"Open platform" my ass. I still have to jump through ridiculous hoops to mod BeatSaber (which is the only way to make it worth playing for more than a few minutes). Quest 3 makes modding even harder. This announcement is trying to frame App Lab as an open app distribution platform; it isn't. Those "basic technical and content requirements" apps have to meet are basically the same ones that Apple or Google or Meta the…
Why can't you play BeatSaber without mods?
because they want to use songs they didn't pay for
Shades of Apple licensing the Mac OS to clone hardware vendors in 1995 - 1997. It seems like Meta will be controlling the software experience quite closely, just like Apple did back in the day. There’s an important difference though: Apple made all their money on Mac hardware margins which the nimble clone vendors could undercut. Whereas for Meta, the Quest hardware has always been sold at breakeven or even as a loss…
Like other comments have pointed out, I think of this as similar to how Google controls the Android OS. While theoretically open, the real useful stuff on top of Android (Google services etc) require a license from Google along with their Play store, so Google makes revenue from there.
Certainly more open (edited) than the Apple ecosystem, but still controlled by one (big) player, with a little bit of flexibility but not a whole lot.
I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around the upside-down language that Meta is trying to execute here with the repeated use of 'open' to describe any of this. This is an invitation for other corporations to drink from their social spigot and join their walled-off app store. The word 'open' really is under multiple fronts of diffusionary attack lately.
I wonder if this "opening" of the operating system is their way of putting the metaverse project out to pasture - analogous to donating it to the Apache Foundation - without admitting that the company burned $36 billion on a misadventure.
1. Zuck always wanted to own a platform. He was a developer at heart and wants a product that developers can build on. He’s personally invested in this. 2. I’m pretty sure a lot of the cost quoted for their “Metaverse” stuff included their CapEx for a ton of GPUs which probably have a lot of other uses within the company.
as a developer at heart he should have thought back to how interested he would have been in sharecropping on someone else's locked down platform!
I wonder if this "opening" of the operating system is their way of putting the metaverse project out to pasture - analogous to donating it to the Apache Foundation - without admitting that the company burned $36 billion on a misadventure.
I'm guessing it's the opposite. Meta is trying to establish the same OS-level foothold/control that Microsoft, Apple and Google have.
Having a personal computer at home was a game-changer, though. "The Metaverse" has been around for a couple years now, and yet consumer VR (which has been around for eight years now) is still just a "gimmick", rather than a must-have.
The IBM Personal Computer released in 1981. By 1989... yeah.
iPhone came out in 2007. By 2015, smartphones ruled the world.
I would really love to see proper educational content from Meta but i bet this is not were the 'next money thing' is. Imagine a catalog of proper real life skills you can actually train reasonable good: - cooking - soldering - welding - Tons of woodworking things - ... You could also go to a lot of makers of tools and offer them to digitalize their products for them so someone can actually exercise with a cheap to su…
Where would that fit in between watching others do it on YouTube for entertainment, and doing it for real where you can hold (or eat) the result at the end?
As cheap to perform in as YouTube video, almost as vivid as the real thing, but again with most of the bullshit ("reality has a lot of detail") removed, just like with a YouTube video. Ideally, it would be suitable for experimenting with something you might want to then try out for real, but which would be too risky (time, money, embarrassment) to start with for real.
it requires a meta sign-in, which isn't a facebook account.
potato potato (sounds on)
no, those are completely different… a facebook account is an account on a social network that requires you to use your real name or else you get banned. a facebook account links you to your real life identity and your real life social circles
a meta account is an account that you can optionally link to their social medias, but it isn’t required
While good, Meta is likely to attempt to form a walled-garden in the vein of IOS and even Android to an extent. What I’d really hope for is a general-purpose computing platform with root access for the user, As I believe that mixed reality headsets have the potential to overtake both the smartphone and the PC as the default compute device of choice.
It's a silly caption isn't it, why would it be third-person view, nobody's going to see those sketches and assume it's an actual product render, surely.
Some folks stream VR games with a second camera on a green screen, which provides a 3rd person perspective for the audience. It's pretty incredible.
I can easily see less tech savvy consumers being confused.