Time Magazine’s Top Inventions of the Year

Every year, Time Magazine releases a list of the top 200 inventions from the past 12 months. It’s a daunting task for the editors to choose from the thousands of new technologies and products that emerge every year. But what’s the secret behind their selection process? As it turns out, truly groundbreaking and game-changing inventions are few and far between.

The job of a tech editor is not always glamorous. In reality, discovering true innovations is a rare occurrence, happening only once every few years, if we’re lucky. But when it does, it’s a truly exciting experience.

The Rise of Oculus Rift

One such device that caught the attention of editors over a decade ago was the prototype for the Oculus Rift. At first glance, it resembled a hastily-put-together ski mask. But it was a remarkable presentation, offering a glimpse into the entrepreneurial spirit of the tech world. It was a reminder of the days of the Homebrew Computer Club, where nerds gathered in garages to create something revolutionary.

Fast forward to the present, and it has been a decade since Facebook acquired the startup for a whopping $2 billion. But despite the big deal, the virtual reality headset has not quite changed the way we live. But is it fair to deem it a complete failure? Let’s take a look at where the Facebook/Oculus deal stands today, in April 2024.

“Immersive gaming will be the first, and Oculus already has big plans here that won’t be changing and we hope to accelerate,” wrote Mark Zuckerberg at the time of the acquisition. “After games, we’re going to make Oculus a platform for many other experiences. Imagine enjoying a court side seat at a game, studying in a classroom of students and teachers all over the world or consulting with a doctor face-to-face – just by putting on goggles in your home.”

According to Facebook’s founder, the Oculus Rift was not just a gaming device but a “new communication platform,” comparable to computers and smartphones. It was the realization of a sci-fi dream, and Facebook had grabbed it by the reins. The possibilities were endless, and the potential impact on the world seemed immeasurable – it was the gateway to the metaverse.

The Metaverse and Facebook’s Grand Vision

As if to hammer home its commitment to the concept of the metaverse, Facebook rebranded itself as “Meta,” effectively killing off the Oculus brand on the same day. The social media giant had its sights set on something far bigger. After all, could the dominance of social media platforms last forever? Surely, there would come a day when something completely new and innovative would emerge.

In spite of the $500 billion rebrand, there was one problem – Meta failed to clearly define what the metaverse was. It simply insisted that it was the next big thing, that people should be excited about it, without much explanation. This lack of definition resulted in most people associating the metaverse with platforms like Second Life and Homebrew Computer Club – a far cry from the reality of what Meta had in mind for the metaverse.

If we were to conduct a poll today, the majority of people would likely describe the metaverse as something like Second Life, which has gone through multiple iterations and is now on its fifth or sixth life. And yet, Marc Zuckerberg holds a significant portion of the blame for perpetuating this perception.

Zuckerberg worked tirelessly to make the company’s Horizon Worlds platform synonymous with the metaverse. Recall how much buzz it generated when it finally took off?

So where are we now, in April 2024? The answer is far from straightforward. From a financial standpoint, it’s a rocky road for Meta’s metaverse division, with a loss of over $42 billion between 2020 and the first quarter of 2024. To put that into perspective, that’s more than twenty times the price Facebook paid for Oculus a decade ago. It’s quite a significant chunk of change – roughly one-fourth of Mark Zuckerberg’s current net worth (not accounting for inflation).

The Long Game

Why is Meta willing to hemorrhage billions of dollars for its metaverse division? The simple and cynical answer is, because it can. After all, Facebook’s revenue in 2023 was a whopping $134 billion, with a net income of $39.1 billion. Losing $42 billion may seem like a huge loss, but for Facebook, it’s a drop in the bucket.

But there’s more to it than just sheer financial power. Meta has a long-term strategy in mind. It’s widely believed that the company sells its Quest headsets at a loss, despite having the best manufacturing scale in the industry. This may seem like a terrible short-term strategy, but Meta is playing the long game. The ultimate goal is to get enough headsets into people’s hands to reach a critical mass of adoption, word of mouth, and developer content. And if that means losing money in the short term, then so be it – it’s an investment in the future.

It’s a massive and risky bet, but one that Meta is willing to take. How long they will play this long game largely depends on the patience of their shareholders. But if they are successful in saturating the market and cornering the content, they will be in a prime position to capitalize on the exponential growth of mixed reality.

And so far, they are off to a good start. Meta’s dominance has edged out the competition and sucked the air out of the room. As an HTC Vive executive once said, “I think Meta has adjusted the market perception of what this technology should cost.” Smaller companies simply cannot compete on price and content in the consumer market, so many have turned to the enterprise sector, where clients have deeper pockets to support their expensive products.

In terms of market share, Meta has reached unprecedented levels of success. As per IDC’s report, Meta held over 50% of the market share as of the second quarter of 2023. Of course, we’re not talking about smartphone numbers here. As of early 2023, Meta had sold an estimated 20 million headsets. And by the end of that year, the Quest 2 was still outselling the Quest 3. One aspect of Meta’s thesis has undoubtedly played out – people are looking for an affordable way to experience this groundbreaking technology.

The Arrival of Apple’s Vision Pro

But the mixed reality market may be in for a dramatic shift, as tech giant Apple enters the scene with its Vision Pro headset. Upon its announcement, I received a flood of comments from VR headset manufacturers, all stating that they saw Apple’s entry as validation for the industry. Of course, this is a common sentiment whenever Apple enters a market, and many companies do not make it out in one piece.

But in the case of Meta, it is undoubtedly validation. Zuckerberg himself used this opportunity to point out the significant differences between Facebook’s headsets and Apple’s Vision Pro, primarily in terms of price – Meta’s headsets are significantly less expensive and do not require an additional external battery. Additionally, Meta has a massive head start in terms of VR-specific content.

“It seems like there are a lot of people who just assumed that Vision Pro would be higher quality because it’s Apple and it costs $3,000 more,” Zuckerberg stated back in February. “But honestly, I’m pretty surprised that Quest is so much better for the vast majority of things that people use these headsets for, with that price differential.”

While Zuckerberg may argue that Facebook’s headsets are superior, the truth is that the Vision Pro is a more impressive piece of technology. Whether it justifies the $3,000 price difference is up for debate. What is certain, though, is that these products fall into two different categories – Apple is targeting business customers at that price point, while Meta is focused on democratizing access to VR by selling their headsets at a loss.

The Future of Mixed Reality

It’s still early days for Vision Pro and mixed reality in general. And if it ever does become a ubiquitous technology, it will be the result of countless hard-fought battles. As we mark a decade since Facebook’s acquisition of Oculus, I find myself returning to Zuckerberg’s statement about the possibilities that VR can bring – imagining enjoying a courtside seat at a game, studying with students and teachers from around the world, or consulting with a doctor face-to-face by simply putting on a headset in your own home.

But as we look back from 2024, it’s clear that while Zuckerberg was right about the content, the way we interact with each other and the world has been transformed in ways we couldn’t have predicted. And surprisingly, the COVID-19 pandemic played a significant role in destigmatizing virtual activities. But for now, headsets are not a requirement for these virtual interactions. Who knows what the next decade will bring for mixed reality and the metaverse?