It's Not About Looking Good in XR, or Good-Looking XR That Is the Problem

I found it funny a few days ago when I responded to a post about Snap's new MR/AR glasses. I wrote that it's too early to combine "looking good in XR" with "good-looking XR." And I stand by that. For me, it's not one of the keys to success.

Of course, it will be amazing to see our VHS tapes shrink and become more stylish over time. But the technology to create real value, unique solutions to existing problems, and new applications is already there—it’s good enough, even though it can always improve.

For example, I see much bigger issues with companies that largely view XR as a somewhat gimmicky internal tool, instead of the powerful, global, highly external tool that I primarily see it as. To get there, many pieces need to fall into place, and I sincerely hope that something as superficial as looking good while using it is not the major limitation here..

Personally, I got much more excited about Meta finally giving us access to the video feed! And making their own version of Varjo's teleportation, which I’ve been drooling over for a while but held back on due to its high cost and lack of flexibility. The whole idea of having to go to a specific location, as with all PC VR, only to then teleport to another digital place has always felt a bit backwards to me... But I still have to give Varjo credit—it looks fantastic, and I’m really excited to test Meta’s standalone version.