Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg Says Quest 3 is Better Than Apple Vision Pro

[TommyBoy5]

I would have to agree that the Quest 3 is better at least for me and what I would use it for. Mostly because I can hook it up to my gaming PC for some serious VR gaming at awesome frame rates which is NEVER going to be possible at that level with a locked down Apple device. Sure they have made advancements and it is actually possible to port games over to their M chips and some of them run decently but it will never be as good as a dedicated GPU. Also the price. My build was $3300 with i9 and RTX 4090. Add another $500 for a Quest 3 and I am barely over MSRP on a Vision Pro.

Exactly. Bought my first Apple product in 1985 and have had every product since. In our family we have four iPhones, three iPads, three MBP, one MacBook Air M2, four sets of AirPods Pro 2, three AppleTV 4Ks, one Home Pod and three satellites and four Apple watches. Love the ecosystem.

But I also built a massive gaming PC with a 3090 three years ago and love that thing. I have the Quest 3 and the price of my gaming PC and Quest 3 together are less than $3000. The Quest 3 is a fun device and I really enjoy it. For $500 it's just an incredible piece of equipment.

There is no way in hell I'd pay $4000 out the door for the Vision Pro. The tech will trickle down and there will be a product down the road much less expensive with many more use-cases.

 

[steve09090]

I’m not following. Who makes a product and compares it to a competitors previous version and thinks it’s a selling point?

Zuckerberg.

 

[Uofmtiger]

I see a lot of people saying the AVP could replace the iPad down the road. How long will it take for the complaints that you will still need a Mac to do a lot of tasks? I have to think a $3500+ iPad replacement that still requires a Mac to get certain work done will have more complaints than we currently get with iPadOs. I wish they had just put a version of MacOs on the thing that can run both iPad and full MacOS apps. Maybe then, the price would make a lot more sense.

As for Zuck, I can’t really blame him for comparing the products and discussing the huge price difference. It may sell some headsets for those that are curious that can’t afford an AVP or those that want something cheaper to mess around with while they await a more polished version of AVP.

 

[contacos]

It’s on the company who built its job to develop a platform that other companies want to invest in. Why has Apple TV+ come to Samsung tv’s? Bc they made it desirable for Apple to build it. And who wants to side load apps? You proved my point that you have to go outside of the given resources to make it do what you want it to. No thanks.

But at least you have the option 🤷🏼‍♂️ for example, my understanding is that AVP only supports one virtual desktop and not even 3rd party apps can change this (unless I misunderstood) like what’s up with that!

 

[haydn!]

I mean, he’s possibly right, they do have a bit of head start afterall. But… does anyone take anything this guy says seriously anymore regardless?

 

[bgillander]

So people with an Apple Vision Pro are using it standalone without a Mac?

I would assume a few are, just like I use my Quest standalone, but that is beside the point. In your post you mentioned the $20 software and the hardware without listing the hardware price, like $20 was the only cost. That would be like me saying I can use the AVP to mirror my Mac for free, because the software is included at no cost. None of these things are free, and the $20 cost is just a blip in the equation. I see you later listed your total as being around $3000, which is a real number, so kudos to you.

It is just getting tiring seeing everyone going on about the cost of the AVP like the build cost is the same as the Quest. And beyond the build cost, it sounds like Apple is having trouble sourcing enough parts, so why would they sell them at a lower price, simply to be unable to supply the increased demand it would create? It would be a terrible business move, and it only makes sense to drop the price after they can produce more units. Some people are talking like Apple has never lowered prices, but the $8000 Mac II I was looking at in 1987 was much more expensive than the $8000 Mac of today. The AVP is looking like the Lisa to me... the expensive experiment that led to the Mac. I waited for the Mac... none of this is unheard of.

Meta Quest 3 & Apple Vision Pro Production Costs Estimated

A supply chain analysis firm estimated the costs of each component in Meta Quest 3 and Apple Vision Pro.

www.uploadvr.com

 

[jo-1]

Nailed it.

not really - what does too pricy mean? In reality it only means too pricy for your - which tells us more about you than the product. Price is a relative measure. One man's ceiling is another mans's floor.
I find these claims irritating and cringey

He makes good points! Vision Pro is too pricy !

same here - without any argument such comments are nothing more than a personal statement which is utterly unimportant for others.
Without a bigger context everything is too pricy - don't you think?

As a kid I perceived sweets to be too pricy.
Later I perceived used cars too pricy.
Nowadays I perceive houses too pricy

But there will be a time when I find private jets too pricy

There will be always something between you and your desired goal. The trick is to remove these roadblocks so you perceive it as adequate.

For me the AVP is rightly priced and easy within my financial reach - the income with my Apple shares easily pays for that within a year and I am pretty optimistic about the AVP and other new stuff driving the share price up - just have a look at the history in Apple shares.

 

[Hails09]

Not the same
The big difference is not a lot of people are going to pay Apple’s price for their headset

 

[Hails09]

Of course Mark is going to say that, it's his technology. Now it is up to the user which one is better. 🤷🏼‍♂️🤷🏼‍♂️🤷🏼‍♂️🤷🏼‍♂️

It will come down to price not everyone has 3,500 spare for a headset.

 

[Hails09]

I worked at Meta for years. And Quest 3 has a lot going for it right now. But Meta is just not good at software design. They're an engineering-led culture whose strongest suit is refinement and optimization (hence why they don't ever make anything - they just buy or copy existing apps and tweak the living hell of them).

Apple has destroyed them here in one particular category - design. AVP is designed in a way that transforms it beyond a nerdy novelty and becomes something that is actually enjoyable to use and is designed to scale into a much broader array of use cases (which, to be fair, have not yet come to fruition). It has an ecosystem advantage that Meta will neverrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr have (bc it also sucks at hardware). There are still missing pieces that give Meta a short term advantage in some areas, but I think any reasonable person can see that each of those pieces will be filled in via OS and developer updates over time.

Meta has a path to success, but it's limited to playing the budget alternative to Apple, stealing their best ideas quickly, and optimizing them to hell. If they get cocky and ignore the AVP (which I don't think they will), the Meta Quest will indeed end up being the new Blackberry.

Not everyone can afford 3,500 for a headset so it might be the other way round

 

[Izauze]

Not everyone can afford 3,500 for a headset so it might be the other way round

Sure, that’s why Metas path to success is the budget alternative.

 

[The-Real-Deal82]

Sure, that’s why Metas path to success is the budget alternative.

Budget alternatives always appeal more to the mainstream due to price and value for money. The Vision Pro could well blow the Meta product out of the water, but it’s a bit of a ‘so what?’ sort of scenario if it doesn’t appeal to the vast majority of consumers in that market.

The HomePod is a good example of that in that it was the best quality sounding smart assistant in its sector, but it was so expensive compared to anything Google or Amazon released, and it was a few years late to market, a bit like the AVP is now. Most people will buy the best value to spec ratio product that is available and if it does ‘enough’ of what people need, then it’s good enough. I suppose the standard iPhone has a similar sort of appeal too over the Pro. Not everybody wants the extra bells and whistles.

 

[steve09090]

Budget alternatives always appeal more to the mainstream due to price and value for money. The Vision Pro could well blow the Meta product out of the water, but it’s a bit of a ‘so what?’ sort of scenario if it doesn’t appeal to the vast majority of consumers in that market.

The HomePod is a good example of that in that it was the best quality sounding smart assistant in its sector, but it was so expensive compared to anything Google or Amazon released, and it was a few years late to market, a bit like the AVP is now. Most people will buy the best value to spec ratio product that is available and if it does ‘enough’ of what people need, then it’s good enough. I suppose the standard iPhone has a similar sort of appeal too over the Pro. Not everybody wants the extra bells and whistles.

You could also relate the same scenario to a Mac Pro or Pro Display XDR, high end audio gear, or even a Steinway Piano. There is always a market, and there is nothing requiring it to be mainstream. Samsung even makes 2 TV's at US$150,000 & $260,000!

Apple has a lot of history in bringing niche products to market. The main point is that it delivers what it promises, not if it’s good 'bang for buck' because that is purely subjective.

 

[The-Real-Deal82]

You could also relate the same scenario to a Mac Pro or Pro Display XDR, high end audio gear, or even a Steinway Piano. There is always a market, and there is nothing requiring it to be mainstream. Samsung even makes 2 TV's at US$150,000 & $260,000!

Apple has a lot of history in bringing niche products to market. The main point is that it delivers what it promises, not if it’s good 'bang for buck' because that is purely subjective.

I only make the point because it is currently being talked about on this forum like it is going to be replacing our Mac's and iPads etc. I understand it is a niche product and will have its own select market, but I do not believe many of the people adopting this technology realise that. In nearly every thread I have read on the AVP, there are suggestions its an iPad killer and we will not be using computers in the near future. I was just making the point that this sort of technology is very niche and the AVP even more niche in its segment due to price at this moment. The exposure this product is getting probably is disproportionate to its actual appeal is another way of putting it, but that is the marketing engine at play I suppose.

 

[steve09090]

I only make the point because it is currently being talked about on this forum like it is going to be replacing our Mac's and iPads etc. I understand it is a niche product and will have its own select market, but I do not believe many of the people adopting this technology realise that. In nearly every thread I have read on the AVP, there are suggestions its an iPad killer and we will not be using computers in the near future. I was just making the point that this sort of technology is very niche and the AVP even more niche in its segment due to price at this moment. The exposure this product is getting probably is disproportionate to its actual appeal is another way of putting it, but that is the marketing engine at play I suppose.

I agree that it won’t replace the iPad or even the Mac. And I don’t know that anyone can seriously suggest it will. But people will say things just to be inflammatory. It’s way way way too early to even speculate with any level of seriousness.

 

[Nick Turner]

Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg today compared the Apple Vision Pro to the $500 Meta Quest 3 in an Instagram video, and provided several reasons why he thinks Meta's headset is better than Apple's.

According to Zuckerberg, the Quest 3 is better "for the vast majority of things that people use mixed reality for," and here are some of the things he said about the Meta Quest 3:

• It's 7x less expensive than Vision Pro.
  
• It does high-quality passthrough with big screens "just like Vision Pro."
  
• Quest is a lot more comfortable - it's 120 grams less.
  
• There are no wires that get in the way when you move around.
  
• The field of view is wider and the screen is brighter.
  
• Vision Pro has motion blur when you move around. Quest is a lot crisper.
  
• Precision controllers are available, as is hand tracking, and Quest's hand tracking is more accurate.
  
• Quest's immersive content library is a lot deeper.
  
• You can watch YouTube or play Xbox.

Zuckerberg said that he was surprised at the "tradeoffs" that Apple had to make to provide a higher resolution screen than is offered by the Quest 3, sacrificing "comfort," "ergonomics," and more. He went on to explain that Apple is not always the leader in a new product category, and that he hopes Meta's devices will ultimately "win."The Meta Quest 3 launched back in October. It has two 2K LCD panels compared to the Apple Vision Pro's 4K microLED displays. It weighs 515 grams while the Vision Pro weighs 600 to 650 grams, and it does not have a separate battery pack. It uses Qualcomm's Snapdragon XR2 Gen 2 chipset, has 8GB RAM, and is equipped with Touch Plus controllers.

Meta has produced several headsets so far, including the Oculus Quest, the Oculus Quest 2, the Quest 3, and the Quest Pro. Apple plans to continue producing headsets, and rumors suggest that the next-generation version will be much more affordable. When explaining the price of the Vision Pro, Apple CEO Tim Cook said that it was "tomorrow's technology today."

Article Link: Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg Says Quest 3 is Better Than Apple Vision Pro

I alway feel like portions of the reviews that are related to the price are always off. Like, wouldn’t people already know $3500 is too expensive for them? He’s saying his are cheaper as if Apple, journalists, and general public hadn’t Figured that out already. Of all the cometary I’ve seen on the feature vs the price, I haven’t seen anyone disheveled about not being able to afford it. This is that new technology marketing thing he’s doing to try and pounce at some of the smaller backlash. He hopes to see a sales spike. And there’s nothing wrong with that. Just weirdly direct, as if he doesn’t want people to be excited about a new product hitting the market.

 

[SteelLungs69]

consider this - my friend is one of the biggest Apple users and fanboys ever.

He owns an oculus but won’t buy the Vision Pro because of the price.

The oculus does provide better value.

Your friend is broke, that doesn’t make the oculus better lol it just makes him cheap

 

[Hails09]

Sure, that’s why Metas path to success is the budget alternative.

No because most people don’t have 3,500 dollars to spend on a headset.
That’s not actually needed.

 

[Hails09]

Your friend is broke, that doesn’t make the oculus better lol it just makes him cheap

The price is a big factor not everyone has $3,500 dollars sitting around to spend on a headset.

 

[The-Real-Deal82]

Your friend is broke, that doesn’t make the oculus better lol it just makes him cheap

Or he is more sensible with his money and doesn't need to spend three and a half grand on something he can do with the Oculus? The whole brand snobbery thing is rather outdated in 2024 and we are lucky we have a market full of choice at all price points.

 

[webkit]

Which Apple product has gotten cheaper with future iterations? 🤔

The original iPhone launched at $499 (4GB) and $599 (8GB) with 2 year AT&T contract. The next generation iPhone 3G (8GB) was $199 also with 2 year AT&T contract.

Apple has also lowered retail prices of newly launched products. Some examples include the original Macintosh which was lowered in price less than eight months after launch and the original iiPhone which was lowered in price less than three months after launch.

Cheaper can also mean a lower starting price for the product line. The original Macintosh 128K launched at $2,495 but a couple of years later, the Macintosh 512Ke launched at $1,999. By 1990, new Macintosh models were available for under $1,000. The starting price of products like iPhones (e.g., intro of SE) and iPods went down too.

Similar can happen with Apple's Vision line including price reductions, introductions of new cheaper versions, etc.

 

[TommyBoy5]

I would assume a few are, just like I use my Quest standalone, but that is beside the point. In your post you mentioned the $20 software and the hardware without listing the hardware price, like $20 was the only cost. That would be like me saying I can use the AVP to mirror my Mac for free, because the software is included at no cost. None of these things are free, and the $20 cost is just a blip in the equation. I see you later listed your total as being around $3000, which is a real number, so kudos to you.

It is just getting tiring seeing everyone going on about the cost of the AVP like the build cost is the same as the Quest. And beyond the build cost, it sounds like Apple is having trouble sourcing enough parts, so why would they sell them at a lower price, simply to be unable to supply the increased demand it would create? It would be a terrible business move, and it only makes sense to drop the price after they can produce more units. Some people are talking like Apple has never lowered prices, but the $8000 Mac II I was looking at in 1987 was much more expensive than the $8000 Mac of today. The AVP is looking like the Lisa to me... the expensive experiment that led to the Mac. I waited for the Mac... none of this is unheard of.

Meta Quest 3 & Apple Vision Pro Production Costs Estimated

A supply chain analysis firm estimated the costs of each component in Meta Quest 3 and Apple Vision Pro.

www.uploadvr.com

I agree with you. My main issue with the AVP is that I simply can't stand working in a virtual environment. I can work so much faster on my MBP. Having 9 screens surrounding me isn't productive no matter what the resolution is. I used Immersive and Virtual Desktop to pull up both Mac and PC windows and it was interesting for about 5 minutes. Using anything but a physical keyboard seems so slow (uh-oh, Blackberry vs. iPhone anybody?) but I'm sure there are others that can just fly with dictation and swipe-typing.

For my personal use case of consuming media and playing games, the Quest 3 gets it done for a fraction of the price. I'm still very interested in the AVP because I really like Apple as a company and love their tech. This one just doesn't work - for me.

 

[bgillander]

I agree with you. My main issue with the AVP is that I simply can't stand working in a virtual environment. I can work so much faster on my MBP. Having 9 screens surrounding me isn't productive no matter what the resolution is. I used Immersive and Virtual Desktop to pull up both Mac and PC windows and it was interesting for about 5 minutes. Using anything but a physical keyboard seems so slow (uh-oh, Blackberry vs. iPhone anybody?) but I'm sure there are others that can just fly with dictation and swipe-typing.

For my personal use case of consuming media and playing games, the Quest 3 gets it done for a fraction of the price. I'm still very interested in the AVP because I really like Apple as a company and love their tech. This one just doesn't work - for me.

Consuming media might be what could get me to go for the AVP (or more likely AVP2), just because I'm a big fan of 3D. If I add up what I paid for 3d Blu-rays over the years, it would go a (very) long way towards paying for the headset. I'm assuming the newer Marvel and Disney movies will be made available in 3D on AVP... as much as I tried to keep buying 3D on disc, I could justify the cost of importing them from the UK when they disappeared in North America, but when UK Disney dropped them, the only place left was Japan and the cost to get each disc delivered to Canada was over $100... way too much for me to even try to rationalize. But if the 3D versions are included with the regular purchase on iTunes, that inclusion would justify a fair bit of the extra hardware cost to me. Of course, I guess Meta could get Disney 3D, which would tilt the equation back.

 

[JippaLippa]

I'm still waiting for a CEO saying their product is worse than the competition.

 

[TommyBoy5]

Consuming media might be what could get me to go for the AVP (or more likely AVP2), just because I'm a big fan of 3D. If I add up what I paid for 3d Blu-rays over the years, it would go a (very) long way towards paying for the headset. I'm assuming the newer Marvel and Disney movies will be made available in 3D on AVP... as much as I tried to keep buying 3D on disc, I could justify the cost of importing them from the UK when they disappeared in North America, but when UK Disney dropped them, the only place left was Japan and the cost to get each disc delivered to Canada was over $100... way too much for me to even try to rationalize. But if the 3D versions are included with the regular purchase on iTunes, that inclusion would justify a fair bit of the extra hardware cost to me. Of course, I guess Meta could get Disney 3D, which would tilt the equation back.

Again, seems like we have similar interests. I am at a stage in my life where piracy isn't an option. Both ethically and economically, it's just not something I want in my life. I can afford to purchase things that I enjoy.

Apple would provide an option for that. Being able to download 4K videos from the Apple ecosystem, store them on the AVP and watch them whenever and wherever is attractive.

In order to do this on the Quest 3 you need to either purchase a Blu-Ray player, purchase the Blu-Ray discs, and then rip them to a file and download them onto the device, or you could pirate the files and do the same thing. Not an option for me. I'm not sure I want to go through all that just to have a few movies to watch on a plane.

You can stream all day in high quality from Skybox VR or Virtual Desktop - and I do that now. Virtual desktop is great for streaming Netflix, YouTube or Max to the Quest 3 and sitting in a nice theatre environment and watching content. But you're still streaming.