Apple. Android XR, in fact.
While past debates about specifications or options may rage on, it’s a different story when it comes to the elephant in the room – flat apps – that will ultimately determine whether Meta can successfully navigate the intensifying competition with Google and Apple within the XR landscape.
While flat apps like Spotify, TikTok, Snapchat, and Discord might not initially seem like a compelling use case for a headset. Professional, leveraging its vast library of flat iPadOS apps, has poignantly demonstrated the immense value generated by seamlessly integrating XR technology with familiar applications, rather than isolating users when donning a headset. Now, Android 13, or Android XR, is mirroring this strategy by allowing all existing Android apps to be supported directly from the Google Play Store.
While Meta’s headsets truly shine in gaming applications, it’s evident that the XR technology has far-reaching possibilities beyond its impressive gaming capabilities alone.
A company focusing exclusively on gaming, such as Nintendo, will inherently struggle to match the scale and scope of a broader technology giant like Microsoft. That’s why Microsoft is priced similarly to Nintendo – approximately 43 times as much. Although this isn’t a direct comparison, since Microsoft does far more than just develop a gaming console, the parallel is likely self-evident.
Here is the revised text in a different style:
Two XR platforms are now pitted against each other – Meta’s innovative endeavour and Google’s ambitious project.
- Meta’s Horizon OS boasts a cutting-edge library of immersive applications that set the standard for innovation.
- Google’s Android ecosystem boasts an extensive repository of high-quality, flat-design applications.
In their quest to prevail in XR, each side craves what its adversary possesses. Who else struggles with a far greater challenge?
Meta, seemingly, has a stronger footing.
Immersive app builders drive innovation and advancement in their field. If a preferred recreation can secure an additional 25% of customers by porting to Android XR, the decision is straightforward.
While mainstream flat applications such as Spotify, TikTok, Snapchat, and Discord are unlikely to significantly benefit from being migrated to Horizon OS. They would be lucky to achieve a mere 0.25% increase in customer acquisition from their existing Android-based offerings.
While the notion that Horizon OS is built on Android might lead one to assume app porting would be a straightforward endeavour, it’s crucial to note that the technical aspect of porting can indeed be relatively seamless. Managing massive apps with vast user bases requires sustained efforts to maintain and update these systems, presenting a significant commitment of resources.
Given the convergence of XR and Horizon, it’s more advantageous for Google to attract top-tier immersive applications to Android XR than for Meta to bring vital flat apps to Horizon OS. Without significant clusters of flat applications, Meta’s headset is at risk of being relegated to immersive gaming consoles rather than general-purpose computing devices?
And that’s certainly not where Meta should be. Initially, Meta’s primary motivation for entering the XR space about a decade ago was genuinely driven by its ambition to control XR before Apple or Google could establish themselves as the next dominant computing platform.
It’s undeniable that platforms with both key flat apps and key immersive apps would likely have a significant advantage over those with only one type of app, as users seek a seamless transition between different experiences.
Even if Meta consistently improves its hardware, such as producing headsets 20% faster, lighter, and cheaper than comparable Android XR headsets, I still don’t think that can have a lasting impact unless they develop core flat apps available on their platform.
Without viable alternatives, that poses a catastrophic threat to Meta’s virtual reality aspirations, leaving no discernible escape route.
