I love the instant "no threat" attitude some here take. This is a threat to Apple, sure head to head, the iPad is a better device, problem is this thing only costs $199, compared to $499. That alone will draw many, many people to this device. Top that with the Amazon ecosystem and it is a winner. I will never own one, I love my iPad but for Christmas I was considering buying a "family" iPad for my two girls, now I can buy them each a Fire. They are not power users and do not need the full functionality of an iPad. They are like many consumers that are in the market but just do not want to spend $499.
This is zero threat to Apple, in fact it will push iPad sales even higher. The return rate on these is going to be high. "Cool i gotz a $199 Android tablet". "Wait, it runs an outdated version of Android which does not run most Android apps". "Hey there is a cool Android app...but it runs like crap on my tiny tablet because it was optimized for a 10" screen and a faster processor and graphics chip rather than my barebones, dog slow cheapo Amazon tablet". "I wish i had gotten an iPad..."
What non-limited use do iPad and ICS tablets have that the Kindle Fire doesn't?
I'm under the impression that it has a weaker processor and graphics than the full-sized and full-featured ones.
So games are likely to be less usable, with many impossible, at least going forward. No gyro for sure, no GPS, maybe no position sensors at all? I'm not certain.
Maybe it can do WIFI triangulation? I don't remember anything about that, however. But certain games and activities are limited by the hardware.
Does it support Flash? IIRC, ICS does. If not, major gaming deficit compared to ICS tablets.
I hear the Firte has a good web browser, which seems like 90% of what is needed in a cheap tablet.
It has little internal storage and shorter battery life, doesn't it? So bringing several movies along for a lazy weekend at the camp might not be a use you could put it to.
I don't have info on the ports - does it have any HDMI output capability? Can you bring it to your friend's house and easily plug it into his Home Entertainment System? Certainly it does not have the wireless capabilities of the iPad, which are a major advantage. I'm not sure if ICS has the sophisticated mirroring and streaming stuff that Apple is doing either - if the Fire can come anywhere close, I'd be very amazed.
No cameras, so no pics taken - but it would work friggin great to display them when out of the house.
as a new ipad 2 owner and android owner i must say..
grow up kids... they are both great devices. In practicality Fragmentation doesn't really mean shit to me. My 2 yo galaxy S can still play all the games and apps.
And the more I use the ipad, I am beginning to realize what this "walled garden" everyone is talking about. I can't even rearrange my icons my way... REALLY? WTF. That's just one of many issues in android, I can solve easily.
At this point, it's Windows for PC Android for Phones and Ipads for a tablet.
1) I disagree with Apple's assesment. Because it's a fork it's insulated enough from the standard Android builds that it will have a null effect on Android. What it will do is hurt Android sales as if it were a $199 tablet built on WebOS, WP7, or some other OS entirely.
It fragments development, and, because of all the buzz about how it is "Android" it fragments the perceived platform.
The issue, as I see it, is about multipurpose device (iPad) versus more limited, but less expensive ones. It is an interesting marketing problem. Although I know it is said that noone uses a swiss knife, I believe the multipurpose nature of iPad makes it ultimately cheaper. I see also a problem for Amazon to recover from the losses they make on Kindle, because they can only achieve this by transforming it into a pure Amazon-buying device, which, for many reasons, is not a viable option.
Having said this, a pure "electronic book" device has probably its place on the market ... on the condition it is (and remains) undoubtedly more efficient than the iPad for book reading ...
This is zero threat to Apple, in fact it will push iPad sales even higher. The return rate on these is going to be high. "Cool i gotz a $199 Android tablet". "Wait, it runs an outdated version of Android which does not run most Android apps". "Hey there is a cool Android app...but it runs like crap on my tiny tablet because it was optimized for a 10" screen and a faster processor and graphics chip rather than my barebones, dog slow cheapo Amazon tablet". "I wish i had gotten an iPad..."
The only person that would remotely even know what you are talking about is a power user. If a power user wants a tablet, they will know what they need and buy accordingly. Since power users make up about 1% of 1% your point is moot. Also, Amazon is planning on keeping this thing locked down and on their own eco system. This tablet is aimed at the other 99.9% that just wants a simple device, which this is.
It fragments development, and, because of all the buzz about how it is "Android" it fragments the perceived platform.
I would doubt most buying this entry-level tablet would even know what the OS foundation is, and those that know are likely more inclined to know this is a fork. Amazon doesn't even list the OS on their product page. The only reference is with the proper name in, "Additional email apps are available in our Amazon Appstore for Android."
Why do people insist on comparing a 7" Fire tablet to a 9.7" iPad and then marvel at how much cheaper the Fire is? Amazon quotes the New York Times on the Kindle Fire page as saying, "At $199, the Fire is less than half the price of the Apple iPad at $499". That almost implies that they're comparing apples to apples (no pun intended) which they are not. Sure, BMW could run around all day claiming that their car is $10,000 less then Mercedes-Benz's, but that would be dishonest. But then, I guess I can't blame Amazon for trying to play off of consumer ignorance.
It doesn't have the Android Market, either. People will be able to sideload, possibly without rooting their device, but there's no guarantee that apps not from the Amazon App Market (or whatever they're calling it) will work on the Fire.
Kindle Fire purchasers — myself included, because I think it looks like a great little device — will just have to cross their fingers that it sell well enough that app makers make sure their programs run correctly on the Fire and submit them to Amazon if they want to use, say, Dropbox, Netflix, Hulu… (Although maybe the web versions work fine for those, too. We'll see!)
I think it will. But it's not a sure thing yet. Cook is right: it is further fragmenting the Android user base and forcing developers to have to ensure their apps run on Amazon's forked version of Android if they want to sell to Fire owners. If it sell well enough, though, Fire owners may not need to care. Google and Android, however, might…
Is it really that difficult for Tim to grasp what Amazon has on offer?
No he understands what it offers.
But he also understand that it's targeted to a totally different audience that weren't likely to buy an iPad anyway. So the iPad numbers will stay stable even while this thing perhaps sells and doesn't get returned in droves like some of the others. Thus he's not really worried.
I would doubt most buying this entry-level tablet would even know what the OS foundation is, and those that know are likely more inclined to know this is a fork. Amazon doesn't even list the OS on their product page. The only reference is with the proper name in, "Additional email apps are available in our Amazon Appstore for Android."
Amazon Appstore for Android is quite a mouthful.
I agree with your point about Fire buyers not knowing/caring about the OS. I imagine that Amazon will get stuff like Angry Birds and Facebook for the Fire, and the FireBuyer will be satisfied.
Did we need evidence? Did anyone think Apple was going to bring out an iPad mini... at half the price? A made up rumour if I ever heard one.
Steve already gave out the design reason against it and frankly I don't think that Tim is going to demand they flip that since to do so he's got to get Jonny on his side and Jonny was probably the one that already prototyped a less than 10 inch for Steve and why it was a bad move. And it seems that when it comes to design decisions Steve left Jonny with only the board to answer to and even then they can't really veto him on design issues. More like just the power to fire him if he majorly screws up.
I think the only way we might see a less than $499 tablet is if they decide to up the iPad to a 32, 64, something run and they keep the 16 GB in a wifi only a la the iPhones. They could sell it online only if they wanted to or even pull a Macbook and sell it only to schools and it would still go like crazy. But even then I think the cheapest we might see is $299.
This is zero threat to Apple, in fact it will push iPad sales even higher. The return rate on these is going to be high. "Cool i gotz a $199 Android tablet". "Wait, it runs an outdated version of Android which does not run most Android apps". "Hey there is a cool Android app...but it runs like crap on my tiny tablet because it was optimized for a 10" screen and a faster processor and graphics chip rather than my barebones, dog slow cheapo Amazon tablet". "I wish i had gotten an iPad..."
You overestimate people who don't have a lot of money to spend.
I think it'll be more like "gee this Kindle Fire is pretty cool. I'm glad I didn't have to pay $500 for an iPad to do all this."
The only person that would remotely even know what you are talking about is a power user. If a power user wants a tablet, they will know what they need and buy accordingly. Since power users make up about 1% of 1% your point is moot. Also, Amazon is planning on keeping this thing locked down and on their own eco system. This tablet is aimed at the other 99.9% that just wants a simple device, which this is.
So not being able to run Android apps on an Android tablet is only going to affect "power user"s? Huh? That makes zero sense. Fragmentation of a platform affects all users of said platform.
Comments
I love the instant "no threat" attitude some here take. This is a threat to Apple, sure head to head, the iPad is a better device, problem is this thing only costs $199, compared to $499. That alone will draw many, many people to this device. Top that with the Amazon ecosystem and it is a winner. I will never own one, I love my iPad but for Christmas I was considering buying a "family" iPad for my two girls, now I can buy them each a Fire. They are not power users and do not need the full functionality of an iPad. They are like many consumers that are in the market but just do not want to spend $499.
This is zero threat to Apple, in fact it will push iPad sales even higher. The return rate on these is going to be high. "Cool i gotz a $199 Android tablet". "Wait, it runs an outdated version of Android which does not run most Android apps". "Hey there is a cool Android app...but it runs like crap on my tiny tablet because it was optimized for a 10" screen and a faster processor and graphics chip rather than my barebones, dog slow cheapo Amazon tablet". "I wish i had gotten an iPad..."
What non-limited use do iPad and ICS tablets have that the Kindle Fire doesn't?
I'm under the impression that it has a weaker processor and graphics than the full-sized and full-featured ones.
So games are likely to be less usable, with many impossible, at least going forward. No gyro for sure, no GPS, maybe no position sensors at all? I'm not certain.
Maybe it can do WIFI triangulation? I don't remember anything about that, however. But certain games and activities are limited by the hardware.
Does it support Flash? IIRC, ICS does. If not, major gaming deficit compared to ICS tablets.
I hear the Firte has a good web browser, which seems like 90% of what is needed in a cheap tablet.
It has little internal storage and shorter battery life, doesn't it? So bringing several movies along for a lazy weekend at the camp might not be a use you could put it to.
I don't have info on the ports - does it have any HDMI output capability? Can you bring it to your friend's house and easily plug it into his Home Entertainment System? Certainly it does not have the wireless capabilities of the iPad, which are a major advantage. I'm not sure if ICS has the sophisticated mirroring and streaming stuff that Apple is doing either - if the Fire can come anywhere close, I'd be very amazed.
No cameras, so no pics taken - but it would work friggin great to display them when out of the house.
Likely there's more.
grow up kids... they are both great devices. In practicality Fragmentation doesn't really mean shit to me. My 2 yo galaxy S can still play all the games and apps.
And the more I use the ipad, I am beginning to realize what this "walled garden" everyone is talking about. I can't even rearrange my icons my way... REALLY? WTF. That's just one of many issues in android, I can solve easily.
At this point, it's Windows for PC Android for Phones and Ipads for a tablet.
1) I disagree with Apple's assesment. Because it's a fork it's insulated enough from the standard Android builds that it will have a null effect on Android. What it will do is hurt Android sales as if it were a $199 tablet built on WebOS, WP7, or some other OS entirely.
It fragments development, and, because of all the buzz about how it is "Android" it fragments the perceived platform.
Because at $199 the Fire is going to sell very well.
Sell IN or sell OUT.
I see lots of dust collecting on sell IN units.
Enough already with the keyboards, why should Apple take a leap in the past, to please who exactly? The analysts?
Keyboards are a dying breed, just like the users they supposedly would please...
The keyboard option is called MacBook Air
Having said this, a pure "electronic book" device has probably its place on the market ... on the condition it is (and remains) undoubtedly more efficient than the iPad for book reading ...
This is zero threat to Apple, in fact it will push iPad sales even higher. The return rate on these is going to be high. "Cool i gotz a $199 Android tablet". "Wait, it runs an outdated version of Android which does not run most Android apps". "Hey there is a cool Android app...but it runs like crap on my tiny tablet because it was optimized for a 10" screen and a faster processor and graphics chip rather than my barebones, dog slow cheapo Amazon tablet". "I wish i had gotten an iPad..."
The only person that would remotely even know what you are talking about is a power user. If a power user wants a tablet, they will know what they need and buy accordingly. Since power users make up about 1% of 1% your point is moot. Also, Amazon is planning on keeping this thing locked down and on their own eco system. This tablet is aimed at the other 99.9% that just wants a simple device, which this is.
It fragments development, and, because of all the buzz about how it is "Android" it fragments the perceived platform.
I would doubt most buying this entry-level tablet would even know what the OS foundation is, and those that know are likely more inclined to know this is a fork. Amazon doesn't even list the OS on their product page. The only reference is with the proper name in, "Additional email apps are available in our Amazon Appstore for Android."
Likely there's more.
It doesn't have the Android Market, either. People will be able to sideload, possibly without rooting their device, but there's no guarantee that apps not from the Amazon App Market (or whatever they're calling it) will work on the Fire.
Kindle Fire purchasers — myself included, because I think it looks like a great little device — will just have to cross their fingers that it sell well enough that app makers make sure their programs run correctly on the Fire and submit them to Amazon if they want to use, say, Dropbox, Netflix, Hulu… (Although maybe the web versions work fine for those, too. We'll see!)
I think it will. But it's not a sure thing yet. Cook is right: it is further fragmenting the Android user base and forcing developers to have to ensure their apps run on Amazon's forked version of Android if they want to sell to Fire owners. If it sell well enough, though, Fire owners may not need to care. Google and Android, however, might…
Is it really that difficult for Tim to grasp what Amazon has on offer?
No he understands what it offers.
But he also understand that it's targeted to a totally different audience that weren't likely to buy an iPad anyway. So the iPad numbers will stay stable even while this thing perhaps sells and doesn't get returned in droves like some of the others. Thus he's not really worried.
I would doubt most buying this entry-level tablet would even know what the OS foundation is, and those that know are likely more inclined to know this is a fork. Amazon doesn't even list the OS on their product page. The only reference is with the proper name in, "Additional email apps are available in our Amazon Appstore for Android."
Amazon Appstore for Android is quite a mouthful.
I agree with your point about Fire buyers not knowing/caring about the OS. I imagine that Amazon will get stuff like Angry Birds and Facebook for the Fire, and the FireBuyer will be satisfied.
Did we need evidence? Did anyone think Apple was going to bring out an iPad mini... at half the price? A made up rumour if I ever heard one.
Do not awaken StylusGuy!
...My 2 yo galaxy S can still play all the games and apps.
Probably didn't hurt that you bought a top-of-the-line phone 2 years ago. My nephew's Android phone at about the same ago isn't faring so well.
Did we need evidence? Did anyone think Apple was going to bring out an iPad mini... at half the price? A made up rumour if I ever heard one.
Steve already gave out the design reason against it and frankly I don't think that Tim is going to demand they flip that since to do so he's got to get Jonny on his side and Jonny was probably the one that already prototyped a less than 10 inch for Steve and why it was a bad move. And it seems that when it comes to design decisions Steve left Jonny with only the board to answer to and even then they can't really veto him on design issues. More like just the power to fire him if he majorly screws up.
I think the only way we might see a less than $499 tablet is if they decide to up the iPad to a 32, 64, something run and they keep the 16 GB in a wifi only a la the iPhones. They could sell it online only if they wanted to or even pull a Macbook and sell it only to schools and it would still go like crazy. But even then I think the cheapest we might see is $299.
There is absolutely no reason for BMW to be concerned about anything that Chevrolet comes out with, even though BMW and Chevrolet are both cars.
Unless Chevrolet pulled a Samsung.
This is zero threat to Apple, in fact it will push iPad sales even higher. The return rate on these is going to be high. "Cool i gotz a $199 Android tablet". "Wait, it runs an outdated version of Android which does not run most Android apps". "Hey there is a cool Android app...but it runs like crap on my tiny tablet because it was optimized for a 10" screen and a faster processor and graphics chip rather than my barebones, dog slow cheapo Amazon tablet". "I wish i had gotten an iPad..."
You overestimate people who don't have a lot of money to spend.
I think it'll be more like "gee this Kindle Fire is pretty cool. I'm glad I didn't have to pay $500 for an iPad to do all this."
The only person that would remotely even know what you are talking about is a power user. If a power user wants a tablet, they will know what they need and buy accordingly. Since power users make up about 1% of 1% your point is moot. Also, Amazon is planning on keeping this thing locked down and on their own eco system. This tablet is aimed at the other 99.9% that just wants a simple device, which this is.
So not being able to run Android apps on an Android tablet is only going to affect "power user"s? Huh? That makes zero sense. Fragmentation of a platform affects all users of said platform.