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?
Didn't say all I wanted to do is read. It's a matter of weight you give to usage and how much money you want to spend. The latter not being insignificant. I'd love to surf the web occasionally while lying in bed, or sitting on the sofa reading. But in those circumstances I'm mainly reading. A device that offers resolution comparable to e-ink (like a retina iPad) plus the OPTION to use as a tablet computer, portable media server is a good thing. Still, there are times when you know you just want to sit outside and read. In that case an e-ink reader is still a good thing to have. If you can't justify spending the money on an e-ink reader and a retina Ipad, then the fire is appealing. Again, the fire is not a direct competitor to the ipad. It's alternative product targeted at a slightly different niche. The gamble for amazon is how big that niche turns out to be. From a cost stand point, you can own a kindle touch e-ink reader AND a kindle fire and still spend 200 bucks less than the entry level iPad.
I am not going to start comparing the iPad to the Fire but simply say well done to a company that appears to have taken it's time and not jumped on the band wagon without thinking first and coming up with a few products that look worthwhile in their own right. Competition is healthy for everyone and Amazon appear to be one of the few that are properly competing rather than copying. Who knows their might be room in our lives for one of each of these products!?
I am not going to start comparing the iPad to the Fire but simply say well done to a company that appears to have taken it's time and not jumped on the band wagon without thinking first and coming up with a few products that look worthwhile in their own right. Competition is healthy for everyone and Amazon appear to be one of the few that are properly competing rather than copying. Who knows their might be room in our lives for one of each of these products!?
Didn't say all I wanted to do is read. It's a matter of weight you give to usage and how much money you want to spend. The latter not being insignificant. I'd love to surf the web occasionally while lying in bed, or sitting on the sofa reading. But in those circumstances I'm mainly reading. A device that offers resolution comparable to e-ink (like a retina iPad) plus the OPTION to use as a tablet computer, portable media server is a good thing. Still, there are times when you know you just want to sit outside and read. In that case an e-ink reader is still a good thing to have. If you can't justify spending the money on an e-ink reader and a retina Ipad, then the fire is appealing. Again, the fire is not a direct competitor to the ipad. It's alternative product targeted at a slightly different niche. The gamble for amazon is how big that niche turns out to be. From a cost stand point, you can own a kindle tough e-ink reader AND a kindle fire and still spend 200 bucks less than the entry level iPad.
Actually, I didn't mention the iPad at all just because I don't see the Fire as a competitor. I see the real competition for the Fire being the e-ink readers offered by Amazon at a much cheaper price.
Android phones currently outsell iOS phones more than 2 to 1.
Why do you expect the tablet market to be different?
I agree that tablet markets will follow along similar lines. However, Amazon's survival is predicated on having consumer get to their site for content (books, movies music). They have been squeezed out in the "post PC" market where Apple pushes their customers to their Appstore, and Google pushes their advertising to their customers. To remain relevant, they need their own portal to their store. So their goal is to sell as many Kindle fire even if they make no money on their device. It is a loss leader, that will be their paid piper to get them to their core business, which is selling content.
So yes, they will sell a lot of cheap, dated tablets for next to nothing. But it will have little impact to Apple's business strategy, just like the smartphone business where they make over 50% of the profits. It will impact Google.
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.
People looking for leading technology are a tiny market segment. For example, the 16 month-old iPhone 4 is the best selling single phone out there, and it is in no way leading technology. A better example is the 3GS, which has zero leading technology, and is the second-best selling smartphone.
The Geekazoids don't count much with the bean counters at Apple. Or Amazon. Or in most any consumer market. There are niche products for them, like Ferraris. Apple aims for the sweet spot, the broadest market segment. And leading tech is no way to get grandma to buy your portable device. She doesn't care.
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.
What is so fundamentally different in the iPad vs this? NOTHING!
A retailer turned content seller turned hardware manufacturer competing against a hardware manufacturer turned content seller turned distributor.
They both are in the same market competing for dollars. Both are in the tablet business and both consumption units with limited content creation capabilities.
One selling it almost at cost (or even below cost) the other selling it at above cost (and at a profit).
Amazon's strategy is loss leader. They generate most of their profits through software sales, not on hardware sales.
As many people realized with the HP's firesale, people are very sensitive with prices in this category as it is not a necessity with very capable alternatives available in the market.
We saw similar comments in the early days of Android phones too.
You didn't read my comment. If you thnk the kindle will defeat the iPad on price then it has to defeat all other Android devices on price as manufacturers can't subsidize. So if Android is 70% then it is all Kindle.
Actually, I didn't mention the iPad at all just because I don't see the Fire as a competitor. I see the real competition for the Fire being the e-ink readers offered by Amazon at a much cheaper price.
I mentioned the ipad. I plan on getting one when/if it goes retina. For reading only, I wouldn't get any lcd screen, and I haven't.
But if you decide you want a tablet, and you already own an e-ink device, getting the color version of the product you own (meaning everything digital you bought through your existing account migrates effortlessly to your new device and OS) is especially appealing at a price that is so much cheaper than other tablets. The fire is a cheap alternative for people mainly interested in an e-reader to migrate to tablets to see if they like the experience, without dropping 500 bucks.
I happen not to fit in that niche myself. I want an e-ink reader, and I want a tablet with superior resolution. I'll spend the significant wad of dough to get a retina ipad AND also have an e-ink reader, but I'm not always that wise with how I spend my money.
People looking for leading technology are a tiny market segment. For example, the 16 month-old iPhone 4 is the best selling single phone out there, and it is in no way leading technology. A better example is the 3GS, which has zero leading technology, and is the second-best selling smartphone.
The Geekazoids don't count much with the bean counters at Apple. Or Amazon. Or in most any consumer market. There are niche products for them, like Ferraris.
If you are talking about appliances, that may be true, but not for technology.
While iPhone3GS are heavily discounted upfront, it is still second to iPhone4 which is more expensive. For people who prefer apple, iPhone4 is the leading technology available (until next week), which prove my point. Wait until iPhone 5 is released and see which becomes the hottest phone.
For most technologies, people do not aspire for second rate equipment, not if they can help it.
I agree that tablet markets will follow along similar lines. However, Amazon's survival is predicated on having consumer get to their site for content (books, movies music).
Amazon is not fighting for survival. Not even close. Indeed, their stock is doing extremely much better than Apple's over several different time horizons.
I'm expecting the Kindle Fire to easily crush all other droid-based iPad clones in terms of profit and sales. And to still be a distant #2 to iPad in terms of profit and sales. We'll see in about a years' time.
This looks like a good move for Amazon. It's basically a 'razors and blades' strategy. Sell the device for as little as possible to make money selling content. The content and distribution has always been the key to these types of devices. Apple will continue to do VERY well with their iPad which has carved out a nice niche in the business community. The Kindle is really designed more as a consumer device with very little appeal to businesses. Interesting times we live in. The birth of a new computing paradigm
Well, the Kindle Fire will be the "iPad" everyone got because they couldn't or didn't want to get the iPad. At best.
One of the great marketing realities is that company's need to be willing to "eat their own children" (products).
The posters who said the Fire will have an impact are correct -- it competes for the "tablet-is-easier-to-use-than-my-PC" space in the home. Once Amazon's movies, apps get entrenched then that household will be more likely to follow the upgrade to more expensive Amazon (modified Android) products as long as their app/media investments are preserved.
The number of households who want multiple, unrelated, tablet families with a different UX are a
NANO-segment of buyers. There is really only one opening in households for a "tablet-is-easier-to-use-than-my-PC" device.
Apple would do themselves a great favor by finding a way to get very, very close to the price point of an Amazon Fire in order to reduce intrusion into the iPad's primary market space. Find it, build it, iCloud it, and then give them a reason to move up to a faster, better, more expensive iPad (as the first one gets handed to someone else in the household).
The general (non-tech) media will establish the market position that it's an alternative to the low end iPads before today is over. Just look at the headlines from Fox and MSNBC already.
I've been wrong before, but almost never about marketing.
I mentioned the ipad. I plan on getting one when/if it goes retina. For reading only, I wouldn't get any lcd screen, and I haven't.
But if you decide you want a tablet, and you already own an e-ink device, getting the color version of the product you own (meaning everything digital you bought through your existing account migrates effortlessly to your new device and OS) is especially appealing at a price that is so much cheaper than other tablets. The fire is a cheap alternative for people mainly interested in an e-reader to migrate to tablets to see if they like the experience, without dropping 500 bucks.
I happen not to fit in that niche myself. I want an e-ink reader, and I want a tablet with superior resolution. I'll spend the significant wad of dough to get a retina ipad AND also have an e-ink reader, but I'm not always that wise with how I spend my money.
Actually... I'm like you. I have the iPad v1 but am waiting for a higher rez version before I'll purchase another (my Wife uses it for photos, email, browsing... I use it mainly for astronomy and games)... at the same time, though, I have been waiting for the new version of the Kindle to use as an e-reader.
Comments
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?
Didn't say all I wanted to do is read. It's a matter of weight you give to usage and how much money you want to spend. The latter not being insignificant. I'd love to surf the web occasionally while lying in bed, or sitting on the sofa reading. But in those circumstances I'm mainly reading. A device that offers resolution comparable to e-ink (like a retina iPad) plus the OPTION to use as a tablet computer, portable media server is a good thing. Still, there are times when you know you just want to sit outside and read. In that case an e-ink reader is still a good thing to have. If you can't justify spending the money on an e-ink reader and a retina Ipad, then the fire is appealing. Again, the fire is not a direct competitor to the ipad. It's alternative product targeted at a slightly different niche. The gamble for amazon is how big that niche turns out to be. From a cost stand point, you can own a kindle touch e-ink reader AND a kindle fire and still spend 200 bucks less than the entry level iPad.
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.
It will do really well... It won't do iPad kind of numbers, but I expect it to outsell all tablets not named "iPad". Will I buy one? Yes indeed...
Its a vending machine.
That's all.
+1
I'm calling it mobile Amazon store.
I am not going to start comparing the iPad to the Fire but simply say well done to a company that appears to have taken it's time and not jumped on the band wagon without thinking first and coming up with a few products that look worthwhile in their own right. Competition is healthy for everyone and Amazon appear to be one of the few that are properly competing rather than copying. Who knows their might be room in our lives for one of each of these products!?
Gotta agree...
Didn't say all I wanted to do is read. It's a matter of weight you give to usage and how much money you want to spend. The latter not being insignificant. I'd love to surf the web occasionally while lying in bed, or sitting on the sofa reading. But in those circumstances I'm mainly reading. A device that offers resolution comparable to e-ink (like a retina iPad) plus the OPTION to use as a tablet computer, portable media server is a good thing. Still, there are times when you know you just want to sit outside and read. In that case an e-ink reader is still a good thing to have. If you can't justify spending the money on an e-ink reader and a retina Ipad, then the fire is appealing. Again, the fire is not a direct competitor to the ipad. It's alternative product targeted at a slightly different niche. The gamble for amazon is how big that niche turns out to be. From a cost stand point, you can own a kindle tough e-ink reader AND a kindle fire and still spend 200 bucks less than the entry level iPad.
Actually, I didn't mention the iPad at all just because I don't see the Fire as a competitor. I see the real competition for the Fire being the e-ink readers offered by Amazon at a much cheaper price.
Android phones currently outsell iOS phones more than 2 to 1.
Why do you expect the tablet market to be different?
I agree that tablet markets will follow along similar lines. However, Amazon's survival is predicated on having consumer get to their site for content (books, movies music). They have been squeezed out in the "post PC" market where Apple pushes their customers to their Appstore, and Google pushes their advertising to their customers. To remain relevant, they need their own portal to their store. So their goal is to sell as many Kindle fire even if they make no money on their device. It is a loss leader, that will be their paid piper to get them to their core business, which is selling content.
So yes, they will sell a lot of cheap, dated tablets for next to nothing. But it will have little impact to Apple's business strategy, just like the smartphone business where they make over 50% of the profits. It will impact Google.
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.
People looking for leading technology are a tiny market segment. For example, the 16 month-old iPhone 4 is the best selling single phone out there, and it is in no way leading technology. A better example is the 3GS, which has zero leading technology, and is the second-best selling smartphone.
The Geekazoids don't count much with the bean counters at Apple. Or Amazon. Or in most any consumer market. There are niche products for them, like Ferraris. Apple aims for the sweet spot, the broadest market segment. And leading tech is no way to get grandma to buy your portable device. She doesn't care.
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.
What is so fundamentally different in the iPad vs this? NOTHING!
A retailer turned content seller turned hardware manufacturer competing against a hardware manufacturer turned content seller turned distributor.
They both are in the same market competing for dollars. Both are in the tablet business and both consumption units with limited content creation capabilities.
One selling it almost at cost (or even below cost) the other selling it at above cost (and at a profit).
Amazon's strategy is loss leader. They generate most of their profits through software sales, not on hardware sales.
As many people realized with the HP's firesale, people are very sensitive with prices in this category as it is not a necessity with very capable alternatives available in the market.
What is so fundamentally different in the iPad vs this? NOTHING!
Size, hardware, specs, capabilities, software, compatibility?
We saw similar comments in the early days of Android phones too.
You didn't read my comment. If you thnk the kindle will defeat the iPad on price then it has to defeat all other Android devices on price as manufacturers can't subsidize. So if Android is 70% then it is all Kindle.
Actually, I didn't mention the iPad at all just because I don't see the Fire as a competitor. I see the real competition for the Fire being the e-ink readers offered by Amazon at a much cheaper price.
I mentioned the ipad. I plan on getting one when/if it goes retina. For reading only, I wouldn't get any lcd screen, and I haven't.
But if you decide you want a tablet, and you already own an e-ink device, getting the color version of the product you own (meaning everything digital you bought through your existing account migrates effortlessly to your new device and OS) is especially appealing at a price that is so much cheaper than other tablets. The fire is a cheap alternative for people mainly interested in an e-reader to migrate to tablets to see if they like the experience, without dropping 500 bucks.
I happen not to fit in that niche myself. I want an e-ink reader, and I want a tablet with superior resolution. I'll spend the significant wad of dough to get a retina ipad AND also have an e-ink reader, but I'm not always that wise with how I spend my money.
The Geekazoids don't count much with the bean counters at Apple. Or Amazon. Or in most any consumer market. There are niche products for them, like Ferraris.
If you are talking about appliances, that may be true, but not for technology.
While iPhone3GS are heavily discounted upfront, it is still second to iPhone4 which is more expensive. For people who prefer apple, iPhone4 is the leading technology available (until next week), which prove my point. Wait until iPhone 5 is released and see which becomes the hottest phone.
For most technologies, people do not aspire for second rate equipment, not if they can help it.
It is not just digital books.
Of course not. Read the original post to which I was replying.
I agree that tablet markets will follow along similar lines. However, Amazon's survival is predicated on having consumer get to their site for content (books, movies music).
Amazon is not fighting for survival. Not even close. Indeed, their stock is doing extremely much better than Apple's over several different time horizons.
Get real.
Well, the Kindle Fire will be the "iPad" everyone got because they couldn't or didn't want to get the iPad. At best.
One of the great marketing realities is that company's need to be willing to "eat their own children" (products).
The posters who said the Fire will have an impact are correct -- it competes for the "tablet-is-easier-to-use-than-my-PC" space in the home. Once Amazon's movies, apps get entrenched then that household will be more likely to follow the upgrade to more expensive Amazon (modified Android) products as long as their app/media investments are preserved.
The number of households who want multiple, unrelated, tablet families with a different UX are a
NANO-segment of buyers. There is really only one opening in households for a "tablet-is-easier-to-use-than-my-PC" device.
Apple would do themselves a great favor by finding a way to get very, very close to the price point of an Amazon Fire in order to reduce intrusion into the iPad's primary market space. Find it, build it, iCloud it, and then give them a reason to move up to a faster, better, more expensive iPad (as the first one gets handed to someone else in the household).
The general (non-tech) media will establish the market position that it's an alternative to the low end iPads before today is over. Just look at the headlines from Fox and MSNBC already.
I've been wrong before, but almost never about marketing.
I mentioned the ipad. I plan on getting one when/if it goes retina. For reading only, I wouldn't get any lcd screen, and I haven't.
But if you decide you want a tablet, and you already own an e-ink device, getting the color version of the product you own (meaning everything digital you bought through your existing account migrates effortlessly to your new device and OS) is especially appealing at a price that is so much cheaper than other tablets. The fire is a cheap alternative for people mainly interested in an e-reader to migrate to tablets to see if they like the experience, without dropping 500 bucks.
I happen not to fit in that niche myself. I want an e-ink reader, and I want a tablet with superior resolution. I'll spend the significant wad of dough to get a retina ipad AND also have an e-ink reader, but I'm not always that wise with how I spend my money.
Actually... I'm like you. I have the iPad v1 but am waiting for a higher rez version before I'll purchase another (my Wife uses it for photos, email, browsing... I use it mainly for astronomy and games)... at the same time, though, I have been waiting for the new version of the Kindle to use as an e-reader.
Regarding money... I'm that fool...
Android phones currently outsell iOS phones more than 2 to 1.
Why do you expect the tablet market to be different?
Tablets aren't phones. They're closer to PCs. The way Microsoft looks at this question:
Windows laptops currently outsell OS X and Google Chrome laptops more than 7 to 1.
Why do you expect the tablet market to be different?