silly.
    In this case, isn't it the other way around? 

    Meta is the established and dominant player and Apple is the one stepping in. 


    So what happen to Nokia, Palm, Windows Phone, Blackberry, Motorola (Illinois) when the Apple iPhone was released in 2007?


    williamlondonwatto_cobra
  • Reply 17 of 18
    avon b7avon b7 Posts: 7,769member
    danox said:
    avon b7 said:
    ssfe11 said:
    A social media company competing with Apple on hardware/software is just silly.
    In this case, isn't it the other way around? 

    Meta is the established and dominant player and Apple is the one stepping in. 


    So what happen to Nokia, Palm, Windows Phone, Blackberry, Motorola (Illinois) when the Apple iPhone was released in 2007?


    Don't count those chickens before they hatch. 

    That said, it's the same situation. Apple wasn't the dominant player when the iPhone came to market. 

    Then Samsung popped onto the scene and became the dominant player. 

    In terms of software (iOS/Android) Apple isn't dominant either. 
  • Reply 18 of 18
    danoxdanox Posts: 2,984member
    avon b7 said:
    danox said:
    avon b7 said:
    ssfe11 said:
    A social media company competing with Apple on hardware/software is just silly.
    In this case, isn't it the other way around? 

    Meta is the established and dominant player and Apple is the one stepping in. 


    So what happen to Nokia, Palm, Windows Phone, Blackberry, Motorola (Illinois) when the Apple iPhone was released in 2007?


    Don't count those chickens before they hatch. 

    That said, it's the same situation. Apple wasn't the dominant player when the iPhone came to market. 

    Then Samsung popped onto the scene and became the dominant player. 

    In terms of software (iOS/Android) Apple isn't dominant either. 

    I count them all Microsoft if they felt a sense of urgency (they don't) in combo with Qualcomm might stand a chance down the road but not Meta, Samsung and not Google they simply can't execute in house software/hardware the little details are beyond them they can only build facsimiles afterwards.
    edited April 23
Sign In or Register to comment.