At Meta Connect 2022, Meta announced the Quest Pro, their flagship VR headset designed for the workplace. With state of the art features, including mixed reality capabilities, the Quest Pro is impressive. In the middle of the presentation, I preordered the Quest Pro but after watching the entire presentation, I canceled it. Here’s why. UPDATE: here is an incredible demo of the Quest 3!
Quest and Quest 2 have already become the most successful VR products ever and have become household names. Now, Meta wants Quest to become not just an entertainment device but a ubiquitous part of our lives by making VR a tool for the workplace.
It’s not a new strategy. Microsoft has focused on industrial and commercial use for its Hololens augmented reality headset. But whereas augmented reality headsets have a very limited field of view (similar to a floating window the size of a postage stamp in front of your eyes), the Quest Pro uses a color passthrough display to enable virtual objects to be projected anywhere in the user’s view.
Quest Pro was also designed for collaboration. It has eye-tracking and face-tracking to make it possible for users to interact more naturally with eye contact and natural facial expressions.
Thus far, the most significant criticism against the Quest Pro is the $1500 price. The price reflects the underlying technology as much as the fact that the Quest Pro wasn’t designed for consumers but for work.
Why I canceled my Quest Pro order
Although the Quest Pro’s price is very high, it is not completely unreasonable. The Quest Pro’s capabilities are somewhat similar to those of the Varjo Aero, which costs $2000. Moreover, unlike the Varjo Aero, the Quest Pro can also be used as a standalone VR headset, not just as a desktop VR headset.
Ultimately, however, I decided to cancel my Quest Pro because of what I believe is Meta’s product strategy.
I was hoping that Quest Pro costs $1500 but can use not just Quest software but also its own apps with advanced graphics. But that doesn’t seem to be the case. Quest Pro uses a Qualcomm Snapdragon XR2+ chip. Although it’s described by Qualcomm as a “premium-tier platform” that is supposedly 50% more powerful than the XR2 chip used in the Quest 2, it is fundamentally still a processor for mobile devices. I interpret this to mean that Quest Pro will have a software library that is similar to that of the Quest 2.
I’m sure there will be software that utilize the Quest Pro’s mixed reality capabilities in ways that aren’t possible for the Quest 2. However, there was a recent leak of the Quest 3 (update: Quest 3 revealed here), which will be a consumer device and will have mixed reality capabilities, just like the Quest Pro.
Quest 3 might not have eye-tracking or face-tracking capabilities and might not benefit from foveated rendering. But given Meta’s decision to use a mobile processor for the Quest Pro, it would seem that the Quest 3 is likely to be able to use the same library as the Quest Pro.
OK but surely the eye-tracking and face-tracking capabilities could facilitate collaboration in VR? I’m sure they would. The only problem is that I don’t know how often I’ll end up collaborating with people in VR. I’ve been using VR since 2016 and although I’ve played some online games with other people, I haven’t used it much for meeting people in VR. I’m fine using the Quest 3 for its mixed reality capabilities and as a virtual monitor. But I don’t think I really need it for collaboration, as much as Mark Zuckerberg would have me believe otherwise. I can count the number of times I’ve had a need to meet people in VR other than to test software. And I have a feeling many other VR users feel the same way. Even those who do want to use the Quest Pro for collaboration might find difficulty finding people to collaborate with (unless your workplace issues Quest Pro headsets to its staff).
Because I think Quest 3 is eventually going to be available with most of the Quest Pro’s capabilities, and with a similar software library, and because I don’t have enough of a need for VR collaboration to justify the Quest Pro’s price premium, I’ve decided that it’s better for me to wait for Quest 3. What do you think of Quest Pro? Let me know in the comments!
Yes it is really cost too much, I think it can be popular if price will be very low, people find it for business now in Russia it is popular trainings for business and big things to collect people such thing I think may be interesting for some people who like it also it is interesting for World Wide education this is can open to all over r the world education for every one…
I think Quest 3 will be that headset.
A great summary on the Pro Mic, I’ve ordered the Pico Neo 4 which ships next week. It appears to be priced well for the features it offers, and a decent step up from the Quest 2 in areas that are important to me. I don’t think the Neo 4 is marketed for the USA yet, but there are ways to order/import it to USA (amazon.de for example)
Thanks Rod. I like the Pico 4 features but I’m worried about whether there will be enough apps for it.
I agree with you on the ‘No’ to the Pro. It offers not enough benefit to cost for me. Much like Rod, I’m getting the Pico 4 for improved comfort, performance and possible potential. The Pro isn’t even what was teased, with no real depth sensing.
App wise, I have no worries. The store is building and will advance quickly, with developers gaining a potential market in China and I will still be able to play my Quest crossbuy apps on Virtual Desktop.
I do like the potential of the Pro’s controllers, but at $300, I can wait for them to be cheaper.
Quest 3 may be an option next year, but as the XR2 Gen to will be available to Pico too, they might even get out a Pico 5 before it lands, simply updating the processor and going for stereo passthrough and a depth sensor.
Who knows who might also be joining in next year? Deckard?
I returned the Pico 4 just for that ery reason and with streaming there is an issue still (can’t use netflix and bigscreen via PCVR, the screen is black). I might reconcider once they solve that and have a different ecosystem at hands too. But i’d rather wait for Quest 3. I read everywhere that the Pro suffers lots of issues concerning orange haze, light bleed, tracking and so on. Not only a pricey product but also a faulty product and just doesn’t combine very well…
I’ve got one on pre-order and reading articles like this to make sure I’m not under the spell of ooooh, new technology! I am. But, that’s who I am and I recognize that. In this case, the points you made are actually the selling points for me. I want to be able to present in front of groups, whether they are in VR or 2D Windows looking in. I want a high quality avatar with face and body tracking. Not much on the latter here, but facial expressions are critical when presenting so this might be good for that. We will see! With BestBuy’s TotalTech, I get a 60 day return…
That’s great — I think the Quest Pro is exactly tailored for users like you!
You never hung out in Big Screen TV? Throwing popcorn and tomatoes at people??
No, I’m one of the boring people who just want to sit and watch a movie quietly and not get bothered haha
Why should I care that you canceled your order, canceled if it’s because you disagree with their product strategy? What a ridiculous reason. Do you want it? Will you use it? Is it within your budget? Then buy it. If it’s not, don’t. Nobody, including you, should not buy it because of your opinion of their broader product strategy. Who cares?
Hi Orwell. Of course it’s not the product strategy itself but rather the impact of the product strategy on me. IOW, I expect that Quest Pro will not have a lot of apps that use its capabilities, and whatever apps there are will not look all that different from Quest apps.
I agree with you people who don’t think like us should just shut up!!!
(sarc)
He is not stopping anyone from buying it.
Please, by all means have a Snickers. You’re not yourself when you’re hungry. Geez Louise!
TLDR;
It’s not the price – but it is the price
i will tell only one thing.
1800 × 1920 – 90hz in 2022 plus 1 hour battery life, it’s a scam
So you canceled the Quest and price wasn’t the issue. Then ended it by saying you can’t justify paying the price for it. So you canceled it because of the price. Ok…
I’ve been wanting eye tracking for a long time not for any of the reasons mentioned here, but rather because it can enable very lifelike simulations of various magical/psychic abilities. I’ve always been very passionate about that kind of thing; it’s the kind of experience I long for. And if a headset can detect what I’m looking at, then it can tell with high certainty exactly which in-game object I’m focusing on. So I’d be able to, say, look at something, then do a gesture or something, and it’ll just know what object I want to target, as if it could read my mind.
The main thing that pushed me to buy a Meta Quest Pro was Waltz of the Wizard’s mixed reality sandbox, though of course I’m excited to experiment with mixed reality in other ways too. While I haven’t tried a mixed reality headset yet, I feel like being able to see these fantastic things in the same physical space I’m used to living in, where I can actually touch a lot of what I see (even if not the fantastic stuff) would really make it feel more real to me. That’s what I’m passionate about, and having a headset that I can put on whenever I feel like it to enhance my experience of my surroundings in that manner sounds insanely awesome, and totally worth the $1,500 price tag to me. (Thankfully I can afford it–wish everyone could.)
I agree with you entirely.
I have never had to meet someone in VR exclusively for any particular reasons. I am sure there are some practical uses for this such as viewing a 3d model or sightseeing. But it all boils down into the software.
Quest 2 is a wonderful device. Not perfect. But the imperfections arise from the software and mostly the lack of good software and apps. That’s where suckerberg should focus his money on. Build fun games and useful software for the quest 2. Which will become the quest 3. That is the sole reason why people would spend money to jump on the VR wagon. I will wait too.
Psvr2 have all the features & even way more better lenses & field of view & expects to be price for 500$ now I understand that this pro is designed for business but this is useless because a company does not enforce which customer use its hardware ! The customer is the one who decides, if my company decided to use quest 2 in its workspace should I go and tell them now because Meta believes its a gaming only device 😂
Unless you are a developer, or a business user who can write it off,
Waiting a year for Quest 3 is a good strategy.
For $1500 you could buyca PS5, PSVR2 and a 55″ TV
Why do you even want a Quest 3? Quest 3 will not be much more powerful than Quest 2. If it is cheap, it will be cutting as many corners as Quest 2. I fyou only want to play games, a ps5 + a psvr 2 will be much better.
I own a Oculus Rift S and an Quest 2. The Rift S is connected to a very high end laptop and performs great, even with taxing games like Half-Life Alyx. Being a techie I first thought this would be a replacement and upgrade to the Rift S, which it may be. But it seems to be targeting the corporate market which is not something I’m looking for.
As the article states, you will need to have other Quest Pro users to take advantage of the cooperation features and frankly many of the new features. While I do think there are some companies that would find this useful…aerospace comes to mind, I don’t see widespread use or coming to my industry. I would also say that having been involved in VR and AR for some time (early Google Glass user), the hardware is dependent on the execution of software which honestly has been lacking. Even Meta’s own foray into VR software has been underwhelming.
For these reasons and the ones the author mentioned, this is a hard no for me at this time.
I highly recommend Quest Pro. Unjust title for an article…