"I get headaches from using it, and there isn't enough reason to be in VR" is probably the same reason oculus didn't really penetrate the Apple/tech/trendies.
The target the author sets for them trying it again is basically meta's roadmap.
the _hilarious_ thing is that meta cannot coherently deliver/demostrate baby steps to those targets, or explain through the medium of snootynosed PR/marketing hyperbole the potential of the oculus platform.
Put it this way, the reason the iPhone succeeded is because a lot of people gave apple the benefit of the doubt. It had two things: music and well engineered smooth scrolling. _Everything_ else was sub par. No 3g, terrible batterylife, no GPS, no apps, no sideloading and no flash. Fucking slow proc (but the interface was always given priority.)
If VR is going to succeed with apple, it will be because people gave them the benefit of the doubt for v1/v2. Most of the reviews are a lot of "It will be" "when x is delivered" and "when x makes content in y". Meta doesn't have that good will to draw on, they have to deliver first time They can't because the head of VR/AR is someone who ships features not releases coherent products.
You know the best fucking part? the quest pro could have been a 95% AVP. If they managed to ship the depth sensor, then passthrough would have worked. If they had planned their shell properly, not wasted many many people-years fucking porting react to VR, then they might have had time to design a coherent UX.
But thats the problem with most competitors, they shitout features, rather than release coherent experiences.
Apple: I want a VR headset that anyone can use, requires no hand controllers, and doesn't block out the world
Meta: Lets ship eyetracking and hand based controllers, but only release 4 pages of documentation on all of it. something something metaverse, something something playing poker in a room together.