• Tarquinn2049@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      8 months ago

      What Apple actually brought was visibility and a sign that maybe it’s not just for nerds anymore. Their headset doesn’t have to be worth buying to do that, it just has to be worth making. Most people that try an Apple Vision pro end up buying a Quest 3. But the Quest 3 is surprisingly awesome, especially when you compare the price points. And I think with a bit more time on the market, the Apple Vision pro will steadily gain usefulness. It’s mostly in a position of lacking software right now. They launched out of the gate in much better shape than any other companies first headset software-wise, but they had to of course, as they are playing catch up.

      I do think they will catch up, and their second or third headset might be a real contender. Even though it can definitely be said that their first headset wasn’t a revolution, it still needed to be made. You can only make software for unreleased hardware for so long, eventually you need some hardware on the market.

    • Chinchillax@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      8 months ago

      There are few things that boost inspiration and innovation quite like a competent competitor.

      • CarbonIceDragon@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        8 months ago

        honestly, I feel like something like Pico is more of a competitor to facebook/meta in the VR market, considering apple’s vr seems to be aimed at an entirely different part of the market, whereas pico makes hardware that is very similar in capability, use case and price to what meta puts out.