Hands-On with Meta's New VR Headset Prototypes!

Why are we deluged with such low quality, low interest, low curiosity articles - about some screenshot of Mark Zuckerberg's avatar of all things - when plenty of really fascinating and intellectual-curiosity-satisfying information exists out there about the metaverse? For instance, this video: ▶ this video Especially on Hacker News, of all places! This article is the equivalent of celebrity tabloids. (This comment is probably not written with the best tone, but I am upset. PR mishaps aside, the metaverse is extremely technically interesting. Why HN skips all of that and just does reruns of Zuckerberg's avatar or whatever is beyond me.)

> it just isn't happening with dorky headsets and probably won't until the tech matures enough to get there Zuckerberg is well aware of the technical challenges of VR headsets and they're putting a lot of effort into getting the headsets where they need to be. Seems like they're helping push the technology much further than any other company right now. Here's a 30 minute video where he and Michael Abrash go into the technical challenges, and what they've been doing to address those issues, as well as showing off prototype devices they've been working on[1]. And there's an hour long episode of Adam Savage's Tested series where they get to try the prototypes and go into even more detail[2]. [1]: link [2]: ▶ this video

While I think Apple throwing their hat in the ring with a super-high end device is great for the market and should light a fire under Meta (and everyone else's butt), I think that the idea that Apple has a super-advanced technology lead isn't totally true for those that have been paying close attention to the XR space. I mean yes, Apple is the best hardware company in the world, and they've assembled/polished best in class hardware and most importantly, have been willing to commit to the volumes for production for bleeding edge parts (eg, companies like eMagin have been demoing 4K micro OLED display for years [1] but no one's ever committed for an $X billion order - already we're seeing the "Apple" effect though as suppliers now have customers to chase [2]). Meta's FRL has been working on pinch-and-release click for years with a haptic EMG controller that while bulkier, I think would actually be a more satisfying experience: link Meta has also been working on next-gen displays (focused on varifocal displays/fixing vergence acommodation conflict) for years. I still think that Doug Lanman's 2020 EIS Plenary presentation is one of the best technical talks of recent memory, and highly recommend watching it to anyone interested in displays: link - Tested had a good demo video of what they have in the labs last year: ▶ this video and you can read about their DeepFocus work from back in 2018: link or see their Half Dome prototypes going back the same time period: link You can go

I don't think anyone is going to crack VR in the short term. Watching this tour of Facebook's Reality Labs, ▶ this video , it seems that they realize the challenges ahead. Looking at these challenges (resolution, brightness, eye tracking, form factor) is there an area where Apple is going to be a generation or more ahead? I think the world will be waiting another decade or so before VR gets anything like phone penetration in the market.

Tested hands on impressions: ▶ this video Funny thing about the $1500 price point. If the Quest Pro could replace my triple monitors, $1500 is a bargain. It's basically a laptop with 3 monitors that appear out of thin air whenever you want. Amazing. To do this it needs to be comfortable enough to wear all day and it needs to be high enough resolution to stare at text all day. It's at least plausible the Pro is comfortable enough for some based on early impressions. But the displays are not cutting it. I don't think it needs to equal the DPI of a monitor at human viewing distance, but 2160x2160 is still way to low. Maybe 3k would do it with super sampling. Oh and the Quest Pro would need to run any Android app, or else it would only be useful tethered to my computer and lose a lot of the appeal. So if the Quest Pro can't handle this use case, $1500 seems crazy expensive. A luxury. They have to hope they have a killer game or app that somehow gets people in. During the height of the pandemic I would have almost paid $1500 if this had a really good 'virtual couch' experience where you can hang out and watch Netflix with friends, passively socializing in a way that felt comparable to the real thing. People love doing this in but it's always so janky.

I was watching ▶ this video about Meta's VR prototypes. They seem pretty clear-headed on where they need to get to, but a lot of it seems like a decade away. At double the price-point of Quest Pro, Apple may solve some of VR's issues (battery-life, speed, ergonomics and looks) but the screen-tech just doesn't exist yet.

First you need VR goggles that you can reasonably work in... These guys are making a go at that: link And facebook is probably going to in the future given the R&D they've been showing off: ▶ this video But having used the current generations of headsets (Valve Index, Quest 2), they just aren't quite there yet.