Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Of course the AVP is much nicer than the Quest 2. For more than 10 times the price it had better be.

It doesn't really describe the companies' different abilities but the design goals. The quest 2 was clearly 'make it as cheap as possible so lots of people can buy it' and the AVP's was 'make it as good as it can be, price is not a factor'

Still though, both products eventually get stuck at the same point: a killer usecase. Neither has a compelling reason to actually want to put it on. There's very few things that are better in VR and the ones that are are really niche. I personally love VR gaming and stimulations. I love VR for it and I use it a ton. But those are pretty niche.

But socialising in VR is not really a great user experience despite most of meta's focus going there. And Apple? They don't really have any usecase that shines. Maybe watching movies but even that works better on an actual TV as you can share the experience with others.



My take on VR/AR socialization is that it can work, but only if it's as low-friction as picking up a phone and doing a video call is today, which isn't achievable so long as we're still stuck on headsets as the primary form factor.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: