The most recent VR controversy shows how deeply entrenched we are in our niche
Meta now uses MR to mean both MR and VR, and this has caused some controversy in the community. But does it really matter in the long run?
What happened?
A few weeks ago, an internal Meta memo was leaked. It was written by the head of Reality Labs, Andrew Bosworth and was addressed to the department's employees. It stated, that Reality Labs "needs to drive sales, retention, and engagement across the board but especially in MR".
Former Oculus CTO John Carmack responded to the reports on X and asked Bosworth why he was referring to MR specifically? He replied and explained that the term MR for Meta now covers both VR and MR.
UploadVR addressed the terminology shift in an article, expressing concern that the change in terminology could lead to confusion among developers and customers.
Adding fuel to the fire
This week, Bosworth weighed in on the controversy in an Instagram AMA, explaining why Meta uses the term MR more often than VR and subsumes VR under it.
When asked why Meta no longer uses the term VR, Bosworth said:
"We do when it's appropriate. This is going to be one of the most absolutely manufactured controversies of all times, just a total fabrication of the community out of nothingness.
We use the term mixed reality more often in public and internally because there was some confusion in the marketplace. Since Apple leaned so hard into marketing mixed reality features for the Apple Vision Pro, we wanted to make sure people were aware that Quest 3 in particular was as good, or in my opinion, better, than what they get elsewhere. We found out through market research, which we do, that was a key thing.
So often, this community is so crazy. Listen, if you're watching this, you're in, I don't need to talk to you. I'm trying to get more people in, you know that, right? Most people we're marketing to, they're not you, they're not following my AMAs, they're the people who have currently chosen not to buy in, and we'd like them to, and I figure out how to help them do that.
God, you all need to move on!"
Bosworth's statement didn't have the effect he hoped for, and it turned the VR community on X even more against the idea. The CTO responded to the concerns in a dozen posts, but the damage had already been done.
A tempest in a teapot
I can see Bosworth's point. This is not about giving up on virtual reality or denying its existence and value. It's about marketing and trying to get people interested in the technology who aren't users yet and would just shake their heads at our bickering over terminology.
We enthusiasts can distinguish the nuances, we know what VR and MR are, but the rest don't care. This is my experience from numerous conversations with people who know little or nothing about the technology.
To me, this controversy shows how deeply we're still stuck in our niche thinking, and I feel that virtual reality, mixed reality, spatial computing, or whatever you want to call it, will only be truly mainstream when we no longer feel the need to argue about what it should be called.
The last ten years have shown that the terminology is constantly changing, and it will continue to change as the technological possibilities open up
What is your opinion on this? Join the conversation on Facebook, Bluesky or X or share your opinion in the comments below.
For feedback, topic suggestions, or other ideas, please email us at hello@mixed-news.com.
Note: Links to online stores in articles can be so-called affiliate links. If you buy through this link, MIXED receives a commission from the provider. For you the price does not change.
