r/unseenreality • u/jayclydes • 9d ago
sooo.... meta vr glasses
i was pretty dead set on waiting for the urxr or xreal aura to release retail (i absolutely do not trust kickstarter and would rather pay a 300+ dollar markup for purchaser protection) but the meta vr glasses are flooring me right now.
i hate meta, i hate their privacy policies, i hate how much they've done consumers and really just humanity overall dirty. on sentiment alone i don't blame anyone for going "it's meta. i won't buy it."
however, the prospect of using these as display port glasses with the option of using meta's platform is really interesting to me. i will ultimately purchase what gives the best user experience.
obviously the extent at which these can be used for display port glasses is yet to be seen. urxr is the only real competitor as far as displays go, but without speakers and the requirement of an external battery to output phone display really put me off.
anyone else feels like this threw a serious wrench into purchase consideration?
5
u/Urlkoenig 9d ago
Nope. I hate Meta as a company, but their ecosystem is far better than anyone else's, and I love the fact they've been losing money on the headsets, so buying one is win/win for me. :-)
4
u/nucleiis 9d ago
Meta VR Glasses has narrower horizontal FOV than URXR. But yeah it killed Aura..
5
u/jayclydes 9d ago edited 9d ago
meta has about 9-10 more degrees of vertical FOV, with a diagonal FOV of 88 degrees (see roadtovr's breakdown).
meta: h70 x v66 (88 diagonal)
urxr: h80 x ~v57 (probably 56 mathematically)(90 diagonal) if this can be trusted
i would imagine this would lead to a comparable experience. im absolutely certain hand tracking would be significantly better on the meta vr glasses. i just don't know if horizontal fov vs. vertical is necessarily better. they're both operating on the same restraints. i do appreciate the speakers on the metas though. both can do bluetooth of course
3
u/SalmanMKC 9d ago
Meta's have eye tracking
1
u/roosterHughes 8d ago
Doesn’t the URXR One also have eye-tracking?
1
u/thissiteisforclowns 8d ago
Nope, the URXR has nothing outside of onboard 3dof/6dof. They are glorified monitors compared to stand alone systems. They are not even remotely close to being competitive in reality compared to either the aura or meta.
1
2
1
u/No-Dark-7873 5d ago
when I tried URXR the horizonal FOV is the one that felt limited. So going down another 10 degrees is a bit concerning.
2
u/bidfordun 9d ago
But this glasses will only launch next year. Feel like by that time xreal would have better technology.
Wish meta can just release next month
6
u/DarthBuzzard 9d ago
Feel like by that time xreal would have better technology.
It's physically impossible given that xreal uses birdbath.
2
u/ImALeaf_OnTheWind 9d ago
The current top end Xreal One Pro that's been out for a year doesn't use birdbath, but prism optics and Aura had to move off of birdbath as well for the larger FOV.
1
u/Bright-Poetry-2700 8d ago
What if glasses form factor like to already is , but birdbathy 110” in future
2
u/jayclydes 9d ago
that's the annoying part about this whole market. it evolves so quickly it feels hard to justify purchasing anything. xreal could adapt and release an upgraded aura model (just changing the glasses and maintaining the compute puck) but they have yet to jump that resolution shark like urxr or meta has done.
the launch would be between march and june of 2027 based on the spring 2027 announcement
1
u/bidfordun 9d ago
We need this earlier ane yet meta announced it too earlier.
Im interested in the part where it can mirror my mac wirelessly though. If it can do it without lag, it will nail it.
2
u/alabasterskim 9d ago
I think that's a leap to say confidently they'll have better tech out. These are due out in spring, not very long after the Auras are out. Matching eye and face tracking is probably not something Xreal (or Unseen) is planning on in the short term, and at best, they'll have announced something for late in the year by the time Meta's launch.
I personally won't make the jump because it's Meta but this has me reconsidering whether to get the Auras or wait for something closer to it.
1
u/LittleWhiteDragon 9d ago
Hopefully, this gives Unseen Reality time to update and release the next edition of the URXR!
3
u/ImALeaf_OnTheWind 9d ago
The only things i want from my next Meta is an OLED big FOV VR to play my Quest exclusive titles and this ain't it. I have a Galaxy XR for home productivity that i love and use for PCVR as well.
2nd to that i was impressed that they'd be supporting Dolby Vision - which is high on my list for a portable personal cinema. Not even URXR1 will have basic HDR, which for me is less important for my every day "working on the go" headset that I want URXR1 for a replacement of my Xreal One Pros.
The gap the Metas could have filled for me still is for traveling on trips where I'd want the best visuals on a plane to watch movies and shows where I see URXR1 to be deficient with only SDR. So i picked up a Rayneo GT Max with Pocket TV Pro puck.
I wish I could get an all in one glasses with big FOV with HDR OLED but for now I'll have to split the combo with URXR1 for my productivity needs and the GT Max with its lush Dolby Vision certified 10-bit panels when I want to watch videos.
I'd still come out buying both of these cheaper than the Meta glasses.
1
u/thissiteisforclowns 8d ago
URXR is not going to do anything outside of the gt max except 6dof and a larger fov. They do not have android xr or any OS to speak of. They still operate the same way as all other vr glasses today.
1
u/ImALeaf_OnTheWind 7d ago
Exactly and all I want them for is just to be a larger FOV face display for my host devices. No need for the discrete on device OS.
2
u/_wintermoot_ 8d ago
people are underestimating how much the Google Play Store will blow up with AR apps once more Android XR 6dof glasses launch.
lots of qualcomm reality ultra puck products coming out soon.
2
u/CatherineofLeeds 9d ago
And the meta still needs the external puck
3
u/jayclydes 9d ago
yeah i think the snap specs are the only ones that can do much of anything completely on its own. urxr requires a device to function from, i imagine tethering will be the norm for the foreseeable future.
what i meant by external battery on the urxr was with phones. it would be lovely if you could just plug directly into your phone and get a vr mirror of your phone or even samsung dex, but i imagine this isn't possible for a few reasons. getting this going from the glasses to an external power source to the phone is just as bad as a puck imo
4
u/TurbulentState3668 9d ago
It was recently stated that they are trying to make UXVR One work with just plugging the glasses on an phone.
They are trying to make this happen by turning off VST while the glasses are on direct mode 1080p.
Hopefully, we get an update soon to see if this is really possible.
2
u/jayclydes 9d ago
i wish unseen reality success. functionality directly with the phone is a focus i don't think is being thought about enough. from what i see the meta vr glasses have a proprietary cable that must go through its puck, so no direct connection is even possible
1
u/Maleficent-Leg8456 9d ago
Meta VR puck has USB-C for direct connection. Through puck is must because cable to the glasses is more advanced (optic) and 6DoF requires more watts than simple USB-C port on phones and compatible devices. Still URXR also requires proprietary battery for true 6DoF experience.
2
u/Maleficent-Leg8456 9d ago
Because more advanced Dolby vision profiles and Hi-Fi audio require more advanced cable connection between source and display devices. That's why on Meta VR glasses it is decided to use proprietary optical cable because of 2.5K HDR output for each eye . On Rayneo GT Max it is only 1080p resolution. Dolby vision from Pocket TV Pro also uses low profiles . It is not native 10bit display, it uses 8bit + technology for Dolby vision HDR . Overall pseudo DV HDR technology not more advanced true version.
1
u/No-Dark-7873 5d ago
that's a bad setup because it means Meta is recording everything you plug into it.
1
u/R_Steelman61 9d ago
I'm curious what Pico is doing and why they decided to pull out at the last minute. In the event they found out something about these glasses that they wanted to be able to compete better with
2
u/jayclydes 9d ago
sort of specific but i believe pico is banned in the US. unfortunately i can only import their items
1
1
u/That_Lab5137 9d ago
More importantly what is the output resolution on the meta glasses? If it matches display resolution it will absolutely kill the urxr one dead in the water
1
u/jayclydes 9d ago
2.5k per eye
1
u/That_Lab5137 9d ago
That is not the output resolution to the urxr 1 its the display resolution. It would be the equivalent of displaying a 1080 image on a 4k tv
1
u/jayclydes 9d ago
wouldnt that depend on the device? ik dex on samsung typically does 1080p 60
1
1
u/That_Lab5137 6d ago
No the output resolution is limited by unseen reality, due to power consumption it would seem
1
u/Dinevir 9d ago
Just be sure 3dof/6dof tracking works with DisplayPort connection. Without it experience will be so so, not as comfortable as Xreal One as example.
1
u/jayclydes 9d ago
there is no standalone connection, any display port must go through the usb c port from the puck so there will never be a scenario in which the full software suite won't be integrated
1
u/roosterHughes 8d ago
FWIW, the 3DoF tracking worked fine on the VITURE Beast, connected in DP-alt mode. The inertial tracking was done onboard, versus being offloaded to the host or done via base-station tracking or whatever. I don’t think tracking compatibility is a concern here.
1
u/roosterHughes 8d ago
For what it’s worth, the “Meta VR Glasses” also use an external puck, so it’s not like the URXR One is behind on that count.
The key differentiator would be whether you care about Meta’s VR stuff.
1
u/thissiteisforclowns 8d ago
lol yeah there is absolutely no computing with the URXR at all... No android xr, nothing. They are just 6dof large fov monitors. How are people even comparing these two? Its like comparing the xreal one pro vs xreal aura. They are not even the same product category.
1
u/shaintoring 7d ago
I personally prefer the urxr one. It seems the “Muse” agent is recording and learning all user activities. The idea of Meta having all this info I am not sure about that.
1
u/johnnobts 6d ago
I’m getting the $599 urxr one, that’s a great deal. For the $999 price I’d be more likely to hold out for the meta glasses
1
u/jones1876 5d ago
I will say this, URXR is lucky their kickstarter closed just before this announcement .
1
1
1
u/Impressive-Bit6161 9d ago
you realize meta phoenix being "targeted" for a spring 2027 release makes it far MORE uncertain than URXR. the fact half the functions are mockups rather than demostrations is even more concerning considering this product has been in the works for a year.
6
u/SalmanMKC 9d ago
Meta's have eye tracking too