Pixelated - Is Android XR a Vision Into the future?

Episode Date: October 24, 2025

Welcome to episode 75 of Pixelated, a podcast by 9to5Google. This week, we dive into the long-awaited launch of Galaxy XR, the realized name for Project Moohan and our first glimpse at a real Android XR product. But what spot can Google and Samsung claim in a market that hasn't shown much demand yet for premium hardware? And is the future of Android XR other third-party headsets, or is this a stopgap on the way to glasses? Abner, Damien, and Will try to make sense for this vision of wearable computing. Subscribe YouTube Podcasts Pocket Casts Spotify Apple Podcasts Overcast Hosts Abner Li Damien Wilde Will Sattelberg Read more Samsung’s Galaxy XR is the first Android XR headset, available now for $1,799 Samsung’s Galaxy XR case and controllers are $250 each – yes, each Comment: Galaxy XR is a needed step, but feels dead on arrival [Video] Samsung teases Android XR glasses with new partnerships Listen to more 9to5 Podcasts The Sideload 9to5Mac Happy Hour Electrek Space Explored Feedback? Drop us a line at [e-mail], leave a comment on the post, or reach out to our producer.

Welcome to Pixelated episode 75. I'm your host, Will Sattelberg. This week, AbnerD Damien and I talk through Samsung's launch of the Galaxy XR, an $1,800 VR headset that serves as our first taste of Android XR. It's a bit of a confusing product, though, so you're going to hear all three of us try to make sense

of the vision Samsung at Google C with this product. Is it a fully-fledged device you should run out and buy right now, or the stepping grounds to a grander vision of computing? So Android XR is out in the wild. We've seen Samsung just unveiled their brand new headset, which was originally Project Mujan, and now is the simply titled Galaxy XR, terrible name. Not sure how I feel about the whole AR thing, XR thing,

but guys, tell me what you think about the future of this, because I feel like this is a stepping stone for something greater, a little bit down the line. This is not the first Google's first rodeo. This is not Samsung's first audio with headsets. Gear VR was it? And Daydream a few years ago. So headsets are far from a new concept.

Apple and last year, meta and Oculus have been doing for years. They just haven't... I think... I guess I'll just boldly hot take, cold take, say headsets probably aren't a mass market device in the short term. I think that's fine, though. Do you think that's fine? I don't know, Will, you were about to interrupt me, which I interrupted you first. But yeah, go ahead.

I think, I feel like you feel the same as me, right? I do. I guess I just have, like, difficulty seeing where the vision is. So like, like if I'm, if I'm starting out on good things, right, like I was convinced that what we now know is the Galaxy XR was going to be like Apple pricing or maybe slightly undercut. And to my, you know, I'll give them this. $1,800 is not $3,500. In fact, it's basically half the price for fairly similar hardware. So, you know, if you liked the idea, the vision of the Vision Pro.

but didn't want to spend either didn't want to be in the Apple ecosystem or didn't want to spend $3,500 on it. This is like a fairly, you know, comparable experience, but on Android. And like, I think a lot of the things that would make me want to have a Vision Pro are here as well. Like, movie watching, for example, like, I do think this would be great for for solo entertainment, uh, uh, viewing. I don't know how often I run into that anymore, to be honest with you, but, you know, 10 years ago, I would have loved this. Otherwise, though, it's, you know, it does feel difficult to lock down.

What is Samsung's pitch for this beyond being the first Android XR headset? And to that end, that does make me wonder, it's like, okay, but you guys have a grander vision for Android XR, it feels like. Yeah. I mean, do you think Samsung kind of, I feel like they've held back a bit. It's almost like they've, and we talked a little bit about it with the S-25 edge. It's almost like they kind of, I know, it's not run out of ideas or anything like that. It's almost like they've put something into production. They're kind of like, oh, damn, we've got to release this now.

And the wheels have come off a little bit in the wider space. Like if Apple can't make the Vision Pro work at scale that maybe they would hope it would work at scale, then Samsung are kind of like seeing it and be like, oh, and maybe. Maybe that's why they dragged the heels a little bit with Mujan, and it was originally the Mujan development kit, because that was available, what I say available, it was announced last December, was it Abner? I don't know if that's correct.

I just wonder if there's a little bit of dragging the heels, and this is why I'm kind of a little bit, I don't know how to describe it. I think the concept of VR is fantastic, and I'm old, I'm definitely show my ageer. I'm old enough to remember when VR was like tried to be pitched in the 90s as like a whole entertainment gaming thing and seeing it every.

everywhere and seeing it like kind of fairgrounds and like theme parks and stuff and everybody wanted VR. Vio is this amazing thing and they didn't have the technology as it were or the power of the technology to do it justice. Now it feels like we have and there still kind of hasn't been enough of a, we've had breakthroughs, right? I think MetaQuest 3 is, yeah, I mean it's very popular in a gaming circles and a very, very small portion of gaming but I just don't know where maybe Samsung kind of like, I don't know, did they take the foot off the gas a little bit? It just feels like that to me. I don't know. I don't know. So that's what we know in Google and Samsung deciding to release this headset. Okay, from a more fundamental level, headsets are what's

attainable, what's possible in this form factor right now, in the augmented reality form factor. To Google and Samsung start at the high end. They could have absolutely done a cheaper headset with less than 4K per eye resolution, but they didn't. So that in itself is revering in terms of they think this, what they want to do is at the high end. What they want to do is that screen unlocks true productivity use cases in terms of being able to read text, read crisp text, and do other stuff versus,

others in the field. So they're going after the Vision Pro in that regard. So, well, the way you do this, you start at the high end and then you hope that technology and displays becomes cheaper, but you need to start the high end to unlock all the capabilities

and build from there. So the idea of headsets as absolutely an entertainment device, I have watched stuff in Vision Pro hour-long shows. I haven't done a movie yet, but I have done hour-long shows. Gaming a little bit, not so much. With the Vision Pro specifically,

I can do everything I want on the Mac on the virtual display that the Vision Pro offers. So it is, I can do everything. I can use it as that entertainment as a work device that's pitched by Apple and that Google and Samsung are trying to also offer. But I don't do it primarily. It's not a everyday device for me.

The Vision Pro is maybe a few times a week device at best, most maybe once a week, more realistically. So that's what this is possible for. In the case of Samsung and Google, we'll see what it's actually good for. once it hits the market, that albeit a very small market. So that's the vision. I think the biggest question going in was when this launches, what are they targeting?

What do they want this to be? And the answer that we got at launch is everything that the vision pro has shown for the past year. Well, it's interesting. Abner, before we move too far away from it, I want to get your thoughts on this because you described kind of the grand scope of of Samsung and Google having played in the VR XR space before and it I do think it's really interesting that the and and I'm interested in both of your thoughts on this that there are kind of three tiers of VR right there's cheap there's mid range and there's there's premium I would say that cheap basically died out but that was where you had the gear VR slot your galaxy S7 edge

and do a phone yes right exactly you had cardboard to sliver phone and some cardboard, right? And then on the other side, on the expensive side, which is where Samsung and Google are currently playing and, like, eventually would like to move down market, but are playing in the expensive side. You have the Vision Pro, you have the Galaxy XR. But the space we've seen the most success for this. And I would say, like, maybe the only truly successful, like, headset is, like, the Quest, you know, the Quest line and specifically kind of the Quest 2, Quest 3, Quest 3S. Why, like... Why didn't they start there?

Yeah, other than the fact that Apple didn't start there, if there is success in this field, and it's not like meta is a particularly, I was going to say popular, but also well-run company. Like I do think there is space for competition against meta. Why not start there and say, like, look, we've like, we have a vision, or even just make like two headsets, one, you know, in a way that meta has, one for the premium,

do this Galaxy XR, you know, we're completely. competing against the Vision Pro, but half price, and then also do this headset that is, you know, a little bit more, something that people are going to be able to buy and put under the tree this Christmas. You know what I mean? Yeah, I think the biggest problem with that is Android. And I don't mean that in a disrespectful sense. I mean that the, that with, Android XR, you are still, you are limited by what it is going to be able to do. In terms of productivity. It's very, very difficult for professionals, because I do feel like this is aimed at professionals. Like as an entertainment device, I think that's the secondary side. Entertainment is easy.

Absolutely. Entertainment is. Do you think they just have to say YouTube, YouTube, which is still not on the Vision Pro as a dedicated app. YouTube is, they can't, it unlocks so much content. And that's nearly, I dare say it's solved just by putting YouTube on it. Yeah, I mean, it's like 90% isn't it, of the entertainment value. I mean, yeah. It's tough. It's tough. I keep coming back to the thought process that most people are still better served with the value, like a $1,700, what was it, $1,799? You get, well, I don't really know how your guy's tax system works, but I know you're taxed after the fact. So you will pay, what, $1,800? Let's just round up. Let's say $2.000. Let's just say $2,000. For $2,000, you could get yourself an incredible element. LG OLED TV on discount, which will serve you a decade. It won't be hindered by software updates. The image quality will be as good, if not better than a VR headset, in theory.

Entertainment for everyone in the home. You could get yourself a fairly substantially decent, and that's a terrible way to phrase it, a decent Tab S9, something like that. You have entertainment on the go. You still have access to all those Android applications that you were on your phone anyway. I just, like, that aspect to me, maybe I'm too deep into it where I'm thinking that this new paradigm, and it sounds like I'm being overly negative about Android XR and I'm not, I think that this is a fantastic step towards what we're going to get to, and we'll talk about later in the episode. There is a limitation here as to what you can and can't do.

Entertainment cannot be the sole reason that people are going to spend $1,800 on this. I just think it, it, it, it, it, it, it. It shows where we are in terms of like the wider space, because Vision Pro for all of its foibles, for all of its problems, for all of its Appleness, does have a desktop class CPU in there. You can do the kind of things on that device

that were never going to be possible on Android. I mean, they just updated it. It's got an M5 in there now. So, yeah. So you have a supercomputer almost of sorts. Like you can do things in that machine that this Snapdragon XR2, whatever it is, VR profile,

is just not capable of. And that's a disappointing aspect and something that does worry me about where this is placed in the market. And to go back to your three-tiered approach, well, it's kind of like, at the low end, Samsung could have done something, I think.

I think they could have done something really, really impressive. And I feel like maybe that's what they're going to do. But again, it comes back to my thought process that they dragged the heels a little bit. Maybe they could have got this out the door early. And that might have affected the current price point. Maybe they were looking to do something

a little bit closer to Apple, but because of the time delay, they've waited too long and they can't do that now. The vague rumor around it is that display is that they saw the Vision Pro, and then they upped the display to this 4K that we have now. That is the vague rumor around it. But yeah, it's coming a year plus since Vision Pro, right? Almost two, right? Wasn't it around CES when the Vision? I think I was maybe at CES when the Vision Pro, like availability.

stuff was announced and that was 2024. So yeah, like almost two years later. And Abner I believe that rumor completely because it strikes with what we've seen Samsung doing lately, right? Like it completely matches our conversation from last week

about the Edge series where it's like you guys are just like doing this thing where you follow Apple on specific elements when like that market might not exist. I feel like we recorded all that stuff about the Edge and the iPhone air And then like later that day or maybe the next day, it was like, oh, by the way, the iPhone

air might also not be selling well in this market. It's not exist. And it's like, okay. So, so I don't know. I don't understand why, like, even if this thing has downgraded displays and it's like $1,000, I think that's a better, like you're, you are getting more people in the door. And to be honest, it's like you go to the product page. You know, we want to talk about productivity, but it's like you have to scroll pretty far to

get past all of the, like, entertainment focus stuff. Like they are pushing this. And it kind of brings along like the foldable dilemma times 10 where it's like you're buying this product that can be, you know, for the same price point, be filled by other things. And sure maybe you're paying for the the ability to combine a 75 inch OLED TV with a tablet, right? And make the productivity of Apple. Yeah. But like you're asking, it's a big, you know, even more so than the foldable.

It's like, okay, but this is a device in addition to your phone. So you're already, you know, have to get over that hump. And then it's like, plus it's clunky and you're paying $250 for a case. And like, $250 for the controllers if you want those. It's, it just becomes so difficult in the same way that the foldable does where you're like, well, here's a list of things you could buy for $2,000 that kind of tackle the same thing and maybe better. I mean, Damien, I bought an OLED TV this year. And to your point, like, I paid less than what the, with the Galaxy X-R costs, and I can watch it with

my fiance. And that's not something you can say. Yeah, I think that's it. I think with VR, it's very much like, and I want, and I'm kind of glad that it's here in this form factor of the last couple of years, because I'm of the age where I grew up watching sci-fi films and everybody put a headset on and kind of like, that was the cool thing that that couldn't, I couldn't even conceptualize it as a child. but now as an adult, it's like, wow, these things exist.

This is science fiction in reality. But at the same time, it's like you're kind of, you're almost there. Like, there's nothing that makes me think, ah, this is going to be so much better than the TV I have on the wall or the tablet I have in my bag or the foldable phone I have in my pocket. But then let's get away from the negativity for a moment because I think there's some things that are genuinely very, very good here. I want one of these to be fair.

In the same way that I wanted a Vision Pro, it's just that the, The price tag becomes so. But I'm like, yeah, no, I do want to watch Avatar on this. Like, I do. So one thing I will say with certainty is that at least Google has a very good repository of content that you can tap into straight away, which I think was the biggest thing that has hindered the Vision Pro in to some extent. I think with MetaQuest, it's a bit different because they align themselves with gaming

a little bit more and game development as well, it's closely aligned 3D worlds you can get into them. I think one of the biggest benefits to this price aside,

we have things that Google has been doing for the better part of, what, how long has Street View existed for a better part of a decade, you now have the

opportunity to get in person effectively with all of these things that have existed for a long time in a way that wasn't feasible before. So the Google Maps

immersive view that is something that I would love to try. I think that as a tourist is a fantastic way to kind of get your bearings before you visit a place. Maybe you could go to places you would never have the opportunity to go to. But for $1,700, you may be able to get a ticket

to visit there, but that's another complaint. Do you think that that is going to be enough for people to say, I want one of these just to access these things that have existed for a long time in a different way? The key question that we asked earlier, is why didn't they start at the middle tier?

Why didn't they start at $500 to $1,000 range? And again, entertainment and productivity. Entertainment, as evidenced by the fact they include controllers, they want to do some gaming. They offer the ability to buy controllers. They want to do gaming stuff, which, okay. The productivity, to me, it really comes down to the productivity.

if the use case, it's just, we need to use it. We need to see if it's desktop class Chrome. They showed a video editor application from Adobe on there, which again, okay, but they also showed flow, which is Google's AI generation thing, which I assume prompting will be so much easier than timeline management. It's not like giving them a pass on this one.

They do need it. They needed to get something out the market. And I do wonder if in the grand scheme, the biggest customer of this will be Google themselves and developers to work on XR. If we're trying to, we're heavily trying to find a reason for why this exists, it feels like. and that presentation that Google made,

when Samsung made, it was revealing in terms of what they're prioritizing and all that. So I guess it's, I think this, getting it into the market was necessary and making it powerful enough that it can be used as a test bed for other things. That is important. but the prices of the service that's why we're harping on it so much it's what if they use cheaper

components lower resolution components and got this out earlier including last year or earlier this year and the discount effect applied by now by at this point it's it's a something it's not it's not going to happen. That's not the world we're living in right now, so to speak. But I guess they have to get it. It needs to be out there to understand what it is. And that doesn't read confidence in typical consumer electronics. But at the same time, this is the first of its kind for Google and Samsung in the modern era. I feel you're right. I feel right about the price situation as well because this feels like this this feels like a developer kit that's been pushed out publicly when it should have been. Yes. Yes. And it's so much money to ask, you know, I mean, I mean,

maybe larger developers, sure, but like if you're just like looking to make, if you're just one person, like it's a, it's a big buy-in to build. And then who are you building for? Right? You have to factor in. It's like, okay, if you're an indie dev, I want to make a, a VR app for Android XR, but like, who, who, like, you're already putting up a lot of money up front and then who's your audience. that's the thing that I'm thinking. It's like, am I, okay, if, if, if, if, if, if, if, if, if, if, if, if, if, if, if, if, development focused and it was price at this and it was released at that point, I think, I don't think we'd have a problem.

I don't have a problem with it if he's developed a focus kit. However, Google, Google, Google and Samsung have partners with this. There's barely any Samsung elements apart from the hardware, right? The software is, it looks as about as close as you can possibly get to. streamlined a Google experience from what I can see. There is a few Galaxy apps there, but not very many. It looks like something Google would have made. If they'd have put Nexus in front of it, see, I feel like we would have been a bit,

we would have been a bit different thinking about this. Absolutely. Probably not, probably not, really. But I think, I think if you just said, this is a developer-focused experience and we're ready for the next wave of hardware, which is effectively what it feels like. I don't think, I don't think I would be, I'd be hypercritical. I think I'm hypercritical because this feels like a consumer focus launch. They want us as a consumer.

Yes, exactly. They want us every, all the messaging, they've, they've not telegraphed in any other way that this isn't a consumer device. And I guess the thing that consumers are most sensitive about is the price. And we're treating it as such. It keeps coming back to the price, doesn't it? And it's so odd. We've been talking about like, what is this for?

And if you want more evidence that this is. Maybe we can talk a little bit about like the idea of glasses as opposed to this. But like if you want any more evidence that this is kind of, this really is a stepping stone. And everybody involved thinks that this as a stepping stone towards lighter, more everyday wear glasses. If you scroll down on the product page to the frequently asked question section, there's the top one. What are the main features of Galaxy XR? And the one that it highlights is not entertainment. It's not productivity.

it's it's Gemini it's conversational AI powered by Gemini is is the thing that it says is the main feature of Galaxy XR which lines up with the idea of you wearing this all the headset some kind of something on your face all day glasses presumably I just can't I like have stumbled on this no I can't see it for anything else other than like almost a proof of concept for for Android XR but but again and it wrapped up in this consumer product with this ultra high price, it does leave me scratching, leaves all of us scratching our head a little bit, it sounds like. Do you think, do I wonder if there is, I mean, they'll have investor pressure, right? There'll be pressure from big time investors to get this out

there to basically say, okay, we have this product. This is that, like you said, a stepping stone, this is the first wave of hardware. And it's only going to get better. I do agree that the, The major reason a lot of people will be looking at this and wondering is Gemini is that is effectively the killer feature here. We finally get to see Gemini, we're interacting with things in the real world with a headset kind of system, real-time cameras. It's Gemini Live video, but all the time more, I'm guessing it can get more contextual. It's probably using the same models, I imagine.

So the understanding and stuff like that, I think is going to be interesting. Obviously, it has that screen context awareness as well. And if you have multiple screens on at the same time, it's very much more aware of every single aspect of what you're doing, more so than Gemina Live Video can on your smartphone. So in that respect, it is, if it works, I mean, I haven't been able to test this. Happen as the only one who's been able to test something similar to this.

That has to be a success, I guess. That is the main reason that this is public. I think are we all on agreement in that? I feel like that is the main component of Galaxy XR and Android XR so far is get Gemini out there in the world proper, seeing things, interacting with things, interacting with what you have running on the device, what else is in the background. Like, yeah, that I am very, very excited by. I think that is the MO of this.

But just tell us a little bit about you. You had the pleasure, Abner, been able to test this out at one point. Just tell us a little bit about how you feel this has developed since you saw it originally. A lot of it is the same since I saw it in December, yes, December 10 months, 11 months ago. It's the models, I'm sure, have come far further. I think we were at Gemini 2.0. Then we're at 2.5 now. And the optimizations that all that has improved in the past.

10 months. Yeah, I'm waiting for the final thing, obviously, but again, I just have to go back to the idea of productivity in terms of at the problem is at $1,800, $1,000, $2,000 final is it's not couldn't be a replacement productivity device. God knows tablets have tried to be that, but they're not. everybody still sticks with laptops and at the same time I'm also happy they didn't do entertainment only because that is limiting that is just an entertainment device you get to consign it as a way as just entertainment and not the future of everything

else but anyways in using Gemini in that well talking to things you are that you do have the benefit of it's primarily using it at home and I think that is the most curious thing, whether the primary way you end up controlling this is with your voice versus hand gestures and on vision pro primarily. How much can you really get done in the work context or even in an entertainment context that used Gemini as the launcher effectively? That is the question. But from my memory and from I guess the previews we got this week, it on paper they seem to have nailed down the basics same as better same as apple that has all appeared that all appears to be refined and only gotten better since i used in december so the i'm not

worried about the basics here it's just what else can you do to differentiate it even though differentiating something in this market is so early and premature in terms of how many people have actually used it. But yeah, Gemini comes back to Gemini and how heavily Google is emphasizing it in, it was like the first part of their blog post. It's the first part of everybody's announcements of Gemini's key role. I guess moving towards the future and when people actually experience this, it's not going to be on their headset, it feels like. It's going to be on the first glasses, which we got a tease from Samsung. They're working with Warby Parker and one other company to make glasses. So it's very, I think at this point it's obvious that these first

glasses will be no displays, just a camera and voice and microphone input. That will be people's first real interaction with Gemini on this new form factor, on having an always on world-facing camera capturing the world and giving you help with it. So this next phase is, in an ideal world, this headset and Samsung's glasses are announced at the same time. I guess the best thing we can record to right now is that the grass is, it doesn't take until October of 26 for the glasses to watch. I really do think that needs an accelerated schedule given how far matter is right now. Do you think as well with regards to those glasses are going to come without the visual element? Do you think this might, and I don't even want to say this, but it's the only way I can kind of quantify it,

do you think that somewhat sets those glasses up for failure a little bit? Because we're going to get an XR device currently, which will give visual elements. you will get the visual feedback, but then you will be expected to wear a pair of glasses, which have all of it, but the one thing that I'm not saying somebody will buy the VR headset, the XR headset, and then buy the AR glasses. But if somebody does,

there's going to be a little bit of a, I don't know, your brain kind of quantifying it and being able to being confused. I do wonder if that might, do we potentially just see a huge, I guess it's a, It's a technology jump where we get those visuals in glasses. We get that little tiny screen that's capable of almost,

is it projecting an image, I guess. Do we need that? We do need that, sorry, I'm answering the question. But do you think that this is, Samsung are almost preempting themselves? I know we expect it to be speaker and no visuals, but I just wonder if that sets set so much for failure again a little bit. I don't know. It's, I know, metal A bands have proven that people,

people like just the audio-only format. They use them as headphones, plus world-facing camera, video specifically. If the state of the art is the meta-layband display that was announced a few weeks ago, that is the state of the art that prices, they're absolutely subsidizing that price, $800 something that is not, it's no way that technology is that cheap. If that is the state of the art, the displays and glasses aren't ready yet. It's no.

They all do look bulky. And I don't think you're getting enough value for $800. Even if they're subsized in the technology, I don't think the display is a killer functionality. But this audio-based augmented reality is... I, I, I, I, I, we haven't seen, that's, we haven't seen gem, something as good as Gemini on this form factor from anyone because only Google has Gemini. Um, that's a bit obvious. But I do wonder how hard they push it when it launches. Like, yeah, you have, you have a, a camp, a

camera position that's always available to you. You have, uh, head, you have music. You have, you have, audio, you have a good, well, hopefully a good notification experience. You have a voice assistant on your face. Gemini, it's really killer, it's really key that Gemini becomes the killer thing, the unique differentiating thing from what matter is doing. And again, I just hope it's coming much sooner than later and that it's not a full year between this Android XR launch and the next one. Where do we see... How do we see headsets fitting into... Like, what would be successful for Android XR, right?

If we're saying that, like, we don't think that the Galaxy XR as it exists right now is going to be particularly... It's going to sell it in a lot of numbers. I don't know what success qualifies that. But I don't think any of the three of us are predicting high sales for this. And then we're envisioning the glasses in a year, hopefully, maybe two. two years from now, but hopefully sooner rather than later, as we're saying. What, what is, is that the successful product? Is there another successful product? Is, can a company,

can a Lenovo come in and make a headset that is successful? Is this fully, I'm just, I'm curious where you guys, where you guys are at on this because I have so many conflicting. I can't figure out what people want, do people want the screen? Do people just want, like, like, as you're saying, Abner, like audio and a camera and Gemini support? Like I, like, what, what is the path to success here for, for Google really on Android XR? I think they want part. If they get four or five partners to sign up and make their own versions, if Oppo do one,

if, if one plus do one. But I don't think that's going to happen. Yeah. I think if they, if they, if they, you mentioned Lenovo, you mentioned the Lenovo. I think Lenovo have been in computing for long enough to have already. probably toyed with this idea, right? The only reason I can envision Lenovo doing it is, is to really push the gaming element of it.

Like, I could see them making a Legion XR VR headset, right? That is, you know, in the same way that they've made these gaming handhelds. But even then, I'm not, like, convinced they would do it. And I still think it would have to be sub-thousand dollars to really have any success, especially. It's so interesting. It's like the one space where meta is like ahead on all fronts. And like I...

It is, but it's still not a lodge. No, it's not. But it is interesting that everything I'm like envisioning, I'm like, I'm like, oh, they just need to do what meta's doing, which is not usually a sentence I think to myself. I'm going to pose a question then. Do you think that Google and not so much Samsung, I think it's definitely Google here? Do you think they're happy to seed ground to meta in that, in that headset space? Because the headset space is not where Google sees this.

I don't think Google sees that. That's not where the money is, realistically. Do you think they're happy to cede that ground to META in the headset space and let them take that? And I wonder if that's one of the reasons why this has been held back a little bit. I do think some of it is definitely down to Samsung. And as Abner alluded to potentially making those display changes, I think, I'm just going to say it.

I think Google are very happy to let META do their thing with the gaming headsets and take all of that market, take as much market as they want, because this is just that okay we now we know we can do this like we can give you the software that can run on these devices when this when we get somebody out there

who's making hardware running our AI software nobody else is going to be able to compete obviously I think meta I don't know what their AI platform is called so that just shows you how well they're doing I can't see open AI they're going to have to do it through a partner

and they don't but they're not in the hardware game. Google have this vested interest to do so because they have so many big high-level partners who are just going to, I'm not going to say bend to the will, but they're going to do things that benefit everybody in a kind of different way.

Yeah, I think personally that, like say, Google are happy to let meta lead in the VR, cheap VR headset space because they know that the end game is theirs for the taking if they do this correctly. Does that dissuade developers from picking this up, if that's like the clearest vision we can see from Google? Like why would you develop a game for the Galaxy XR, for Android XR if like the vision at the moment is like probably displayless or or maybe there's a HUD but not 4K panels for each eye? Like that just makes this release even more confusing.

And I'm not, I know why it's here and I know why it's here. this, you know, why this is the path for it. But it's like every time I feel like I'm stumbling on the answer for like what the grand vision is. And I think, I think you guys are right. I think it's Gemini. I think this is a Gemini play.

But that does make this product and, and the first step of Android XR feel very out of step with what Google is probably building up to. Yeah. Out of step is probably best way to describe it, isn't it up there? Yeah. Yeah, it's, again, it goes back to the price dictating people's expectations for it.

I think so. As fans, if you can't, well, people will talk about anything. They will absolutely have opinions about everything. But if the fact that they can't really use it, that is inherently limitation. And you do want word of mouth on this, you idea. one positive word of mouth on this. And right now everybody, the comparison to the meta, I think on paper, Samsung and Google could have absolutely competed with them

with a cheaper device, but they didn't do so because I don't think they see it as the future. Right. I don't think cheap entertainment devices, headsets are the future. that the inherently limiting factor there is the isolation of it and households and that kind of stuff. It's, it's, I, they could have made, I'm sure they could have made the cheaper device, but I don't think their grand visions are served by it.

And their grand visions in the long term are served by it. So they inherently decided to do the thing that is obviously more limiting. That is, I'm sure they everybody involved here knows it's not a mass market device they have to yeah this feels like

it's done just because it needed to be done like it feels like a product that exists because it has to exist if that makes sense and that makes me less I am interested in it it just makes me less enthralled by the prospect of it I also think

I want to ask you guys the question which is a best better comparison for this product? Do you think it's better that Google and Samsung, because obviously we know this is probably the tightest they've worked on anything since WearOS, right? So, and obviously they do stuff with Android. And it's inherently more complex. Yeah, I think this one's a little bit different. Do you think it's better for them to be compared to Meta or better to be compared to Vision Pro? Because I think there's a lot

more people comparing to Meta and the Quest than they are comparing to Vision Pro. Because the Vision Pro feels like a completely different product, even though it is within the same category. I think it's, I think it's just the success. It's, it's success versus prestige. I don't know what to call it. Like, like, it just, it's, the Vision Pro is obviously like this, this extremely high-end headset, you know, complete overkill.

It's a state of the art. And, and Samsung was, was smart to cut around some of those corners. I am so grateful that I can't, that Samsung doesn't have like a display on the, on the front to show my eyes, which like, There was a world where they do that and this thing costs an extra $700 for no reason. And so they followed through on like some smart ideas to bring the cost down and I think avoided some of the pitfalls Apple had. I think the reason the meta examples like ring so true is not just because that's where we've seen success in the headset space. I think like I can't think of another product I'd call successful outside of the quest line in terms of VR really.

like maybe the first PlayStation VR, maybe, but I probably not. And, you know, as we're saying, if their vision is glasses, well, meta is also there. Apple's not there right now. And so I think it's just natural to look to meta at the moment and be like, this is kind of what you're angling for, except, you know, with, hopefully with the power of a much better assistant, if glasses are the vision. But it again, you know, circling back to, to, I feel like we keep coming back to like, but that doesn't make this release make any more sense beyond just checking a box on a list,

which is, which is frustrating. I'm not against a headset, to be honest with you. Like, there are, you know, nights where either Maddie goes to bed early or whatever, she's got plans. But, you know, I would buy a $500, $600 headset with a better display than the, aging quest two I have now to watch movies on I just don't want to do it for $1,800 and certainly not $3,500. So yeah, I don't know.

I think Gemini's the play. I think you guys are, I think you guys have convinced me on the path, on the path forward here. It just makes this release feel a little deflating. Yes. I think we've kind of stumbled a little bit onto Gemini being the play here. I'm excited to hear what you think of this after. I know you have one on pre-order.

So I'm very, very excited. and we will be talking about that very, very soon because, again, we've been a little bit critical, but I feel like sometimes you kind of have to be in this space. Not everything is going to be a success. I don't get me wrong, I would love to see Android XR be a success, and I want it to be because it means we're going to get,

it is that bridge to the future of computing that I think we all have wanted any science fiction fans out there. We kind of want that world-facing camera that does everything and it's like computer in your eyes. I think that would kind of be cool. but yeah. Yes, we'll have much more to talk about next week once we get, we see the final shipping thing.

So work out, work forward to that. Yes. I'm sure the hardware will be a lot better than it looks online as well because, like say, with everything, renders don't always do things for justice. But I want to say thanks, thanks for joining me, guys. I know we talked a little bit about our thoughts on everything related to Gemini, related to headsets, related to eyes, and I love the fact that we've kind of stumbled up on us

on what we think is the answer. Yeah. It's either what we said, or it's Nintendo's $100 virtual boy reboot. It's one of those two. Yes. No in between. No in between.

So, yeah, thanks, guys, and we'll speak to you next week. Bye. Bye. Thanks for listening to Pixelated, a 9 to 5 Google podcast. If you enjoyed the show, we ask that you rate and review it on the podcast platform of your choice

and help spread the word by sharing the show with friends or on social media.