VR's problem isn't friction, it's a lack of meaning: Lessons from $70B in losses
linernotesxr.substack.com
VR's problem isn't friction, it's a lack of meaning: Lessons from $70B in losses
1–4 of 4 posts
Re: VR's problem isn't friction, it's a lack of meaning: Lessons from $70B in losses
#2Key Points:
• Meta lost $73B proving that infrastructure without purpose creates ghost towns.
• Hardware friction is a myth: History shows users tolerate massive friction (early smartphones) if the value is clear.
• Beat Saber & VRChat succeeded not because of tech, but because they solved for "embodied meaning" rather than simulation.
• It's time to stop porting 2D concepts to 3D and start building for presence.
Re: VR's problem isn't friction, it's a lack of meaning: Lessons from $70B in losses
#3Meta's Reality Labs includes AI spend, so that's not 70B on VR
Re: VR's problem isn't friction, it's a lack of meaning: Lessons from $70B in losses
#4Meta's Reality Labs includes AI spend, so that's not 70B on VR
That’s a fair point. Reality Labs covers AR (Orion), neural interfaces, and the Ray-Ban partnership too.
But the 'Metaverse' was the governing thesis that justified that entire strategy and burn rate. Even if the breakdown is 50/50, we still have tens of billions spent on a VR software ecosystem (Horizon) that's nearly empty.
The specific dollar amount matters less than the ratio of 'capital invested' to 'consumer value created'. And there's a big gap between those.