this post was submitted on 04 Aug 2024
56 points (93.8% liked)
Virtual Reality
1954 readers
5 users here now
Virtual Reality - Quest, PCVR, PSVR2, Pico, Mixed Reality, ect. Open discussion of all VR platforms, games, and apps.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Many people do care about choice and only buy something that isn't controlled by a single vendor.
But sure, if you can build a positive brand image, some people will overlook this despite the obvious shortcomings, but Facebook is so widely hated that this is a bad strategy for them.
What fer0n probably was hinting at (and I agree with): Yeah, there are some people, especially concentrated in bubbles like Lemmy, who care a lot about privacy, security, ownership (soft and hard) and all that good stuff.
But if, for example, Meta releases a product for price x and a privacy-conscious company releases functionally the same product, but with a truly open system, for 200 bucks more, most people outside our bubble (and even a lot inside) will buy the Meta product.
Why?
Because they don't care about anything but short-term functionality. And, in a lof of minds, if they'll get the same functionality for cheaper elsewhere, they'd be pretty stupid to not buy that one.
Folks in general couldn't give less of a fuck about their privacy and ethics in products and services they buy and use. Usability, Features and Service reign supreme.
That's an counterfactual argument, because there is a third option: not buy at all, which is what people are doing.
And it's largely because Facebook, even outside of Lemmy circles. Heck, the sale of the original Quest was even forbidden for quite some time in large parts of Europe because of shady business practiceses of Facebook. This is not a privacy bubble fringe problem, at least not in Europe.