
Oculus CEO says selling to Facebook convinced big developers to build for it - briankim
http://techcrunch.com/2014/05/05/facebook-acqusition-helped-oculus/
======
dkarapetyan
Yes, a big corporation with big pockets means more money and stability but it
comes at a cost. The cost being whatever you do must at the end of the day
feed back into the pockets of your parent company. Twitter used to be a
platform too but how many third party applications do you see now? A lot less
than what it used to be. What do you think will happen to Oculus applications?
Those that are sanctioned by Facebook will thrive and those that aren't will
be brutally shut down.

At the end of the day this isn't good or bad. It is really more about long
term disruptive technology and its viability outside giant dens like Facebook
and Google. Looking around I don't see an ecosystem that can support such
things without giant corporate backers and that is definitely not a good thing
because at the end of the day the values of our corporate overlords tend to be
slightly misaligned with that of the individual.

~~~
rtpg
>What do you think will happen to Oculus applications? Those that are
sanctioned by Facebook will thrive and those that aren't will be brutally shut
down.

Does Facebook have a history of doing this? Instagram is still completely
seperated (there's fb integration but twitter is the one that broke instagram
integration, not the other way around).

Not even mentioning the fact that the Oculus is not a SaaS, it's a screen. How
is Facebook going to "shut down" calls to a device driver (if it's even that)?
Why would they do that?

People here seem to think that Facebook the company can only consist in
Facebook the website, but they have a lot of money to invest in other things.

~~~
dkarapetyan
That's not sustainable. Facebook is not buying these companies because they
are adhering to some kind of moral code. Facebook is a corporation like any
other that needs to justify things to investors and analysts. That's the model
as far as I know. So if they're pouring money into Oculus and its ecosystem
then surely they expect to get something out of it. Ultimately they control
the technology and as a profit driven corporation they are going to drive the
technology in the direction of profits. They are not going to drive it in the
direction of sustainability. Facebook is not in this to break even and they
are not going to subsidize more benevolent but unprofitable uses of the
technologies they acquire.

Like I said in my original comment. I don't think this is a good or bad thing.
My philosophical stance on technology is different and I'd much rather see a
sustainable ecosystem of technologists that are not always driven by profits
and quick payoffs from acquisitions.

~~~
ajcarpy2005
Startups need to be profitable too.

~~~
dkarapetyan
I don't think that's true. Sustainability makes for a better ecosystem. If
you're driving towards breaking even and delivering value instead of
profitability then it's a different kind of mentality. It's just that it's not
the current status quo.

------
DerpDerpDerp
I mean, I hope things go well for them and their partnership brings nothing
but good things. From what I've seen, they've put a lot of work in to their
device and made significant gains.

But Facebook doesn't and won't have a device in my life, and I refuse to buy
an Occulus product because I don't believe that Facebook won't get access to
usage data (or be involved as a platform middleman).

~~~
gjjhjjjhhh
Oculus complete source code is available. That still doesn't guarantee their
transparency; I'm certain when the next version( when under Facebook ) is
released it won't have any facebook integration, and its protocols will be
checked and revealed by the community anyway.

~~~
selmnoo
> I'm certain when the next version( when under Facebook ) is released it
> won't have any facebook integration, and its protocols will be checked and
> revealed by the community anyway.

That doesn't necessarily mean anything. Lots of hip tech companies open source
a lot of things, that doesn't make their rent-seeking, dark-patterned, scammy
operations any better for the end consumer.

Facebook is one of those companies who's done so much public bad that I
personally can never forgive them - it doesn't matter if they open source
Oculus code, I just simply will not participate in anything that will make
Facebook richer.

~~~
gjjhjjjhhh
Can you give a couple of argumentative examples of their "public bad" actions?
Maybe something else that dark design patters, which aren't exclusively
limited to facebook. I'm honestly unfamiliar with their other nefarious
behaviour, but I would love to know more about that.

~~~
selmnoo
I've talked about this before -- one of the reasons is how it helped in
changing sharing culture w.r.t. privacy. One example:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6530166](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=6530166)

~~~
gjjhjjjhhh
How is it Facebook's fault that your friends are posting pictures of you
online?

------
netcraft
So IMO that interviewer was terrible. Iribe gave mostly good answers despite
the questions - but did anyone actually think that FB was going to put their
messenger in the oculus?

It is also telling to me that when they talked about the emotions that you
could evoke with VR vs a 2D screen that most of them were negative.

We have a couple of the DK1's and we really had a lot of hope for the tech -
but I remain unconvinced that this acquisition will be a good thing in the
long run. I also didn't like how he talked about the kickstarter campaign
being the first to prove that the crowdfunding model could be used to create a
billion dollar company - I believe if you went back and asked most of the
initial investors in the kickstarter I don't think that was something they
were hoping for.

------
cyborgx7
So he prefers rapid growth, with the risk of the whole thing becomming a
bubble instead of the stability that results from a slow build of users and
developer support? That doesn't put a lot of confidence in me either.

~~~
michaelt
If you launch too gently, there's a risk no customer will buy it because no
developer supports it, and no developer will support it because no customer
will buy it.

That said, I got the impression things were going pretty well for Oculus
without Facebook's help.

~~~
caust1c
I respect your business perspective about slow growth early on, but.. It's
fucking virtual reality! I don't think there's any doubt that developers would
be flocking to this with or without the acquisition.

------
bobbles
I was one of the people disappointed with the acquisition.. but to be honest
as long as they put out a decent bit of kit and I actually get to experience
VR the way they're demoing it I'll be one happy dude

~~~
rhizome
Looking forward to the Facebook App Store launch. What do you think its name
will be?

~~~
boomzilla
Facebook Virtual Reality Platform with Realtime Social Communication for
Facebook Certified Users (TM)

~~~
tormeh
Nono, this isn't Microsoft. It'll be something like Facebook Matrix Feed.

~~~
swasheck
If it was Microsoft, it'd have to go through multiple rebrands before landing
on something like Oculus 3.

~~~
DougWebb
Oculus 2014, which would be released beta-quality in 2015 and usable-quality
in 2016 as Oculus 2014 SP1.

------
mikeryan
FFS Selling to Valve would have convinced developers to build for it too.

~~~
acgourley
Serious question - could Valve buy a company of more than a few people? Their
company structure depends on having certain types of employees who are local
in bellevue. I would also speculate those employees need to be added in a
steady drip and not a huge rush. Maybe you're thinking 'What if they left
Occulus alone and in LA?' \- well... who would manage them from Valve's end? A
self organizing committee?

~~~
CamperBob2
Valve could buy the Vatican if they wanted.

~~~
joeevans1000
Now that's an interesting mashup.

------
rhizome
Was there ever any indication that big developers were holding fire? As far as
I'm aware, there wasn't time to even know how the market and developer support
was shaking out.

------
joeevans1000
I like how the only way to comment on this article is by your Facebook
account.

Now, reporters will look at the comments by FB predisposed people and assume
there is now acceptance.

------
netcraft
Off topic, but the scroll down to be slammed into a full screen slide show is
quite disorienting.

------
joeevans1000
Not me.

Oh, right, but I'm just a small developer.

------
general_failure
I am surprised nobody has pointed out the typo in the title

------
rhizome
...or however you spell it.

------
bluthru
A blazer over a hoodie over a dress shirt?

Apparently I don't have enough money to pull that off.

------
alecco
No sign of remorse. Screw the community that took him there. Get Facebook's
billions under the excuse to get major game studios behind the platform. Huge
blow to future crowdfunding. Lovely guy.

------
outside1234
I thought this was going to be a story about Zuck being totally wasted, doing
lines of blow, and then suddenly shouting to Occulus: "I'll buy it for $2B!"

That would have made it make more sense at least.

