You could easily access the Internet before smartphones, dont rewrite history, my symbian was more than capable to do it before iPhone. Pure lies IPhone got popular due to the great layout and easy of use
if i could put on my VR headset, and just go straight to my desktop. no nonsense, no OCULUS UI, no silicon valley avatar nonsense, no 'friends list'. leave me alone. straight to my desktop. just be a TOOL. im so tired of all this other stuff and i think others are too. perhaps.
Yeah half the problem is Meta bought out the biggest hardware player, but had no idea what to do with the product. So they basically defaulted to selling it as a fancy upmarket Wii, and it's just a huge waste of potential.
Agreed, and on top of that, why are they even bothering with power hungry tracking cameras and all that? A simple, extra display on my glasses would be dope like a HUD from video games. I dont need it to be anchored in meat space. I just wanna browse the internet and watch funny youtube videos before falling asleep...
There was a place in my town, back in 18, that tried to make a VR arcade, charging 30$ for 20 minutes. Anybody that had fun, bought a headset for themselves. Anybody with motion sickness never came back. They closed after 4 months.
I remember the mall I used to go to a while ago had a VR arcade too! It was a great way to try a full-blown PC VR setup and it helped immensely in my decision to get one of my own, but yeah, that business model was not sustainable at all lmao
The smart phone took off because it had a competent internet browser. It's that simple. "The internet in my pocket" sold the smart phone. Not the apps, not the tech, not the touch screens, not anything else, that's all bonus features. We already have the internet in our pocket. What does VR do?
And what's the internet for? Porn. What can VR do? 3D fully immersive porn. It's that simple, these companies are just too straight up stupid to realise what they have on their hands.
Such a poignant point. The similarities between the smartphone and VR are so similar. When the smartphone arrived everyone talked about there's an app for that, talked about the customisations, and ringtones. And yes, those things are still true, but the smartphone's selling point was it's forms of communication that a dumb phone couldn't do: video communication, image sharing, and emojis. And it's internet browsing capabilities. Everything else is either a niche, or can be boiled down to forms of communication or more advanced browsing. What does the VR headset do that cannot be fundamentally done on a smartphone or PC or does it so much better? Gaming, maybe education. There's not a niche that VR adds more value than its cost Vs another form factor, and even if there is, it hasn't been found yet.
Frankly, good point. Trying to navigate the internet using a Quest 2 is miserable. Worse experience than using a tablet, which you would expect the experience to be similarly easy. Maybe It's bottlenecked by VR headsets using desktop-formatting for sites, rather than the larger, more forgiving mobile layouts. I think something that even further propelled smartphones was internet porn in your pocket, which frankly, I hate to say it, VR has very interesting prospects for. We've seen various companies, games, and websites try to utilize VR for this purpose, but it's all been a bad experience. But hey, you can get your hands dirty and still navigate without making a mess.
As someone who lives in the heart of Silicon Valley, I think the reason why tech execs keep wanting to replace the smartphone is because they're salty that they weren't working at Apple and Google 15 years ago with a generous amount of stock options. Most executives of startups these days were either at the bottom of the totem pole then (I.E. interns) or were working at startups that failed miserably, resulting in their stock options being worth $0.
That's a strange way of looking at it. The obvious answer is that they're being paid to create the next big thing, since being on the ground floor of a revolution is how you make the big bucks in consumer tech. Let's say Apple was late to smartphones, and someone else nailed it first. Right now, they'd essentially be as they were in the 90's, pre ipod. If your company created the replacement to the smartphone and could capitalise on it, everyone involved would be minted, not to mention have some kind of legacy.
The era of happy consumerism has been over for some time now. Nobody could have predicted just how far Apple and Google would have come by now at the time they were really on the cutting edge of innovation, but at the very least people were more able to justify risking some money on a possible gimmick back in the late 2000's/early 2010's as opposed to hiding it away for a rainy day or spending on necessities as we do now. Early smartphones weren't great but they were big enough business that they were worth the continued investment in improving them to the point we are at now. The basic utility of the mobile phone paired with advances in user interfaces and sites like UA-cam having pretty much infinite content available on them paid off in such a big way it can't really be overstated. Nowadays everyone is chasing that hubristic high, rather than being content to make modest profits with solid tech it's all a gamble on "the next big thing". Investors and shareholders don't help it by being so easily distracted by jangling keys in the form of buzzwords and aesthetics, encouraging the whole sorry business.
Yeah they are incredibly desperate to find the next huge thing which will make the entire world shittier forever so they can get in on the ground floor. And the sad part is they aren't even doing it to buy yachts and bang supermodels, they are doing it just out of the love of the game... the game of making everyone's life more empty and annoying
Tech companies seem to forget that to make a long term product successful it has to offer a solution to a problem that is better or at least comparable to the alternative
And this is why so many small teams that aren't that ambitious end up being the most successful, they know what they want to make, they know what would only seek the harm the product, and they know they aren't repeating an existing invention. Silicon valley is failing because so many people don't even understand the inner workings of their tech, so they end up coming up with some "revolutionary new technology" and it turns out they just reinvented the train, but worse.
@@JamesTDG I've tinkered with a lot of electronics. Computer hardware, old VHSes, stuff like that. I consider myself fairly learned in technology, if a bit amateur. I remember opening up my oculus rift controller to try and fix it and being absolutely dumbfounded with how complex it was. So many tiny lil bits and bobs with esoteric purposes in such a bizarre frame. Oh, and it's glued shut. I pity the poor soul that did repairs on early VR tech. Harrowing shit.
@@JamesTDG tbf trains are pretty great and in America you kinda of need trains under a different guise as most people are so against trains for no reason
@@olivermahon5618 I wonder why they're so against trains... could it be because the schedule is ass, unreliable and expensive? I heard one city had a schedule of 6 trains coming into the city in the morning rushhours and 6 leaving in the evening rushhours back to the suburbs. Freight trains are on paper forced to wait at sidings to let passengers pass, they're deliberately too big for the sidings so passenger trains are forced to wait at sidings as long freight trains roll by at a leisurely pace. As for the expensive... how are you getting to the train station, probably a car? why not do the complete trip by car. Lastly for the trains under a different guise, it's trains but WORSE. Some examples: hyperloop, tesla tunnel of cars, autonomous single container trains. If all the money invested in this stuff was put into actual trains, you'd have a very functional train system, 99.99% electrified instead of whatever pathetic number it is now *googles* Electrification in the US reached its maximum of 3,100 miles (5,000 km) in the late 1930s By 1973, it was down to 1,778 route miles (2,861 km) In 2013 its 122 miles (196 km).
@@olivermahon5618he’s referring to things like musk’s hyperloop, which is supposed to be an underground passenger network but, even if it could feasibly exist, would just be a worse version of a typical subway
How is "add virtual things to your home" a selling point? A virtual note on my fridge? Why? Add a cool new virtual painting? Yeah the painting is gone as soon as I take the headset off... Ppl like real things
It's fucking stupid, they are just grasping for stuff to do with it. All of it sucks and is useless and they know it. But if you tell people something is real through certain channels, a good percentage of them will actually believe it and start thinking they need a virtual refrigerator or whatever tarded nonsense you tell them to buy
I'm in the "bought a Occulus, used it a few times and put it on the shelf" club. It's real fun, but I can't use it more than 20 minutes until I get a migraine.
I never even got the migraines, I'm the core demographic (avid gamer and Half Life fan, got maybe 2 hours into Half Life Alyx), but it's just not easy to use. I'm always intensely aware of this big thing on my head, it seems like I'm always going outside the boundaries (granted, I have a regular sized bedroom that houses my PC setup and my sleeping area), and as someone who wears glasses, it's always either shifting in and out of focus or my glasses are pressed against my face. I'm near sighted anyway, there theoretically shouldn't be an issue, but for some reason there is.
@@MeatSnaxLense technology is still bad, that's probably why. Right now the best displays on the consumer market are Apple vision pro, with both pancake lenses and MicroOLED. Meta quest 3 has pancake LCD and PSVR2 has fresnel OLED. In short the pancake lenses are clearer and easier to see whereas the fresnel(most common type of lense) are kinda blurry on the edges and have a pathetic sweet spot. So even healthy eye sight individuals can be disappointed by the lenses, it's not a you issue.
I mean if you'd never seen a screen before youd be motionsick like people used to with modern games. If you keep at it you get your VR-legs. It is a shame it's something you have to work on though
The only time I've ever gotten a headache when using VR, was due to the headstrap I was using, it was putting localized putting pressure on various points on my head. I changed it, and the problem went away. I'd bet that your problem is solvable with a more comfortable headstrap or adjusting the one you have now.
Not only are they bulky and make you look funny, what are they really replacing? How is the average consumer going to stop buying a desktop and buy VR goggles instead? They barely have the technology to transcribe speech into text to replace our keyboards, and not without being connected with the internet.
You also look funny when you hold a black square to your head and talk in public. The difference is, people have gotten used to seeing this since everyone does it, so it no longer "makes you look funny". If VR went mainstream, I guarantee you people would stop complaining about how you look when you use VR.
the old massive mobile phones ppl carried looked pretty silly too. especially the ones that had a brief case battery lol [oh look we've come full circle with the apple vision pro] vr isn't at its smartphone boom yet. it's still in its brick phone enthusiast market baby steps era.
Well with the popularity or vr chat and the general gaming community along with conditions irl when it comes to community and 3rd spaces i assume theyre expecting vr to become a ready player one style replacement for socializing.
If speech to text and speech recognition in general were improved, it would be a bigger contribution to tech than VR being successful. The constant nascant raving about another two letter bubble, AI, makes me wonder why Siri and Google Assistant, two of the biggest speech to text services out there, still haven't combined the two things rather than relying on a massively inaccurate model that hasn't been improved in any way for over a decade.
I used to be what some people have called a "VR enthusiast". I still have all of my VR stuff, their just sitting in boxes; but I had, what was at the time, the most high end headset on the market, full body tracking, a pc built to fight god, a big open space in my apartment. I haven't played a VR game in months now, possibly not in this year. I think that you nailed it on the head that the hassle of setting everything up and putting everything on is what has kept me from booting it up. That, and none of my friends play VRchat anymore.
This guy has hardly hit anything in the head. He's a guy with a platform that someone else made popular. As a developer, and someone who loves VR, I can tell you that the companies that this bozo pretends to understand are playing the long game. The technologies that made the smartphone were developed across multiple decades by hundreds of people. These guys are not even market analysts. I'd be amazed if this guy even had a high school diploma. Don't fret, mate. VR will be all over the place before this dufus finds a person with enough brain damage to reproduce with.
I'm in the same place. What has kept me from putting it back on is thumbstick drift. I replaced one thumb stick and that was such a pain in the ass that when my other started drifting I just havent brought myself to fix it.
Considering their similarity, could always try out similar applications like Resonite and maybe make new friends? Resonite specifically seems to be going broader than just being purely social VR, providing potentially interesting stand-alone content for you. It's perfectly fine to not feel obligated to using a technology every single day, rather than just when feel like using it. Can just pop back in when see something new that's interesting.
That's why I'm done with PCVR. I have a meta quest 3 and a tiny bit of space to use it in. You can just pick that thing up and you get back into the game you were playing in a few seconds. It also just completely shits over my previous PCVR headsets in every way too, other than controller tracking.
I can think of some. 1. Screen size doesn't require a big device, just clip it on your shirt when you're done. It's like having a portable home theatre on the go. 2. No having to crane your neck for hours for portable entertainment or work. 2. Complete privacy in public, no one can peek into your smart glasses.
@@wilddog73So a couple accounting points to that first of all is very rare occasions where people want to have an entirely home theater size setup physically or virtually on them at some time. To most people obviously don't have problems with the neck thing because we've been using them for so long. And also you're replacing neck strain with eye strain. And the very last thing is that the privacy thing is not only a non-issue because most of the time when your privacy is violated, it's through back entrances on services instead of people peeking around you. But in particular the privacy can turn into isolation, which has been one of the biggest problems with this field. Humans are very much a communicative species and thus want to interact each other. I mean, think about it. We have an entirely robust networking service and people still went absolutely crazy during the lockdowns because they couldn't go outside and breathe on people's private parts all day. People need that interaction. It's the same exact reason why home video and streaming did not completely annihilate the movie theater. So that's another big hurdle that VR needs to solve. Into be honest, I don't think I could ever solve that problem due to the intrinsic nature of the platform.
@@wilddog73 Counters 1. You can't "just clip it to your shirt when you're done" when the headset weighs two pounds and is the size and shape of a construction brick 2. You can do that with an other device if you don't have terrible posture. 3. Having a VR headset on in public? Why? Why not just stay home if that's what you want to do? Anything that you'd specifically want other people not to see is likely something that you shouldn't take out of your front door in the first place. If it's not that, it's probably a distraction further eroding your already miniscule attention span.
@OtakuUnitedStudio The form of this tech that's meant to replace smartphones is AR capable smartglasses, not VR headsets. Check out Meta's Orion smartglasses for a better reference.
Definitely an interesting technology. Silicon valley has pushed it as a "productivity device", where it can replace an expensive and bulky desktop setup, be used for 3d modeling, conferences, etc. But apart from the 3d modeling (which I'm aware has some practical uses within industry), none of those uses are actually better than the alternatives people already have, come with a huge learning curve, the hassle of limited battery, and the other problems you mentioned here. Meanwhile, people who actually like the technology are almost all gamers, and the main killer app for VR is VRChat, a game that could never appeal to a mainstream audience and would get obliterated for copyright infringement if it ever was positioned as a major selling point. It's an ok, unique gaming device that can provide some one of a kind experiences, but the suits want it to be something it isn't.
As someone who is a frequent Quest 2 user I can see how most people will just put their headsets down and not use them after a few weeks, those people clearly didn't get what they wanted from VR. I think there definitely is still a market for VR at least when it comes to gaming because the capacity for immersion its simply unmatched.
Even for gamers it's a very chicken and the egg scenario because there needs to be an install base before people release games and apps which aren't just glorified tech demos.
But the people that VR gaming works for already have games established for them. Sims have been supporting headsets for 7 years now and it isn't easy to find one that doesn't. Just because you can't play every FPS or 4X in VR doesn't mean there's no software.
Idk, personally I don't get much immersion from booty graphics and a hot, heavy, headset squeezing my brain. The most immersion I've felt is playing Skyrim Special Edition on a nice tv in a dark room, felt like I was really just there in Tamriel taking in the auroras. I'd love to try Skyrim VR but I refuse to purchase the game for a third time when I know it'll probably look terrible and I'll play for all of 15min, not to mention the reviews.
I think for a lot of people wearing one of these things is kind of straining. Personally I like it for the awesome 3D effects but I would not use this for every day application just enjoying 3D experiences
I bought an oculus DK1 during the Kickstarter and figured that the next 10 years would be filled with open source and indie developers making cool VR experiences and slowly improving the niche tech. Instead, it had to be "The Next Big Thing" in Silicon Valleys eyes.
Indeed, absolutely wrecked it just because it wasn't allowed to grow steadily, and nobody could truly experiment with the tech. Same rings true with smart watches, the market for em is so niche just because there's no way for nerds to jailbreak em and develop software that takes full advantage of the hardware to create new things.
@@Foogi9000 Elite: Dangerous in VR is astounding. Watching a space station turn in space and realising just how ridiculously huge everything is. To quote Douglas Adams, "Space, it's big,"
@@JamesTDG There were custom OS' for the early crop of Android Wear devices, not to mention tonnes of hobbyist apps. The Pebble scene was very healthy too. Pine Watch continues to plod along, along with even more niche devices like Watchy. There's always been ways for enthusiasts to experiment with smartwatch tech, and I've done a lot of it. Turns out we just couldn't figure out what to do with them.
@@fix0the0spade elite dangerous, and dirt rally are basically the only things I play in vr. One of the limiting points I don't see people mention that often is just space. My computer is in my bedroom, I started playing rumble and ended up twatting my wardrobe, monitor etc. Unless I move my pc into the living room its just not feasible to do room scale vr.
There's a quote from a tech dude I can't name off the top of my head that goes, "From the moment the smartphone debuted, I knew it would be the next big thing in the industry. It's shaped to be conveniently carried in your pocket and fits perfectly in your hand, you know...like a box of cigarettes." Until VR/AR is as convenient as putting on a pair of glasses, it fundamentally does not have the same draw as a smartphone, and the only thing VR is good for is a dedicated gooner
and even then, unless it pairs up as actual glasses I'm not gonna bother taking off my actual glasses and taking them back on everytime I want to see the real world
It will never hit that level because it's socially isolating. VR will always be for the hobbyist crowd, or at best it competes with home cinema. Ultimately it's a thing you use in a quiet room by yourself, which means it will never hit the ubiquity of a smart phone or laptop that can be used just about anywhere and easily shares the experience.
@@suspecm6316 Google Glass had prescription lens options. It also made you look far less like a dork, since it looked more like a regular pair of glasses with the AR stuff on the side.
We treat Vr like another story of the internet but we often forget that it has to be easy for the average consumer. Personal computers didn't take off because people thought it was the future it became simple enough for people to understand and people were finding uses for it. once something has enough of a use it can grow if you have something that has possiblities of uses thats cool and all but vr is more like 1990s internet rn.
I would agree if not for the fact that smartphones can do the majority of things that vr can do better and more conviniently regardless of the user's literacy with the device.
Correct, a lot of true success is based on the answer being yes to the following question - "can even the lowest common denominator moron pick it up, set it up and use it" and considering some people still can't type for dick after years of smartphone use, they were never going to be able to figure out how to get a VR headset going, nor would they want to.
@@Foogi9000it's not about useability, it's about daily application. My mom (now deceased, but I am 45 and she had me in her 30s) was very tech-phobic and railed against smart phone conversions as they became more than just phones. But change was necessary to keep existing in the world. People were using smartphone tech well before the iPhone. They were also using mobile phones as music players and to browse the internet well before the iPhone. I had a flip phone with a browser and if you had the right file type you could upload music on it. But it wasn't easy and browsing the Internet was tiny and pixelated. Opening an email was not worth it on that little screen. iPhone just found the right form factor for things people already wanted and were already using in their mobile phones. Most people aren't looking for VR to get better, they are looking to see how VR would make their life better enough to be worth the purchase and strapping a device to their head. Even in simple glasses form most people are not into it once the novelty has worn off. It's like a fun toy for a week and then it's 'what is this accomplishing that I can't do better/faster another way'.
I am starting to feel like there's a lot of parallel between VR now and like, handheld gaming in the 90s. We remember the good parts, but we forget 90% of the Gameboy library was complete garbage, the screen was impossible to see if you didn't have the exact right angle at the exact right time of day, we forget how much of an impractical pain it was actually carrying around all your spare carts and battery packs and your light accessory (that sucked balls) etc etc... I don't think VR is gonna ever take over and be THE era defining world changing tech, but it will have its DS/PSP golden age someday, in a generation or two.
it won't have it's golden age as big tech is trying to hard to make it the next big thing every time there's a breakthrough... instead of leaving it to enthusiasts for a breakthrough or 2 to develop it further, to make that 90% complete garbage and figure out what works and what doesn't before trying to milk the normies.
The idea that the gameboy's screen was hard to see is iphone zoomer cope, the pocket's screen was incredibly viewable, and the colour was not much worse (not mentioning DMG lol). Advance, quite a bit worse, SP, a disaster. Carrying that shit was never a real problem, other than the simple fact you had to decide in advance what games you were bringing. I had/still have a simple branded pouch that holds 3 games, console, worm light and extra spare batts in a size not much bigger than the console. When I was a kid I had a zip box thing that could hold my console and practically all my games and it was compact and easy to take on car trips etc. The idea that the gameboy was impractical etc has never rung to me as true, as someone who had them back in the day and now.
@@LordVarkson You can't just call every opinion you disagree with"zoomer cope" dude, Pocket was my first one, and it was fine as long as you had a reasonable amount of ambient light. Gameboy Colour and pre-SP Advance though? No way dude, you needed a planetary alignment to see those screens properly. And those plug in accessory lights were always useless. Carrying the games was tolerable at the time but just try it now- You'll get bored of it and just get a flashcart instead within weeks. We just didn't have better options back then. Stop being blinded by nostalgia.
I like the VR chat... but I have to admit that the "chat" thing is waaaay more important than the "VR" thing. I also admit that the exp. is not the same with no VR. The only problem I see with this thing, is, the batery. I need them available 24/7 just like my desktop
it's like how we all thought we would love video phone calls but instead we just text. The tech can be seamless but what does it provide? nothing new of value.
I read in a book about internet language about how one reason why cvideo calls took off was because of texting. We've had the tech for video calls for a while after all, but it wasn't until we had an ultra low investment way of communicating (ie texting) that video calling became a viable thing. Without it, calling somebody on a video call is a huge intrusion--it assumes you're both in a fit state to talk AND in a fit state to be seen by distant eyes. Texting fixes it by letting you prepare and arrange a time quick and easy
Virtual Reality was started as a sci-fi concept wasn't it? I mean from what I see it is more of a flying car thing where this is a dream that people want it to become a reality rather then being a solution to a problem.
I love my quest 3. When I’m not recovering from surgery, I’m using it every day for over an hour just to exercise. I’ve lost weight and feel better than I have in years. I’m the kind of guy who wants to use it and will use it religiously. Most people aren’t me.
Same. I use body weights and fighting games (Blade and Sorcery, Battle Talent) and good old fashioned push ups. I’m in the best shape of my life and I look forward to my workouts. The testosterone boost I get from defeating a boss not with X X Y, but ME is amazing
Here's the internet in your pocket! --- Neat, thanks. Here's the internet, but as bulky goggles you have to wear on your head, and you have to navigate via a first person avatar! --- Uhm... no?
My parents first phone were both work phones. The reason the smartphone took off is that it had practical business applications, VR doesn't. Why use an ugly, cringey, glitchy, gimmicky, expensive VR conference room when a Zoom call already exists? I remember watching a video (probably from you) about how the cheapest video game console always wins, and well... VR is far from cheap.
A lot of the really high end VR stuff only exists precisely because it has practical business uses. Apple wouldn't have been able to make their goggles without a lot of the advancement industrial VR uses have been pushing forward. It's just that it's super niche and specific to certain industries, it's never gonna be something your average desk jockey needs.
Well, the Quest 2 was very cheap (originally) being cheaper than game consoles, and that's why it sold so well. Many people could justify buying it for their kids. The Quest 3 being $600 is too expensive to be a cheap toy to buy for kids, not to mention the economy now compared to the quest 2's release. The Quest 2 wasn't capable of being properly used as a work supplement. However, I believe the Quest 3's better passthrough (I have no experience with it) allows it to be more practical than a smartphone, tablet, or computer for dirty jobs where touching your device would get it dirty, or damage it.
@@addmix I disagree becuase any job where it's too dark, filthy and and busy to use a smartphone is not a job where you can afford to keep 6 sensors clean or have the space to walk around and look at different apps
@@addmixAnd the solution to damaging an electronic device in a highly volatile work environment is strapping an extremely sensitive piece of tech on your eyes? Not to mention how the OS is gonna bother you all the time because "we can't track your environment!!!" Yeah no lol. If you just need comms a speaker does the job good enough, no cellphone or vr required
I still love the smartphone because I have not forgotten that it is basically sci-fi that it even exists lol. As a 90s kid my mind was blown by portable tech like camcorders and Gameboys. Later in my teen years I got my hands on a digital camera that could take pictures AND video AND voice memos… that just was not a common thing and the 60 dollars I spent on a 128 (megabyte) card complimented it well. Anyway, my brain has held onto those memories and I can’t help but view the iPhone I’m typing on right now as straight up sorcery. Add the capabilities of internet and entertainment of all sorts and smartphones laying to the wayside just seems absurd.
There's a 50 something year old guy where I work who rarely ever unglues his face from his smartphone, but I have to help him use the computers at work because he literally does not know which button on the mouse to click for what reason
The sad thing is, a lot of the younger generation is the same way. It feels like it's only a small group of Millennials and experts from other generations that actually get computers, while both the grandparents of Millennials and their Gen Alpha grandchildren are ignorant of computers and only know how to do things on the phone.
@@jeremyandrews3292 Good observation, it means that smartphones are more successful and intuitive than desktop style computers at this point then. I still find that hilarious considering how inaccurate typing on a touchscreen is - literally almost every single word I'm typing on mine now is only saved from gibberish by predictive text, and even then sometimes it messes up half a dozen words in a row and has to be manually corrected.
VR got me through the pandemic and i couldnt imagine going through that, being stuck at home, and not being able to just throw on my Rift S and escape into VRchat or Elite Dangerous.
>the ability to easily put a moving 3-dimensional illusion of anything anywhere in real space. >use it to simulate 2-dimensional screens. Golly, I don't know what could have been done differently...
hmm what could we use 3d for without necessarily inducing nausea from too much movement mismatch? RTS games What RTS games are currently popular? the ancient ones in no particular order: aoe2, sc2, planetary annihilation
@@sirjmoWhat motion mismatch, we're talking about office work here (for the specific example of the virtual workspaces filled with 2D screens). Even for games though, RTS isn't even remotely close to the only available genre, there's plenty of really great VR experiences with zero motion mismatch gameplay, including Valve's sole first party entry into the space with HL Alyx
@@bosstowndynamics5488 Motion mismatch is what I use as the catchall term for visuals not matching senses. Example: car sickness. I was just thinking we could make use of the space available to create 3D miniature landscapes with the gods/birds eye perspective and of course other things can use this too, I just thought of classic RTS. as for zero motion mismatch gameplay, I think you're being a bit generous with the term zero, considering that it is first person.
@@sirjmo I'm really not being generous though, most VR games use 1:1 tracking, and for movement in large spaces usually offer teleportation which doesn't involve any perceived motion for the brain. I'm sure some people still get a bit of motion sickness but overall judgement of how bad the problem is will be thrown off both by the fact that there's plenty of games that offer non 1:1 movement for those of us with VR legs (and some people who should use teleportation will use those movement systems instead and then feel sick), and probably a side order of latency issues given that self contained headsets like the Quest 2 and 3 will actually be more dependent on reprojection than tethered headsets like the Vive or Index, not to mention much higher latency when using a tethered mode over wifi or USB
Europe has it really bad with VR Headset prices. While the Apple Vidion Pro costs $3500 in the US it costs $5500/€5000 here. 3500 was already a stupidly high price, but 5500 is ridiculous. Every other headset also costs at least 50-70% more here.
This is probably the biggest issue big tech is overlooking. North america is a tiny, very erratic market to target for. Smartphones can be bought not only for like 50$ but you can do it literally everywhere.
@@natzos6372 Of course it varies in every country of europe, but for example: when the Quest2 was still readilly available, it cost 199$ in USA and 299€(~325$) in Germany. Where I live its just a fact that the prices are not comparable
I've been arguing this for the past few years. Google glass in its wearability, minor camera features, and connectivity to the Internet arguably made it the best option when it came to AR. It was mostly hindered, in my opinion, by its style and usage of a screen rather than reflecting an image onto the glasses or into the users eye. arguably the best option for the common person but failed due to the market sadly
I remember the social stigma against Google Glass when it was announced. Journalists were coinning the term "glasshole" to someone who wore them in public because it had a camera. Nobody liked that Google Glass could be recoding people at any moment without anyone realizing it, and I think thats why it failed
I'm tempted to say it was too early, but I don't think that's what consumers want today either. I think modern people would want something that lets them watch tiktok while driving or whatever people do these days. If all you want is notifications and some limited ambient information, smartwatches already do that fine.
I watched old people in the 90s touch a PC for the first time and have zero issues understanding how moving the mouse moved the cursor. It's a lot more intuitive than you make it seem.
Its because the smartphone had business potential and ramifications. As such I genuinely doubt it’ll ever be replaced, much to the dismay of Silicon Valley tech fuckboys
If that's the case then I'm kind of relieved that AR/VR glasses won't be widely used. Imagine in the near future being surrounded by people wearing these at the grocery store. They're all bumping into things and getting distracted from having their attention split, possibly scanning you for info or taking pictures without your knowledge. And who would stop them from wearing them in the car if they look just like sunglasses?
UI is something that always makes me hesitate on getting more niche tech devices. Seems like the layout is an afterthought for these companies. The OG Samsung Folds were notoriously buggy in that regard. Apps never scaled properly to the correct aspect ratio the way you would expect them to, and those were premium flagships.
Catch 22, it's up to app developers to design their apps to support foldables, they won't invest the time without a large enough support base. Android tablet apps still have similar problems, especially because some of the most popular Android tablets are the crappy 7" variety that don't look too bad with phone apps blown up to the size.
Guess I'm the minority. Love my VR gear, I've had the CV1, Quest 2 and Quest 3. Spend between 1 and 2 hours a day in it, but when something new comes out (which is sadly rare) I can easily spend 6 or more hours in one go, hooked up to a battery. Games like Blade and Sorcery, H3VR, and Into The Radius have gameplay that you absolutely, positively CANNOT get anywhere else outside of VR. I posted a video of a tense encounter where I needed both my hands but also needed to see in a dark corner. Without thinking about it I take my flashlight, turn it on and toss it into the dark corner of the room while I wait for the ambush. It's such a unique experience having the freedom to do nearly anything you can imagine.
Personally I don't think you're missing out on much, but as another person said there are probably some ways around it, or even just holding it up to your face with one hand.
I mean most successful consoles have either had "masterpiece" titles on/around launch (e.g. the various mario games like Mario 64) or backwards compatibility with the previous generation(s) of consoles
There are two types of people who make up 99% of the 1000+ hours VR customer base: those autisticly invested in one of the few games (beatsaber), and the alcoholics (vrchat)
The only game I play is Compound, and I play it every day, for hours at a time. It's not even one of those games that's acceptable to be autistically invested in either, it's just some random game that was made then abandoned a few years back.
The problem with vr is that it doesn't really offer anything that a phone cant. Why would you want to browse the internet or read emails with a VR headset? Smart phones are basically perfect because they're quick and simple. At the end of the day, what would be more convenient? Strapping on a headset and controller to just look up stuff? Or pulling out your phone? In my humble opinion, VR will likely remain a niche novelty for enthusiasts.
Criticizing VR because it's not good for smartphone-like functions, is like criticizing a drill for not functioning as a good hammer. Sure, you can use it as a hammer, but it works far better when you use it as a drill.
I have VR and I thought about sculptung in VR. Haven't tried it yet though. There could also potentially be more fun ways to do creative stuff in VR,but I haven't found much
I think the big difference between the Smartphone and all the other smart thingies that came after was the attitude form the companies making these things. To be more specific, Google and Apple. In the early Smartphone days it was like "do whatever you want you can do with these things, even if its kind of ridiculous". Like in the days of 3.5" phones, really it was goofy to watch youtube, play GTA 3 or browse the internet which at the time was almost exclusively made up of desktop sites because that was the norm. But over time both the Software and the hardware adapted to how real people were using these things. Phones got bigger and more powerful and websites made mobile friendly sites or Apps. This is so drastically different from for example Smartwatches, where the manufacturers from the start tightly controlled everything - no fun allowed. With many you don't even have a webbrowser and all Apps have to be super optimized for the formfactor and can't offer more than super basic features because that would go against the ethos of maximum minimalism.
VR is amazing, but do you think the average person wants to turn their head and body to perform tasks that could be done on a rectangle that fits in their pocket with little conscious input?
I am pretty bummed by how I now interact with VR tech. I splurged on a pretty advanced setup and used to use it daily, but the hassle of resetting my audio devices, untangling the wires, standing in a specific spot in my room, and needing to acclimate is no longer outweighed by cool new software. Cool VR games don't seem to come out anymore, and so now it's a fragile $1k device I use to make Elite Dangerous a bit more interesting.
VR is cool af, you wanna use it all the time. But then the novelty wears off. All that stuff about using your headset instead of your phone is cool for the first week, then you realize pulling your phone out is easier and less annoying. As much as I like VR and all the potential it has, I can't see it as anything more than a novelty, no matter how small and light and cheap it gets.
Why assume it will always just be a novelty when it, for example, it's as heavy as glasses? Or works perfectly with no hassle when you just put them on?
@@epiclamp44 Because it will always be more annoying than simply using your phone, or a computer. Even if they manage to find a way for the device to work without using some sort of controller. Just literally a pair of glasses that reads your hands as you move them. It will always, always be more tiresome and annoying to flail your arms around that to simply use a phone, or a mouse and keyboard combination. This will always be a gimmick. Maybe a useful one for certain situations, but a gimmick nonetheless.
Vr has it uses. Asside from being great for in door workout. Its can be pretty awsome working tool. But replacing the mobile with it really makes no sense
We’re all missing a pretty obvious problem with those razor-thin glasses. People who wear normal glasses and either don’t want to wear or dont have contacts won’t be able to wear AR glasses. They’d have to be prescription, which would seriously drive up the price and likely distort the image
I’m one of those ‘Stop using their meta quest after a month’ people. Incredible it’s the norm but I get it. It’s just so much more hassle than booting up steam
Always look forward to this channel's videos. The combination of his voice, funny pictures and intelligent takes always make these a treat. Genuinely one of my favorite channels. Good stuff.
The reason you feel sick in headsets is the same reason people can get sick playing first person shooters. There's liquid in your ears that detects movement and momentum. It's essential for keeping your balance. It's your gyroscope. The dizziness and nausea are caused by the disconnect of your eyes seeing motion but your ears not detecting any. It impacts people to varying degrees. For me, it's really bad. There's a lot of games I can't play. I can't even watch movies with 3d glasses on. XD
I've worked in VR demoing programs for NVIDIA and in a sort as a guide for games in an arcade like setting.. And I can say whole heatedly.... The novelty wears off FAST! Think the Nintendo Wii, fun at parties, buuuuut it's just not as chill as using a simple controller... And being surrounded by AR all day sounds like living hell.
problem with VR is we are trying to make it do everything all at once, what we should do is make glasses that act as a Heads up Display (HUD), have it do a few things that we all can easily access like display local weather, messages, navigation like you were a videogame character. after we get that down then we can start trying to pump it up with new software and other things. I for one really wanted something cool like a VR device. an Anime .Hack does it well with both a mobile and stationary version.
Yeah but that doesn't avoid all the issues he discussed. It's still not intuitive. It's dangerous the battery life. The headaches induced by overstimulation. It still wouldn't work.
They made it, it was called the Google Glass. Even today it's the least compromised AR experience. Ignoring the social problems around the device, it simply doesn't do enough. Having a HUD is of limited value and the vast majority of people don't need that information so available. The ones that do have a smartwatch.
I feel like these companies tried to turn VR into something which it was never meant to be and we can thank Zuck and his Metaverse for that. I love VR but its been a while since i've used it and everytime i use i still feel an awe but i also never used it for many hours. The way i always saw it was like having an Arcade Lounge right in your home, its great for a few hours but you don't stay for too long there and not everyday. Its also very exhausting to use them, especially for me because of motion sickness, never finished Half Life Alyx because of that. So expecting these things to replace smartphones any time soon is just silly.
The first virtual game we had, you stood in a platform, put a huge headset on and had a handheld button device. People thought "This is awesome!" So what did you get to do in this virtual world? Throw projectiles at a pterodactyl. $20 for 10 minutes. Not to mention it probably cost more than a car to purchase at the time. Ok, awesome for novelty, but 10 minutes was about the limit you would bother to try. No replayability value, clunky graphics and laggy enough where it effected your ability to play. Ok, now it's better developed 30 years later, but nothing has changed. It's still the same gimmicky, one hit wonder. Nothing interesting for more than a quick play with. It's cheaper more streamlined, but it still has no practical use in any way that you can't already do with an "antiquated" laptop. I recently got a portable GPS map device for my birthday for the dashboard of my car. Its suffering from the exact same problem. It's superfluous. It was supposed to make it easier to use google maps while driving, and it suffers the same problem VR does. Why? Why do I need a portable dashboard device I have to remove and hide to stop theives from being tempted to steal? I have to remove it to protect it from being damage by summer heat in the car as well. I have to screw around setting it up every time I get in the car. It takes time to get itself loaded, and I can't play my music while using it. Why? Because the entire device is not only set up to function through my mobile phone, it's a completely redundant system that the phone already does more efficiently. I now have to set up two devices to do the same function my phone already did. VR is exactly the same. It's a gold plated backscratcher when the stick you already had was just as effective, and this is the problem starting to take shape in a lot of tech these days. Superfluous design that has no real advantage in to the technology it's trying to surpass.
Being a person who know enough about the human body, biology and physics, I laughed since the beginning at the prospect of VR headsets becoming mainstream or even useful. It's just not possible not only for the technology but for the biological makeup a human body carries. I think this only can work with a kind of biotech. Something like our own brains and body make the work helped by technology (chips, programming, something of the sort) but that's science fiction and not something we could achieve in the next century AT LEAST
I also got too optimistic with VR. But I also had connections and friends within the industry (even if I never ended up working in it myself). There _was_ a lot of cool tech made by cool people and it was exciting to see how fast the technology was moving. Even if as a product it stagnated I'm still impressed by what was able to be made so far with the tracking and spacial software. Something I did become aware after this video was how said early adopters/big users treated VR. I never acted like this was a whole world I was "transported" into or something i would live in. it was a funky game console. You got used to having to set up a "space" and messing with the position and boundaries. You got used to that slight head-up tilt so you could look at the space under your nose (before they added external cameras). It's still fun as a niche when you treat it as a niche at least.
I have a Quest 2 and love the thing, awesome for gaming, but I despise the idea of using it for anything else, and would be extremely extremely embarrassed to wear it or see someone wearing it in public. Can we keep it for gaming please?
Sry ... I have to travel sometimes in a Bus or train for like 8 hours Quest 3 is the BEST way to enjoy entertainment that way and honestly i just dont care what strangers think of me But i get it thats a bit out there aint it xD
@@smallbutdeadly931 have an extra charge bank that you can carry in a backpack. It's really easy to not run out of battery while out and about, you just need to have the bare minimum of a setup.
The smartphone is a device that opens you to a world without any restrictions. The headsetglasses is a closed system that limits you to space, place and time. The smartwatch also limits you.
21:08 "Fundamentally, this concept can't go mainstream" Damn, that line hits hard. No matter how good the technology gets, it will never be mainstream. I think that VR headsets belong to the same category as videogame consoles. I don't even have one, I use a PC all day for everything.
I got a Vive headset a few months after it was released, and I started spending an hour or 2 most nights playing Elite Dangerous in VR. I found that I didn't have much of an issue with motion sickness (it helps that the game is a flight sim so it's played entirely from the chair), but I did start to feel this weird strain in my eyes. I think it's because even though your eyes will move to perceive things as closer or further by parallax, there's no corresponding change in your eyes' focal distance the same way as happens IRL. Your eyes are always focused for a screen a fixed distance from your face, even when your brain is seeing objects closer and further away. That makes this weird tension that you can maybe get used to but it makes VR feel just a bit "off" to me. And it's one of those issues that current screen technology can't really fix.
I think the biggest issues lie in trying to commercialize the technology. I work with VR stuff for academic research, and there we find tons of use. We've tested things like proving that people's choices in a VR buffet reflects their choices in a similar real buffet, which then means that we have validation to do more crazy stuff with nutrition and how people pick and portion food with use in training or experimentation. We've also worked with VR exhibits for museums or floor shows across multiple fields with good reactions. It's just the idea of making it "common" that falls apart due to the issues brought up in the video. In small, specific situations it still works very well.
My reason for VR sticking on my shelf is simply I don’t have enough room. The area I would use is shared by other people in the house, but I don’t want to move a bunch of stuff just so I can mess around for a couple hours in a VR game.
Unlike all those other tech, VR is actually a problem to a solution, recreating depth perception and having physical presence. Now the problem is people don't really value that. It costs more than just money. It costs calories.
I would love to get into VR, but there's multiple issues. Price is a big one, especially with the rising prices of groceries and gas and other stuff. And sure, I'll agree it needs more things to do. I think people are viewing "nobody is buying it" as lack of interest when in reality its a priority thing. Would I rather get a VR headset or be homeless this month, not exactly difficult choice. Also, I will say that I do the exact same stuff with my consoles. I buy them, play the game I wanted to play, and then it sits there gathering dust until another game comes out that I want to play. The only thing I haven't done that with is my computer, but my computer does more than a console or a VR headset.
Not sure why anyone couldn't see the smartphone as the confluence of factors that it clearly ended up being. Consider: -Telephone function will never be completely replaced; people will always want the ability to have audio only conversations as well as the ability to reach someone very quickly -Text messaging will never be completely replaced; starting with instant messaging, the ability to hold a recorded text conversation at varying pacing will always be in demand -People will always desire convenient access to the internet, as long as it continues to exist It made a lot of sense that computing tech would reach the point that cell phones would be able to provide all these functions, and it's also hard to imagine all these functions being more conveniently accessible from one device any time soon. So, until/unless that happens, smartphones are the big kahuna.
With the iPhone, people have had phones for years so it was easy to adopt. Apple Watch, people have had watches and are used to the idea. With Vision Pro, it is something very new to consumers, and most people don’t have experience with something like this. Once they are glasses I think the familiarity for people will increase adoption.
In my opinion, the Vision Pro has always been intended as a prototype platform to get developers on board and to get content ready for when we inevitably get AR glasses
I'm just over 50 and I'm realizing there's been two main developments in tech that I consider indispensible: personal computers and then smartphones. Most everything else is just peripheral stuff or completely uninteresting. VR won't be interesting to me unless I can be immersed in it like a holodeck from Star Trek.
I have a 3d tv. I've used it so much that now... when I use my phone... red lettering and objects float above above blue and green when there's a black background.
As someone who's working on the ''science fiction graphene sort of stuff'' I think the ultra thin smart glasses that last 8h on a single charge are coming within 10-15 years max. Btw it's not gonna be graphene but rather other two-dimensional materials (graphene might be part of the material stacks) that are gonna revolutionize LED devices and sensors
i think a large part of the problem is the intention. trying to replace the smartphone is going to be extremely difficult and require mature technology.
Things going mainstream is what always, always ruins them. The best is when niche markets are self-sustainable thanks to their dedicated audience. Sadly, too many people believe something is a failure unless it continuously grows forever.
Even if the technology advances i just dont think headsets will ever be for me personally i dont like the idea of having to wear something on my head for entertainment
14:47 I remember back when people were hyping up the metaverse there were a lot of them who'd say it'd catch on once VR headsets were like this. They'd say it as if VR/AR headsets with the power to render high-res photorealistic graphics while as unobtrusive as a normal pair of glasses with a battery that lasted all day was just around the corner. So absurd to say that when you'd need enormous fundamental breakthroughs in physics and engineering to do that.
VR is not the future, AR is. You wont feel motion sickness when you are actually moving through the world. AR goggles with the form factor of normal glasses with the functionalities of the vision pro will definitely become big. Because there are just so many use cases. Imagine studying in a classroom where the teacher can just pull up models of historical events in history or demonstrate physical simulations in physics. Imagine looking at a plant and all the relevant information of it pops up. You can attach notes around the world in a digital space for others to find. Make art in VR and put it special places. There are so many advantages to having AR Glasses that it will feel like a disability not having them, just like how it is with phones.
We do not have anything like the series of technological revolutions it would take to make what you're talking about possible. Batteries, lens, computing power, all of that would need to be exponentially better in a way that the materials we currently use for those things are not capable of. By the time we had the materials available at all (let alone cheaply) I think the computing form factor would have already changed drastically, and how we access the internet being slightly different would not be much of a selling point.
@@luisaazul agreed, will not happen until having actual glasses is more expensive than getting your sight corrected (current tech laser correction) Normal glasses can already sometimes be considered heavy, how will AR fix this issue? "Vegeta what does the scouter say about his powerlevel?" 1006 Millions of people wear glasses and lots of VR/AR does not work with glasses.
@@patrickwilliams1206 In which way would the computing form factor change? I can image that in 10 years we will have something that weighs about as much as a smartphone that you can wear on your face. More computing heavy task could be offloaded and only be accessible in cities. I dont know the timeline of technological progress that we will make but i dont see any other emerging technology that would be able to replace smartphones atm. But at the same time i doubt we will still use smartphones in 50 years.
Sounds like some kind of hellscape. Imagine all the freakin advertising being pumped into that. It would turn the entire world into a pumped up version of a las vegas casino floor, continues stimulation and everything around you turned into a sales pitch... You know that is what it will turn into.
Some of my irl friends swear vr is the best thing ever and will take off soon. Then waste thousands of dollars on new vr crap in their overpriced apartment. Like, bro. They could probably have made a down-payment on a house where we live. Also, vr sucks. Gives me a headache and the games are lame.
most vr games are just plain bad. Oculus's dominance in the VR space is mostly to blame. Developers only concept is a/b x/y, thumbstick, and trigger for controls. control schemes are bad. The 2 games that I keep coming back to are H3VR, and VTOL VR. They were both originally HTC-Vive centric. H3VR has so many options for different control schemes. However, the original control scheme, where thumbstick input is interpreted as HTC vive thumbpad movement, and "buttons" are made using gestures, such as stick down + click, or stick left + click, as well as motion gestures such as stick left + move down + click to accomplish actions, ends up making using guns feel more similar to real life, and avoids "press B to reload" game design. VR takes dedication and attention to detail, something that is unfortunately rare in the gaming industry today. The cost minimization in headset design is also a problem, especially as it relates to the headstraps. Squeezing a VR headset to your face is the worst way to wear a headset. It's uncomfortable and causes migraines. The industry as a whole needs to revert to halo straps and proper head-mounting solutions, rather than mounting on the face. Even the official "premium" headstraps from Meta still have the inherent flaw of squeezing the headset to your face.
Buying a $400 something headset and needing to buy a better offbrand strap because the default one is trash, and putting on the headset to see that just about every game worth playing is at least $30. Sitting there you realize that this fun little off and on play/novel gimmick device is much more of an investment than you thought, and all those games you bought can only be played for an hour before you get a headache and your guts want to exit your skinsuit because the graphics just aren't there yet. Needless to say I hope I can sell my Quest 2 for a decent amount...
VR is something you try a couple times and then forget about - unless you're an avid user who has one or two games to play most of the time like VRChat or racing games.
So I generally agree with everything you've said! However I would like to make a counterpoint: the physical TVs you listed aren't even close to the relative size of the screens in his set up and would get significantly more expensive to match. This actually opens up one of the few genuine use cases for these devices; adding screens/workspaces where it wouldn't be physically possible to do. But if you can afford something like the Vision Pro, you can probably afford a better space, or at least better solutions.
The first 500 people to use my link will get a 1 month free trial of Skillshare skl.sh/knowledgehusk07241
No, thank you! :)
Been meaning to ask ya for the outro song.
❤
Do you use skillshare, Tyler?
You could easily access the Internet before smartphones, dont rewrite history, my symbian was more than capable to do it before iPhone.
Pure lies
IPhone got popular due to the great layout and easy of use
if i could put on my VR headset, and just go straight to my desktop. no nonsense, no OCULUS UI, no silicon valley avatar nonsense, no 'friends list'. leave me alone. straight to my desktop. just be a TOOL. im so tired of all this other stuff and i think others are too. perhaps.
Virtual desktop is a thing you know
Yeah half the problem is Meta bought out the biggest hardware player, but had no idea what to do with the product. So they basically defaulted to selling it as a fancy upmarket Wii, and it's just a huge waste of potential.
Agreed, and on top of that, why are they even bothering with power hungry tracking cameras and all that? A simple, extra display on my glasses would be dope like a HUD from video games. I dont need it to be anchored in meat space. I just wanna browse the internet and watch funny youtube videos before falling asleep...
Valve is the only company that treats their hardware as tools to experience great content, but they kinda stopped caring about VR
This feels like a complaint from someone who doesn't have a headset
There was a place in my town, back in 18, that tried to make a VR arcade, charging 30$ for 20 minutes.
Anybody that had fun, bought a headset for themselves. Anybody with motion sickness never came back.
They closed after 4 months.
Too expensive. Can't make a hobby out of that. Then on the flip side, can't make enough money to run a business and keep the lights on.
@@anguswilliam2141
Awful business model, for a redundant service in a way too small town.
The owner must've taken "virtual reality" too seriously
@anguswilliam2141 there are a ton of expensive hobbies so you're wrong on that
I remember the mall I used to go to a while ago had a VR arcade too! It was a great way to try a full-blown PC VR setup and it helped immensely in my decision to get one of my own, but yeah, that business model was not sustainable at all lmao
And this is why when you do VR in an arcade, you offer it as an option within, rather than the only choice there
The smart phone took off because it had a competent internet browser. It's that simple.
"The internet in my pocket" sold the smart phone. Not the apps, not the tech, not the touch screens, not anything else, that's all bonus features.
We already have the internet in our pocket. What does VR do?
And what's the internet for? Porn. What can VR do? 3D fully immersive porn.
It's that simple, these companies are just too straight up stupid to realise what they have on their hands.
Internet access on your eyes at all times might be compelling to some people
Such a poignant point.
The similarities between the smartphone and VR are so similar. When the smartphone arrived everyone talked about there's an app for that, talked about the customisations, and ringtones. And yes, those things are still true, but the smartphone's selling point was it's forms of communication that a dumb phone couldn't do: video communication, image sharing, and emojis. And it's internet browsing capabilities. Everything else is either a niche, or can be boiled down to forms of communication or more advanced browsing.
What does the VR headset do that cannot be fundamentally done on a smartphone or PC or does it so much better? Gaming, maybe education. There's not a niche that VR adds more value than its cost Vs another form factor, and even if there is, it hasn't been found yet.
Frankly, good point. Trying to navigate the internet using a Quest 2 is miserable. Worse experience than using a tablet, which you would expect the experience to be similarly easy. Maybe It's bottlenecked by VR headsets using desktop-formatting for sites, rather than the larger, more forgiving mobile layouts.
I think something that even further propelled smartphones was internet porn in your pocket, which frankly, I hate to say it, VR has very interesting prospects for. We've seen various companies, games, and websites try to utilize VR for this purpose, but it's all been a bad experience. But hey, you can get your hands dirty and still navigate without making a mess.
I think the "killer app" for AR glasses (VR not so much) will be a good AI assistant that can overly applicable info on the real world.
Once I saw that they wanted to utilize VR to join Microsoft Teams calls, I wanted it to fail like nothing else has failed in the history of humankind.
How webcams would even work there?
@@Mordecrox they will show everybody with the lens on
Imagine how much you'd hate vr after using it for work all day
As someone who lives in the heart of Silicon Valley, I think the reason why tech execs keep wanting to replace the smartphone is because they're salty that they weren't working at Apple and Google 15 years ago with a generous amount of stock options. Most executives of startups these days were either at the bottom of the totem pole then (I.E. interns) or were working at startups that failed miserably, resulting in their stock options being worth $0.
Tech has become a field filed to the brim with bitterness, resentment and broken promises
It's almost sad
That's a strange way of looking at it. The obvious answer is that they're being paid to create the next big thing, since being on the ground floor of a revolution is how you make the big bucks in consumer tech.
Let's say Apple was late to smartphones, and someone else nailed it first. Right now, they'd essentially be as they were in the 90's, pre ipod.
If your company created the replacement to the smartphone and could capitalise on it, everyone involved would be minted, not to mention have some kind of legacy.
The era of happy consumerism has been over for some time now. Nobody could have predicted just how far Apple and Google would have come by now at the time they were really on the cutting edge of innovation, but at the very least people were more able to justify risking some money on a possible gimmick back in the late 2000's/early 2010's as opposed to hiding it away for a rainy day or spending on necessities as we do now. Early smartphones weren't great but they were big enough business that they were worth the continued investment in improving them to the point we are at now.
The basic utility of the mobile phone paired with advances in user interfaces and sites like UA-cam having pretty much infinite content available on them paid off in such a big way it can't really be overstated. Nowadays everyone is chasing that hubristic high, rather than being content to make modest profits with solid tech it's all a gamble on "the next big thing". Investors and shareholders don't help it by being so easily distracted by jangling keys in the form of buzzwords and aesthetics, encouraging the whole sorry business.
They expect unending growth, it's incredible
Yeah they are incredibly desperate to find the next huge thing which will make the entire world shittier forever so they can get in on the ground floor. And the sad part is they aren't even doing it to buy yachts and bang supermodels, they are doing it just out of the love of the game... the game of making everyone's life more empty and annoying
Tech companies seem to forget that to make a long term product successful it has to offer a solution to a problem that is better or at least comparable to the alternative
And this is why so many small teams that aren't that ambitious end up being the most successful, they know what they want to make, they know what would only seek the harm the product, and they know they aren't repeating an existing invention. Silicon valley is failing because so many people don't even understand the inner workings of their tech, so they end up coming up with some "revolutionary new technology" and it turns out they just reinvented the train, but worse.
@@JamesTDG I've tinkered with a lot of electronics. Computer hardware, old VHSes, stuff like that. I consider myself fairly learned in technology, if a bit amateur. I remember opening up my oculus rift controller to try and fix it and being absolutely dumbfounded with how complex it was. So many tiny lil bits and bobs with esoteric purposes in such a bizarre frame. Oh, and it's glued shut. I pity the poor soul that did repairs on early VR tech. Harrowing shit.
@@JamesTDG tbf trains are pretty great and in America you kinda of need trains under a different guise as most people are so against trains for no reason
@@olivermahon5618 I wonder why they're so against trains... could it be because the schedule is ass, unreliable and expensive?
I heard one city had a schedule of 6 trains coming into the city in the morning rushhours and 6 leaving in the evening rushhours back to the suburbs.
Freight trains are on paper forced to wait at sidings to let passengers pass, they're deliberately too big for the sidings so passenger trains are forced to wait at sidings as long freight trains roll by at a leisurely pace.
As for the expensive... how are you getting to the train station, probably a car? why not do the complete trip by car.
Lastly for the trains under a different guise, it's trains but WORSE. Some examples: hyperloop, tesla tunnel of cars, autonomous single container trains. If all the money invested in this stuff was put into actual trains, you'd have a very functional train system, 99.99% electrified instead of whatever pathetic number it is now *googles* Electrification in the US reached its maximum of 3,100 miles (5,000 km) in the late 1930s By 1973, it was down to 1,778 route miles (2,861 km) In 2013 its 122 miles (196 km).
@@olivermahon5618he’s referring to things like musk’s hyperloop, which is supposed to be an underground passenger network but, even if it could feasibly exist, would just be a worse version of a typical subway
How is "add virtual things to your home" a selling point? A virtual note on my fridge? Why? Add a cool new virtual painting? Yeah the painting is gone as soon as I take the headset off... Ppl like real things
Ah you see, the problem is that you take the headset off. *cue Black Mirror episode*
Not to mention the virtual stuff is more like $2 temu junk. I fill my house with cool and meaningful items.
It's fucking stupid, they are just grasping for stuff to do with it. All of it sucks and is useless and they know it. But if you tell people something is real through certain channels, a good percentage of them will actually believe it and start thinking they need a virtual refrigerator or whatever tarded nonsense you tell them to buy
I suppose if you nailed the tech correctly it’d be useful to see how furniture or a particular design would look in your home.
@@JoelJames2yeaa maybe but it’s still not the real thing.
I'm in the "bought a Occulus, used it a few times and put it on the shelf" club. It's real fun, but I can't use it more than 20 minutes until I get a migraine.
I never even got the migraines, I'm the core demographic (avid gamer and Half Life fan, got maybe 2 hours into Half Life Alyx), but it's just not easy to use. I'm always intensely aware of this big thing on my head, it seems like I'm always going outside the boundaries (granted, I have a regular sized bedroom that houses my PC setup and my sleeping area), and as someone who wears glasses, it's always either shifting in and out of focus or my glasses are pressed against my face. I'm near sighted anyway, there theoretically shouldn't be an issue, but for some reason there is.
@@MeatSnaxLense technology is still bad, that's probably why. Right now the best displays on the consumer market are Apple vision pro, with both pancake lenses and MicroOLED. Meta quest 3 has pancake LCD and PSVR2 has fresnel OLED. In short the pancake lenses are clearer and easier to see whereas the fresnel(most common type of lense) are kinda blurry on the edges and have a pathetic sweet spot. So even healthy eye sight individuals can be disappointed by the lenses, it's not a you issue.
I really want the Apple Vision but Im worried it'll suffer the same fate, on top of costing as much as a used car
I mean if you'd never seen a screen before youd be motionsick like people used to with modern games.
If you keep at it you get your VR-legs. It is a shame it's something you have to work on though
The only time I've ever gotten a headache when using VR, was due to the headstrap I was using, it was putting localized putting pressure on various points on my head. I changed it, and the problem went away. I'd bet that your problem is solvable with a more comfortable headstrap or adjusting the one you have now.
Not only are they bulky and make you look funny, what are they really replacing? How is the average consumer going to stop buying a desktop and buy VR goggles instead? They barely have the technology to transcribe speech into text to replace our keyboards, and not without being connected with the internet.
You also look funny when you hold a black square to your head and talk in public. The difference is, people have gotten used to seeing this since everyone does it, so it no longer "makes you look funny". If VR went mainstream, I guarantee you people would stop complaining about how you look when you use VR.
the old massive mobile phones ppl carried looked pretty silly too. especially the ones that had a brief case battery lol [oh look we've come full circle with the apple vision pro] vr isn't at its smartphone boom yet. it's still in its brick phone enthusiast market baby steps era.
Well with the popularity or vr chat and the general gaming community along with conditions irl when it comes to community and 3rd spaces i assume theyre expecting vr to become a ready player one style replacement for socializing.
half of the tech industry is just cope trying to deny the fact that IBM invented the best way to do computery stuff in 1981
If speech to text and speech recognition in general were improved, it would be a bigger contribution to tech than VR being successful. The constant nascant raving about another two letter bubble, AI, makes me wonder why Siri and Google Assistant, two of the biggest speech to text services out there, still haven't combined the two things rather than relying on a massively inaccurate model that hasn't been improved in any way for over a decade.
I used to be what some people have called a "VR enthusiast". I still have all of my VR stuff, their just sitting in boxes; but I had, what was at the time, the most high end headset on the market, full body tracking, a pc built to fight god, a big open space in my apartment. I haven't played a VR game in months now, possibly not in this year. I think that you nailed it on the head that the hassle of setting everything up and putting everything on is what has kept me from booting it up. That, and none of my friends play VRchat anymore.
This guy has hardly hit anything in the head. He's a guy with a platform that someone else made popular. As a developer, and someone who loves VR, I can tell you that the companies that this bozo pretends to understand are playing the long game. The technologies that made the smartphone were developed across multiple decades by hundreds of people. These guys are not even market analysts. I'd be amazed if this guy even had a high school diploma. Don't fret, mate. VR will be all over the place before this dufus finds a person with enough brain damage to reproduce with.
I'm in the same place. What has kept me from putting it back on is thumbstick drift. I replaced one thumb stick and that was such a pain in the ass that when my other started drifting I just havent brought myself to fix it.
Considering their similarity, could always try out similar applications like Resonite and maybe make new friends? Resonite specifically seems to be going broader than just being purely social VR, providing potentially interesting stand-alone content for you. It's perfectly fine to not feel obligated to using a technology every single day, rather than just when feel like using it. Can just pop back in when see something new that's interesting.
That's why I'm done with PCVR. I have a meta quest 3 and a tiny bit of space to use it in. You can just pick that thing up and you get back into the game you were playing in a few seconds. It also just completely shits over my previous PCVR headsets in every way too, other than controller tracking.
ok but hear me out, wouldn't the world be hugely improved if smartphones DID cause you physical pain after more than 30 minutes of sustained use?
I was thinking that haha
that is a really good point! haha
No, I like listening to albums more than 30 minutes long.
@@henryfleischer404 you destroyed this poster, good work!
@@henryfleischer404Music players have existed long before smartphones and they'll exist long after them.
Most tech since the smart phone can be described as "you had an idea, but you didn't solve any problems."
I can think of some.
1. Screen size doesn't require a big device, just clip it on your shirt when you're done. It's like having a portable home theatre on the go.
2. No having to crane your neck for hours for portable entertainment or work.
2. Complete privacy in public, no one can peek into your smart glasses.
There has been no tech since the smartphone. It is mankind's last invention
@@wilddog73So a couple accounting points to that first of all is very rare occasions where people want to have an entirely home theater size setup physically or virtually on them at some time. To most people obviously don't have problems with the neck thing because we've been using them for so long. And also you're replacing neck strain with eye strain. And the very last thing is that the privacy thing is not only a non-issue because most of the time when your privacy is violated, it's through back entrances on services instead of people peeking around you. But in particular the privacy can turn into isolation, which has been one of the biggest problems with this field. Humans are very much a communicative species and thus want to interact each other. I mean, think about it. We have an entirely robust networking service and people still went absolutely crazy during the lockdowns because they couldn't go outside and breathe on people's private parts all day. People need that interaction. It's the same exact reason why home video and streaming did not completely annihilate the movie theater. So that's another big hurdle that VR needs to solve. Into be honest, I don't think I could ever solve that problem due to the intrinsic nature of the platform.
@@wilddog73 Counters
1. You can't "just clip it to your shirt when you're done" when the headset weighs two pounds and is the size and shape of a construction brick
2. You can do that with an other device if you don't have terrible posture.
3. Having a VR headset on in public? Why? Why not just stay home if that's what you want to do? Anything that you'd specifically want other people not to see is likely something that you shouldn't take out of your front door in the first place. If it's not that, it's probably a distraction further eroding your already miniscule attention span.
@OtakuUnitedStudio The form of this tech that's meant to replace smartphones is AR capable smartglasses, not VR headsets. Check out Meta's Orion smartglasses for a better reference.
Definitely an interesting technology. Silicon valley has pushed it as a "productivity device", where it can replace an expensive and bulky desktop setup, be used for 3d modeling, conferences, etc. But apart from the 3d modeling (which I'm aware has some practical uses within industry), none of those uses are actually better than the alternatives people already have, come with a huge learning curve, the hassle of limited battery, and the other problems you mentioned here. Meanwhile, people who actually like the technology are almost all gamers, and the main killer app for VR is VRChat, a game that could never appeal to a mainstream audience and would get obliterated for copyright infringement if it ever was positioned as a major selling point. It's an ok, unique gaming device that can provide some one of a kind experiences, but the suits want it to be something it isn't.
This. Just keep it in gaming.
As someone who is a frequent Quest 2 user I can see how most people will just put their headsets down and not use them after a few weeks, those people clearly didn't get what they wanted from VR. I think there definitely is still a market for VR at least when it comes to gaming because the capacity for immersion its simply unmatched.
Oh indeed, it really feels like it is best used for simulation scenarios, but the moment holo decks become affordable, VR is obsolete
Even for gamers it's a very chicken and the egg scenario because there needs to be an install base before people release games and apps which aren't just glorified tech demos.
But the people that VR gaming works for already have games established for them. Sims have been supporting headsets for 7 years now and it isn't easy to find one that doesn't. Just because you can't play every FPS or 4X in VR doesn't mean there's no software.
Idk, personally I don't get much immersion from booty graphics and a hot, heavy, headset squeezing my brain. The most immersion I've felt is playing Skyrim Special Edition on a nice tv in a dark room, felt like I was really just there in Tamriel taking in the auroras. I'd love to try Skyrim VR but I refuse to purchase the game for a third time when I know it'll probably look terrible and I'll play for all of 15min, not to mention the reviews.
I think for a lot of people wearing one of these things is kind of straining. Personally I like it for the awesome 3D effects but I would not use this for every day application just enjoying 3D experiences
I bought an oculus DK1 during the Kickstarter and figured that the next 10 years would be filled with open source and indie developers making cool VR experiences and slowly improving the niche tech. Instead, it had to be "The Next Big Thing" in Silicon Valleys eyes.
Yup, i actually think that modded bethesda games in vr are the best experience. That along with modded Cyberpunk 2077 in vr.
Indeed, absolutely wrecked it just because it wasn't allowed to grow steadily, and nobody could truly experiment with the tech. Same rings true with smart watches, the market for em is so niche just because there's no way for nerds to jailbreak em and develop software that takes full advantage of the hardware to create new things.
@@Foogi9000 Elite: Dangerous in VR is astounding. Watching a space station turn in space and realising just how ridiculously huge everything is. To quote Douglas Adams, "Space, it's big,"
@@JamesTDG There were custom OS' for the early crop of Android Wear devices, not to mention tonnes of hobbyist apps. The Pebble scene was very healthy too. Pine Watch continues to plod along, along with even more niche devices like Watchy. There's always been ways for enthusiasts to experiment with smartwatch tech, and I've done a lot of it. Turns out we just couldn't figure out what to do with them.
@@fix0the0spade elite dangerous, and dirt rally are basically the only things I play in vr. One of the limiting points I don't see people mention that often is just space. My computer is in my bedroom, I started playing rumble and ended up twatting my wardrobe, monitor etc. Unless I move my pc into the living room its just not feasible to do room scale vr.
There's a quote from a tech dude I can't name off the top of my head that goes, "From the moment the smartphone debuted, I knew it would be the next big thing in the industry. It's shaped to be conveniently carried in your pocket and fits perfectly in your hand, you know...like a box of cigarettes."
Until VR/AR is as convenient as putting on a pair of glasses, it fundamentally does not have the same draw as a smartphone, and the only thing VR is good for is a dedicated gooner
and even then, unless it pairs up as actual glasses I'm not gonna bother taking off my actual glasses and taking them back on everytime I want to see the real world
It will never hit that level because it's socially isolating. VR will always be for the hobbyist crowd, or at best it competes with home cinema. Ultimately it's a thing you use in a quiet room by yourself, which means it will never hit the ubiquity of a smart phone or laptop that can be used just about anywhere and easily shares the experience.
@@suspecm6316 Google Glass had prescription lens options. It also made you look far less like a dork, since it looked more like a regular pair of glasses with the AR stuff on the side.
@@fix0the0spade If anything, this has proven that normies lack object permanence.
@@LordVarkson I'm sure they were affordable and didn't cost an arm and a leg
We treat Vr like another story of the internet but we often forget that it has to be easy for the average consumer. Personal computers didn't take off because people thought it was the future it became simple enough for people to understand and people were finding uses for it. once something has enough of a use it can grow if you have something that has possiblities of uses thats cool and all but vr is more like 1990s internet rn.
Hopefully VR progresses to the point where it can be usable for the average person
I would agree if not for the fact that smartphones can do the majority of things that vr can do better and more conviniently regardless of the user's literacy with the device.
Correct, a lot of true success is based on the answer being yes to the following question - "can even the lowest common denominator moron pick it up, set it up and use it" and considering some people still can't type for dick after years of smartphone use, they were never going to be able to figure out how to get a VR headset going, nor would they want to.
@@Foogi9000it's not about useability, it's about daily application. My mom (now deceased, but I am 45 and she had me in her 30s) was very tech-phobic and railed against smart phone conversions as they became more than just phones. But change was necessary to keep existing in the world. People were using smartphone tech well before the iPhone. They were also using mobile phones as music players and to browse the internet well before the iPhone. I had a flip phone with a browser and if you had the right file type you could upload music on it. But it wasn't easy and browsing the Internet was tiny and pixelated. Opening an email was not worth it on that little screen. iPhone just found the right form factor for things people already wanted and were already using in their mobile phones. Most people aren't looking for VR to get better, they are looking to see how VR would make their life better enough to be worth the purchase and strapping a device to their head. Even in simple glasses form most people are not into it once the novelty has worn off. It's like a fun toy for a week and then it's 'what is this accomplishing that I can't do better/faster another way'.
I am starting to feel like there's a lot of parallel between VR now and like, handheld gaming in the 90s. We remember the good parts, but we forget 90% of the Gameboy library was complete garbage, the screen was impossible to see if you didn't have the exact right angle at the exact right time of day, we forget how much of an impractical pain it was actually carrying around all your spare carts and battery packs and your light accessory (that sucked balls) etc etc... I don't think VR is gonna ever take over and be THE era defining world changing tech, but it will have its DS/PSP golden age someday, in a generation or two.
it won't have it's golden age as big tech is trying to hard to make it the next big thing every time there's a breakthrough... instead of leaving it to enthusiasts for a breakthrough or 2 to develop it further, to make that 90% complete garbage and figure out what works and what doesn't before trying to milk the normies.
I remember the Virtual Boy and the Gamegear, devourer of batteries.
90% of everything is garbage, that's Sturgeon's Law.
The idea that the gameboy's screen was hard to see is iphone zoomer cope, the pocket's screen was incredibly viewable, and the colour was not much worse (not mentioning DMG lol). Advance, quite a bit worse, SP, a disaster. Carrying that shit was never a real problem, other than the simple fact you had to decide in advance what games you were bringing. I had/still have a simple branded pouch that holds 3 games, console, worm light and extra spare batts in a size not much bigger than the console. When I was a kid I had a zip box thing that could hold my console and practically all my games and it was compact and easy to take on car trips etc.
The idea that the gameboy was impractical etc has never rung to me as true, as someone who had them back in the day and now.
@@LordVarkson You can't just call every opinion you disagree with"zoomer cope" dude, Pocket was my first one, and it was fine as long as you had a reasonable amount of ambient light. Gameboy Colour and pre-SP Advance though? No way dude, you needed a planetary alignment to see those screens properly. And those plug in accessory lights were always useless. Carrying the games was tolerable at the time but just try it now- You'll get bored of it and just get a flashcart instead within weeks. We just didn't have better options back then. Stop being blinded by nostalgia.
"Who wants to be stuck in this thing all day anyway?"
Clearly you've never met a vrchat guy
True.
I like the VR chat... but I have to admit that the "chat" thing is waaaay more important than the "VR" thing. I also admit that the exp. is not the same with no VR. The only problem I see with this thing, is, the batery. I need them available 24/7 just like my desktop
How do you even meet a vrchat guy outside of vrchat
@@qoph1988 And how can you guarantee that it's a guy, rather than some moeko catgirl?
it's like how we all thought we would love video phone calls but instead we just text. The tech can be seamless but what does it provide? nothing new of value.
I read in a book about internet language about how one reason why cvideo calls took off was because of texting. We've had the tech for video calls for a while after all, but it wasn't until we had an ultra low investment way of communicating (ie texting) that video calling became a viable thing.
Without it, calling somebody on a video call is a huge intrusion--it assumes you're both in a fit state to talk AND in a fit state to be seen by distant eyes. Texting fixes it by letting you prepare and arrange a time quick and easy
Even though zoom is standard at my work, it's pretty normal to just not use the camera during a meeting.
@@LordVarkson Maybe zoom would be better if you didn't see yourself as well. But then it becomes a privacy issue
Isn’t this like the 4th time AR and VR have been touted as “the next big thing”?
Virtual Reality was started as a sci-fi concept wasn't it? I mean from what I see it is more of a flying car thing where this is a dream that people want it to become a reality rather then being a solution to a problem.
Every "next big thing" is a forced meme
I love my quest 3. When I’m not recovering from surgery, I’m using it every day for over an hour just to exercise. I’ve lost weight and feel better than I have in years. I’m the kind of guy who wants to use it and will use it religiously.
Most people aren’t me.
Same. I use body weights and fighting games (Blade and Sorcery, Battle Talent) and good old fashioned push ups. I’m in the best shape of my life and I look forward to my workouts.
The testosterone boost I get from defeating a boss not with X X Y, but ME is amazing
Here's the internet in your pocket! --- Neat, thanks.
Here's the internet, but as bulky goggles you have to wear on your head, and you have to navigate via a first person avatar! --- Uhm... no?
My parents first phone were both work phones. The reason the smartphone took off is that it had practical business applications, VR doesn't. Why use an ugly, cringey, glitchy, gimmicky, expensive VR conference room when a Zoom call already exists? I remember watching a video (probably from you) about how the cheapest video game console always wins, and well... VR is far from cheap.
A lot of the really high end VR stuff only exists precisely because it has practical business uses. Apple wouldn't have been able to make their goggles without a lot of the advancement industrial VR uses have been pushing forward. It's just that it's super niche and specific to certain industries, it's never gonna be something your average desk jockey needs.
Well, the Quest 2 was very cheap (originally) being cheaper than game consoles, and that's why it sold so well. Many people could justify buying it for their kids. The Quest 3 being $600 is too expensive to be a cheap toy to buy for kids, not to mention the economy now compared to the quest 2's release.
The Quest 2 wasn't capable of being properly used as a work supplement. However, I believe the Quest 3's better passthrough (I have no experience with it) allows it to be more practical than a smartphone, tablet, or computer for dirty jobs where touching your device would get it dirty, or damage it.
@@addmix I disagree becuase any job where it's too dark, filthy and and busy to use a smartphone is not a job where you can afford to keep 6 sensors clean or have the space to walk around and look at different apps
Nobody likes Zoom chats either.
@@addmixAnd the solution to damaging an electronic device in a highly volatile work environment is strapping an extremely sensitive piece of tech on your eyes? Not to mention how the OS is gonna bother you all the time because "we can't track your environment!!!"
Yeah no lol. If you just need comms a speaker does the job good enough, no cellphone or vr required
I still love the smartphone because I have not forgotten that it is basically sci-fi that it even exists lol.
As a 90s kid my mind was blown by portable tech like camcorders and Gameboys. Later in my teen years I got my hands on a digital camera that could take pictures AND video AND voice memos… that just was not a common thing and the 60 dollars I spent on a 128 (megabyte) card complimented it well.
Anyway, my brain has held onto those memories and I can’t help but view the iPhone I’m typing on right now as straight up sorcery. Add the capabilities of internet and entertainment of all sorts and smartphones laying to the wayside just seems absurd.
There's a 50 something year old guy where I work who rarely ever unglues his face from his smartphone, but I have to help him use the computers at work because he literally does not know which button on the mouse to click for what reason
The sad thing is, a lot of the younger generation is the same way. It feels like it's only a small group of Millennials and experts from other generations that actually get computers, while both the grandparents of Millennials and their Gen Alpha grandchildren are ignorant of computers and only know how to do things on the phone.
@@jeremyandrews3292 Good observation, it means that smartphones are more successful and intuitive than desktop style computers at this point then. I still find that hilarious considering how inaccurate typing on a touchscreen is - literally almost every single word I'm typing on mine now is only saved from gibberish by predictive text, and even then sometimes it messes up half a dozen words in a row and has to be manually corrected.
VR got me through the pandemic and i couldnt imagine going through that, being stuck at home, and not being able to just throw on my Rift S and escape into VRchat or Elite Dangerous.
>the ability to easily put a moving 3-dimensional illusion of anything anywhere in real space.
>use it to simulate 2-dimensional screens.
Golly, I don't know what could have been done differently...
hmm what could we use 3d for without necessarily inducing nausea from too much movement mismatch? RTS games
What RTS games are currently popular? the ancient ones in no particular order: aoe2, sc2, planetary annihilation
@@sirjmoWhat motion mismatch, we're talking about office work here (for the specific example of the virtual workspaces filled with 2D screens). Even for games though, RTS isn't even remotely close to the only available genre, there's plenty of really great VR experiences with zero motion mismatch gameplay, including Valve's sole first party entry into the space with HL Alyx
@@bosstowndynamics5488 Motion mismatch is what I use as the catchall term for visuals not matching senses.
Example: car sickness.
I was just thinking we could make use of the space available to create 3D miniature landscapes with the gods/birds eye perspective and of course other things can use this too, I just thought of classic RTS.
as for zero motion mismatch gameplay, I think you're being a bit generous with the term zero, considering that it is first person.
@@sirjmo I'm really not being generous though, most VR games use 1:1 tracking, and for movement in large spaces usually offer teleportation which doesn't involve any perceived motion for the brain. I'm sure some people still get a bit of motion sickness but overall judgement of how bad the problem is will be thrown off both by the fact that there's plenty of games that offer non 1:1 movement for those of us with VR legs (and some people who should use teleportation will use those movement systems instead and then feel sick), and probably a side order of latency issues given that self contained headsets like the Quest 2 and 3 will actually be more dependent on reprojection than tethered headsets like the Vive or Index, not to mention much higher latency when using a tethered mode over wifi or USB
Comeback of 3D video??
Europe has it really bad with VR Headset prices. While the Apple Vidion Pro costs $3500 in the US it costs $5500/€5000 here. 3500 was already a stupidly high price, but 5500 is ridiculous. Every other headset also costs at least 50-70% more here.
No? Quests and Pico and the like are comparable
This is probably the biggest issue big tech is overlooking. North america is a tiny, very erratic market to target for. Smartphones can be bought not only for like 50$ but you can do it literally everywhere.
@@natzos6372 Of course it varies in every country of europe, but for example: when the Quest2 was still readilly available, it cost 199$ in USA and 299€(~325$) in Germany. Where I live its just a fact that the prices are not comparable
Oddly enough, google glasses seem like the best, least intrusive form of this kind of tech, and it was dumped over a decade ago
And it was abandoned because it made people awkward about the ubiquity of its camera, which…seems ironic somehow…
I've been arguing this for the past few years. Google glass in its wearability, minor camera features, and connectivity to the Internet arguably made it the best option when it came to AR. It was mostly hindered, in my opinion, by its style and usage of a screen rather than reflecting an image onto the glasses or into the users eye. arguably the best option for the common person but failed due to the market sadly
I remember the social stigma against Google Glass when it was announced. Journalists were coinning the term "glasshole" to someone who wore them in public because it had a camera. Nobody liked that Google Glass could be recoding people at any moment without anyone realizing it, and I think thats why it failed
I'm tempted to say it was too early, but I don't think that's what consumers want today either. I think modern people would want something that lets them watch tiktok while driving or whatever people do these days. If all you want is notifications and some limited ambient information, smartwatches already do that fine.
I watched old people in the 90s touch a PC for the first time and have zero issues understanding how moving the mouse moved the cursor. It's a lot more intuitive than you make it seem.
As a glasses wearing person I don't see how anyone would want to hull around this tub of a device on their face all day long
Thankfully, My phone doesn’t physically hurt me after an hour. It only hurts me psychologically.
I have a feeling smartphones won't be dethroned for a long time, like decades.
cellphones aree too eficient, too easy and too fast to use. it is hard to imagine something replacing it.
Its because the smartphone had business potential and ramifications. As such I genuinely doubt it’ll ever be replaced, much to the dismay of Silicon Valley tech fuckboys
If that's the case then I'm kind of relieved that AR/VR glasses won't be widely used. Imagine in the near future being surrounded by people wearing these at the grocery store. They're all bumping into things and getting distracted from having their attention split, possibly scanning you for info or taking pictures without your knowledge. And who would stop them from wearing them in the car if they look just like sunglasses?
Attention spans cannot get lower, surely?
UI is something that always makes me hesitate on getting more niche tech devices. Seems like the layout is an afterthought for these companies. The OG Samsung Folds were notoriously buggy in that regard. Apps never scaled properly to the correct aspect ratio the way you would expect them to, and those were premium flagships.
Catch 22, it's up to app developers to design their apps to support foldables, they won't invest the time without a large enough support base. Android tablet apps still have similar problems, especially because some of the most popular Android tablets are the crappy 7" variety that don't look too bad with phone apps blown up to the size.
Guess I'm the minority. Love my VR gear, I've had the CV1, Quest 2 and Quest 3. Spend between 1 and 2 hours a day in it, but when something new comes out (which is sadly rare) I can easily spend 6 or more hours in one go, hooked up to a battery. Games like Blade and Sorcery, H3VR, and Into The Radius have gameplay that you absolutely, positively CANNOT get anywhere else outside of VR. I posted a video of a tense encounter where I needed both my hands but also needed to see in a dark corner. Without thinking about it I take my flashlight, turn it on and toss it into the dark corner of the room while I wait for the ambush. It's such a unique experience having the freedom to do nearly anything you can imagine.
When wearing a Vision Pro and accidentally clicking delete on your project: "Don't look at confirm! Don't look at it! DON'T LOOK AT IT!"
shame that my skull is deformed from the car crash so I can’t even use a VR headset at all
Alot of headsets can have swappable inserts maybe a 3D printed one could allow a headset to properly fit
Lol
@@Ball4184 i dont think that is somthing to laugh at
@@HonourableFox It's more about the random tonal nature of the trauma dump than the trauma itself
Personally I don't think you're missing out on much, but as another person said there are probably some ways around it, or even just holding it up to your face with one hand.
"People don't buy video game boxes with no games"
You suuuuure about that
To replace the terrible GameStop used ones
I still remember being baffled at how, despite owning the discs, HL2 refused to install without also installing/launching Steam
I CRIED SO HARD, FOR GAMES AT LAUNCH
I mean most successful consoles have either had "masterpiece" titles on/around launch (e.g. the various mario games like Mario 64) or backwards compatibility with the previous generation(s) of consoles
“Ps5 has no games”
There are two types of people who make up 99% of the 1000+ hours VR customer base: those autisticly invested in one of the few games (beatsaber), and the alcoholics (vrchat)
The only game I play is Compound, and I play it every day, for hours at a time. It's not even one of those games that's acceptable to be autistically invested in either, it's just some random game that was made then abandoned a few years back.
There is a third, more sinister thing....
The problem with vr is that it doesn't really offer anything that a phone cant. Why would you want to browse the internet or read emails with a VR headset? Smart phones are basically perfect because they're quick and simple. At the end of the day, what would be more convenient? Strapping on a headset and controller to just look up stuff? Or pulling out your phone? In my humble opinion, VR will likely remain a niche novelty for enthusiasts.
Exactly. The only way VR could possibly surpass phones is if they find a way to scale it all the way down to the size of a pair of reading glasses
Criticizing VR because it's not good for smartphone-like functions, is like criticizing a drill for not functioning as a good hammer. Sure, you can use it as a hammer, but it works far better when you use it as a drill.
@@fireaza This is hammer drill slander
11:00 no you're overly optimistic about the general public's mental ability, they can touch the screen but they're not sure what they're doing on it
I actually got to try a VR headset over the weekend.
I wouldn't consider it much more than a gimmick or something for specific games like simulators.
Try social VR.
@@psycho0815it's just a zoo
@@psycho0815 Spending time hanging out with the most autistic and weirdest people on the internet doesn't seem appealing to me...
What game did you play?
I have VR and I thought about sculptung in VR. Haven't tried it yet though. There could also potentially be more fun ways to do creative stuff in VR,but I haven't found much
Closing off my 2 most important sense just makes that little lizard part of my brain that keeps animals from being eaten to start screaming
I think the big difference between the Smartphone and all the other smart thingies that came after was the attitude form the companies making these things. To be more specific, Google and Apple.
In the early Smartphone days it was like "do whatever you want you can do with these things, even if its kind of ridiculous". Like in the days of 3.5" phones, really it was goofy to watch youtube, play GTA 3 or browse the internet which at the time was almost exclusively made up of desktop sites because that was the norm. But over time both the Software and the hardware adapted to how real people were using these things. Phones got bigger and more powerful and websites made mobile friendly sites or Apps.
This is so drastically different from for example Smartwatches, where the manufacturers from the start tightly controlled everything - no fun allowed. With many you don't even have a webbrowser and all Apps have to be super optimized for the formfactor and can't offer more than super basic features because that would go against the ethos of maximum minimalism.
VR is amazing, but do you think the average person wants to turn their head and body to perform tasks that could be done on a rectangle that fits in their pocket with little conscious input?
I am pretty bummed by how I now interact with VR tech. I splurged on a pretty advanced setup and used to use it daily, but the hassle of resetting my audio devices, untangling the wires, standing in a specific spot in my room, and needing to acclimate is no longer outweighed by cool new software. Cool VR games don't seem to come out anymore, and so now it's a fragile $1k device I use to make Elite Dangerous a bit more interesting.
VR is cool af, you wanna use it all the time. But then the novelty wears off. All that stuff about using your headset instead of your phone is cool for the first week, then you realize pulling your phone out is easier and less annoying. As much as I like VR and all the potential it has, I can't see it as anything more than a novelty, no matter how small and light and cheap it gets.
Why assume it will always just be a novelty when it, for example, it's as heavy as glasses? Or works perfectly with no hassle when you just put them on?
@@epiclamp44 Because it will always be more annoying than simply using your phone, or a computer. Even if they manage to find a way for the device to work without using some sort of controller. Just literally a pair of glasses that reads your hands as you move them. It will always, always be more tiresome and annoying to flail your arms around that to simply use a phone, or a mouse and keyboard combination. This will always be a gimmick. Maybe a useful one for certain situations, but a gimmick nonetheless.
Vr has it uses. Asside from being great for in door workout. Its can be pretty awsome working tool. But replacing the mobile with it really makes no sense
i got distracted rooting for the DVD screensaver to perfectly hit the corner of the screen.
I got my Quest 3 for Christmas and ive ended up playing that more then flatscreen games
We’re all missing a pretty obvious problem with those razor-thin glasses. People who wear normal glasses and either don’t want to wear or dont have contacts won’t be able to wear AR glasses. They’d have to be prescription, which would seriously drive up the price and likely distort the image
I’m one of those ‘Stop using their meta quest after a month’ people. Incredible it’s the norm but I get it. It’s just so much more hassle than booting up steam
Putting a headset on is more hassle than Steam, the program that wants to update every time you switch it on?
@@LordVarkson literally never been a problem, you’re probably a poor with bad internet
Always look forward to this channel's videos. The combination of his voice, funny pictures and intelligent takes always make these a treat. Genuinely one of my favorite channels. Good stuff.
The reason you feel sick in headsets is the same reason people can get sick playing first person shooters. There's liquid in your ears that detects movement and momentum. It's essential for keeping your balance. It's your gyroscope. The dizziness and nausea are caused by the disconnect of your eyes seeing motion but your ears not detecting any. It impacts people to varying degrees. For me, it's really bad. There's a lot of games I can't play. I can't even watch movies with 3d glasses on. XD
People want VR, the type of VR you see on shows or movies. The holodeck from star trek. Not some goggles.
I've worked in VR demoing programs for NVIDIA and in a sort as a guide for games in an arcade like setting.. And I can say whole heatedly....
The novelty wears off FAST!
Think the Nintendo Wii, fun at parties, buuuuut it's just not as chill as using a simple controller... And being surrounded by AR all day sounds like living hell.
problem with VR is we are trying to make it do everything all at once, what we should do is make glasses that act as a Heads up Display (HUD), have it do a few things that we all can easily access like display local weather, messages, navigation like you were a videogame character. after we get that down then we can start trying to pump it up with new software and other things. I for one really wanted something cool like a VR device. an Anime .Hack does it well with both a mobile and stationary version.
Yeah but that doesn't avoid all the issues he discussed. It's still not intuitive. It's dangerous the battery life. The headaches induced by overstimulation. It still wouldn't work.
They made it, it was called the Google Glass. Even today it's the least compromised AR experience. Ignoring the social problems around the device, it simply doesn't do enough. Having a HUD is of limited value and the vast majority of people don't need that information so available. The ones that do have a smartwatch.
I feel like these companies tried to turn VR into something which it was never meant to be and we can thank Zuck and his Metaverse for that. I love VR but its been a while since i've used it and everytime i use i still feel an awe but i also never used it for many hours. The way i always saw it was like having an Arcade Lounge right in your home, its great for a few hours but you don't stay for too long there and not everyday. Its also very exhausting to use them, especially for me because of motion sickness, never finished Half Life Alyx because of that. So expecting these things to replace smartphones any time soon is just silly.
The first virtual game we had, you stood in a platform, put a huge headset on and had a handheld button device.
People thought "This is awesome!"
So what did you get to do in this virtual world?
Throw projectiles at a pterodactyl. $20 for 10 minutes. Not to mention it probably cost more than a car to purchase at the time.
Ok, awesome for novelty, but 10 minutes was about the limit you would bother to try.
No replayability value, clunky graphics and laggy enough where it effected your ability to play.
Ok, now it's better developed 30 years later, but nothing has changed. It's still the same gimmicky, one hit wonder. Nothing interesting for more than a quick play with. It's cheaper more streamlined, but it still has no practical use in any way that you can't already do with an "antiquated" laptop.
I recently got a portable GPS map device for my birthday for the dashboard of my car. Its suffering from the exact same problem. It's superfluous. It was supposed to make it easier to use google maps while driving, and it suffers the same problem VR does.
Why? Why do I need a portable dashboard device I have to remove and hide to stop theives from being tempted to steal? I have to remove it to protect it from being damage by summer heat in the car as well. I have to screw around setting it up every time I get in the car. It takes time to get itself loaded, and I can't play my music while using it. Why? Because the entire device is not only set up to function through my mobile phone, it's a completely redundant system that the phone already does more efficiently. I now have to set up two devices to do the same function my phone already did.
VR is exactly the same. It's a gold plated backscratcher when the stick you already had was just as effective, and this is the problem starting to take shape in a lot of tech these days. Superfluous design that has no real advantage in to the technology it's trying to surpass.
Being a person who know enough about the human body, biology and physics, I laughed since the beginning at the prospect of VR headsets becoming mainstream or even useful. It's just not possible not only for the technology but for the biological makeup a human body carries. I think this only can work with a kind of biotech. Something like our own brains and body make the work helped by technology (chips, programming, something of the sort) but that's science fiction and not something we could achieve in the next century AT LEAST
I also got too optimistic with VR. But I also had connections and friends within the industry (even if I never ended up working in it myself). There _was_ a lot of cool tech made by cool people and it was exciting to see how fast the technology was moving. Even if as a product it stagnated I'm still impressed by what was able to be made so far with the tracking and spacial software.
Something I did become aware after this video was how said early adopters/big users treated VR. I never acted like this was a whole world I was "transported" into or something i would live in. it was a funky game console. You got used to having to set up a "space" and messing with the position and boundaries. You got used to that slight head-up tilt so you could look at the space under your nose (before they added external cameras). It's still fun as a niche when you treat it as a niche at least.
I have a Quest 2 and love the thing, awesome for gaming, but I despise the idea of using it for anything else, and would be extremely extremely embarrassed to wear it or see someone wearing it in public.
Can we keep it for gaming please?
Sry ... I have to travel sometimes in a Bus or train for like 8 hours
Quest 3 is the BEST way to enjoy entertainment that way and honestly i just dont care what strangers think of me
But i get it thats a bit out there aint it xD
@@Just-Ventras gimmie that magical 8 hour VR headset battery you speak of
@@smallbutdeadly931 have an extra charge bank that you can carry in a backpack. It's really easy to not run out of battery while out and about, you just need to have the bare minimum of a setup.
The smartphone is a device that opens you to a world without any restrictions.
The headsetglasses is a closed system that limits you to space, place and time.
The smartwatch also limits you.
12:27 Thank GOD it didn't happen. I love my Thinkpad too much
21:08 "Fundamentally, this concept can't go mainstream" Damn, that line hits hard. No matter how good the technology gets, it will never be mainstream. I think that VR headsets belong to the same category as videogame consoles. I don't even have one, I use a PC all day for everything.
I got a Vive headset a few months after it was released, and I started spending an hour or 2 most nights playing Elite Dangerous in VR. I found that I didn't have much of an issue with motion sickness (it helps that the game is a flight sim so it's played entirely from the chair), but I did start to feel this weird strain in my eyes. I think it's because even though your eyes will move to perceive things as closer or further by parallax, there's no corresponding change in your eyes' focal distance the same way as happens IRL. Your eyes are always focused for a screen a fixed distance from your face, even when your brain is seeing objects closer and further away. That makes this weird tension that you can maybe get used to but it makes VR feel just a bit "off" to me. And it's one of those issues that current screen technology can't really fix.
You were blasting your eyes directly with light from an inch away my man.
I think the biggest issues lie in trying to commercialize the technology. I work with VR stuff for academic research, and there we find tons of use. We've tested things like proving that people's choices in a VR buffet reflects their choices in a similar real buffet, which then means that we have validation to do more crazy stuff with nutrition and how people pick and portion food with use in training or experimentation. We've also worked with VR exhibits for museums or floor shows across multiple fields with good reactions.
It's just the idea of making it "common" that falls apart due to the issues brought up in the video. In small, specific situations it still works very well.
My reason for VR sticking on my shelf is simply I don’t have enough room. The area I would use is shared by other people in the house, but I don’t want to move a bunch of stuff just so I can mess around for a couple hours in a VR game.
I remember the days my parents would tell me to get get away from staring at the TV closely. Having VR up on your eyes is probably not good for them.
You're simply ignorant, first those were cathode ray tubes then there's the distance of your depth perception in the headset.
The perks that VR grants aren't saving anyone a whole bunch of hassle like smartphones. The cost-benefit analysis isn't worth it to most people.
This has been "a nice to have" in the CAD world for 20 years, not a must have.
Unlike all those other tech, VR is actually a problem to a solution, recreating depth perception and having physical presence. Now the problem is people don't really value that. It costs more than just money. It costs calories.
Not my precious calories!
We are for sure at a plateau of technology. It'll be interesting to see what actually pushes into the next phase of whatever is to come.
I would love to get into VR, but there's multiple issues. Price is a big one, especially with the rising prices of groceries and gas and other stuff. And sure, I'll agree it needs more things to do. I think people are viewing "nobody is buying it" as lack of interest when in reality its a priority thing. Would I rather get a VR headset or be homeless this month, not exactly difficult choice.
Also, I will say that I do the exact same stuff with my consoles. I buy them, play the game I wanted to play, and then it sits there gathering dust until another game comes out that I want to play. The only thing I haven't done that with is my computer, but my computer does more than a console or a VR headset.
Get a job then.
Not sure why anyone couldn't see the smartphone as the confluence of factors that it clearly ended up being. Consider:
-Telephone function will never be completely replaced; people will always want the ability to have audio only conversations as well as the ability to reach someone very quickly
-Text messaging will never be completely replaced; starting with instant messaging, the ability to hold a recorded text conversation at varying pacing will always be in demand
-People will always desire convenient access to the internet, as long as it continues to exist
It made a lot of sense that computing tech would reach the point that cell phones would be able to provide all these functions, and it's also hard to imagine all these functions being more conveniently accessible from one device any time soon. So, until/unless that happens, smartphones are the big kahuna.
With the iPhone, people have had phones for years so it was easy to adopt. Apple Watch, people have had watches and are used to the idea. With Vision Pro, it is something very new to consumers, and most people don’t have experience with something like this. Once they are glasses I think the familiarity for people will increase adoption.
In my opinion, the Vision Pro has always been intended as a prototype platform to get developers on board and to get content ready for when we inevitably get AR glasses
No VR headset will ever be the same as a regular glasses, it's just not feasible
I'm just over 50 and I'm realizing there's been two main developments in tech that I consider indispensible: personal computers and then smartphones. Most everything else is just peripheral stuff or completely uninteresting. VR won't be interesting to me unless I can be immersed in it like a holodeck from Star Trek.
I have a 3d tv. I've used it so much that now...
when I use my phone...
red lettering and objects float above above blue and green when there's a black background.
i feel like the cameras mixed with social media was a big reason smart phones did will.
I think vr isn't going to be big cause lots of people wanna just escape from technology
Big Tech doesn't believe in diminishing returns.
As someone who's working on the ''science fiction graphene sort of stuff'' I think the ultra thin smart glasses that last 8h on a single charge are coming within 10-15 years max. Btw it's not gonna be graphene but rather other two-dimensional materials (graphene might be part of the material stacks) that are gonna revolutionize LED devices and sensors
i think a large part of the problem is the intention. trying to replace the smartphone is going to be extremely difficult and require mature technology.
Things going mainstream is what always, always ruins them.
The best is when niche markets are self-sustainable thanks to their dedicated audience. Sadly, too many people believe something is a failure unless it continuously grows forever.
I love how these companies think that everyone's jobs are just reading reports and spinning 3D models around with their mouth hanging open.
Even if the technology advances i just dont think headsets will ever be for me personally i dont like the idea of having to wear something on my head for entertainment
14:47 I remember back when people were hyping up the metaverse there were a lot of them who'd say it'd catch on once VR headsets were like this. They'd say it as if VR/AR headsets with the power to render high-res photorealistic graphics while as unobtrusive as a normal pair of glasses with a battery that lasted all day was just around the corner. So absurd to say that when you'd need enormous fundamental breakthroughs in physics and engineering to do that.
I love your voice activated animation. Is it powered by Fugi Tech?
I mean, VR is fun for gaming, and I have a Vive, but I can't imagine it being all that useful for everyday work-related stuff.
VR is not the future, AR is. You wont feel motion sickness when you are actually moving through the world. AR goggles with the form factor of normal glasses with the functionalities of the vision pro will definitely become big. Because there are just so many use cases. Imagine studying in a classroom where the teacher can just pull up models of historical events in history or demonstrate physical simulations in physics. Imagine looking at a plant and all the relevant information of it pops up. You can attach notes around the world in a digital space for others to find. Make art in VR and put it special places. There are so many advantages to having AR Glasses that it will feel like a disability not having them, just like how it is with phones.
Literally will never happen
We do not have anything like the series of technological revolutions it would take to make what you're talking about possible. Batteries, lens, computing power, all of that would need to be exponentially better in a way that the materials we currently use for those things are not capable of. By the time we had the materials available at all (let alone cheaply) I think the computing form factor would have already changed drastically, and how we access the internet being slightly different would not be much of a selling point.
@@luisaazul agreed, will not happen until having actual glasses is more expensive than getting your sight corrected (current tech laser correction)
Normal glasses can already sometimes be considered heavy, how will AR fix this issue? "Vegeta what does the scouter say about his powerlevel?" 1006
Millions of people wear glasses and lots of VR/AR does not work with glasses.
@@patrickwilliams1206 In which way would the computing form factor change? I can image that in 10 years we will have something that weighs about as much as a smartphone that you can wear on your face. More computing heavy task could be offloaded and only be accessible in cities. I dont know the timeline of technological progress that we will make but i dont see any other emerging technology that would be able to replace smartphones atm. But at the same time i doubt we will still use smartphones in 50 years.
Sounds like some kind of hellscape. Imagine all the freakin advertising being pumped into that.
It would turn the entire world into a pumped up version of a las vegas casino floor, continues stimulation and everything around you turned into a sales pitch...
You know that is what it will turn into.
Our physiology protecting us from that dystopian outcome
Some of my irl friends swear vr is the best thing ever and will take off soon. Then waste thousands of dollars on new vr crap in their overpriced apartment. Like, bro. They could probably have made a down-payment on a house where we live.
Also, vr sucks. Gives me a headache and the games are lame.
most vr games are just plain bad. Oculus's dominance in the VR space is mostly to blame. Developers only concept is a/b x/y, thumbstick, and trigger for controls. control schemes are bad. The 2 games that I keep coming back to are H3VR, and VTOL VR. They were both originally HTC-Vive centric. H3VR has so many options for different control schemes. However, the original control scheme, where thumbstick input is interpreted as HTC vive thumbpad movement, and "buttons" are made using gestures, such as stick down + click, or stick left + click, as well as motion gestures such as stick left + move down + click to accomplish actions, ends up making using guns feel more similar to real life, and avoids "press B to reload" game design.
VR takes dedication and attention to detail, something that is unfortunately rare in the gaming industry today.
The cost minimization in headset design is also a problem, especially as it relates to the headstraps. Squeezing a VR headset to your face is the worst way to wear a headset. It's uncomfortable and causes migraines. The industry as a whole needs to revert to halo straps and proper head-mounting solutions, rather than mounting on the face. Even the official "premium" headstraps from Meta still have the inherent flaw of squeezing the headset to your face.
Buying a $400 something headset and needing to buy a better offbrand strap because the default one is trash, and putting on the headset to see that just about every game worth playing is at least $30. Sitting there you realize that this fun little off and on play/novel gimmick device is much more of an investment than you thought, and all those games you bought can only be played for an hour before you get a headache and your guts want to exit your skinsuit because the graphics just aren't there yet. Needless to say I hope I can sell my Quest 2 for a decent amount...
VR is something you try a couple times and then forget about - unless you're an avid user who has one or two games to play most of the time like VRChat or racing games.
So I generally agree with everything you've said! However I would like to make a counterpoint: the physical TVs you listed aren't even close to the relative size of the screens in his set up and would get significantly more expensive to match. This actually opens up one of the few genuine use cases for these devices; adding screens/workspaces where it wouldn't be physically possible to do. But if you can afford something like the Vision Pro, you can probably afford a better space, or at least better solutions.
Ever since smartphones peaked, these big tech companies have just been hopelessly struggling.
Why did they think that something with a screen size smaller than a gameboy screen be used for everything
Honestly, it should look like eyeglasses and not like a headset.