Comparing Sammy XR
Yesterday Samsung Electronics (005930.KS) released its long-awaited Galaxy XR headset. Aside from the hardware and software features, the key point of focus for this device is the cost, which at $1,800 is half that of Apple’s (AAPL) Vision Pro and a bit above Meta’s (FB) Quest Pro, which was released at $1.500 (Now available for $999) and the Meta Quest 3s, a lower priced version released as an alternative to the Meta Quest Pro in 2024. As the Samsung device has just been announced and will not be delivered until October 31 at the earliest, we have limited our comparison to hardware and software, leaving user input for a later comparison.
We compare these four XR devices to help investors and users understand the feature/cost ratio, essentially what you get for your money and how the feature set compares with others.
We compare these four XR devices to help investors and users understand the feature/cost ratio, essentially what you get for your money and how the feature set compares with others.
A note on controllers… Price tiers help to determine how these devices arecontrolled. Less expensive headsets, such as the Meta 3s, are driven by hand-held controllers (Meta’s are called ‘Touch Plus’) that contain gyros, accelerometers, triggers, buttons, and haptic feedback. Aside from the sensors in the controllers, the headset’s hand tracking cameras continually map the free space location of the controllers to the headset image giving what is called 6 degrees of freedom (6DoF). As this was the traditional way to control VR headsets it remains available in most cases, but the trend is toward eye tracking and gesture based systems, along with voice commands. The Meta headsets we show both use handheld controllers that are included with the initial purchase and the Samsung Galaxy XR offers them as an optional ad-on. The Vision Pro does not offer controllers. As the move away from hand-held controllers continues, the importance of the resolution of the hand tracking cameras becomes more important to register fine movements.
While hardware tends to be the topic most written about for headsets, software and applications are really the driver for consumers. The holy grail for XR headsets is to be able to use the virtual experience as a ‘theater’ when watching videos or movies, using the device as a window into highly realistic gaming, and to replace multi-screen desktop monitors with an ultra-large virtual desktop. Some of these functions are part of the OS and some are application based, but the ease with which the user is able to achieve the three major functions are the determinant for success currently. AI adds a bit of complexity to the mix (mostly at the developer level) but can simplify use by performing some of the functions that might have been done by the user, but again, we are at the very early stages of Ai integration.
While hardware tends to be the topic most written about for headsets, software and applications are really the driver for consumers. The holy grail for XR headsets is to be able to use the virtual experience as a ‘theater’ when watching videos or movies, using the device as a window into highly realistic gaming, and to replace multi-screen desktop monitors with an ultra-large virtual desktop. Some of these functions are part of the OS and some are application based, but the ease with which the user is able to achieve the three major functions are the determinant for success currently. AI adds a bit of complexity to the mix (mostly at the developer level) but can simplify use by performing some of the functions that might have been done by the user, but again, we are at the very early stages of Ai integration.
NOTE: Our web software does not handle large table well. In orer to post the table above and the table below, we had to repeat some sections. Our apologies...
RSS Feed