Price : $1500
Includes the headset, side light blockers, controllers, stylus tips, a 45W USB-C charger, a portable controller charger cable, and the charging doc.
I’m pretty underwhelmed really. For 50% more cost than a 3 year old Index, it seems like you’re still more or less getting the capabilities of an Index.
Eye tracking and facial tracking? But no FBT capability, so not great for social VR.
Oh… I suppose its capabilities are meant for Horizon Worlds where avatars have faces but no legs. Right. That competitor to VRChat that Zuckerberg can’t even get his own employees to use.
Who’s going to buy this thing to do what? It seems to fall short in some important way for each purpose you might buy it for.
Spec wise the Quest Pro is a huge disappointment to me. In particular the low panel resolution when compared to a Pico 4 at a 1/3rd of the cost is shocking.
The planned collaboration with Microsoft for O365 and Teams looks interesting, I will keep an eye on how that pans out.
I don’t think Meta are comfortable where they find themselves as of now:
in hardware, they are slotted between a lower price/higher spec Pico4 and an upcoming higher or same price/way higher spec Apple HMD
in Software, they have apparently found the light of Open Source; or, they accept that their initial approach to a closed ‘metaverse’ isn’t going to work.
The pricing of the Quest Pro as well as the recent price increase on the Quest 2 could be indication that Meta isn’t able to continue to subsidise hw sales to achieve market share, as they did for the longest time.
A closed version of the metaverse would be detrimental to its future.
The fact that Meta wasn’t able to corner the market and doesn’t think it will be able to do so in the medium run is mainly a result of the strengths of its current and future competitors.
This is not targeted at gamers but rather a kind of a proof of concept and first contact for using MR in professional use cases. Just look at the battery power being exhausted after 1-2 h.
There were rumors prior to Connect 2022 that the Quest 3 would release much sooner than we would expect, so possibly around new year instead of at Connect 2023. I didn’t consider these to be viable, especially because one of them claimed that it would come with the newer XR2 iteration than the Quest Pro - but if the Quest Pro is solely aimed to allow professional software companies build, and businesses try, the eco system for professional use, the CPU/GPU power is not the main factor, it is more understanding the issues and challenges in a professional use case to make it attractive and efficient for such use.
Which would then again open the window for Meta to announce a Quest 3 just 2-3 months after the Quest Pro.
Let’s see. But for now I am going to skip the Quest Pro, too expensive for too little added value for me.
Yeah exactly @Axacuatl this is not a headset for the visitors of this forum. Maybe if you’re into VRChat that it might offer something but other than that it’s nog a gamer headset but more geared at social collaboration in business environments.
Yes that is what he means. Quite a poor offering. A decrease of 32 pixels per eye. Quest 2 has 1832×1920 vs 1800×1920 in the pro. The pro currently listed as only having 90hz vs Q2 has 72 to 120
It seems there charging a premium for doubling the ram, upgraded xr2+ and bundled accessories.
The lesson here is embracing Opensource. Closed ecosystems are limiting and hinders forward momentum.
If pimax would put more effort into opensource as originally planned. Things like a linux driver could be a reality along with interfaces like pimax XP with specific tailoring where desired for kiosk pimaxvr experiences.
Quest Pro is very disappointing. For 3 times the money, we got the same resolution and the same LCD.
The improvement is over chipset, tracking and RAM, but those things are not important for regular users.
If anything Pimax has proven in the past 7 years, that is people like headsets with wider FOV and higher resolution, and people will be willing to pay those for a premium.
Now Meta is trying to sell a visually similar headset for 3 times the price ? I can only say good luck with that. The head of marketing department should be fired. If this is Zuckerberg’s idea, then he will step down from the CEO position, because it’s so clear that this Quest Pro will be a failure.
I don’t think companies will really buy this kind of headset to promote remote working. We already have so many remote collaboration software. Don’t another one that demands putting a headset on your head. Maybe Zuck will find it fun to do it with his employees, but definitely not for any others.
Remember the craze about Pokemon ? It was so popular that I once saw tens of people playing it around a park square. Meta just need another free and fun game like Pokemon to sell their headsets.
Quest 2 was a great step forward, but now Quest Pro might just have undone it. I hope Meta’s next headset will not be this bad.
Guys, you are misinterpreting the intent of the Q Pro: it is not aimed at consumers - it is not supposed to replace your Quest 2.
And if you are criticizing the price: it is common knowledge that Meta subsidized their hardware sales heavily to boost adaptation. So the commercial price to get some profit out of the sales would have surely been somewhere near 800-900$. And now add new pancake lenses, eye- & face-tracking plus the better passthrough camera, and on the controllers each have their own SoC and camera’s for better tracking, and better haptics. Ah yes, and then there‘s the charging dock. There’s your higher cost and thus price.
So it likely is a fair price for what it is being offered if you look at it from the cost perspective. That we as consumers, gamers are not too enthusiastic about this headset is okay - we‘re supposed to wait for Quest 3 which is said to come in at 300-500$.
If you take a deeper look as what @Axacuatl has said this is not targetted a regular VR users.
The Res is actually mildly decreased by 32 per eye.
Now do I think the price is over inflated? Sure but we would need to see what other goodies are being offered. Just keep in mind the goodies will be targetting professional use vs. Average or gamer vr user.
Meta is taking a risk though if competitors like Pico can offer similar for less.
I agree with that. But I don’t see what business cases it fulfills either. That is, I see business cases that AR could fulfill, but the specs of the Quest Pro don’t seem adequate to them.
For instance, Meta likes to show this idea of multiple virtual desktop screens hovering in the air for productivity. That’s a great use case that the Quest Pro doesn’t actually have sufficient PPD to pull off.
What business use cases are there which the Quest Pro can actually do effectively? And of those, which are not better served by some other VR or AR headset?
