Meta has openly expressed its ambition to become “the Android of XR.” Intriguingly, Android XR aims for the same pinnacle.
When you look beyond the specs and features, there’s a crucial element that might dictate Meta’s success against heavyweights like Google and Apple in the XR domain—flat apps.
Now, flat apps such as Spotify, TikTok, Snapchat, and Discord might not scream innovation when it comes to headset use, but the Vision Pro has demonstrated the immense value in integrating these beloved apps into the XR space. It enriches the experience without completely detaching users from these familiar platforms. Following suit, Android XR is breaking ground by supporting all existing Android apps found in the Play Store.
While Meta’s devices shine brightly in the gaming sector, let’s not forget that XR’s promise stretches far beyond just games.
Think about it: a gaming-only company like Nintendo, no matter its prowess, will never match the scale of Microsoft—a titan that offers a comprehensive computing environment. Look at their market valuations; it’s staggering. Microsoft dwarfs Nintendo by about 43 times. While this isn’t a perfect apples-to-apples comparison since Microsoft’s ventures extend well beyond computing platforms, the point stands clear.
Let’s put it this way: with Meta and Google, you’ve got two different XR ecosystems:
1. Meta’s Horizon OS features the most expansive and best immersive apps lineup.
2. Google’s Android XR boasts the top collection of flat apps.
To conquer the XR space, each needs what the other possesses. So, who’s got a steeper hill to climb?
It looks like Meta’s journey is the trickier one.
Immersive software creators are constantly chasing expansion. For a successful game capable of pulling in an extra 25% user base by becoming compatible with Android XR, the choice is clear as day. On the other hand, for giant flat apps like Spotify or Snapchat, transitioning to Horizon OS might barely nudge their user count—maybe a mere 0.25% increase at best compared to their reach on the entire Android platform.
You might argue, “Horizon OS is built on Android, so migrating apps should be a breeze!” Sure, the technical transfer is manageable. However, for colossal apps with extensive user bases, the true challenge is the ongoing maintenance and support, which demands significant resources and commitment.
Consequently, Google is strategically positioned to draw leading immersive apps into the fold of Android XR, more so than Meta’s ability to lure essential flat apps to Horizon OS. Without a substantial variety of flat apps, Meta’s headsets might end up being pigeonholed as mere immersive gaming consoles instead of versatile computing devices.
And being boxed into that niche is exactly what Meta intends to avoid. Meta’s very entry into XR about a decade ago was driven by the aim to steer XR towards becoming “the next computing platform,” before tech giants like Apple or Google swooped in.
Even if flat apps aren’t, in your opinion, a critical part of the XR puzzle, it’s undeniable that a platform boasting both essential flat and immersive apps will outperform one that lacks in either category.
Suppose Meta builds superior hardware: consistently crafting headsets that are 20% more efficient, lighter, and cheaper than their Android XR counterparts. Even then, it’s unlikely to outweigh the impact of whether they house core flat apps on their platform.
This presents a profound existential challenge for Meta’s aspirations in XR—a challenge without any straightforward solutions.
