Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

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

I have both a Vision Pro and the Quest Pro which should not be too dissimilar from the 3 in terms of screen quality (with a worse pass through).
The quest has clearly an edge for gaming, both in terms of content and in terms of confidence to not destroy a 3500$ headset. This is pretty much the only advantage I currently see. Controllers tend to drift after few weeks of usage, content consumption is not enjoyable seeing the pixels, the battery on the back offsets the weight but prevents you to lay your head against something to rest. For productivity again the display quality and controllers are a big no.
The Vision Pro went all in with technology trying to make everything invisible to the user like the automatic IPD alignment. It is simply on another level for productivity and content consumption and especially polishness of the UI and interaction with it. Ideally I would use the Vision Pro for most of the stuff and a quest 3 for gaming and fitness. For now I really don’t think is one or the other but more what one wants to use the device for. I see the AVP as replacing the iPad in Apple lineup over time. The quest has a totally different proposition.
 
  • Like
Reactions: diogenis
Not going to lie been enjoying my quest 3 on virtual desktop for my pc and MacBook while also binge watching all my spatial videos I recorded on my 15 pro max for way less of the price than the apple vr headset
 
When the CEO has the need to state that their product is better than x, then it's a clear sign that the person in charge is worried about the new competition on the market, and how their market share will change in the coming years.
 
He has some good points there, especially the pricing for a first generation product in a totally new (for Apple) category.

IMO, Apple’s greed will hinder both AVP spread amongst the potential early adopters and app development, as it would be much more lucrative for developers to stick to well-established and thus more profitable iOS/iPadOS/macOS markets.

Apple could have started with a simpler, less spec-rich product and then gradually improved it, getting to a Pro specs and pricing. Instead they choose to rush in Apple Maps style, where instead of a 3D bridge we get a “meet a dinosaur in a tunnel” offering. The field of vision is limited (which we cannot actually appreciate from Apple’s ads), the virtual keyboard is barely useable for productive typing, personas are, still, well spooky and the whole thing is heavy. All of this for a whooping 3.5K.
 
KSB said:
When the CEO has the need to state that their product is better than x, then it's a clear sign that the person in charge is worried about the new competition on the market, and how their market share will change in the coming years.
Click to expand...

Remember those countless “I’m a Mac, I’m a PC” ads? All companies are looking to improve their business and it is not like Z is giving us some false info here.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ToyoCorollaGR, Ulfric and arkitect
Takeo said:
BIG Steve Ballmer reacting to the first iPhone vibes
Click to expand...

This is not the same, as iPhone was a truly innovating product, turning the whole smartphone industry 360°. Unlike Ballmer, Zuckerberg does not ridicule AVP, focusing instead on their respective headsets specs and pricing. And I do see many valid points he brings up there.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ulfric and arkitect
This is where I wonder who’s driving Meta.

Apple’s DNA, is not to provide the best product in its first iteration, it’s to shake it up, push the boundaries and innovate.
This way of thinking goes back to the Pixar days, when after producing Toy Story, Jobs and his team, rocked the cart, and brought in an unknown director, to make Impossible. Never rest on your laurels, keep hungry, stay foolish.
The iPhone wasn’t the best at launch, but then who remembers the ‘rubbish’, that was smart phones back then, and look where the market and the tech is now!
 
How is "CEO of rival company says own company's product is better than competitor's" even news? Even for an Apple-centric site, that's about as dog-bites-man of a story as you can publish.
 
His remarks on open and closed models in every computing generation are interesting. Is he referring to the home computer age in the 80s as being closed? Or the Atari console era? I’m not really sure. The new PC era for home computing didn’t really take off to the late 90s and to be honest that has had a very long run now.

The reality is closed curated systems generally offer more advanced systems for users. Interoperable and “open” systems never provide the most cutting edge systems .
The pc market made everyone think it was cutting edge but when arm and Apple got deeper with their closed system it was obvious how much more advanced it can be at the same stage of computing.

So I think Zuckerberg is saying have worse products but more open stuff is good for everyone. I don’t know if I want that life…
 
TommyBoy5 said:
Incorrect. Virtual Desktop is $20. PCVR experience at 120fps. I have played every GamePass and Steam Game (Both Steam VR and Steam Flat games) on a theatre screen with 36ms latency on an AMD 5600X / 3090 setup. But yes, it is a $20 app you would need to purchase.
Click to expand...
Why bother adding the $20 app price if you are going to leave off the AMD 5600X / 3090 price?
 
  • Like
Reactions: WarmWinterHat
Remains to be seen when Apple releases a $1200 version of its VR headset. Guess that in this time we will also see another iteration of Metas headset, maybe catching up in terms of resolution.
Since Apple doesn't create/develop or produce those kind of high resolution displays, maybe Meta will get their hands on too (not the same but very similar, since the production lines are hungry).

Competition is always fun!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: ToyoCorollaGR
kiensoy said:
For being $3000 dollars cheaper, he's not wrong.
Click to expand...
Yes, $3000 cheaper can be a good (or even great) value, but that doesn't mean it's better.

If cheaper = better, then anyone in the market for a new car would buy a Mitsubishi Mirage because it's the cheapest
 
MacRumors said:
Now look, I know that some fanboys get upset whenever somebody dares to question if Apple is going to be the leader in a new category, but the reality is that every generation of computing has an open and a closed model. And yeah, in mobile, Apple's closed model won. It's not always that way. If you go back to the PC era, Microsoft's open model was the winner. In this next generation, Meta is going to be the open model, and I really want to make sure that the open model wins out again. The future is not yet written.
Click to expand...

How is Meta the open model? They make the Quest hardware and the OS. They charge developers 30 to 47.5% commission. They are just the other closed model.

You can at least still run SteamVR in Rift mode, but Zuck pitching Quest as open model just makes it seem like he doesn’t realize that Microsoft supplied the OS for other hardware manufacturers. Now Valve pitching itself as the open model, that I could sort of see.
 
  • Like
Reactions: gusmula
This is going to be a very interesting competition. Both CEOs seem to very convinced that this is the next big thing and invested a lot of money. Apart from the stark price difference, I think Apple's biggest problem will be the lack of serious games for the AVP. Cook thinks that the AVP will sell without games. I'm not convinced.
 
Born Again said:
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.
Click to expand...
yeah, like Prius has more value than Ferrari, since more people own Prius.
Common, it’s about the value you can purchase - budget is often a constrain.
Use case is also to be considered. I wouldn’t drive classical Ferrari even if I owned one just to do the groceries (not enough trunk volume).
 
urahara said:
Prius has more value than Ferrari, since more people own Prius.
Click to expand...
I don't think that's a great comparison. You drive a car, get noticed, and that's it. All the utility already is in the product. Computer hardware is only useful if there is third party content like apps, movies, games. Without them the AVP would be quite dull and not more than a intelectual curiosity. They have some apps and movies already. But the questions is, if publishers are going to port interesting game titles as well. Right now I think the Quest is more interesting in this regard.
 
Born Again said:
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.
Click to expand...
I'm not a huge apple fanboy (but a big user)

I've bought a Vision Pro because the untethered capabilities will surpass all other platforms for productivity. I would never consider doing my job fully from an oculus headset. The apps that are available to iPadOS make that a possibility and a pipe dream of mine on Vision Pro. Just need to wait for it to come to Europe in a friend's luggage :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Born Again
For everyone here thinking X numbers of generations of a device will fix the product or simply have people understand how they should use it:

OIP.jpg


*Sound engineers everywhere in the universe all screaming at the same time Alderaan style*

The watch began as an all-purpose device to finally settle as a simple health/notification device, what every early devices already did. The only difference is the execution and prices going down enough to become acceptable to a fringe of the population.

VR usages have already been explored since decades, and it's not a product solving anything besides giving you some thrills for entertainment and *some* gaming. Most of us still prefer to game on a real screen with a real console.

Looking at the trends (AVP is more of an iPad replacement than a computer, women have overwhelmingly no interest in this category, the excitement is already wearing off besides being awesome screens, the lack of physical input method is hindering the usage), I think what MZ says is quite spot on. Not that I will buy a Meta Quest 3.

The right thing to do now is I'll just wait and see what any of them have to sell in a few years...
 
  • Like
Reactions: gusmula
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back