What Mark Zuckerberg Thinks About Apple's Vision Pro (theverge.com) 103
An anonymous reader quotes a report from The Verge: Mark Zuckerberg doesn't seem fazed by Apple's introduction of the Vision Pro. In a companywide meeting with Meta employees today that The Verge watched, the CEO said Apple's device didn't present any major breakthroughs in technology that Meta hadn't "already explored" and that its vision for how people will use the device is "not the one that I want." He also pointed to the fact that Meta's upcoming Quest 3 headset will be much cheaper, at $499 compared to the Vision Pro's $3,499 price tag, giving Meta the opening to reach a wider user base.
"I think that their announcement really showcases the difference in the values and the vision that our companies bring to this in a way that I think is really important," Zuckerberg told employees, who were gathered at the company's Menlo Park, California, headquarters for its first all-hands meeting since 2020. Zuckerberg said that the Quest is about "people interacting in new ways and feeling closer" while also "about being active and doing things." "By contrast, every demo that they showed was a person sitting on a couch by themself," he said of Apple's WWDC keynote earlier this week. "I mean, that could be the vision of the future of computing, but like, it's not the one that I want."
Here are Zuckerberg's full remarks about Apple's headset: "Apple finally announced their headset, so I want to talk about that for a second. I was really curious to see what they were gonna ship. And obviously I haven't seen it yet, so I'll learn more as we get to play with it and see what happens and how people use it.
"I think that their announcement really showcases the difference in the values and the vision that our companies bring to this in a way that I think is really important," Zuckerberg told employees, who were gathered at the company's Menlo Park, California, headquarters for its first all-hands meeting since 2020. Zuckerberg said that the Quest is about "people interacting in new ways and feeling closer" while also "about being active and doing things." "By contrast, every demo that they showed was a person sitting on a couch by themself," he said of Apple's WWDC keynote earlier this week. "I mean, that could be the vision of the future of computing, but like, it's not the one that I want."
From what I've seen initially, I'd say the good news is that there's no kind of magical solutions that they have to any of the constraints on laws and physics that our teams haven't already explored and thought of. They went with a higher resolution display, and between that and all the technology they put in there to power it, it costs seven times more and now requires so much energy that now you need a battery and a wire attached to it to use it. They made that design trade-off and it might make sense for the cases that they're going for.
But look, I think that their announcement really showcases the difference in the values and the vision that our companies bring to this in a way that I think is really important. We innovate to make sure that our products are as accessible and affordable to everyone as possible, and that is a core part of what we do. And we have sold tens of millions of Quests.
More importantly, our vision for the metaverse and presence is fundamentally social. It's about people interacting in new ways and feeling closer in new ways. Our device is also about being active and doing things. By contrast, every demo that they showed was a person sitting on a couch by themself. I mean, that could be the vision of the future of computing, but like, it's not the one that I want. There's a real philosophical difference in terms of how we're approaching this. And seeing what they put out there and how they're going to compete just made me even more excited and in a lot of ways optimistic that what we're doing matters and is going to succeed. But it's going to be a fun journey."
Hey Zuck... (Score:5, Insightful)
Guess what? Your vision of the "future of computing" isn't what anyone else wants. That's why you're losing billions of dollars a year on creating your "vision."
Re: (Score:1)
Well, that and the embezzlement...
Re:Hey Zuck... (Score:5, Insightful)
That statement is the sound of a man whistling past a cemetery.
Re: (Score:2)
I always enjoy negative comments about new Apple products. Especially when I read them again a few years later. They age so well...
Re:Hey Zuck... (Score:4, Interesting)
Guess what? Your vision of the "future of computing" isn't what anyone else wants.
It certainly is more desirable than spending $3500 on hardware. The Quest 2 sold better than the PS4. It clearly is what people want. The issue is there's a complete lack of content creating a desire for people to keep using it. Throwing better hardware at that doesn't solve anything.
That's why you're losing billions of dollars a year on creating your "vision."
Who is losing billions of dollars? Zuck's company made just shy of $30bn profit last year, and yes that includes the amount of money he's spending on VR Meta bullshit. Incidentally his expenditure on VR puts him below most tech peers in terms of R&D spend as a proportion of either revenue or profit. I know people struggle with big numbers that have the word billion after them but so far the number being invested is pretty damn ordinary for the tech industry.
It feels nice to shit on companies, but Meta gives us sooo much we can shit on them about please choose a topic that actually makes sense.
Re: (Score:3)
Who is losing billions of dollars? Zuck's company made just shy of $30bn profit last year
Where are your numbers from? Net income was down last year to 23.2B from 39.7B in 2021 [statista.com]. Shaving 40% profit in a single year is a massive.
There's no question that there was a HUGE impact to net income in Metaverse development.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Where are your numbers from? Net income was down last year to 23.2B from 39.7B in 2021 [statista.com]
You are correct, don't trust the first number you get from Google. It was a pre-tax figure.
Shaving 40% profit in a single year is a massive.
Yeah, but most of the tech industry shaved 40% of profits in a single year. 2021 needs a big fucking asterisk attached to any data you pull from it. It was a complete nonsense year. Just looking at net profit alone for a single company doesn't tell you anything. The premise was the Meta is losing money. They aren't. You even independently verified it.
There's no question that there was a HUGE impact to net income in Metaverse development.
Indeed. R&D has a huge impact to net income for all companies. M
Re: (Score:3)
The premise was the Meta is losing money. They aren't. You even independently verified it.
Nor did I suggest otherwise. They're still a wildly profitable company. I'm just pointing out the numbers were wrong. And no, not every tech company [macrotrends.net] had profits down 40% in 2021. Here [ycharts.com] you can see Googling increase margins by 41% at one point in 2021.
But if your argument is that investing this level of money is some kind of out of the ordinary sign of doom for a company with $116bn revenue, then you couldn't be more wrong.
Never said or implied. Meta isn't anywhere near "doomed" they make billions in profits.
Re:Hey Zuck... (Score:4, Funny)
Guess what? Your vision of the "future of computing" isn't what anyone else wants.
It certainly is more desirable than spending $3500 on hardware.
Having goose shit on my shoe is much more desirable than having dog shit on my show. The high cellulose and low protein content means that when it dries out, it just falls off. And it has very little scent. No big deal. Whereas dog shit really fucking stinks, and it keeps stinking until it is scrubbed off the bottom of the show. It won't just dry out and fall off without being noticed.
Does that mean that there is a big commercial future in applying goose shit to shoes? No.
Re: (Score:2)
While your analogy is correct I'm not sure how to apply it. Are you saying Apple is the goose or the dog? I mean $3500 is a big shit, much bigger than a goose is capable of. Are you saying all VR is shit? Then why do you care one way or the other?
I agree with what you're saying, even though I have no idea what it means in the context of this discussion.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It means most people don't want to strap a VR thing on their head in the first place.
30 years ago when people were imagining VR "in a few years" "just around the corner" it included either a body suit that let people feel the virtual environment, or a brain-adjuster that either fed real-seeming emotions to you or caused the brain to construct real-seaming visuals.
Which all sounded good but is probably less desirable the more you think about it.
In any case, the hype that led to these creations wasn't about w
Ummmm..... (Score:3)
We have two. They gather dust.
Our daughter barely uses hers. Our son almost never. My wife used them a little and put them down. I've tried one on, worked through part of the demo, didn't bother with more.
Don't think it matters whether it's Zuck's $500 thing on your face or Apple's $3,500 thing on your face:
a. Content is king. Don't bother 'til you can offer something compelling (with LEGS, maybe).
b. Nobody wants a thing on their face for long. Even the ones who paid for the thing.
c. Cartoony crap that mak
Re: (Score:2)
posted to reverse accidental moderation
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I know people struggle with big numbers
... which explains why you think that 20 million Quest 2 units sold [roadtovr.com] is somehow more than 114 million PS4 units sold [ign.com]. I know people (read: you) struggle with big numbers that have the word million after them but it takes a special kind of smugness to write in the tone and tenor you did while being 5 orders of magnitude incorrect.
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry, not orders of magnitude. 500% incorrect.
Re: (Score:2)
Facebook's VR -- and everyone else's except this last one -- is is based on the concept of VR as presented in scifi stories. But outside of the scifi stories the concept is flawed.
No one cares... (Score:2)
No one cares about what you pretend to think Mark! Do you feel the heat yet? Try not to lie as usual when you answer this one...
Re: (Score:2)
Seriously, who gives a fuck what Zuckerberg think?
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Do you feel the heat yet?
What heat? Do you honestly think Meta is losing a single customer to a headset that is 5x the price and has zero content? If they are feeling the heat from anyone it's from HTC with the ViveXR making the Quest Pro instantly obsolete. But if I had $3500 to spend, I'd probably spend it on a Vive and and use the rest to pay hookers to give me a blowjob while I play games rather than buy Apple's expensive paperweight.
Re: No one cares... (Score:2)
Re: No one cares... (Score:2)
Mark knows what's what (Score:5, Funny)
Apple will fail because it doesn't have any real vision of the future. Putting all your money where your mouth is shows takes real genius. Metaverse will bury Apple once enough money has been invested in it to iron out the early bugs. We are all right behind you Mark, you handsome charismatic leader!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Not the Iron (Score:2)
It's content, and there's nothing yet. At least nothing worth the cash and inconvenience.
Breaking Bad (or pick your own fave hugely popular show) didn't become a cultural touchstone because of the TV sets it played on.
I'm with Grumpy Cat on this one (Score:5, Funny)
I hope they both lose.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
I think that you will get your wish, because both of them have dumb visions.
When I imagine AR, I don't imagine camera passthrough, and I don't imagine massive ski goggle sized equipment. I imagine glasses that can overlay graphics on what I'm actually looking at, with a (holographic?) lens element to solve the depth problem so they don't give me a headache. I want an AR solution I can use all the time, not just a toy one that only works inside of an office. And I want people to see my actual eyes, not a bad
What do you expect him to say? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Did people really expect him to say "OMG it's amazing, we're fucked" or similar? These types of articles are just dumb.
Not exactly, but I don't think his messaging was that great. He comes across as kinda arrogant dismissive, which isn't really how one should respond to Apple entering your market (even an Apple without Steve Jobs).
Honestly, if I was him I would have said something along the lines of "I loved their presentation, they made some different decisions than us like X, but I welcome their efforts in building the metaverse".
And realistically, Facebook isn't going anywhere quickly metaverse-wise. If they play this ri
Re: (Score:2)
Arrogant-dismissive. Like how /. was when the iPod was announced ("No wireless. Less space than a Nomad. Lame").
Or like how RIM (BlackBerry), Nokia, Microsoft, and Palm was when the iPhone was launched.
I would be extremely worried. I don't see the Apple Vision Pro taking over the world, but at $35
Re: (Score:3)
If he was being honest he'd probably say "finally people might actually want to use the Metaverse, after they have tried literally every other app for their $3,500 headset!"
Price point (Score:5, Insightful)
The laughable $3500 price point probably had Zuck breathing a sigh of relief, even Apple fanatics will have to pause at that price. I have an older (now) HTC Vive Pro, and while I like it, I can't see what Apple is offering, especially in terms of games and its walled garden, that would in anyway tempt me to drop that amount of cash (yes, I know it's more than just VR, it's AR too etc, but it's features don't particularly interest me). I'll probably get a new VR/AR headset at some point, but will stay in the $400-500 range.
Sidenote: while the Vision Pro no doubt is more comfortable than my Vive Pro, I still find I only want to wear it for short periods of time. I can't see doing an 8 hr day it -- I wonder about long term affects on vision and other unknowns with heavy continual use, I feel like I always need a bit of an adjustment time visually when leaving VR environments.
Re: (Score:3)
had Zuck breathing a sigh of relief
I'm not sure what people thought was going to happen. That Apple was magically light years ahead in not only technology but also the economy of it when it comes to production? Everyone predicted Apple will create a better headset, but everyone predicted it would be a toy for the filthy rich and completely priced out of reach of general consumers.
Lots of companies are pouring lots of R&D into this field. No one has some magic bullet that solves world hunger without costing anything to implement.
Re: (Score:2)
Good point! I can't wait to buy one so that I can invite all my friends over during football night, and we can all bask in the glory of watching a game together on Apple's awesome hardware.
And the good news is that it's a lot more functional than a car! I mean, a
Re: (Score:2)
Given that it's a laptop and home entertainment center in one
Most HMDs on the market are both stand alone hardware and capable of playing movies, for 1/5th of the price, or in the really high end, 1/2 the price.
Price point is for a "PRO" model (Score:2)
The laughable $3500 price point ...
Notice the "Pro" in the name. That suggests there will be less expensive non-Pro models. For example:
Mac Pro $7,000 vs Mac Studio $2,000 / $4,000 vs Mac mini $600 / $800 / $,1300.
iPhone Pro $1,000 vs iPhone SE $430
iPad Pro $800 vs iPad $330.
Well, Apple at least recognized a lot of problems (Score:3, Insightful)
I mean, there are a lot of problems that Meta didn't even recognize. What if you're wearing the Quest 3 and someone is going to sniff your crotch and then starts to touch you? You're only going to notice that then. The Apple headset recognizes this and shows the wearer a ghost approaching you.
I mean, yes. You can make this cheaper, but can you make it not suck then? What Apple demonstrated is heaps and bounds ahead of what Facebook has been doing. Meta isn't even recognizing the problems, much less offering solutions to them. Apple basically threw them against the wall and Zuck is slowly sliding down the wall and offering cheap excuses.
Apple has the will to be successful and has plans to do this. Meta is just dreaming.
Re: Well, Apple at least recognized a lot of probl (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Porn films are about the journey. We all know the ending.
Re: (Score:3)
What Apple demonstrated is heaps and bounds ahead of what Facebook has been doing. Meta isn't even recognizing the problems, much less offering solutions to them.
Okay... but seven times as expensive?
Re: (Score:2)
It's solving a problem that most people don't have.
Re: (Score:2)
Man, possessing $3500 and having nothing more worthy to spend it on (including savings, investments, etc.) than VR/AR done "better" is quite a specific kind of problem. If that is a problem someone has, they have a pretty good life.
Re: (Score:2)
My last iPad Pro cost me somewhere around $2k.
My last Apple laptop cost me around $7k all said and done.
I have a Valve Index already, and nothing I saw about this particularly impressed me compared to what I can already do with it, so I doubt I'll jump at the opportunity to get one of these... particularly considering the fact that my couple hundred Open/SteamVR compatible games aren't going to work on
Re: (Score:3)
I mean, there are a lot of problems that Meta didn't even recognize. What if you're wearing the Quest 3 and someone is going to sniff your crotch and then starts to touch you? The Apple headset recognizes this and shows the wearer a ghost approaching you.
*Sigh*. The Quest 2 has detected people entering your play area and presents both a warning and flashes up guardian to display a point cloud of their location. It has for 2 years already.
People need to stop thinking just because Apple did something that they invented it.
What Apple demonstrated is heaps and bounds ahead of what Facebook has been doing.
No. What Apple demonstrated is a perfectly ordinary ultra high end product designed without budget in mind. Apple showed off some truly impressive hardware, just like NVIDIA's RTX4090 is a truly impressive graphics card. Two products that I
Re: Well, Apple at least recognized a lot of probl (Score:2)
The issue of content is WHY they introduced the product at WWDC-to get developers interested in developing content. But, they also mentioned it can run iPhone and iPad apps - that's a lot of preexisting content that can be accessed using the UI of the Vision Pro.
The Vision Pro is not yet available to purchase. Apple is hoping that developers will add code or write new apps that leverage VP-specific features.
For me, the thing is out of my budget. But, it is cool.
Re: (Score:2)
The issue of content is WHY they introduced the product at WWDC-to get developers interested in developing content.
So what you're saying is there's no point or compelling reason to own this product and it's only for developers who want to play in an uncertain future? That's exactly my point.
In the meantime competitors including both Valve and Oculus launched with actual compelling content. In fact I would argue I'm far less interested in VR today than I was 3-4 years ago where big name development was happening. The index, overpriced toy. Halflife Alex the most fucking mindblowing experience I've ever had. That's the re
Re: (Score:2)
If your biggest problem is that strangers approach you when you're wearing a VR headset, with the purpose of invading your personal space just to sniff your crotch, I would propose that maybe the $3500 would be better spent hiring some movers and relocating to a safer location.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: Well, Apple at least recognized a lot of probl (Score:2)
This will join BitCoin and ChatGPT... (Score:2)
$3,500 for the Vision Pro? (Score:2)
Apple's not selling your eyeballs to advertisers (Score:3, Insightful)
That's why their device is more expensive. Meta will monetise your eyeballs and attention on Facebook and Instagram with their device and thus can subsidise the cost.
That's before you even look at the technical details of the device. I haven't looked too closely but my read of the Apple device is that it is a pretty astonishingly sophisticated piece of equipment that deploys a lot of new research.
(Note: I own zero Apple devices; I am an Android user. No skin in this game, yet. But I trust Apple more than I trust Meta.)
Re: (Score:2)
Facebook learned this lesson early on... you don't put ads on something until it's already "cool" and popular. Their VR offerings aren't really cool or popular yet, and adding advertising to them would just only lessen their chances of that happening.
subsidized via content subscriptions (Score:2)
Re: Apple's not selling your eyeballs to advertise (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That's why their device is more expensive.
LOL you really bought the Apple marketing hook line and sinker. I mean the marketing targeted at you, not the marketing targeted advertisers, which is a thing and has a whole dedicated website telling them how Apple makes it easy to target you.
Look please stop talking out of your arse. It's okay to say the Apple hardware is good. It really is. It's the highest end of the high end. That's why it commands the price. Meta isn't selling HMDs at a loss.
Re: (Score:2)
I did say the Apple hardware is good
It's cool but not that cool (Score:4, Interesting)
A lot of people are comparing it to HoloLens due to the price, but it's more correct to compare it to a Quest which really puts the price disparity on display.
The HoloLens is built for a completely different application: it doesn't obstruct your view, giving you a natural ultra-wide FOV (even if the projected screen space is smaller) so you can use it in work places without knocking stuff around in your periphery
The Quest and Apple's headset both have a narrow scuba-goggles FOV and their AR is really meant for use in more controlled spaces.
The tech in it, compared to existing VR today, is all stuff that's either already been done or is a very obvious evolutionary improvement. It's cool but it's not $3500 cool -- I guess that describes a lot of Apple products, but this one seems especially egregious. In my mind this screams toy for tech workers with too much money.
Wrong, it's like HoloLens (Score:1)
A lot of people are comparing it to HoloLens due to the price, but it's more correct to compare it to a Quest
This s because it's really lots more like the HoloLens, once we iron out your misconceptions.
The HoloLens is built for a completely different application: it doesn't obstruct your view, giving you a natural ultra-wide FOV
The Vison does that as well, when you put it on most people describe it as seeing everything you could see with it off.
even if the projected screen space is smaller
The problem was it
Re: Wrong, it's like HoloLens (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
So I will give the experts some trust here.
If you look closely the ones who were saying it was like the index were all people who had to use correction inserts (had glasses) so that narrows the vision somewhat.
Other reports I read made it sound like you could see pretty far to either side... and again it has side cameras for a reason.
I do expect it to be a bit narrower than a HoloLens, but it's basically enough you can wander around in full freedom because you can see your surroundings. Like I said it has
Re: (Score:3)
I know the unit itself can do 130 degrees.
Who know though. VR experiences are very subjective.
Re: (Score:1)
I have an Index. I've never felt like the pass-through cameras had a narrow FOV.
I'll take your word on that; have not had the chance to try an Index. Perhaps it is similar then.
We'll get better comparisons in time, but at the moment none of the reviews I've seen (and I have read/watched a LOT) have said it's too narrow to use for AR, and many mention the view "wraps all the way around to the edge of vision" (one person did mention seeing a little black bar in peripheral vision).
Re: (Score:3)
Vision Pro has hugely higher resolution though, and the Index has a much higher refresh rate.
Ultimately, I imagine the Apple device is going to be a great experience, because I know my Index is.
How do you know? (Score:1)
Index can do 130 degrees, the Vision Pro can do 120, so they should be very similar in terms of AR perspective.
Where did you get 120 from? I've not seen any published specs yet, did Apple say something elsewhere about the FOV? Would like to be more sure myself...
I do think either are plenty though.
Re: (Score:2)
Where did you get 120 from?
Commonly given online if you google... However- there's no source of this information given... So it very well could be bullshit.
I assumed if enough places came up with the same number, then there must be some truth to it... Of course, that's not 100% true, though.
One example. [fresherslive.com]
did Apple say something elsewhere about the FOV?
Damn good question.
The more I google, the more suspect I get about original sourcing- so you might be right- the 120 number might be horseshit.
Re: (Score:2)
I expect it to be a similar experience to a Quest or Index too.
As a VR enthusiast (been on since Oculus CV1, now using an Index with FBT) I can't wait to try it out, but if I view it as a mere "Quest but with eye tracking, higher res cameras, and Magic Leap style inputs" -- it feels too evolutionary to be worth the price.
Right now the way it's been presented, it feels like they're trying to thread a needle to artificially distance it from being feature/price compared like this.
Re: (Score:2)
I mean, it's obviously not "full peripheral FOV", but at 130 degrees, it covers pretty much your full stereoscopic vision + a bit of your peripheral.
It "feels" full when you're wearing it... but with obviously missing peripheral vision. Kind of like scuba goggles, except you can really see obstructions with scuba goggles, and you don't really with an Index... Your far peripheral vision is just kind of... not there.
I do agree you c
Re: Wrong, it's like HoloLens (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
but it's more correct to compare it to a Quest which really puts the price disparity on display.
Right, Quest as in Nissan Quest, a cheap mini-van that is comfortable to drive and has lots of power.
Forget this shit, you can buy a used Nissan Quest in good condition for less money.
Re: (Score:2)
> In my mind this screams toy for tech workers with too much money.
Probably right - developers, most likely. Apple almost certainly don't expect many people to buy this ("many" in apple terms, I mean). Instead, they might sell a few thousand to some properly good developers who'll generate some really good content. Internally they can give one of these to every developer that they have in their AR/VR team too - no more fighting over the one working prototype to try some ideas out - now those devs can dev
Choose how much it Zucks (Score:2)
On that subject (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Not exactly BK vs McD, but there's a good interview with an exec from Wendy's: https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
Expensive or super expensive. Both useless. (Score:1)
This is 2 dogs barking at the moon, fighting over which dog owns it.
$500 useless or $3500 useless but avatars have legs.
Hahaha (Score:2)
You guys are like the same jackasses who said the iPod would flop: https://slashdot.org/story/01/... [slashdot.org]
Hey Zuck! (Score:2)
How are the legs coming along?
Let's ask Musk and Bezos too (Score:3)
We already asked Musk what he thinks about NVIDIA. Let's ask all these guys what they think of Apple. Then let's ask Tim Cook what he thinks of Oracle. And Larry Ellison can weigh in on Amazon Prime. I'm hoping King Charles can tell us what he thinks of Tesla.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't know about the rest of it, but you must be a particularly inaccessible sort of masochist to be willing to listen to a Larry Ellison interview.
Musk at least will wave his hands in the air and make crazy eyes to entertain you. And Racist Chuck can at least form a complete sentence.
Who knows what Tim Cook would sound like... everybody knew better.
Re: (Score:2)
you must be a particularly inaccessible sort of masochist to be willing to listen to a Larry Ellison interview
interview masochists really lost a unique person when John McAfee died.
As for Tim Cook, the best he's been was as an interlocutor interviewee with Jeri Ellsworth [youtube.com]
iPod, iPhone, iWatch OH they will never sell !! (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Vision Pro price will drop within the next 1-2 years, probably be under $2,000.
That'd still be too much, although not as ridiculous.
Vision Pro can/will be used with 100's of different apps/programs/games and will be unlimited to what it can be used for in the future !
Apple doesn't have a history of letting you use the hardware you paid for in any way you want to. Their machines have been getting ever more locked down throughout their history, only the Apple I-III series was completely open.
Time is a circle (Score:2)
"No wireless. Less space than a Nomad. Lame"
The Price is Fine (Score:2)
It's the Vision Pro. "Pro" right there in the name. Within two years there will be a Vision Air for around $1000 and a Vision SE for around $500. They will figure out the manufacturing, get the costs down, and with the next fabrication node they will be able to have an M3 with an R2 on the same die. The current product is for developers and other professionals. It will peel off some people who would otherwise get two big pro-level 5K displays will get this instead and it will actually be cheaper. It has som
He has no besseller yet (Score:1)
Other quotes that could be Zuck... (Score:2)
“The development of mobile phones will be similar in PCs. Even with the Mac, Apple has attracted much attention at first, but they have still remained a niche manufacturer. That will be in mobile phones as well,”
“We've learned and struggled for a few years here figuring out how to make a decent phone
Quest = meh (Score:2)
I've use a Quest trying to play this cooperative game where you're trying to defuse a suitcase bomb. The hand controllers are supposed to allow you to interact with the suitcase including picking it up and moving it around. It's total garbage. I found myself physically walking around the suitcase because it was faster. As a parallel, supposedly the reason Steve Jobs killed the Newton was the stylus saying that when you're using it, you can't use the rest of your fingers. Whether or not that actually ha
Competitions. (Score:2)
At least, there will be competitions with the big apple! ;)