The Navigator Identity Crisis: A Call for Design Sovereignty and Customization.
To the Meta Design Team, you are making your device worse by trying to be someone else. Meta was the leader because you were the ones who actually figured out how to make standalone VR functional and accessible in the first place. For you to throw away the very leadership you built just to become a knock-off version of Apple is a total failure of vision. You didn’t need to reinvent the wheel, you just needed to polish it. Instead, you’ve scrapped a great, functional interface for a filtered version of the Vision Pro. By forcing the Navigator into a rigid, head-locked position, you’ve sacrificed user sovereignty for a spatial look that you don't even have the eye-tracking hardware to support on your current mainstream headsets. Even if your next device has that hardware, the millions of people using your hardware right now shouldn't be forced into a "look-to-lock" logic that makes the system feel broken. Taking away the ability to freely grab and park windows, forcing us to re-center our entire world just to move a menu is a massive UI/UX regression that makes the system feel less capable and more restrictive. This interface feels like it was designed by geeks who prioritize clean code and data structures over how a human being actually moves their hands and head in a room. Mark Zuckerberg started with a site that was nothing but white backgrounds and blue text a bland, sterile database and that same nerd logic has now infected the Quest. A nerd designs a menu based on where it’s easy for the code to sit; a designer or a real user needs it where their hand naturally wants to reach. Your current interface is the definition of mayonnaise tech: bland, sterile, and corporate. You finally made the Navigator transparent, but you stopped halfway. Transparency isn't just a style choice; it’s a mechanical need in a spatial environment. Why are the store, the menus, and the sub-folders still stuck in these solid gray and white blocks? Every single window should be transparent by default. This is the obvious direction for the medium, yet you're forcing us into light versus dark folders instead of just providing opacity sliders. Users need the ability to choose if they want to block the world out or let their room shine through. It is 2026, so being stuck with gray and white as our only options is a joke. A simple color wheel for the UI would allow for a green aura, a blue glow, or custom highlights for menus. A transparent green theme should be a simple slider adjustment, not a corporate mandate. You already had a winning format with the original Quest interface. You didn't need to scrap it; you just needed to make it transparent and give us the tools to move it. You need to restore the "grab-to-slide" logic so we can orbit windows 360 degrees and park them to our left or right without the system fighting us. Stop trying to look fashionable through imitation. You built your success on utility and being the original in the standalone space, don't throw that away to be a second rate copy of a competitor. Give us back the original soul of the Quest, enhanced with the transparency and the customization that this technology actually demands.
Accessibility Feature Request: Conversation Focus Mode for Ray-Ban Meta Display Glasses
Hi everyone! I’m a Ray-Ban Meta display glasses user who is hard of hearing and wears hearing aids daily. I’d love to see a conversation focus mode added that prioritizes voices directly in front of the wearer and reduces background noise. In busy environments, this would make a big difference for hearing-aid users and others who rely on clearer speech in real time. If this type of accessibility feature is ever developed, I would absolutely love the ability to have it added to my glasses and would be happy to provide feedback or participate in any beta or user-testing opportunities. I’ve also submitted this through support channels, but wanted to share here in case the team is gathering feedback.Who do I have to talk to, to get this done right?
Your art director may need to be replaced. Here's a common sense suggestion, that Meta needs to implement into the user interface; allow the user to adjust the opacity of the tool bars and menus, from 0% - 100%. If you decide to do things "your way" then make the main menus: the horizon feed, the navigation bar, appz background, 0% transparent, and **Be Sure To ADD DROP SHADOWS**, behind every text, div , box, and so on, to counter light colors in the far background such as walls, or television program. The Main thing is to be able to see your background sceneries in both mr/vr . The second thing which should have been the first thing, because you had it right in a earlier version, when Meta allowed us to carry a compact version of the menu around like a tablet. That was the greatest concept yet in my opinion. Meta need to allow the users to adjust the menus and navigation bar, through stretching, (not just expand) but adjusting the size of the actual navigation menus, the way they automatically do it when you move them away and towards you. The user should be allow to adjust it manually, for those that wear corrective lens, that would allow them to adjust the menus to a view that they can see clearly while searching for their favorite app, or for just general reading of text. Its selfish and counter intuitive to be the developer and then adhust the screen distnce and size to how you see fit, rather than giving the user full control of the distance and size of the bar and menus. Currently if i want a larger menu screen and bar, I'd have to lean back if im sitting, stretch the screen, and then sit forward for the screen to be closer and larger, without it shrinking like when I pull it towrds me. I want it to stay the same size i had it adjusted to just closer. I would like some feedback regarding this so I am assured that i am not just typing this for my health. I hope I'm not here just wasting my energy sharing ideas that I believe you should have figured out a long time ago, as a simple fix. You should be adding things and not replacing them, unkess necessary. The original backgrounds were good, but then someone went left, and ebtered their second childhood it seemed. But again hope this is not a waste of time for me, if you're not even taking things like this into consideration but chose to take advice from 9 year old using their parents equipment. Stop preying on children, they should not be the focus. Children want to do what the adults do, that's why they gravitate to gta, baby stuff is simply for babies, and if you have a baby, that baby almost always want your things over theirs. Cater to the adult, modern age people, or you'll be stuck on 67, which is brain rot. It similar to rapp music, this stuff is for a certain demographic, they should be catered to, and as time goes one focus on the same age group, as well as your first supporter. The ones that got you this far, by spreading the word, and most people still haven't even tried vr. So again, I do expect feedback. You should be paying me for this advice, seriousor. But I want to see you win, because if you win,in my mind I should he winning being i been here since 2019. horizon worlds was a big waste of time, when Meta could have made this thing futuristic, but instead, focused on children that don't pay money, and then tried biting an idea from a newer but degenerate console when Meta already had the bread and butter You just need to adjust what you already had/have, and that's allowing three things to the disposal of the user: transparent menus (with drop shadows under text and icons, and tinted boxes), allow manual adjustment to the actual size of the menu (not just expanding) and allow a compact version of the menu (or bring back the original compact model) like you had several updates back. [I dont even know why yall got rid of that]. That was a real slow move, because anyone complaining about that may have been trolling you or just complaining just to complain. I used to do graphic design once upon a time. So it's wierd for me to see a newer generation, designing like degenerates. And I have to blame the art director and project management because that's such a simple fix, you're just changing the opacity and/or allowing the user to adjust them. Its a simple code. Even the stretching, instead of having it as static, assign it to stretch. But I went on a tangent, but I came back and doubled down. If I came off rude sorry, but seriously what's going on over there? I've been here since 2019. If you want a change just update and enhance what you already have. Feedback please. Even if its to call me an A-hole 🙏
webXR on Meta Quest scan QR code?
Meta Quest with webXR and passthrough I have a webXR project with passthrough and this is working perfect on the Meta Quest 3s with the meta browser! Scan a QR code? But now I want to scan a QR code (printed on paper, laying on the table in the real world) in order to place digital content on top of this QR code. My browser is on the latest version 40.2. I was reading that webXR did not yet have access to the camera API. Is there some progress on this? When can we have access to the camera? Other solution for QR scanning? Or is there an other solution? I do not need the full camera access but only detect the QR code? We made QR scanning with meta quest working in Unity while access to the camera API is available in Unity. But as said we are really looking in this simple QR scanning solution for webXR? As addition to this. We work with three.js. I really hope that QR scanning will be available. This could make AR tours with QR scanning much more easy. And this scanning of a QR should only be done for example 2 times a second. Just to place the content on top of a QR in near-real-time. I really hope to hearCanvas size (IWSDK)
Is there a way to adjust the canvas size in IWSDK? I'd like to create a story-telling site with Scrollama, but I can't find a way to change the size of the HTML. It's all handled automatically. I tried using window.removeEventListener('resize', () => {} ) but couldn't control it. Sdk: 0.2.2 Meta Spatial Editor: v11.0.0.10Component disappear in Editor
I've been learning ISWDK for a couple of weeks. I like it: it's really cool. I finished the tutorial and almost everything works, but there's one thing I'm not clear on: when I try to create a "prop" on an Entity or Enum component, Meta Spatial Editor doesn't compile (or at least the component disappears) after pressing the Refresh button. It definitely looks like a bug because the documentation cites examples with Entities and Enums. I copied and ran it, but while it doesn't give any errors on the code side, the component on the editor side disappears. All other types are visible and their parameters are accessible from the UI. I'd like to make a tutorial explaining how to migrate from Unity to IWSDK, but I'm missing this step. Here Locomotion is available in Meta Spatial Editor: export const Locomotion = createComponent('Locomotion', { test: { type: Types.Int8, default: 1 }, }); Here Locomotion is NOT available anymore in Meta Spatial Editor: export const MovementMode = { Walk: 'walk', Fly: 'fly' } as const; export const Locomotion = createComponent('Locomotion', { test: { type: Types.Int8, default: 1 }, mode: { type: Types.Enum, enum: MovementMode, default: MovementMode.Walk }, // <-- }); Where I wrong? Sdk: 0.2.2 Meta Spatial Editor: v11.0.0.10 Many thanks in advance #IWSDK, #Types.Entity, #Types.Enum #metaspatialeditor
IWSDK level loading: GLXF only? Performance concerns with Spatial Editor restrictions
Hi, I’m working with IWSDK and currently loading environments using world.loadLevel with .glxf files exported from Meta Spatial Editor. This works functionally, but I’m running into performance and file size issues. Meta Spatial Editor enforces very restrictive export rules (no Draco, no KTX2/ETC1S, no mesh quantization, etc.), which makes GLXF-based levels significantly heavier than optimized GLTF/GLB assets. My questions are: Is .glxf the only supported format for loading a “level” via world.loadLevel in IWSDK, or is there (or will there be) support for treating a plain GLTF/GLB as a level root? From a performance-oriented workflow perspective, is the intended approach to: use large GLXF files as full levels, or skip level loading entirely and assemble environments at runtime (loading optimized GLTF/GLB assets and creating entities in code)? Are there any plans or recommendations for authoring or exporting GLXF outside of Meta Spatial Editor, or for relaxing the compression restrictions in the editor? I’d like to understand the recommended best practice when performance and download size are a priority. Thanks in advance.IWSDK questions
Hiya, since the IWSDK is so new I can't find a lot of information. I have two questions: How to make it support keyboard passthrough? I've enabled it on a quest 3 but when I go to the site and "enter vr" the keyboard passthrough disappears. When trying to build the world with Spatial Editor I can create a nice world, but making it run using the IWSDK there is a weird bluish sphere, which is the background in the default scene. I can't seem to find a way to remove it. What am I missing? Thanks for your help and if there is a better forum to ask these question please point me to it.
