They might have a rocky start, but they still have a lot of advantages.
1. AR will devour smartphones.
2. Apple is the only company that can quickly overcome consumer AR/VR design challenges.
3. Apple has positioned itself to distribute the best AR/VR content.
4. Apple will cement its early lead with a new blue-bubble effect.
---
I could see an argument for it growing along side smartphones. But even then, this feels like fantasy. VR only "works" for driving simulation because... you are sitting there. Any dreams of it making Zelda more immersive will have to grasp with the fact that, you know, you can't actually win a fight with most wild animals. Or climb a mountain. Or hike across the entire continent...
(I say "works" for driving, because even that is glossing all of the physicality of driving that fast. Which is intense and would also be beyond most of us.)
"Growing" is probably a better word than "devour".
In a companion essay, I try to make the argument that AR peripherals are likely.
My best guess is that a smartphone-like peripherals will be shipped alongside the flagship AR/VR headsets. I guess the AR headsets might be viewed as the "peripheral" in the beginning, but I think eventually the AR headset will be the main focus, and the thing you hold in your hand will feel more like a keyboard/mouse.
2. Not Meta? They're the #1 VR company with 75% marketshare and a years-long head start in the industry. The Reality headset from Apple has no rumored/leaked feature that goes beyond what the Quest Pro already has on the market today.
3. Is distribution difficult? Meta distributes content. Valve distributes content. What's so hard about distributing content?
4. What early lead? Meta has the early lead.