Meta's Quest 3 Ignites the Consumer AR Device Market | Opinion

Following the commercial release of the Oculus Rift in 2016, which sparked widespread excitement about virtual reality, it became apparent that VR was not going to be the next big thing its proponents had envisioned. Despite the rapid advancement of VR technology and its potential for immersive experiences, consumer adoption was slow. The market saw the emergence of more consumer-friendly devices like the Meta Quest and PlayStation VR, but headset sales remained sluggish, and users spent limited time with these devices. As a result, the focus shifted to augmented reality (AR), which promised to be more useful, appealing, and expansive than VR. AR, also known as mixed reality, involves using a headset to integrate virtual elements into the real world. Despite significant interest in this technology, no company has yet released a fully functional AR headset to the consumer market. Microsoft's HoloLens was an early effort, but it did not result in a consumer product. Magic Leap made substantial promises and secured large investments but has since shifted its focus to enterprise devices with more modest claims. This landscape is about to change with the launch of Meta's Quest 3, a standalone VR headset featuring advanced AR capabilities, and Apple's upcoming Vision Pro, although the latter's high price point may stretch the definition of a consumer launch. Both devices utilize Passthrough AR, which enables VR headsets with high-fidelity cameras to display a representation of the real world augmented with virtual objects and overlays. This approach differs from "true" AR devices like HoloLens or Magic Leap, which project virtual elements onto clear lenses through which the user views the real world directly. The AR space is poised to see significant developments as Meta and Apple launch their devices, each with a different strategy. Meta is expanding its existing VR product line with the Quest 3, priced around $500, while Apple is making a larger bet on AR as a new category with the Vision Pro, which comes with a premium price tag. Both companies face the challenge of convincing a skeptical public, who have been underwhelmed by VR and are yet to be won over by AR. The backlash against Google Glass serves as a reminder of the social acceptance challenges that certain technologies can face in public spaces. AR has high expectations to meet, driven by its potential to offer wider applicability and appeal than VR. However, the interest in AR among investors and analysts is also driven by the desire for the next big technological leap, similar to the impact of smartphones. Smartphones have reached a technological equilibrium, improving incrementally but offering little room for innovation around their core design. Investors are looking for the next boom, and AR is seen as a potential candidate. For AR to deliver such a boom, it must become a general-purpose computing device that is an essential part of life, not just a display or a tool with niche applications. The argument that AR has a bigger potential market than VR is well-founded, given that AR can deliver many of VR's features without isolating the user from their surroundings. This opens up potential applications in gaming, productivity, creativity, research, and more. However, these potentials remain hypothetical, and actual use cases are less clear. The success of AR will depend on creating a decent platform that attracts developers and changes the world, similar to how apps transformed smartphones. But AR faces a barrier if it does not have the same inherent appeal as smartphones did from the start. The significant price and functionality gap between Meta and Apple's devices could also lead to confusion and impact demand. Ultimately, the real test for these devices will be to demonstrate their value beyond the potential of future apps and to grow their installed base from day one. Winning over a skeptical world will require more than just promises of a future filled with possibilities.