John Carmack just gave his thoughts on Meta's new strategy to supply its headset operating system to third-party hardware companies.
If you somehow missed the news yesterday, Horizon operating system is the new name for the Quest system software, which Meta will also make available to third-party headset manufacturers, starting with ASUS, Lenovo and possibly also LG.
But former Oculus CTO John Carmack, who designed much of the Oculus Mobile system software that eventually became the Quest system software, and soon Horizon OS, doesn't seem to think this is such a great idea for Meta.
Meta Horizon OS runs on headsets from ASUS and Lenovo
Meta is turning its Quest software platform into Meta Horizon OS and opening it up to third-party headset manufacturers including ASUS and Lenovo.
Carmack points out that third parties will have to pay higher prices than Quest, since Meta sells its hardware at cost. Carmack has repeatedly called for cheaper headsets that would open up the VR market to more people. While he says Meta's strategy will enable 'boutique' headsets that push areas like resolution, field of view or comfort, he suggests this 'brings with it the tension' that Meta will no longer have the 'shine to deliver industry-leading high-end performance' end' gear”, which he suggests will force Meta to focus on “new new hardware systems from the research pipeline for their advanced systems, which will lead to bad decisions”.
“VR is held back more by software than by hardware”
But Carmack's biggest criticism of the idea comes from a software perspective. He claims the strategy will “put a brake on software development at Meta” because the technical resources required to make the operating system suitable for third parties and “maintaining good communication and trying not to break your partners” will be the focus stealing from Meta's key software engineers that “could be better spent improving the system”. This, he says, is critical because “VR is held back more by software than by hardware.”
Carmack concluded his statement by suggesting that he instead “provide partner access to the full OS build for standard Quest hardware,” which he said could be done very cheaply and would enable special applications and location-based entertainment, though he acknowledges that this 'would be a much lower price'. important announcement”.
Here is Carmack's full statement from X:
“Meta already sells the Quest systems basically at production cost, and simply ignores development costs, so don't expect this to result in cheaper VR headsets from other companies with equivalent Quest capabilities. Even if the other companies have greater efficiency, they cannot compete with that.
What it CAN do is enable a variety of high-quality 'boutique' headsets, like you get from Varjo/Pimax/Bigscreen on SteamVR. Improve resolution, increase field of view, increase comfort. You could control the Apple displays via Quest Silicon. You could make a headset for people with extremely wide or narrow IPD or unusual head/face shapes. You could add crazy cooling systems and overclock everything. All with full app compatibility, but at higher prices. That would be great!
This brings tension, because Meta as a company, as well as the individual engineers, want the polish of making industry-leading high-end equipment. If Meta cedes these 'simple scaling' axes to other headset developers, they will be left with new new hardware systems from the research pipeline for their high-end systems, which will lead to bad decisions.
VR is held back more by software than by hardware. This initiative will put a brake on software development at Meta. Doubtless. Getting the entire system ready for sharing, then maintaining good communication and trying not to break your partners takes attention away from key developers that could be better spent improving the system. It's tempting to think that this is just a matter of increasing the budget, but that's not the way it works in practice; Sharing the system with partners is not a cost that can simply be discounted.
Just allowing partner access to the full OS build for standard Quest hardware could be done very cheaply and would enable a lot of specialty applications and location-based entertainment systems, but that would be a much less significant announcement.