Facebook Renames to Meta • Hacker News Board

Re: Facebook Renames to Meta

#261

Post by thow-01187 » Thu, Oct 28, 2021, 6:50 PM UTC

b9a2cab5 wrote: post #134

joshenberg wrote: post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's what I wonder. Early VR adopters/technologists hate what happened to Oculus and there aren't a lot of newcomers to that market. I don't think cheaper headsets are going to fix that in the near future so I don't know whom they're targeting. Seems risky to lean into something where the experts already think you screwed up.

Quest 2 is outselling past VR headsets by leaps and bounds according to news reports. The decision to make a standalone headset and build their own app platform was absolutely the right one from a growth standpoint, even if the hardcore VR consumers aren't biting. Early VR adopters are going to buy the next best product and have no loyalty.

> The decision to make a standalone headset and build their own app platform was absolutely the right one

Not sure whether the appeal of Quest 2 is in the standalone-ness and the app platform - or whether it's about being around half the price of comparable headsets before it, perhaps even being sold at a loss

Re: Facebook Renames to Meta

#262

Post by thebean11 » Thu, Oct 28, 2021, 6:50 PM UTC

gitfan86 wrote: post #198

Ansil849 wrote: post #20

In London, in the area around the London Eye, there is a tourist trap that offers a very poor 'haunted house' type of attraction, usually something having to do with zombies. As each iteration of this tourist trap gains a reputation for being total rubbish and gains one star reviews online, every few months the attraction rebrands to another name.

At least at that place everyone is in on the scam. Facebook execs have to smile and say good idea to Mark, when all they want to do is tell him that is stupid

Sounds like a pretty naive take, given how successful the company has been under Mark..

Re: Facebook Renames to Meta

#263

Post by brap » Thu, Oct 28, 2021, 6:51 PM UTC

ritchiea wrote: post #208

7373737373 wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wish he'd just present as his awkward true self, instead of this prerecorded, fake cringefest, something Musk doesn't shy away from

He’s certainly determined whatever his true self is, it’s not good for business.

It’s amazing how no one can be frank with him. “Look mark, the CEO doesn’t have to be the presenter. I’m sorry but you just can’t be the face of the company, it’s bad for business. Please, move aside, and get a normal person haircut”.

Re: Facebook Renames to Meta

#264

Post by coolspot » Thu, Oct 28, 2021, 6:51 PM UTC

czottmann wrote: post #29

Still a terrible, terrible organisation that's detrimental to societies and humankind as such.

Twitter is 100 times more toxic than FB, but somehow everyone is focused on FB.

I guess someone powerful is annoyed.

Re: Facebook Renames to Meta

#265

Post by jstx1 » Thu, Oct 28, 2021, 6:51 PM UTC

Since the linked page didn't really tell me anything, I had to go their twitter for a summary:

> Announcing @Meta — the Facebook company’s new name. Meta is helping to build the metaverse, a place where we’ll play and connect in 3D. Welcome to the next chapter of social connection.

> The names of the apps that we build—Facebook, Instagram, Messenger and WhatsApp—will remain the same.

Re: Facebook Renames to Meta

#266

Post by goatlover » Thu, Oct 28, 2021, 6:51 PM UTC

distrill wrote: post #147

goatlover wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it FB or social media and big tech in general? I'm confused by the laser focus on FB all of a sudden.

I don't think it's particularly sudden, although I am also confused by the laser focus.

Before a few weeks ago, it was all social media and big tech that was getting a bad rap for ruining society, but now it's almost exclusively FB.

Re: Facebook Renames to Meta

#267

Post by spsful » Thu, Oct 28, 2021, 6:51 PM UTC

brap wrote: post #125

The video they put out is extremely cringe. The whole “metaverse” thing is cringe. It makes me believe Zuckerberg is completely surrounded by yes-men who never challenge him and only tell him what he likes to hear. He is truly detached from us normal people and our human experience.

This is what I don't understand about their plan. Who on earth is planning to adopt this? We've seen a push from all sides of the tech industry to open up the AR/VR space, and it never took off.

Remember the Snapchat Spectacles? They still sell them but I don't think they were ever popular. Google glass? Popular, but discontinued. Apple's ARKit? Definitely much less adoption than their commercials would have led you to expect.

It seems like this is an experiment bound to fail, so good luck to the execs at f̶a̶c̶e̶b̶o̶o̶k̶ meta who have to clean this up in the end.

Re: Facebook Renames to Meta

#268

Post by gotostatement » Thu, Oct 28, 2021, 6:51 PM UTC

the picture for "responsible innovation" is so funny... they're like "we're approved by this disapproving black woman!"

Re: Facebook Renames to Meta

#269

Post by whywhywhywhy » Thu, Oct 28, 2021, 6:51 PM UTC

rhcom2 wrote: post #108

nyt-maps wrote: post #19

My god, if you get it, you get it. They are going all in on metaverse / have decided that the future of oculus is the primary long term bet, not facebook itself. And they have the money to make it so. This is incredibly scary, and probably a good investment.

My kneejerk reaction is this will probably waste a lot of their money without much traction. But I'm also happy about Facebook wasting a bunch of their money...

All depends if they can deliver on AR before anyone else.

Gotta remember outside of Oculus, their entire product portfolio exists on top of the platforms of their competitors. This is their play to own the entire thing from the foundation up and the resources they'll be willing to use to accomplish that will be huge and really their only competition is Apple because Google gave up.

Re: Facebook Renames to Meta

#270

Post by ChildOfChaos » Thu, Oct 28, 2021, 6:51 PM UTC

CoolGuySteve wrote: post #231

b9a2cab5 wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quest 2 is outselling past VR headsets by leaps and bounds according to news reports. The decision to make a standalone headset and build their own app platform was absolutely the right one from a growth standpoint, even if the hardcore VR consumers aren't biting. Early VR adopters are going to buy the next best product and have no loyalty.

I wouldn't be surprised if the next gen Switch has a VR headset accessory and blows the entire market away the same way the iPod and NES did to their predecessors. The required parts to make a 60Hz 1080p headset are entering the $100 cell phone market and that segment of components are more or less what Nintendo traditionally uses in its handhelds. Nintendo also has a long history of "blue ocean" products that tweak…

Very unlikely we will see it from Nintendo, Nintendo have lacked innovation for ages, they just sell cutesy games to kids. They cornered the 'disney' market, don't expect them to do anything great from a tech perspective