Top
Best
New

Posted by polymorph1sm 13 hours ago

Meta VR Glasses(www.meta.com)
451 points | 398 comments
ksec 9 hours ago|
I am so so glad Meta, or any company continue to invest in AR and VR. Not because I like AR / VR, to the contrary I am not a big fan of wearing a glasses to use it.

But it is the only thing that will move Low Latency Computing forward. Everything in modern computing is slow, we might have increased throughput by 1000 or 10000x over the course of 30+ years. But latency has gone backwards, from Apps to OS UI response. Decent AR/VR experience mimicking the real world would require sub 10ms results. And this should finally force developers to take latency into account.

me551ah 2 hours ago||
The biggest issue with VR adoption currently is not VR hardware. Quest 3, Pico 4 etc are all great headsets which launched with amazing price points. The issue is that these standalone headsets are pretty much useless. Sure you can watch some videos, or play some extremely basic games which remind me of N64 graphics. But that's about it. To get the most out of these headsets, you need a powerful PC. Driving in Assetto Corsa in VR feels amazing, you get actual realistic car physics and can drive in Tokyo with traffic around you which feels 'real'. VR in Microsoft Flight Simulator allows you to fly in any plane in any part of the world. VR in Elite Dangerous allows you to fly in outer space in a 1:1 scale Milky Way Galaxy. But require a beefy PC to run.

Apple, Meta and other VR companies just keep throwing more and more VR hardware with better lenses and form, but the issue is content. If someone is spending 1200 bucks on this headset and playing/interacting with N64 level content, the novelty wears off pretty fast.

ingenieros 2 hours ago|||
So much to dissect in this post. By “N64 level” content I’m assuming that you refer to low poly geometry with low res textures and baked lights, correct? Well, I don’t know which VR games you are playing because even something as basic as Beat Saber would have been impossible to execute in the N64 era. I also find it interesting that you mention Apple being a VR company when they’ve only released one headset a few years ago and have not announced any major updates or successors in the last two WWDC. Meanwhile you ignore VALVe altogether who are about to release their second VR headset (third if you take the OG HTC Vive into account. And who developed and published what is perhaps one of the most immersive experiences on the medium: Half-Life Alyx. There’s nothing N64 about this game as they really pushed the technology as far as you could possibly do with the hardware limits of that time. No, you are not going to get GTA VI running on an untethered headset anytime soon and perhaps for good reason.
me551ah 1 hour ago||
Half-Life Alyx is great, but it still requires a tethered headset and a beefy PC to run with high fidelity graphics.

Beat Saber is still quite basic graphics, I wouldn’t call it high fidelity.

ingenieros 1 hour ago||
Half-Life Alyx will run on VALVe’s upcoming frame completely untethered. https://vr.org/articles/half-life-alyx-standalone-steam-fram...
everyone 16 minutes ago||
at 30 fps tho, its a joke.
mark_l_watson 1 hour ago||||
I have a different take on this: I bought a Quest 2 several years ago, spent some money and bought about 10 experiences/games/etc. for it, and it is good enough that I continue using it with no real desire to buy a newer model. My wife was watching me use it last week and she commented “isn’t there an upgrade for that?”

Wonderful toy, even though I only use it about 90 minutes a month it is worthwhile for me to own.

jermaustin1 16 minutes ago|||
I bought my Quest 2 when it first came out, and I played it for a while, about 2-3 hours a week, peaking at about an hour a day when I found that Blade and Sorcery is a really good game for "exercise".

I bought the Quest 3 as an upgrade because I had noticed my Quest 2 started having intermittent input lag issues. I never pinpointed what was causing it, but my Golf clubs would fly out of my hand and I'd have to wait a few seconds for them to eventually find their way back to me. My controllers would drift out of view when navigating menus. I uninstalled everything, reinstalled it again. When that didn't work, I upgraded.

The issues persisted in the new version as well. So for about the last 20-ish months, I've averaged under an hour a month, most months I don't even pick it up. I might do some homemade PC VR "experiments" (still have access to mouse and keyboard for the game, and not the controllers) on some random claude code experiments. I have a "cyberpunk" mobius strip space station walking sim I've been working on, that will eventually hook into a treadmill.

me551ah 36 minutes ago||||
I average about 2-3 hours per week. I’ve gotten into simracing and an average Le Mans Ultimate race is around an hour which I play a couple of times per week.

The native experiences are too barebones and I don’t even use it untethered

sigmoid10 1 hour ago|||
The three year old Quest 3 is still the absolute best thing you can buy in this space in terms of value per dollar. Especially the color passthrough is a feature I found to enjoy quite a lot and it prevents me from even considering the new Steam Frame. After the price hike I think Meta might now sell roughly at break even or perhaps even with some tiny margins, but before it was definitely at a loss. If mine fell down and broke today, I'd probably buy it again in a heartbeat, even though I only use it semi-regularly like you.
everyone 17 minutes ago|||
The nice thing for me is I was able to pick up a brand new meta quest 3 still with receipt and warranty for €200 second hand (buyers remorse I guess, there wasn't much they could do with it), and I was able to do all that stuff you mentioned with my beefy pc.

VR has been around for decades, and its always been a really niche nerdy thing, for the same type of people who will build a mock cockpit of a plane in their house for flight sims. I dont think that's gonna change no matter how much cash mega-corps pump into it, it will always be a niche nerdy hobby thing imo.

ChrisRR 4 hours ago|||
I think VR would be completely dead by now if Meta weren't continuing to lose billions every quarter on it. Not many companies can endless sink that much money into a product
utopiah 3 hours ago|||
On the contrary, if Meta didn't acquire Oculus which hadn't poached Valve staff maybe the Steam Frame would have been out years ago.

It wouldn't have been touted at the "metaverse" and a revolution of having business meeting in a virtual room... looking like a boring office and maybe it would "just" be millions of gamers, but to stay we are in a better state because of Meta is questionable.

They did invest a ton and their products (if one can manage to make abstraction why they even exist in the first place) are actually well done but the line their brought on the entire industry created unrealistic expectation.

Is it good, is it bad, I'm not actually sure but I'm rather confident to say it's not obvious.

ben_w 4 hours ago||||
Meta burned all that money because Zuckerberg had just read something related to Snow Crash, not because he had a good idea for how to develop the sector.

I think for now games are the best use of VR, and Valve actually care about games, and Zuckerberg moving on to the next shiny thing leaves room for Valve to join Sony and Microsoft for the next PlayStation/XBox alternative.

If anything, when the Oculus Quest became the Meta Quest, it started feeling like regression rather than progress, with the games going from "wow!" to "did they port a phone game?".

blensor 4 hours ago||||
I am not so sure about that. When it felt like Meta was abandoning the space we saw some resurgence of smaller projects that tried to innovate, but if you have a big player sucking out all the oxygen you can't build smaller scale projects
ChrisRR 4 hours ago||
Unfortunately a couple of small start ups isn't enough to carry the industry. Even big players like Valve who have more money in the bank to take a hit couldn't bring their headset in below $1000
andybak 57 minutes ago|||
Nonsense. VR was and still is sustainable as a profitable niche product for specific use-cases. Zuck spending billions to try and own a new mass market category has nothing to do with that.
hermitShell 1 hour ago|||
I am also very glad for Meta's investment into the future, so second your voice here. In a sense though it's Palmer Luckey who punched the tech into a defensible product. John Carmack surely tried to do the right thing, but I think part of why he left is that it's too difficult for any individual to make significant (risky) design decisions.

Do I have faith in Meta to 'win' in VR or AR commercially? Well... not really, but the technological advancements are real.

aghuang 6 hours ago|||
agreed. would be nice to see the size of the meta glasses and the reviews first before considering to purchase.
guenthert 3 hours ago|||
> Everything in modern computing is slow

Nonsense. Embedded systems, often event driven, improved as did the rest of the computing landscape (perhaps at a tad slower pace). HST has been a major driver on low latency computing in the data center. And then there are of course robotics and military applications ...

nananana9 1 hour ago|||
I have 5 programs open right now - Firefox, Visual Studio, Word, Photoshop and a terminal.

Out of these 5, only Firefox loads faster than it did on a 512MB Windows XP machine 20 years ago, the other 4 are at least a few times slower.

GuB-42 2 hours ago|||
VR is at the intersection of low latency, high throughput, high compute, flexibility and affordable prices.

Embedded systems are often not flexible. They are often designed to do just one thing, like driving an engine, and may run the exact same software for their entire life, which may be decades. They are often limited in term of general computing requirements too.

I don't know HST, but it seems to be similar to embedded: single, highly constrained application, maybe more compute, and I would guess that affordability isn't even on the menu.

Meta VR is consumer software, running on consumer hardware, it runs third party apps, with all the flexibility that is asked of PCs. You can't just put your own realtime OS and claim the entire system for your own specific application.

pazimzadeh 4 hours ago||
I'm just glad the era of having to look down all the time will soon be over.
Lucent 12 hours ago||
I just got swept up in this mass Threads suspension yesterday, despite not using it. I am locked out of Facebook and Messenger, and my Portal, Oculus, and Glasses are now bricked. I pay them $12 for Instagram a month, mostly to deter username thieves, and that was oddly not suspended, despite being linked, so the "safety" claims ring hollow. Be very careful about giving your money to Meta. They are quick to unperson with no recourse.

https://www.reddit.com/r/ThreadsApp/comments/1wnkje9/my_inst...

lemmetellya 18 minutes ago|||
[dead]
stahtops 6 hours ago||
[dead]
aranelsurion 13 hours ago||
Coming from Quest 3, everything about it sounds great BUT for that FOV. Even on Quest with 103 x 96, I sometimes feel like I'm looking around through a mask or binoculars. Can't imagine how restrictive it might be on 70 x 66.

Hopefully it's not so bad.

Oh BTW they showed a new Beat Saber game, and among the logos I've seen Ace Attorney VR among a few others. Let's see if those come for Quest 3 and maybe even PCVR.

jdprgm 10 hours ago||
70 is crazy! I was thinking years ago that surely by this point headsets would be standardizing on a baseline of like 140+. Progress has really stagnated and over the past few years new headsets never seem to just be universally better than whatever they are replacing. It always seems to be pull one lever to improve one aspect while regressing somewhere else.

I really wish VR had followed an iPhone like trajectory over the past decade where we got a new Quest/etc every year and it got consistently better across the board every iteration.

meric_ 8 hours ago|||
It has progressed. The tech is just expensive and heavy and... all sorts of tradeoffs. Meta had a prototype (Boba) with a 180 horizontal and 120 vertical FoV

But it of course is large and heavy like the quest pro and expensive most likely. Things that when you market to consumers don't pan out.

So they are optimizing on the other dimension (weight) which of course trades of many other dimensions.

ilaksh 10 hours ago||||
It's not a headset, it's glasses.
jonplackett 4 hours ago|||
You can’t see through it. So it’s a small glasses shaped headset
rob74 3 hours ago||
...with stray light coming in from all sides because glasses don't cover your face completely. So the best place to use them will probably be a completely darkened room?
bookofjoe 1 hour ago||
Unless like Vision Pro there's a surroundings control that lets you go from total visibility outside the image to complete darkness — within the FOV — in any environment.

Edit: Since the FOV is only 70 degrees, that leaves 110 degrees outside the image, divided between the edges of the glasses and the rest of the room. So for sure in daylight outside light would destroy the theater effect.

kshmir 8 hours ago|||
It's a headset
chaostheory 8 hours ago|||
> I really wish VR had followed an iPhone like trajectory over the past decade where we got a new Quest/etc every year

That didn’t happen because you would need market demand for that. Only Gen Alpha likes VR as a demographic.

ChicagoBoy11 1 hour ago|||
I have a Vision Pro since launch and loved it, and it has a much more traditional, much wider FOV. However, when you do watch movies on it, it looks incredible but usually only a fraction of that full FOV is utilized -- you do see the theater, or environment, etc. My one wondering is if they'll somehow really deliver the experience of a virtual screen, non-occlusion of the real world, and make it so that the huge screen on the wall several feet away from you can be fully rendered on only this 70 degree FOV. To be sure this is a killer for this as an all-encompassing VR device, but I hope that maybe we'll be shown that it might just be good enough for more of a MR use. Or maybe its just cause I'm at least excited someone is trying and bringing products in this space and so I want to cheer this on
bpye 13 hours ago|||
> Can't imagine how restrictive it might be on 70 x 66.

Ouch, that's a tough sell. Maybe useful for AR type stuff, but I wouldn't want to go from a Quest/Index/Frame/etc to that for VR.

firmretention 2 hours ago|||
IMO, FOV is the biggest immersion killer in VR today, and doesn't get nearly enough attention. It's not so bad when you're relatively new to it as the illusion is convincing enough that you don't notice, but once the magic wears off a bit, it's hard to escape that binocular effect. I wish one of the bigger players would tackle that. I'm not willing to take a chance on Pimax.
Svoka 9 hours ago|||
From description I thought this is more 'View on a Virtual TV' rather than a full VR thing, I may be wrong. This is good, because I, honestly, find that a lot of my VR time is sitting or lying down.
dgellow 6 hours ago||
So, xreal competitor?
nicman23 8 hours ago||
quest 3 is sooo heavy though
bpye 7 hours ago||
I'm very interested in Valve's approach, shifting some of the weight to the back.
dmix 13 hours ago||
Youtube video Meta released: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xyD_bmMy5nQ

And another random youtube influencer who tried it https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8J8oIs1GA0o

$1300 price

HelloUsername 5 hours ago||
> Youtube video Meta released: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xyD_bmMy5nQ

That video is on the page itself as well, right top

titzer 12 hours ago|||
Is it just me or do those angles deliberately obscure how thick it is lens-wise? I have a pair of X-real airs, 2 years old now, and they're pretty thick. They're 1/4th the price and basically work as a head-mounted display. Is that what this, but way fancier and more sleek?
numpad0 1 hour ago||
Xreal style glasses use forms of "birdbath" optics with screens up top reflected through prisms. This likely use the regular concentric pancake optics used in many other VR headsets.

But yeah, the angles are to obscure thickness. It's not going to be as thin as it appear from a distance.

crooked-v 12 hours ago||
According to the influencer, the weight is 100 g. I have 25 g (+lenses) glasses I wear often, and even that is right on the upper edge of what's comfortable and needs almost-uncomfortable tight arms to stay steady when my head moves. And, that's all as somebody who's worn glasses all my waking hours since like age 10, complete with nose-indent calluses. Either those Meta glasses are clamping uncomfortably hard on the sides of your head all the time or they'll fall off the first time you lean forward.
scun 11 hours ago|||
Maybe users will develop a distinctive posture.
cubefox 5 hours ago|||
Strange complaint. 100 grams is extremely light compared to every other VR headset.
LorenDB 2 hours ago|||
Most other VR headsets don't put their entire weight on your nose and ears.
dmondok 2 hours ago|||
strange comparing glasses to headsets
cubefox 2 hours ago||
The capabilities are quite similar.
bookofjoe 1 hour ago||
This is the sweet spot Apple's aiming for next year.
tiborsaas 12 hours ago||
If you are going to buy one, this is the platform you support:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=1618&v=qp2IbgJ5Z-8

I know you probably know that, but this is a new low, even for Meta.

flockonus 12 hours ago||
At the timestamp of the video, after the question she goes in length about the [mind boggling] settlement, limiting to 2h/day for under 18 years old is not too bad?
tiborsaas 12 hours ago||
Yes, not too bad for a question the moderator didn't really ask. She's really good at diverting the topic to a less uncomfortable field. No wonder she's in charge of a platform with 3.07 billion monthly active users. Also note the tone and condescending attitude.
bel8 12 hours ago||
meh all of these mega corps do whatever they can to maximise profit. Apple used slave-like labour from China (or still use depending on who you ask) and turned a blind eye until it could no more. Which to me is worse than what Meta did. But they are not Americans so most don't care around these parts.
aucisson_masque 6 hours ago|||
When you buy an iPhone that was made in sweatshop, you contribute to it. There are alternatives but most people really don’t mind having slave labor build their iPhone.

Same for kids wasting their life on screen, most parents don’t mind as long as it keep them busy and it’s one less thing to care about.

tiborsaas 12 hours ago|||
Correct, but that's also whataboutism. I know apathy can easily take over, but when you get laughed in the face just like that it feels really hopeless. No, it's not my first day on the internet and no, it's not the first time I see companies act like this, but something about this feels very wrong.
Grombobulous 13 hours ago||
It’s HoloLens reinvented I guess.

What problem does it solve? I see a bunch of potential uses but I don’t see any problems looking to be solved.

Will I like gaming better if I control the games with my hands instead of a controller?

Will I like working in my glasses better than my laptop screen? Or even a dual laptop screen like a ZenBook Duo? Or a cheap second portable display? Do these glasses fit better in a backpack than a laptop and a second portable screen? They can’t collapse flat.

Are these glasses more portable and convenient than a smartphone? What are the benefits to watching an NBA game on this compared to a phone or my TV screen at home?

I can’t believe Meta is blowing their money on this stuff still.

numpad0 11 hours ago||
I think this is a big stopgap until an actual transparent AR glasses and an admission that Meta and the entire AR industry have no instant next quarter solution for shortcomings of Meta Ray-Ban Display.

The geometric waveguide technology used in the Display glasses is quite complicated and costly, the birdbath optic that Xreal uses is stupid, so to speak, and various holographic solutions used by Even Realities and likes is not so spectacular in light loss(IIUC the fancy term is "quantum efficiency"), as well as multi color feasibility(needs 3 layers with separate image sources).

Prior to now we didn't know if Meta will be doing a Display 2 or Quest 4, or if they plan to do something else. This is that something else.

daemonologist 11 hours ago|||
Rumor is they are going to do a Quest 4 (late next year).

I agree that these seem like a stopgap short of the thing everyone wants - Vision Pro specs (ahaha) in a pair of regular glasses.

Personally, as a glasses-wearer, I'm not quite convinced it's the right target though - even my 20 gram glasses are uncomfortable to wear all day and I take them off whenever they're not needed. I'd rather have a ski-goggle device (similarly light, but with the weight more evenly distributed, and still with optical see-through) with fewer performance compromises. Of course that wouldn't let the manufacturer dominate "the next form of personal computing" or whatever.

Groxx 9 hours ago||
Yeah, I've switched to ultra-light rimless glasses and I really do not want to go back. I no longer have sore nose-pad dents at the end of the day.

(I have a fairly strong prescription, so the literal glass in my glasses does weigh a fair bit more than for most people. Yay modern optional media! It's so much nicer than it used to be)

frmersdog 11 hours ago|||
They had to get something out to undercut Snap finally formally entering the market with a consumer product. That's my read. Their entire strategy for years has been doing whatever they can to box-out potential XR space competitors.
bookofjoe 1 hour ago|||
Related: I watched one (1) live NBA game on Vision Pro. It was terrible in all ways compared to watching on TV. Same with a live baseball game. Apple doesn't grok sports.
Grombobulous 2 minutes ago||
That’s interesting because I kept hearing so much about how its the ultimate movie theater.

If we really step back and think about how most people enjoy sports I think the whole idea of VR being a top tier option is a little silly.

Sports are very much community and family activities. How much fun are they to alone compared to watching with fans?

I see VR as something of a backup method like if you’re on a plane or something.

foldshift 13 hours ago|||
I might consider them if I can wire it to my laptop. I use the meta quest for development because of infinite virtual screens and due to my apartment being so small I can't fit a proper desk and office chair. But still is a very niche usage, if I had space I would very likely get a desk with a dual or triple monitor setup. If the resolution is good, it is actually nice to have a very portable infinite screen setup if you travel a lot.
mardef 12 hours ago|||
You can do this already with xreal glasses for like 1/4 of the price

https://us.shop.xreal.com/products/xreal-xbx-a01

foldshift 12 hours ago||
Thanks, i will check it out. I think I did a couple years ago but mac os support was bad at the time? I don't quite remember, but this seems great now. Do you have one? Any experience with using it for work on mac os with multiple virtual screens?
drcode 12 hours ago|||
fwiw unlike the other person, I use it for hours with my macbook and have no complaints. you will like it if regular vr makes you feel claustrophobic/isolated, since you still see the real world while using it. I don't understand the obsession with extreme text crispness many people have.
dnpls 5 hours ago||
Blurry text is horribly noticeable after a while, and it also creates eye fatigue from trying to focus your vision on it. It also means you can't use smaller font sizes, which is important for some people since you can have more text on screen.
bookofjoe 1 hour ago||
This for me is the FAIL with both Vision Pro and XReal glasses: blurry text. Can't stand it from the get-go.
SkyPuncher 12 hours ago|||
It’s terrible.

I’ve always wanted it to be better, but it’s just terrible. It’s like working on a projector screen where the pixels never line up.

NBJack 10 hours ago||
Really? Did you ever try adjusting the text sharpness?

I've a pair of Nreal Air glasses (before the rebrand) and a pair of Xreal Ones. I have found the latter remarkably comfortable and sharp enough for coding, reading text, playing games, etc. for extended periods of time.

The new widescreen modes are a real treat too. Still waiting for Real 3D to get upgraded to 60FPS though.

agar 8 hours ago|||
You can wire it to a laptop. It supports direct DisplayPort over USB 3 input, which it will display on a large virtual monitor.
garciasn 13 hours ago|||
From the video they have on their site: watching movies in places where you normally would stare at a tiny screen; they also show folks using virtual floating keyboards in front of a VR desktop to work.

So: no problems solved.

fg137 3 hours ago||
I have watched hundreds of movies with my 27" 4k monitor, or 24" 1080p monitor a few years back. Screen size is never something that bothered me. And I know people who watched more stuff on their laptop screen with terrible color accuracy.

I have a VR headset, but other than the one time I tried Skybox just to see what it looks like, it never occurred to me to take the headset out to watch a full length movie. It's just not worth it.

Makes me wonder how often people use it for "watching content on a gigantic screen at home", or it's just mostly theoretical in VR headset marketing material.

VR desktop: that's supposedly the "killer application" of Apple Vision Pro back in 2005 (and only usable on high resolution headsets like those). Guess what, these days nobody talks about it. I haven't seen anyone bringing it up on HN for a long time.

bookofjoe 50 minutes ago||
Your wait is over.

I received my Vision Pro on release day (February 24, 2004). After trying every feature and use case, today (2.5 years later) the ONLY times I use it are 1) To watch films like "Disclosure Day," "Crime 101," "Dune," etc. in 4k on a virtual 30 foot screen — at any time of day — since I can black out the screen surrounding with the control knob, and 2) Watch the short (10 minutes or so long) Immersive Videos that Apple releases more or less monthly. They're fantastic.

N.B. All use is while lying down flat with my head comfortably supported on a pillow, using Apple's Version 2 headstrap. Only the supine position enables even enough distribution of the device's weight across my forehead and under my eyes such that I can (for the most part) not be aware of the VP's weight.

Live NBA and MLB: FAIL

3D movies: meh

Working with virtual Mac screen(s): FAIL because 1) text is blurry, and 2) headset is just too heavy after 15 minutes or so.

In summary: 1) I would NEVER recommend the device to anyone, and 2) I'm glad I bought it because when in use it's like something that came from the future, the viewing experience is so detailed and enveloping and the sound so perfect.

TiredOfLife 1 hour ago|||
> It’s HoloLens reinvented I guess.

Hololens was a transparent display with stuff drawn on top of it.

This has reality drawn on top of opaque display

ffsm8 8 hours ago|||
This product line already exists for years. Meta is just entering it.

It's essentially the xr-glasses /vr glasses category. Plenty of options around on stores

JKCalhoun 11 hours ago||
I mentioned Jaron Lanier in another comment… I've been watching VR try to establish itself and fail for close to 30 years now.
serf 11 hours ago||
I want a glasses-with-puck style like this with a great fov and resolution good enough for crisp text work and nothing else. for sound I just want it to be small enough to wear with headphones. It would be fantastic if I could run a real OS on it. I just want it for productivity, I dont care about the latest 3d gimmick movie or VR apps.

The closest thing so far is a Bigscreen Beyond 2 w/ a laptop if it wasn't for the fact that you need a base station for the damn thing.

I know my request is a fantasy right now, but I put this our there in case someone that could make it less of a fantasy reads this.

mr_briggs 11 hours ago||
100% on the same page. I don't want a device to take me on a virtual rollercoaster of half-*ssed entertainment in exchange for my identity, I just want something that can at least substitute my monitors in a more compact way.
mathisfun123 10 hours ago||
https://youtu.be/aGnMbKwP36U?t=164
dnpls 5 hours ago|||
Same here. I've been looking for a way to bring my multi-monitor setup with me to work when I travel, VR glasses would be the most portable solution. But I won't buy it while it needs a subscription of any kind, I want it to work like my LG monitor: dumb, doesn't need software to use (drivers would be fine, 'apps' won't), haven't had any sort of mandatory update since I bought it years ago, I just plug it and it works.
divan 5 hours ago||
I work with Rayneo Air 4 Pro - they have HDR/120fps displays (image quality is top-notch and they're bright enought to work even with direct sunlight). They don't have battery or software, it's plug-in-play USB-C external screen essentially. It's more than enough for travel, or for sitting straight while working cafe, for privacy reasons or working outdoors. I even tried them while walking in the forest (with laptop in the backpack and using voice input).

Drawback - they don't do 3DoF tracking, so the screen just follows where you're looking, you can't change screen size, and no multimonitor setup. They have IMU sensors, though. It's possible to create your own virutal monitor software (or use someone's else like RealWarp), but IMU drift is hard to beat and experience is far from perfect. So I stick with 'just one high-quality screen' for now, and to be honest it was some quality-of-life improvement for me.

PS. Couple of weeks ago there was new release from RayNeo, which supposedly have 3DoF and same quality. Haven't tried those.

divan 5 hours ago||
Yeah, seems like RayNeo GT Max have proper 3DoF tracking. Shoot, now I need these :)
modeless 10 hours ago||
This is it then, right? You can connect a laptop to this. You don't have to watch movies on it. The FoV should be plenty for productivity.
fidotron 12 hours ago||
Looks like superb hardware, and contrary to many others the use cases this is designed for look actually worth it. "AVP but lighter and cheaper" or "looks designed for trains or planes" . . . well, obviously.

The key problem is it's Meta. People don't even trust other people near them to use Meta hardware, and the way they dealt with Oculus users was just grimy. From basically any other company this would be a very welcome device. Zuckerberg needs to fix the company first, because there's no such thing as a killer product good enough to overcome this hurdle.

ai-x 12 hours ago||
People said the same thing about Meta Muse.

HN constantly under-estimate how much the mass forgives a company as long as they release a cool product (barring a few holdouts that really don't matter to 3B DAU company)

physicallyIllfr 9 hours ago|||
I dont thibk privacy conscious people are using muse, Im not.
fantasizr 10 hours ago||||
people don't care about privacy; every post on snowden does well here but it's a fart in the wind to the general public
eli 12 hours ago||||
Is Muse popular?
nl 11 hours ago|||
Extremely. It's been top of the App store charts since it came out in the US.
chownfm 3 hours ago|||
Almost like it is a well funded marketing campaign.

"Everyone loves Meta Muse now, it is organic growth. My social media feed told me so!"

nl 2 hours ago||
Have you tried it? It's pretty good!
croes 11 hours ago|||
That means nothing, see

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49662990

> I spent $220 on Google app ads. 60% of the installs were robots

jryle70 10 hours ago|||
It also tops Apple App store. Any similar tidbit about installs being bots for Apple?
singularity2001 8 hours ago|||
don't trust this we've spent hundreds of dollars without any effect whatsoever in the statistics
dbbk 12 hours ago||||
Yes
behole 11 hours ago||||
https://www.avclub.com/meta-muse-ai-human-labor not for long.
fooker 11 hours ago|||
I went to set up, it asked for email access.

Nope.

CaveTech 11 hours ago||
Then don’t give it email access
fooker 6 hours ago||
That's the whole purpose. It wants to pretend as if it was you, online.

Anything it does, you are responsible.

dominotw 11 hours ago||||
i asked this in different thread https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49816481

anyone know whats going on with muse. twitter has gone crazy with fake things ppl've supposedly achieved like getting airline to refund 4k, negotiating 45k furniture to 5k, booking flights for 20 dollars. These are the same ppl that were hyping openclaw, not sure what happened to that. and how muse topping charts. Its all befuddling to me.

gundmc 10 hours ago||
Well, Muse is essentially OpenClaw as a service for the general population so that tracks.
ulfw 10 hours ago|||
What's cool about giving all your life's data to Meta Muuuuse?
bellorap 11 hours ago|||
> Zuckerberg needs to fix the company first

First he needs to fix himself

TheAtomic 11 hours ago|||
Impossible.
godelski 11 hours ago||
Why? Does his model not get firmware updates anymore?
alex1138 4 hours ago|||
I was going to say. It's not 'the company', it's him. He has majority voting rights on everything
FatalLogic 5 hours ago|||
>People don't even trust other people near them to use Meta hardware,

Video, showing how random Meta employees don't like slightly creepy stranger obviously using Meta glasses to record them:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dHKhYL3is5o

Meta allegedly took down the video when it was uploaded to their own platforms.

chownfm 3 hours ago|||
I hate Meta with a passion but I think the real problem is not embracing Web XR and an open ecosystem. I love the Meta Quest 3 in terms of hardware but I haven't put the Quest on in 6 months because I don't play games so there is so little content. This solves nothing in terms of what I don't like about VR. The headset weight was no issue at all for me. Then trying to develop with the unreal engine and the Quest 3 was a complete joke. The best thing I seen in VR was the unreal engine VR demo. Everything else looks like a cartoon after that. What is the point of building this nice hardware and then a metaverse that isn't even up to 90s POVRAY standards. Like focusing on building a better web browser without the web.
TulliusCicero 7 hours ago|||
Hardware looks good except the FoV is really bad, a huge downgrade compared to the Quest 3.
sleight42 10 hours ago|||
Zuckerberg needs to fix Zuckerberg first. Meta is going to remain as it is, otherwise.
autuni 4 hours ago|||
Honestly, I think at this point in order to fix Meta Zuckerberg needs to go. People will never trust a company with him in charge, without him they could start to rebuild trust with people.
stahtops 6 hours ago||
[dead]
Manuel_D 12 hours ago|
I thought Meta's approach to AR was pivoting towards transparent glasses with displays in the vein of Ray Ban Display and Orion (I realize that "VR" is in the title, but almost all the images show AR use cases). Their original vision for AR was to have people walking around with quest headsets in passthrough mode. But that's just too weird for the vast majority of people. I can't imaging walking around in public and ordering coffee with my eyes totally obscured behind a device. I saw a couple co-workers walking around wearing headsets like this when I worked at Reality Labs, but it was obvious to me and all my teammates that vanishingly few people would actually do that in public.

I guess the approach here is to shrink down the VR glasses and make them look more like normal glasses from a distance. But I still don't think I'd wear one of these walking around the mall or airport. Reduction in FOV is also a big negative. I'm not really sure where one would use this device over a Quest or the Ray Ban Display. It occupies this awkward middle point where it's not a transparent glass display, but it's also makes a lot of compromises compared to the rest of the VR line.

More comments...