or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › Amazon Kindle Fire aims to undercut Apple's iPad with $199 price
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Amazon Kindle Fire aims to undercut Apple's iPad with $199 price - Page 4

post #121 of 303
I'm wondering about the browser rendering in the sky stuff.

Does that mean that Amazon is going to know every single site that somebody visits?

When I go to visit my favorite site, horny midgets getting it on with horses, is Amazon going to have a record of that?
post #122 of 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robodude View Post

r. To think, all it took was taking the much maligned closed approach for a tablet maker to come up with a competitive product running Android.


Yes, and the haters of closed ecosystems have gotten really angry with Android for subverting an Open Source project left the building.
I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
post #123 of 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by macinthe408 View Post

Undercut the iPad on price? This doesn't make any sense; apples to oranges.

It's like bragging about how your Nissan Sentra undercuts the Porsche 911 GT3 on price.

How many Sentras are sold for every GT3?

How much profit does Toyota make each year compared to Porsche?

What is the most important thing to a huge multinational corporation like Apple?
post #124 of 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shrike View Post

Markets, as a reflection on human culture, always has the top 10% who are willing to pay more for higher value products. Apple under SPJ has been able to target that market really well. Their performance was and continues to be selling products that gets those 10%.

Are you predicting that the iPad will go from 90% market share down to 10% due to the new Kindle? I think that is a little extreme, especially in the short run.
post #125 of 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by ConradJoe View Post

How many Sentras are sold for every GT3?

How much profit does Toyota make each year compared to Porsche?

What is the most important thing to a huge multinational corporation like Apple?

To maintain their share of the tablet market. As I keep having to write, except for conference calls, Apple never get on stage and crow about profits. They crow about Market share when dominant ( iTunes, Tablets, iPods, etc.).
I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
post #126 of 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by joguide View Post

I think the Kindle Fire will sell well for the price conscious consumer. It is however slower than the original ipad, has little memory, poorer and smaller screen, and lacks a camera. It does not have 3G, and it is saddled with Flash (which has yet to work well on tablet form).

It will compete nicely against Samsung and other Android tablets, for whom price is a very big deal. Interestingly, it will put a very distinct and different fork on it, where content will be pushed to Amazon and not Google.

But for most consumers, they are looking for the leading edge in technology, and this is clearly not it.
It is yesterday's technology repackaged in a nice discount price. For some that is enough.

JoeG

What is the ratio of consumers looking at hardware specs vs ease of use and do what I need it to do?

I dont know the exact ratio but if hardware specs where the majority of consumers choice, the iPad would not be the leader in current sales as the Xoom and others have offered way more hardware features already. (USB, better screen ratio/res, memory etc)

The device + echo syste + ease of use for device/echo system + PRICE is the formula that only Apple has gotten right so far.

Kindle already had that formula correct when it came to e-readers.
post #127 of 303
Looks like a cheap PlayBook variant(plastic) without cameras or 3G. Will not and can not compete with the iPad or any other tablet.

Will be a good e-reader, though.
post #128 of 303
The fire is lighter than the iPad and the nook color (which the fire is also cheaper than).

The resolution of the fire and color nook is better than the ipad at 169 ppi to the iPad's 132 ppi. As an LCD reader, the fire and nook color are more appealing to readers because of the slightly better resolution and greater available book content, coupled with the much cheaper cost.

I recently bought the new nook over the nook color because I wanted the e-ink, plain and simple. I bought the device with the best specs for reading (including outdoors). I absolutely love the thing. I figured I'd wait to buy a tablet when the iPad goes retina. At 326 ppi (assuming retina on an ipad = ppi of iphone) the iPad becomes the perfect read-in-bed with the lights off reader (even better if the thing weighs a little less in the newer version), plus all the other features it offers.

At that point price will be the main barrier between potential iPad customers and folks who mainly want an e-reader. By then, many people (like myself) will bite the bullet and decide to own a retina iPad and an e-ink reader. No matter what, e-ink is still fairly similar to ink on paper, and to many people (like myself) the experience of reading print-sharp text on a reflective surface (like paper) is preferable to reading on an emmitive surface (like an LCD). After all, the fire is an e-reader, the ipad is a tablet computer—crossover functions, but still separate devices with specific relative niches. If someone gets around to perfecting color e-ink, I'm there in a heart beat.
post #129 of 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by lkrupp View Post

But there is definitely a market for an inexpensive device that can deliver the basics. We'll just have to wait and see.

Precisely. And in that arena, where there'll be many beasts fights for the scraps, Amazon is quite well positioned.

But, if HP and Nokia have proven anything, you can't be in the market to not make a solid profit in each and every device that goes out the door.

And if Amazon thinks this device will not make a profit but drive sales, guess what, Amazon's products also sell for little profit, in the long run will this compensate?

The 10" is vaporware, Microsoft style future intentions advertised to give customers hope.

In my opinion, Tim and Steve are happy and consider this a victory - the more cheapo /unprofitable business models show up the better.
post #130 of 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by bettieblue View Post

Care to guess what the iPad tablet market share will be in December of 2012? I bet its below 50%, but still the biggest....because of this tablet.


37%. Just like the iPhone. But it will not be the biggest, because all the Apple-haters and cheapskates and poor people with no taste will all buy Android tablets, and Android tablets will be over 50%.
post #131 of 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by bettieblue View Post

Before the Kindle Fire, iPad had 80+% of the tablet market in year 1 of its life. That dropped to 60% (in the sixties) in year two of its life because of Xoom, Tab and others. All of those others lacked, apps early on and the echo system that Apple had.

Care to guess what the iPad tablet market share will be in December of 2012? I bet its below 50%, but still the biggest....because of this tablet.

Huh? 73.4% this quarter according to Gartner.
post #132 of 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by GMHut View Post

The fire is lighter than the iPad and the nook color (which the fire is also cheaper than).

The resolution of the fire and color nook is better than the ipad at 169 ppi to the iPad's 132 ppi. As an LCD reader, the fire and nook color are more appealing to readers because of the slightly better resolution and greater available book content, coupled with the much cheaper cost.

I recently bought the new nook over the nook color because I wanted the e-ink, plain and simple. I bought the device with the best specs for reading (including outdoors). I absolutely love the thing. I figured I'd wait to buy a tablet when the iPad goes retina. At 326 ppi (assuming retina on an ipad = ppi of iphone) the iPad becomes the perfect read-in-bed with the lights off reader (even better if the thing weighs a little less in the newer version), plus all the other features it offers.

At that point price will be the main barrier between potential iPad customers and folks who mainly want an e-reader. By then, many people (like myself) will bite the bullet and decide to own a retina iPad and an e-ink reader. No matter what, e-ink is still fairly similar to ink on paper, and to many people (like myself) the experience of reading print-sharp text on a reflective surface (like paper) is preferable to reading on an emmitive surface (like an LCD). After all, the fire is an e-reader, the ipad is a tablet computer—crossover functions, but still separate devices with specific relative niches. If someone gets around to perfecting color e-ink, I'm there in a heart beat.

Why wouldn't someone just buy one of Amazon's cheaper devices, as you did with the Nook, if all they want to do is read a book?
na na na na na...
Reply
na na na na na...
Reply
post #133 of 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by ConradJoe View Post

Are you predicting that the iPad will go from 90% market share down to 10% due to the new Kindle? I think that is a little extreme, especially in the short run.

http://memeburn.com/2011/09/gartner-...-tablet-market

Question really is will the Kindle Fire change those numbers faster. Much like Andriod did on the smartphone.

Not if but when
post #134 of 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by ConradJoe View Post

37%. Just like the iPhone. But it will not be the biggest, because all the Apple-haters and cheapskates and poor people with no taste will all buy Android tablets, and Android tablets will be over 50%.

Unless the Kindle is 70%, the iPad wont be 30%. Because, as I have written, this tablet has killed all other Android tablets, unless other hardware manufacturers want to sell at a loss.

If you think this will be successful on price alone, the only surviving competitor will be Apple. Nobody else has the content to subsidise the hardware.
I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
post #135 of 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by joguide View Post


But for most consumers, they are looking for the leading edge in technology, and this is clearly not it.
It is yesterday's technology repackaged in a nice discount price. For some that is enough.

JoeG

Android phones currently outsell iOS phones more than 2 to 1.

Why do you expect the tablet market to be different?
post #136 of 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by bettieblue View Post

http://memeburn.com/2011/09/gartner-...-tablet-market

Question really is will the Kindle Fire change those numbers faster. Much like Andriod did on the smartphone.

Not if but when

Apple were never at 90% on the phone market - they have yet to compete on price. And they haven't lost share to Android ( possibly they have lost potential share). What will happen in the next year is Apple growing as they enter new markets - China and Japan - and lower prices.
I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
I wanted dsadsa bit it was taken.
Reply
post #137 of 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by matrix07 View Post

Huh? 73.4% this quarter according to Gartner.

You're wasting your time with bettie. Scroll through her/his posting history and you'll understand why. How's that Palm Pre holding up, bettie?
post #138 of 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by matrix07 View Post

I'm not sure I understand you right but books in iBook store is already cheaper than in Kindle.

Furthermore, I have seen many books that are MORE EXPENSIVE in kindle than in paperback through Amazon. That is scandalous!

Furthermore, you're enprisoned in the proprietary kindle format, it's not PDF! I will shy away from Kindle App as much as possible!
post #139 of 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by island hermit View Post

Why wouldn't someone just buy one of Amazon's cheaper devices if all they want to do is read a book?

Magazines are much more appropriate for a color device. My wife has probably a dozen or more subscriptions to various periodicals on her Nook Color, and often just because it was so convenient to do IMHO. I doubt she regularly reads some of them, but the $30+ every month still charges to her account. She's the kind of customer that Amazon is going after, and I think there's a lot of them out there.
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
melior diabolus quem scies
Reply
post #140 of 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by ConradJoe View Post

Android phones currently outsell iOS phones more than 2 to 1.

Why do you expect the tablet market to be different?

Because they can't tie them to carriers as they can with phones, lol.
post #141 of 303
Nice to see Amazon employees commenting favorably inside AI as if it's going to do squat against the iPad 2. This will not compete against thee iPad 2 perspective buyers.
post #142 of 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by ConradJoe View Post

Android phones currently outsell iOS phones more than 2 to 1.

Why do you expect the tablet market to be different?

If I may...

2 different markets.

Everyone wants a phone but does everyone want a tablet? Maybe Apple is currently fulfilling the tablet market whereas the smartphone market has a long ways to go... lots of open road.

Just a theory as to why the tablet market might be different.
na na na na na...
Reply
na na na na na...
Reply
post #143 of 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post

For proof of this, just look at all the successful 7" tablets on the market today.



3:2.

the 7" tablets you are referring to have a crappy UI, no content and cost twice as much. No valid comparison whatsoever.

Bye bye iPad 90% market share.
post #144 of 303
One might want to keep in mind that the Orcl vs Goog suit will almost certainly result in some licensing fees for Goog/android if not an injunction. Any device based on android has this risk built in. So the final price to amzn may be higher than the reported $180 BOM.
post #145 of 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by asdasd View Post

Unless the Kindle is 70%, the iPad wont be 30%. Because, as I have written, this tablet has killed all other Android tablets, unless other hardware manufacturers want to sell at a loss.

We saw similar comments in the early days of Android phones too.
post #146 of 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post

Magazines are much more appropriate for a color device. My wife has probably a dozen or more subscriptions to various periodicals on her Nook Color, and often just because it was so convenient to do IMHO. I doubt she regularly reads some of them, but the $30+ every month still charges to her account. She's the kind of customer that Amazon is going after, and I think there's a lot of them out there.

I'm not sure how large the market is for magazine readers over book readers. I'd say the vast majority of people would rather spend $79 - $99 to read books than to pay the extra $100 or more so that they can read magazines.

The Fire just seems to be a very limited market to me.

Maybe it would sell better at $149 but that's below the $180 required to build it.
na na na na na...
Reply
na na na na na...
Reply
post #147 of 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by Postulant View Post

Because they can't tie them to carriers as they can with phones, lol.

Seems like a distinction without a difference. Amazon will be tying the device to their online stores.
post #148 of 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by ConradJoe View Post

We saw similar comments in the early days of Android phones too.

You may have seen similar comments, but Android was expected to become the dominate modern smartphone OS on the market by any and all reasonable people. It's used by dozens of vendors with dozens of products (not just smartphones) in the widest distribution and price points possible. The real question is why don't all these Android-based devices besting Apple in WiFi access, page hits, and total revenue or profit. The fact that Apple's sole iPhone has any of those leads is proof Google is fraking it up.
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"
Reply
post #149 of 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by island hermit View Post

If I may...

2 different markets.

Everyone wants a phone but does everyone want a tablet? Maybe Apple is currently fulfilling the tablet market whereas the smartphone market has a long ways to go... lots of open road.

Just a theory as to why the tablet market might be different.

Soon the market will be over saturated with Android tablets. When you have hundreds of manufacturers using Android, there's no other way around it. Apple is an army of one. Android is an army of... Well, you know.
post #150 of 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post

I think the proper phrase is "doesn't directly compete ..."

The Amazon tablet is aimed at a different end user, but this same end user has up until now been buying iPads at lest some of the time. So if you are buying an iPad and just using it for reading and playing the occasional game then you might the tempted to use this device instead. It doesn't do as much, but it's cheaper.

It doesn't "directly compete" because what it does is just a subset of what the iPad can potentially do. At the same time, recent studies have shown that a lot of iPad buyers do regard them as "toys" and do primarily use them just for reading and playing the occasional game.

I don't think it's right to say that the two devices compete or don't compete. The situation is more complicated than that.

In terms of iPad sales, I would say that some sales will indeed be stolen by "dumb" or "locked" tablets like Amazon's as tablet's gain popularity in general. But the iPad is still stealing sales away from netbooks and laptops on the other end and operating in markets that the Amazon tablet will never be in. The markets for each overlap, but don't directly compete.

I think that is a correct, well thought out and phrased comment.
post #151 of 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by ConradJoe View Post

Seems like a distinction without a difference. Amazon will be tying the device to their online stores.

And it wont compete with the iPad... With other e-readers? Yes!
post #152 of 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by tjw View Post

the 7" tablets you are referring to have a crappy UI, no content and cost twice as much. No valid comparison whatsoever.

Same here.
post #153 of 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by Postulant View Post

Soon the market will be over saturated with Android tablets. When you hundreds of manufacturers using Android, there's no other way around it. Apple is an army of one. Android is an army of... Well, you know.

Soon?

I've seen a few Android tablets come and go. I think it's going to be a little later than soon if the other tablets can't even gain any traction.
na na na na na...
Reply
na na na na na...
Reply
post #154 of 303
If this thing can browse the web decently and a few apps here and there......I'll take it over an iPad any day due to cost. For a phone, a full web experience isn't a big deal to me. For a tablet (if this is the market it is trying to grab), flash is a big deal. I can't stand it when I go to an Apple store and while waiting for someone to assist me on whatever it may be that I am there for, the iPad I play with loads the full webpage and certain functions don't work.

A part of it is also lazy or underfunded development for conversion away from flash.
post #155 of 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by bettieblue View Post

What is the ratio of consumers looking at hardware specs vs ease of use and do what I need it to do?

I dont know the exact ratio but if hardware specs where the majority of consumers choice, the iPad would not be the leader in current sales as the Xoom and others have offered way more hardware features already. (USB, better screen ratio/res, memory etc)

The device + echo syste + ease of use for device/echo system + PRICE is the formula that only Apple has gotten right so far.

Kindle already had that formula correct when it came to e-readers.

I am referring to technology, not features. They may quote more features, Xoom is competing on equal footing with relatively similar technology (processing, screen).

Kindle fire is not similar technology, but in fact, dated technology. It will provide a need, but I doubt it will interest people who looking for leading technology. While iPAD was successful, the faster and better iPAD2 did much better. In fact people waited specifically for next best technology. Kindle fire is not that, and caters to a different market.
post #156 of 303
I don't understand their decision to sell it at $199. The cost of materials may be $180, but when you include R&D, packaging, marketing, sales, etc. they'll end up losing money on the device. Why do that? It makes no sense. The device would sell just fine at $249, and they could make a small profit. Looks like another race-to-the-bottom, started by Amazon.
post #157 of 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by emacs72 View Post

the Kindle Fire neither was nor ever intended to compete directly against the iPad.

http://www.engadget.com/2011/09/28/i...ys-stay-tuned/


Quote:
Originally Posted by mytdave View Post

I don't understand their decision to sell it at $199. The cost of materials may be $180, but when you include R&D, packaging, marketing, sales, etc. they'll end up losing money on the device. Why do that? It makes no sense. The device would sell just fine at $249, and they could make a small profit. Looks like another race-to-the-bottom, started by Amazon.

"Dumb price"

Are you serious?

It's called psychological price barrier.

Amazon has broken through that.

It's proven in marketing.

Why $199 vs $249?

Because the units sold @ $199 will be three times as much as units sold @ $249.

Are you arguing from a consumers point of view or as an Apple supporter point of view?

No consumer would say no to a lower price.

It seems like its the latter.



Quote:
Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post

I think the proper phrase is "doesn't directly compete ..."

The Amazon tablet is aimed at a different end user, but this same end user has up until now been buying iPads at lest some of the time. So if you are buying an iPad and just using it for reading and playing the occasional game then you might the tempted to use this device instead. It doesn't do as much, but it's cheaper.

It doesn't "directly compete" because what it does is just a subset of what the iPad can potentially do. At the same time, recent studies have shown that a lot of iPad buyers do regard them as "toys" and do primarily use them just for reading and playing the occasional game.

I don't think it's right to say that the two devices compete or don't compete. The situation is more complicated than that.

In terms of iPad sales, I would say that some sales will indeed be stolen by "dumb" or "locked" tablets like Amazon's as tablet's gain popularity in general. But the iPad is still stealing sales away from netbooks and laptops on the other end and operating in markets that the Amazon tablet will never be in. The markets for each overlap, but don't directly compete.

You are in denial.

"Like I said before, share price will dip into the $400."  - 11/21/12 by Galbi

Reply

"Like I said before, share price will dip into the $400."  - 11/21/12 by Galbi

Reply
post #158 of 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by island hermit View Post

Soon?

I've seen a few Android tablets come and go. I think it's going to be a little later than soon if the other tablets can't even gain any traction.

Most of them are DOA. And the only real distinction between them all is the name on the unit.
post #159 of 303
I think it will be the first non-iPad, flat tablet-y thing that sells well.
But remember what it is....
Its a vending machine.
That's all.
post #160 of 303
Quote:
Originally Posted by ConradJoe View Post

Are you predicting that the iPad will go from 90% market share down to 10% due to the new Kindle? I think that is a little extreme, especially in the short run.

Nope. I'm saying Apple can continue to clean up the profits with their premium hardware, at-cost content strategy because not everyone wants the your average hardware that everyone has. If they can capture the top 10% of the post-PC market, I think they'd be doing great. If they get 20%, 30%? Awesome.

Who knows what they'll get and do. They can sell a $300 or $400 iPad if they wanted, but past history indicates they don't do that all that often.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPad
  • Amazon Kindle Fire aims to undercut Apple's iPad with $199 price
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPad › Amazon Kindle Fire aims to undercut Apple's iPad with $199 price