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

In a Sign of Broader Ambitions, Facebook Opens Hardware Lab

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 80 posts

Re: In a Sign of Broader Ambitions, Facebook Opens Hardware Lab

#71

Post by amelius »

KaoruAoiShiho wrote: post #10
aresant wrote: post #2

FB's hardware strategy is confusing. Oculus was their first, real consumer hardware release and effort. The rollout was amateur hour between delays, customer service, etc, but that's forgivable and understandable at some level for a first major release. But then Vive showed up to the party, shipped nearly on the same time frame, and delivered a product that's in striking distance of headset quality and WINS in intera…

Hardware is commoditized but brands are not. Anyone can make handbags but only some can sell them for $5000. Oculus has potential to be as profitable as Apple if they absolutely nail the execution and the experience. But it remains to the be seen if the Rift is an iphone or a newton. Being tethered to a high end gaming pc "dooms" it to be a niche product. How soon can Oculus either ally with a console or make a conso…

But in any case, we don't want the company selling the $5000 handbags to be the one setting the industry standards.

Re: In a Sign of Broader Ambitions, Facebook Opens Hardware Lab

#72

Post by JustSomeNobody »

ethbro wrote: post #59
JustSomeNobody wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Similar reason to why 3D TV failed; nobody likes stuff on their face.

Do you have any data to back up those assertions? Because they seem pretty "Here is how I feel so therefore it must be that way."

No. I just know people. What's going to happen the first time pretty people have a VR party and headshots of all of them with red, sweaty rings around their faces shows up on FB? They'll never put the VR on again, that's what.

Re: In a Sign of Broader Ambitions, Facebook Opens Hardware Lab

#73

Post by amelius »

JustSomeNobody wrote: post #51
KaoruAoiShiho wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hardware is commoditized but brands are not. Anyone can make handbags but only some can sell them for $5000. Oculus has potential to be as profitable as Apple if they absolutely nail the execution and the experience. But it remains to the be seen if the Rift is an iphone or a newton. Being tethered to a high end gaming pc "dooms" it to be a niche product. How soon can Oculus either ally with a console or make a conso…

> Oculus has potential to be as profitable as Apple if they absolutely nail the execution and the experience. No. VR won't be that popular. I know that's hard for people on HN to hear, but it's true. Sure it'll make money selling to geeks and nerds, but that's all.

> No. VR won't be that popular.

Also if you take pr0n-use into consideration?

Re: In a Sign of Broader Ambitions, Facebook Opens Hardware Lab

#74

Post by hawski »

JustSomeNobody wrote: post #51
KaoruAoiShiho wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hardware is commoditized but brands are not. Anyone can make handbags but only some can sell them for $5000. Oculus has potential to be as profitable as Apple if they absolutely nail the execution and the experience. But it remains to the be seen if the Rift is an iphone or a newton. Being tethered to a high end gaming pc "dooms" it to be a niche product. How soon can Oculus either ally with a console or make a conso…

> Oculus has potential to be as profitable as Apple if they absolutely nail the execution and the experience. No. VR won't be that popular. I know that's hard for people on HN to hear, but it's true. Sure it'll make money selling to geeks and nerds, but that's all.

I think that I partly agree with you on it. It is not hard to imagine two iPhones per person - private one and company one. And yet I doubt that more than one VR in household will be that common. Probably in case of smartphones cost hiding thanks to carrier plans helped in making it popular. Can similar mechanism work for VR? It is true that nowadays you can get additional things with your mobile plan - laptops and tablets for example. But in case of VR you have to consider also beefier machine. GearVR would probably have advantage in this case.

Then it is the issue of having something on your face and not being able to hop-in and hop-out of the experience in case of a second. It makes the experience deeper, but that means you need more time and people don't have time. Even if you play with someone on a console you can, in split second, see them smiling or see that you need to turn off cooker under rice. Never mind about actual appearance of having something on someones pretty face. VR devices are looking probably too Sci-Fi than somewhat elegant iPhone to appeal to public. Elegance appeal to rich people and what appeals to rich people appeals to everyone that would like to be rich. One thing that overcomes elegance is price and it does not apply to VR.

It is deeper experience so it may be closer to cinema than to TV. TV is certainly more popular. I hope that it will enable not only great gaming experiences, but also remarkable development (or professional) environments. Current gen VR is probably not yet there to be used in professional setting, but maybe subsidized by gaming - same as with GPUs - it will get there.

Re: In a Sign of Broader Ambitions, Facebook Opens Hardware Lab

#75

Post by ethbro »

JustSomeNobody wrote: post #72
ethbro wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have any data to back up those assertions? Because they seem pretty "Here is how I feel so therefore it must be that way."

No. I just know people. What's going to happen the first time pretty people have a VR party and headshots of all of them with red, sweaty rings around their faces shows up on FB? They'll never put the VR on again, that's what.

:-) I know people too. And there was a time when looking into a CRT and listening to your modem squawk while the webpage in front of you took 5 minutes to download. The takeaway seems obvious: terrible experience, they'll never use this Internet thing again.

Re: In a Sign of Broader Ambitions, Facebook Opens Hardware Lab

#76

Post by JustSomeNobody »

ethbro wrote: post #75
JustSomeNobody wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. I just know people. What's going to happen the first time pretty people have a VR party and headshots of all of them with red, sweaty rings around their faces shows up on FB? They'll never put the VR on again, that's what.

:-) I know people too. And there was a time when looking into a CRT and listening to your modem squawk while the webpage in front of you took 5 minutes to download. The takeaway seems obvious: terrible experience, they'll never use this Internet thing again.

Not sure what you're comparing here. Cable modems replaced analog modems. Ok, wires in wires out. Same. LCD panels replaced CRT displays. Big and bulky to flat.

We're talking putting something on one's _face_. Even if they made it the size and weight of normal glasses, it wouldn't get any where _near_ as popular as geeks and nerds think (hope?) it will. It just won't.

But, hey, let's put a pin in this conversation and revisit it in 5 years. Ok? If I'm wrong, I'll send you lunch.

Re: In a Sign of Broader Ambitions, Facebook Opens Hardware Lab

#77

Post by gedrap »

JustSomeNobody wrote: post #70
kriro wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not too long ago people assumed that nobody likes to wander around with huge battery packs attached to their smartphones. If the perceived value is great people are willing to put up with a lot of crazy stuff. Also I know plenty of people who wear glasses to reap the value of better sight. Why isn't it conceptually possible for people to wear other stuff to reap other benefits?

I worked my way through college in the optical industry. People hate wearing glasses. Sure there are a few that do it for fashion, but most would rather never have to put them on.

I see what you mean. Just to give a different perspective, I'm wearing glasses all the time for the majority of my lifetime (24 y/o now and since I'm 8). For me, it's not that I hate them or something, I just can't imagine life without them. They just became like a body part. Don't love them, don't hate them, they simply exist.

Re: In a Sign of Broader Ambitions, Facebook Opens Hardware Lab

#78

Post by __jal »

allannienhuis wrote: post #49
__jal wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not necessarily. I block FB at my router at home and via DNS on my phone, reject mail from them at my server and use a browser blocker for their web bugs at work. And still "my" data leaks to them via other people who apparently upload address books, tag me in photos and whatever other mechanisms for soliciting data on nonmembers they've ginned up. I know this because before I started bouncing their mail I'd get an e…

but you're not the one giving them that data - your friends/others are. Not sure how that can be avoided in any social networking type of application. Those applications are pretty much 'public' space in today's world. People who really need to keep their real identities private today (ie some law enforcement personnel) are in a tough place these days.

Correct. And one of my biggest gripes with F*%#book. Perhaps it can't be entirely avoided in a social networking app, but there's a difference between unwanted leakage and active encouragement. Providing incentives to people to rat out my data is scummy.

Unfortunately, scummy is what I've come to expect from them.

Re: In a Sign of Broader Ambitions, Facebook Opens Hardware Lab

#79

Post by ethbro »

JustSomeNobody wrote: post #76
ethbro wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

:-) I know people too. And there was a time when looking into a CRT and listening to your modem squawk while the webpage in front of you took 5 minutes to download. The takeaway seems obvious: terrible experience, they'll never use this Internet thing again.

Not sure what you're comparing here. Cable modems replaced analog modems. Ok, wires in wires out. Same. LCD panels replaced CRT displays. Big and bulky to flat. We're talking putting something on one's _face_. Even if they made it the size and weight of normal glasses, it wouldn't get any where _near_ as popular as geeks and nerds think (hope?) it will. It just won't. But, hey, let's put a pin in this conversation an…

Deal.

Re: In a Sign of Broader Ambitions, Facebook Opens Hardware Lab

#80

Post by jacquesm »

__jal wrote: post #78
allannienhuis wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

but you're not the one giving them that data - your friends/others are. Not sure how that can be avoided in any social networking type of application. Those applications are pretty much 'public' space in today's world. People who really need to keep their real identities private today (ie some law enforcement personnel) are in a tough place these days.

Correct. And one of my biggest gripes with F*%#book. Perhaps it can't be entirely avoided in a social networking app, but there's a difference between unwanted leakage and active encouragement. Providing incentives to people to rat out my data is scummy. Unfortunately, scummy is what I've come to expect from them.

Educate your surroundings. No pictures by default, if they do make pictures and you're in them no facebook. Tag me on facebook and you're off my IRL friends list and if you're family then you can strike me off the birthday invite list.
Post reply on HN