Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

SimulaVR Has Been Subpoenaed by Meta Platforms, Inc

simulavr.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

401–410 of 478 posts

Re: SimulaVR Has Been Subpoenaed by Meta Platforms, Inc

#401

Post by georgewsinger »

majormajor wrote: post #199
georgewsinger wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We understand Meta sometimes future projects that their devices will have broad office applications, but we're skeptical it has any teeth. Consider that Atari tried to compete with office PCs in the early 80s with their 8-bit family, and failed: https://images.fastcompany.net/image/upload/w_596,c_limit,q_... It's hard to focus on multiple things at once, and we're skeptical that the bureaucratic forces in play at a l…

"We don't think they're competent enough to be a competitor" is a bad way to judge whether you're competing with someone. It's like Apple laughing at the IBM PC.

Just want to clarify that I would never characterize Zuckerberg or Meta as "incompetent". Quite the contrary. I would instead more characterize the situation as Paul Graham did in one of his essays[1]:

> A lot of startups worry "what if Google builds something like us?" Actually big companies are not the ones you have to worry about-- not even Google. The people at Google are smart, but no smarter than you; they're not as motivated, because Google is not going to go out of business if this one product fails; and even at Google they have a lot of bureaucracy to slow them down.

[1] http://www.paulgraham.com/startuplessons.html

Re: SimulaVR Has Been Subpoenaed by Meta Platforms, Inc

#402

Post by kanetw »

bgribble wrote: post #395
georgewsinger wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We understand Meta sometimes future projects that their devices will have broad office applications, but we're skeptical it has any teeth. Consider that Atari tried to compete with office PCs in the early 80s with their 8-bit family, and failed: https://images.fastcompany.net/image/upload/w_596,c_limit,q_... It's hard to focus on multiple things at once, and we're skeptical that the bureaucratic forces in play at a l…

As a very nearsighted programmer suffering from increasing age-related farsightedness, I often fantasize about a VR headset that would allow me to comfortably focus (say 6 feet away while wearing contacts) on a huge virtual tmux session for coding. I don't know if this is even remotely a possibility but it sure would beat dealing with constant CSS (can't see s*t)

Prescription inserts (we're working with vendors on this) are possible, and the focus distance of our headset (and most headsets, I think) is in that region.

Re: SimulaVR Has Been Subpoenaed by Meta Platforms, Inc

#403

Post by tipsytoad »

ehnto wrote: post #156
JKCalhoun wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm still skeptical that it is The Next Big Thing. I wonder if Zuckerberg suspects it might not be as well but, hey, Hail Mary!

It's a very different experience to how we currently consume media, and I am not really sure it has mass appeal even with some kind of perfect execution. I am prepared to be totally wrong mind you. It's an incredible tool and way to engage with virtual worlds, but the question we should be asking isn't "Is VR technology good enough" which I think people get stuck on. Really the question is "Does everyone want to be i…

I thought the idea of future vr is mixed reality, so you could be "present" while experiencing an AR like experience

Re: SimulaVR Has Been Subpoenaed by Meta Platforms, Inc

#404

Post by danielmarkbruce »

ece wrote: post #398
danielmarkbruce wrote: post #376

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes and they are overreaching in response to a perceived miss many years ago when FB bought Instagram. The VR market is so young and small that it doesn't need regulatory intervention. Let's allow it play out a little bit before we get regulators involved who think things like: this app is something which "proves the value of virtual reality to users". And yeah, they were, and they were being bought and sold, and Yah…

From your link, the FTC says: > "Meta already owns a best-selling virtual reality fitness app, and it had the capabilities to compete even more closely with Within’s popular Supernatural app. But Meta chose to buy market position instead of earning it on the merits." I don't buy that VR is so young, we're a couple generations in now on multiple platforms. There are still new entrants in the space, which is good, and…

Best selling doesn't mean well selling. Someone is always the best selling in a market. It doesn't mean the market is anywhere at all.

VR might not even exist in 10 years. It's been hyped for 8-9 years now and user growth has been anaemic. Most headsets are shelfware.

Here is an article to read: https://mixed-news.com/en/quest-2-why-meta-isnt-talking-abou...

This isn't speculative nonsense - the usage problem is know across the industry.

Single digit millions of users is either early in the market or late... Either way no interference from a clueless regulator is required.

Re: SimulaVR Has Been Subpoenaed by Meta Platforms, Inc

#405

Post by ece »

onepointsixC wrote: post #118
unnouinceput wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't that what they already did with this statement? Quoting last paragraph subtitle "We're don't view ourselves in competition with Meta" is exactly that. Therefore the FTC can take that and prove FB is a monopoly, or whatever FTC end-game is.

That sounds like a bold faced lie to me. To quote the article: >Meta sells reasonably good gaming headsets to customers who want to be entertained in VR; we're selling general-purpose productivity devices which are aimed at replacing PCs and laptops. So our real competition is laptops & PCs, not other gaming headsets. Everything Meta has been releasing publicly about their VR Headset plans make it blatantly clear tha…

How about a look at Meta's app sales to prove that? I think this list of who the subpoena was served to is pretty hilarious, and it's even more hilarious that Apple's not on this list:

Alphabet Inc.

ByteDance Inc.

HTC America, Inc.

Huawei Technologies USA, Inc.

Nintendo of America Inc.

Panasonic Corporation of North America

Samsung Electronics America, Inc.

Simula VR, LLC

I think the malicious intent is all on Meta's side. They have a head start with Occulus, no one else is even close in the US.

Re: SimulaVR Has Been Subpoenaed by Meta Platforms, Inc

#407

Post by jboy55 »

taneq wrote: post #373
majormajor wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"We don't think they're competent enough to be a competitor" is a bad way to judge whether you're competing with someone. It's like Apple laughing at the IBM PC.

Imagine if during the Microsoft antitrust case, they subpoenaed Apple, Compaq, Oracle, Sony and some small startups for their entire short- and long-term business strategy documentation. Oh, and all their user metrics and any telemetry.

Microsoft subpoenaed MCI, AOL, Intel, Novell others, including all email messages related. https://www.networkcomputing.com/data-centers/amd-subpoenas-... https://cyber.harvard.edu/msdoj/archive.html

In that case, "On September 18, 1998, believing that certain statements from Netscape employees reported in Lessons offered succor for its defense, Microsoft subpoenaed the professors' notes, tape recordings and transcripts of interviews, and correspondence with interview subjects. " https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-1st-circuit/1179769.html

Here is Google subpoenaing Microsoft, https://www.business-standard.com/article/technology/microso...

AMD subpoenaing Microsoft, https://www.networkcomputing.com/data-centers/amd-subpoenas-...

Here is a judge standing up an squashing a Microsoft subpoena of Oracle and Sun , https://www.networkworld.com/article/2310247/microsoft-fails...

Oil Price Information Service, a Oil Industry trade publication was subponeaded in a price fixing case to hand over unpublished information, https://www.competitionpolicyinternational.com/oil-industry-...

Re: SimulaVR Has Been Subpoenaed by Meta Platforms, Inc

#408

Post by bagels »

mlajtos wrote: post #381
chaostheory wrote: post #351

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Looking at the new videos related to the upcoming Quest Pro that will be announced next week, the simulavr guys are dead wrong. https://www.reddit.com/r/AR_MR_XR/comments/xwjzni/meta_quest...

Wait, is that demo rigged? The keyboard in passthrough is not the keyboard of the MacBook.

Definitely some demo-only things going on there. Pass through keyboard is different, and this person just happens to go in to a meeting where the table is in the same orientation and size as the one in his house/office?

Re: SimulaVR Has Been Subpoenaed by Meta Platforms, Inc

#409

Post by solveit »

enjoylife wrote: post #190
onepointsixC wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This seems like a wildly emotional response that is completely out of line with what is being asked. The FTC is suing Meta, and it has a right to get other companies to admit that they are in fact competitors to Meta in the VR Space. SimulaVR is being pretty bad faith in claiming that: "Meta sells reasonably good gaming headsets to customers who want to be entertained in VR; we're selling general-purpose productivity…

Not sure if "wildly emotional" is fair to them either. > In fairness to Meta: the FTC is the one who initiated this fight, leaving them with the burden of demonstrating it isn't behaving "anti-competitively". But I agree, the post does seem similar to an individual trying to get attention for their cause, ie. 'Google locked me out...'. To me the tone is probably trying to help sell their narrative of them being this…

> nothing anybody says after this will make me think

This is clearly wildly emotional and (hopefully) hyperbolic.

Re: SimulaVR Has Been Subpoenaed by Meta Platforms, Inc

#410

Post by bigmealbigmeal »

Raed667 wrote: post #50
cableshaft wrote: post #40

>We're don't view ourselves in competition with Meta >...Meta sells reasonably good gaming headsets to customers who want to be entertained in VR; we're selling general-purpose productivity devices which are aimed at replacing PCs and laptops. Hate to break it to you, but if you don't think that Mark Zuckerberg is actively trying to create VR devices that are general-purpose productivity devices aimed at replacing PC…

Mark wants to be able to sell apps and ads on his end-to-end controlled platform, that is it. He missed the boat on browsers and smartphones, so he is aiming for total monopoly of what he believes is the next-big-thing™.

I think this is mixing up the mythology of Zuckerberg with the reality. There's no indication that he is exclusively or even primarily driven by money or power.

Go watch any long-form interview with him, such as with Lex Fridman. It becomes rather clear that he wants to be more like how Steve Jobs is seen by the wider public: as an innovator and pioneer, not as a power-hungry moneymaker.

Post reply on HN