Amazon Kindle Fire aims to undercut Apple's iPad with $199 price - Page 6

Nonsense. They dominate mp3 players. And no manufacturer can compete with the iPad except Amazon. That's just one model.


Let me repeat what I keep having to say. The android tablet market is dead - that's all Kindle. Only Apple can compete.

That's an interesting question!

I would guess yes -- for these reasons:

1) Next week announce

2) Some rumors of realignment of part numbers

3) No update to the the iOS beta since August 31

4) The recent iCloud enema

5) Rumors of iOS voice activation

I suspect that Apple will announce the new iPhone on October 4, available November 4 (Friday).

They will announce iOS 5 GM for developers (with any new features) available immediately.

iOS 5 can be made available to the Public anytime between Oct 4 and Dec 4.

I suspect that they might do a staggered release of iOS 5 and/or iCloud before the iPhone 5 -- so the can control the download activity and the anticipated load on their iCloud Servers.

This is showtime for Eddie Cue!

I totally agree with this. 16:9 is not an optimal ratio for activities other than watching movies.

Obviously, the device is compared to the iPad here because the banner at the top of this page has "Apple" in the name. The real product this goes head to head with is Nook. I have the latest e-ink Nook and it's awesome. I mainly have it because 1. The original Nook had features that suit me better than the original Kindle, and 2. it sells at brick and mortar stores so you can easily swing by to touch it in person to see how it works (I did so, ironically on my way to the Apple store in my mall). Since I started with Nook, I went with the second gen touch. I can't imagine that the Kindle touch could be significantly better, but it sells for $40 dollars less. In the war between Amazon and B&N, it seems being the first to release a product may not always be best.

B&N had a color reader-tablet like device first, but it sells for $50 more (also with a similar form factor). The fire appears to be a far superior color reader than the Nook Color because of Amazon Prime, and it costs less. I haven't used any kindle to see what the interface is like, but the touch e-ink they sell combined with the greater media and what seems to be a superior device in the fire are the kind of things that could seriously put Barnes and Noble in danger of going out of business, if their brick and mortar experience for people who want traditional printed books isn't enough to offset Amazon pulling ahead in the e-reader department. B&N better have something significant waiting in the wings to roll out soon, or I think they could be in serious jeopardy.

That's the nature of a compromise device - while it does a better job with most uses, other devices do a "best job" with certain tailored uses.

That's an interesting question. In our house we have 6 iPads 3 iPad 1s and 3 iPad 2s. Two of the 3 kids have iPad 1s. the oldest kid has an iPad 2 as do the 2 adults.

The iPad 1 are perfectly adequate for most uses: reading, homework, drill and practice, movies, games.

In fact, all but a handful of the 702 apps we have purchased (including iPhone apps) will run on the iPad 1.

Apple is currently selling refurb WiFi iPad 1s for $299.

I wonder If Apple were to Reintroduce the iPad 1 WiFi as a high-volume, lower-cost model alongside the iPad 2. I suspect they could sell it for, say, $249 and include some iCloud services and iTunes Store apps and content.

I suspect that, with Apple's economies of scale, older technology, development costs already recovered, etc... they could make a respectable profit at $249.

They named it Fire because that's how your fingers feel after being sanded down to use the 7" screen.

Actually I get what they're doing. Content-consumption. Less creation (if any).

I think it's really a competitor to a 3rd Gen iPod Touch.

Mostly consumption, a few non-serious apps, and that's it.

It may sell, but it's not a direct competitor. It doesn't SEEM like they're going head to head with Apple, but sites will say-so to get hits.

The real temptation will be THIS WiFi thing for $200 against a $350 1st-gen iPad WiFI Refurb from Apple (which they've had), or even $300 or less on the used market.

I think they'll see a decent number, but it's stop-gap until later, and won't take a big-bite out of ipad.

It tells us that because of the above points, Amazon sold exactly as many as it ordered. Or wait...maybe they sold DESPITE the above points? Or maybe the points were irrelevant and had little to do with sales one way or the other? Maybe the sales would have been higher/lower had one or more or some or all of the above had been different?

I dunno.

You betchum, Red Rider...

BTW, got a link

...The closest I could find is:

terror of tiny town




An evil gunslinging midget comes to terrorize the good little people of Tiny Town. The townspeople organize to defeat him, and zany antics ensue...

I predict Amazon will sell a ton of Fires, and Apple will sell a ton of iPads, and the world will continue to turn.

My problem with the typical iPad competitor is that it's less functionality (exactly how much is debatable) for roughly the same price as the iPad. Less functionality for a significantly lower price makes a lot more sense to most people. Especially if it does what you need, and the "lost" functionality is something you wouldn't use anyway.

Different people have different needs, but I spend 95% of my iPad time in web, mail, news, and reading apps -- and I'd be shocked if the Fire isn't completely adequate for those. I've bought dozens of awesome apps and rarely use most of them. I have no interest in the iBooks store because I can pay the same price elsewhere for the same ebook that works on multiple device platforms. I find the cripped iPad shopping apps annoying (and think it's ridiculous for Apple to demand a 30% cut for physical products where the actual online seller is likely only making 10%).

All that to say... perhaps the iPad is both overkill and less than perfect for a lot of people?

I'm guessing I could probably keep the iPad and still get $199 of value out of one of these... I could only imagine what that means for someone without an iPad.

Question:

What if Oracle wins its case against Google for Android? Does this mean that anyone who has forked Android is open to a similar lawsuit from Oracle?

As I understand it, once you fork Android -- it's yours from then on (or until you fork another version).

Verdad?

I am quite happy with my iPad. One reason I might buy a Fire is if it has significantly more movie content than iTunes. I am a big movie fan and am often disappointed with the size of Apple's back catalog (though they seem to have most of the new releases).

Kindle TV commercial

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jUtmO...el_video_title

The UI is even more simple than Apple's iPad.

For the price of 1 iPad (wifi 16GB) you can get 3 Kindles ( 2 Kindle Fire + 1 Kindle E-reader) AND still have $20 left for accessories.

Translation:


Quoted from a CNET comment by Pete Saman.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-30686_3-20...carouselMain.0

See AI? How easy that was to quote your sources?

Amzn's pe is vulnerable to individual state's collecting sales tax, like California recently tried to do. In fact their whole business model which has a four percent margin will collapse if when the states start collecting

Personally a five percent bump in their prices makes them less compelling.

In truth I don't find their store design attractive.

Whatever happened to the Android lovers hatred of closed source closed environments?

Apple needs to submit iBooks to the Android store

The Kindle Fire shows that it was only ever about hating Apple for the sake of hating Apple.

What is up with that wanky note on Amazon's front page? Dear Customer, there are two kinds of companies... blah blah blah. Why not just start with "We are excited to announce... " ?

They seem to be worried that people will take the low price as meaning it's junk, and therefore feel the need to frame the announcement with this paragraph at the top, and a similar one at the bottom.

But to today's battle hardened consumer, framing is obvious and clumsy and off-putting. Just trust your customer to think about the product their way, and still come to the right conclusion, instead of trying to control how they think about it.

Or, for the price of a refurb 16 GB WiFi iPad 1 you get:

$299 iPad 1
-Free 5 GB iCloud storage
-Free unlimited iCloud storage for purchased iTunes (and you don't have to spend hours/days uploading your music)
-Free unlimited iCloud storage for purchased Apps

What is iCloud?

Only if you want to write an essay. For reading a book, watching a movie, browsing this is just fine.

One of the iPad's strengths will be that you can type well on it. The Kindle Fire's strength will be that you can consume Amazon media on a cheap tablet.

I don't know why I even try.

For the unabashed fanboys: http://thisismynext.com/2011/09/28/e...dle-fire-ipad/

The iPad and the Kindle Fire are in different markets. But this is sure to hurt iPad sales. It won't stop the growth of the iPad. But it might certainly dent it. Those who want a device to just consume media will pick this up. Those who want a well spec'd tablet computer will get the iPad.

The thing is the iPad is really expensive for what most people do on it: read, watch movies and surf the web. And occassionally play Angry Birds. You'll be able to do all that on a device that's less than half the price.

It's a brilliant move and the right strategy for a company that makes money selling content. Some are hung up on how much they might be losing per device. That's the wrong approach. They'll sell Amazon Prime memberships, Kindle Books, Movies and Android Apps and make up the shortfall in months (I would bet 3-6 months). The strategy has worked for Gillette. It's worked for every game console maker. Why can't it work for Amazon?

And since they are not forking Android (just skinning it), it will be easy for them to attract apps. No need to do additional work. Just submit your app to Amazon's App Store. They'll offer a curated app store and a media eco-system that's as good as what Apple's got (maybe even better in some respects....Amazon Prime for example). All without really having to spend time developing the OS (just work on their propreitary skin) on a tablet that's at impulse buy prices.

This thing easily has the potential to sell at Touchpad like levels. The only question is whether potential users really want an Android tablet that's fully tied into Amazon. We're about to find out how strong Amazon's brand really is.

Have you guys seen any hands on videos? I just did, and I think it looks pretty fluid, smooth and nice. I think a lot of regular people not interested in benchmarks are gonna look at these videos and think "Why pay 500 for an iPad when I can pay 200 for a Kindle Fire? I just wanna read books, surf the web and run some apps and play Angry Birds."
I'd say iPad just got in trouble. Not everyone want nor need the power of the iPad.

This is not a fork of Android though. They are just skinning it. Like HTC Sense, Motorola Motoblur, Samsung Touchwiz, etc. It's a UI layer.

Very few people would disagree that this will sell well. However it is not an iPad killer - and Apple, if pushed can start to sell iPad 1's again.

It has killed the rest of the Android tablet market, it has killed Googles tablet OS plans ( why bother if the major Android OS is not going to use your stuff - devs will develop for 2.2 only, and possibly use Android specific API if any) and it means that google will get no money from tablet sales - the browser caches searches so Android gets one search term per day and delivers it to everybody who searches for that term. Google have developed an OS which is now going to significantly harm their bottom line. They may well stop with tablet versions of the OS.

Excellent article and spot on.

I believe the same thing.

The devices cater to two different markets. The Kindle Fire will be about consumption. The iPad will be about consumption and creation.

Until now there's been no real alternative (price/capability wise) on the consumption side. The Kindle Fire is the first reasonable competitor to the iPad on this front.

Nail, meet head.

It's a fork. That difference is semantic anyway. Amazon will never move past 2.2. It does what they need.

We interrupt this programming to bring you a rant-

So why do all these !#@% laptop makers put 16:9 screens into laptops???.

Sorry, rhetorical rant. Bring back the 4:3 laptop screen!!

You may resume your normal programming.

Agreed. iDevice-killer is a moronic concept anyway. How do you define when a gadget has been "killed"?


Remains to be seen. Not everybody will want to be tied in so tightly to the Amazon ecosystem. Just like not everybody wants to be tied to the Apple or Google ecosystem. And this tablet is still not anywhere as functional as other devices. So there will be a market for regular Android tablets.

Without a doubt though, this will have changed the Android tablet game for sure. I predict we'll see tablets that have iPad capabilities for $300 in a few months. That'll be the only way to compete.

And with this move, Amazon is going to cause collateral damage everywhere. Windows tablets may suffer. So might the iPad. If you're a die-hard Amazon subscriber, would you buy a $500 iPad now just to read some Kindle books? There may have been a few who did that before. Doubt it's going to happen now.


Why would they stop developing the OS? The tablet market is still miniscule compared to the phone market....and incidentally looks like it will be less profitable too. Even if the lost the entire tablet market to Amazon (and that's unlikely), they'll still have an incentive to keep pushing the OS. After all, the iPad's lead hasn't stopped them from trying.

As for developing apps only for Android 2.2 because of this tablet. That would hurt both Amazon and Android as a whole. The higher OS versions also come with higher API levels allowing for better apps. It makes no sense for Amazon to stick to Android 2.2 only. They may have started there, but they'll evolve. It's even more important when you're selling the device at a loss to be able to offer amazing apps. It will be hard to do that if they stick to a dated version of the OS.

As for hurting Google through revenue loss. Sure. But Google cares far more about Android on your phone, than they do about Android on your tablet. You're not going to be using your tablet to navigate, to pay for stuff and to communicate on a regular basis (especially when that tablet doesn't have a 3G connection). They'll offer most of the Google apps through the App Store and be somewhat able to make up the lost revenue.

Using a previous version of an OS is a fork? Since when?

So if I kept my Mac on Snow Leopard and didn't install Lion, I'd be using a fork of OS X?

As for not moving past 2.2, they can try that. They won't attract the best developers then. 2.2 is already several API levels behind. And with every OS update the gap will widen. What developer would want to work with such a limited tool set?

The iPad may be a toy for you, but it is both a tool (and a toy) for me, especially when travelling. PDF editing and plan review in the field (construction sites), e-mail, remote desktop access when needed, photo documentation, video editing of flip video, games, FaceTime, etc.
It has replaced my MacBook as a travel companion, and I leave my Lenovo ThinkPad at my desk in the office anyways

The Kindle Fire will not be capable to satisfactorily fullfill all these functions (starting at the screen size that is simply too small for remote desktop use). However: I am sure it will be the entry drug for more tablet users and it will make some Kindle users upgrade from their current devices for additional functionality. The bigger news to me is the introduction of touchscreen technology throughout the kindle product line.

On the other hand: People who are already iPad users will be less likely to downgrade to this device, and not using e-ink on a primary reading device will not tempt heavy book worms. They will tend to have both an iPad and a Kindle.

Half the memory, a smaller display, why would anyone expect it to not be cheaper than an iPad???

What I would like to know is why the hell is the new entry model $79 in the USA and £89 in the UK?

You didn't build an OS, they did. Android didn't install vanilla 2.2 on their tablets and add stuff on top like a user, they forked the code and added code. Then apps. Then they compiled.

Why would they move past 2.2? it does what they want, and shares no UI with 3.0. Developers will flock to where the money is. If this is an iPad "killer" then it is a rest of the market massacrer. And if devs have no financial reason to move past 2.2, they won't.

Wait, what? A fork implies that they have created a new branch of the OS where if you develops apps for said branch it might not work on other branches of the OS. If you develop an app that works on Android 2.2, it will work on any device that runs Android 2.2 or higher, be it from Amazon or elsewhere. Can you please provide evidence they forked the OS? Until you prove otherwise, this is a baseless assertion. Everything that they have said demonstrated so far seems to me to be a skinned version of Android 2.2. Adding apps does not mean they forked the OS. If you have anything that says they actually forked the OS, I'd love to see it. This is the first I'm reading that they forked the OS.



Because they want developers to have better tools?


You are assuming that it does everything they want. Do you have concrete evidence that Android 2.2 meets all of Amazon's business goals for the Kindle Fire? Why is not possible that this was just the Android level they launched with because it took them damn long to skin the thing....just look at how long it takes some OEMs to put out updates because of their skins. I think it's entirely conceivable that we may see at least Android 2.3.

You may however be right about Android 3.0. But even there, Amazon would be foolish not to eventually migrate to an OS version that properly supports the development of apps for tablets.


Reality is far more complex. Even if Amazon takes the entire Android tablet market, that market will still be miniscule for a while to come, compared to the Android smartphone market. Developers would make far more money there. And there's nothing stopping developers from submitting to both markets, which, if you look at the apps on the Amazon App Store, is exactly what most developers have done.

As for not having any financial reason to move past 2.2. Well that's up to Amazon. If they stagnate the OS version, the best apps will stay on the Android Market and attract the best developers. The Amazon App Store will be its poor cousin. As of right now, most app are developed for 2.1/2.2. In a year from now? That might not be the case.

In any event, we'll see what happens....it's an interesting move on Amazon's part.

1) a fork implies nothing about Apis. It's just taking code from a branch, rather than the latest version.
2) amazon have no reason to care about googles tools or long term plans.
3) If a company is asked to develop an app in the future - say a game - the clients will ask for it to run on Kindle. Thus stymies future Android dev.

It's cheaper, it's fast enough and good enough -- and it really is pretty minimalist. This tablet is basically a consumption device. Amazon works from its strength, and delivers content. It will be a big success.

How much will this cut into the iPad? Not much. It's complementary. The iPad and the Kindle Fire both build the tablet market, and this is a different segment. The iPad may have a little brother someday, but Apple's a hardware company. They aren't retailers on the level of Amazon. I want to know the security details of Silk. It only works if you allow all your web content to go the cloud, get rendered and be passed down to your Fire. That means that Amazon will have a perfectly-detailed record of everything you do on your tablet. It's cheap, but at a price -- it will mostly be like having a store to wander around and buy things from.

No. That's not the definition of a fork. A fork is when you take the code and undertake independent development on it that results in a distinct piece of software. Amazon is using Android 2.3 (not 2.2, confirmed by TIMN). They are creating their own unique version of Android. They are however, creating a unique UI. Or skin.

If they did what you are suggesting, none of the apps on the Amazon Android Appstore would work on the device. Keep in mind the Android Appstore launched months ago and has been selling apps to regular Android users. Had they forked Android, the apps on the Android Appstore would not work on other Android devices.


They don't. But they should care about their long term progress. If they want to compete with the iPad, either they provide the tools or use the tools somebody else (ie. Google) has built. Simple as that.

They haven't even shown the same ambition that Baidu has. Baidu forked Android. Amazon did not.


All depends whether that company cares about selling that app solely in the Amazon Android Appstore or if they want to sell it in the Android Market as well. What do you think most rational developers would choose?

Some points to keep in mind:

1) This thing has no mic or camera. So it won't support apps like Skype.
2) The Amazon Appstore (6 countries?) and all their various media services are still not available everywhere.
3) Kindle Games are US only I believe.
4) Amazon Prime is US only
5) It won't have the most popular apps on Android: all the Google apps (Maps, GMail, Gtalk, Google Earth).

I think sales predictions should be tempered with those items in mind. This will sell better than the Kindle. Might have a minor impact on the growth of iPad sales. And it'll do a bit to Android tablet sales. But not as much as some expect. People will realize its limitations sooner or later. That's my opinion. Others are, of course, entitled to their own.

No, it is your ignorance that is amazing. A large percentage, although not 95% buy an ipad because its an apple device and its cool. They won't even look at a Kindle. Another large percentage buy an iPad because the need iOS to be compatible with their other Apple devices. They too won't look at an iPad.


The competition for a Kindle is a Barnes and Noble Nook Color, not iPad