[Sealobo]

Kindle Fire - Full Color Kindle with 7" Multi-Touch Display, Wi-Fi

What do you guys think? $199 is pretty "magical"...

[Sealobo]

Here is a good side-by-side comparison:

Amazon Kindle Fire vs. iPad 2 — An In-Depth Comparison | Cult of Mac

[The Final Dakar]

The prices are crazy. 7" though.

[osiris]

That's pretty tempting - expandable storage too.

Maybe this'll force Apple to lower their prices.





Yeah right, who am I kidding.

[Sealobo]

i think the Fire's major shortcoming is that it's Wifi only...

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by Sealobo 

i think the Fire's major shortcoming is that it's Wifi only...

It reminds me of the iPod touch in that regard.

[Uncle Skeleton]

a “cloud accelerated mobile browser” that takes the most CPU-intensive parts of loading a website and processes them on Amazon’s servers

[ort888]

I do think this represents a real competitor. For most of what people want to do with a tablet, this thing will do great.

Google has to find this very annoying though. Amazon completely side-stepped them.

I also think the iPad will be $399 sooner rather then later.

[Thorzdad]

a “cloud accelerated mobile browser” that takes the most CPU-intensive parts of loading a website and processes them on Amazon’s servers

Sooooo...Does this mean that Amazon acts as your web portal, screening/filtering everything you browse?
indeed!

[Big Mac]

Originally Posted by Sealobo 

i think the Fire's major shortcoming is that it's Wifi only...

So? I bet most iPads sold are WIFI only as well. I think I've heard that the 32 GB WIFI iPad is the most popular iPad.

[Sealobo]

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

So? I bet most iPads sold are WIFI only as well. I think I've heard that the 32 GB WIFI iPad is the most popular iPad.

of course. but iPad has 3G as an option, that's my point. Most iPad sold are wifi only because they're cheaper. I would pay another $100 for a Fire with wifi+3G.

the Fire could be a more "mobile" device when compared to the iPad due to its smaller size. But without 3G connectivity it's not even in the same bracket.

[Big Mac]

Ah I see. I found the omission of a 3G model of the Fire interesting, but I imagine they will introduce it a bit after the WIFI debut. I definitely don't think it's any sort of showstopper, though. It depends on the person and his or her individual usage, of course. I'm glad I got a 3G 32 GB original iPad, but I really don't use the 3G that much.

[imitchellg5]

I do wish there was a 3G version of the Fire, since most of the time when I download a book on my Kindle, it's when I'm out in the middle of nowhere or somewhere like a bus.

[mduell]

Originally Posted by Thorzdad 

Sooooo...Does this mean that Amazon acts as your web portal, screening/filtering everything you browse?
indeed!

Sure, except for the complete lack of any indication of screening/filtering.

This is the same way Opera Mini works.

[Sealobo]

I suppose the huge Apple data center will do something similar...

[Lateralus]

Yes, this is the first worthy competitor to the iPad.

Sure, the hardware is nothing new in any way whatsoever (in fact, it's essentially a PlayBook clone), but the price point combined with Amazon's general attention to detail is. Not to mention the fact that Amazon has a luster from high customer opinion that has been fairly unique to Apple heretofore. Plus Amazon's marketing power (both online, as well as in print and on air) is quite formidable.

Is 7" ideal? No. But the fact that this thing will do practically everything the iPad does at 2/5 the price and has Amazon's renowned customer service behind it...

[chabig]

Originally Posted by Lateralus 

But the fact that this thing will do practically everything the iPad does at 2/5 the price and has Amazon's renowned customer service behind it...

Surf the web and read book? Yes. But otherwise, it has nowhere near the number of apps the iPad does. Nor does it have AirPlay (which is huge IMO). Also, it may be 2/5 the price, but it's also only about 2/5 the size.

[imitchellg5]

I think having less apps is actually a good thing. Amazon's Appstore is strictly curated, so you don't have to sift through the crap that you get on the Android Market and App Store to find gems.

[chabig]

Were I in the market for one of these I think I'd agree with you. There are a lot of pluses to the curated system. If the Kindle Fire is successful, it will hurt Google.

[Sealobo]

Fire is running Google's Android...

[imitchellg5]

Without Google's blessing, without Google's apps, and without Android Market. The source code came from Google, but Google isn't getting a thing out of it.

[Mrjinglesusa]

ANd this thing will be rooted and running stock Android in no time so you will eventually have the Android Market, Google Apps, etc. if you would rather have those.

[imitchellg5]

Yep. It'll be great for normal consumers and great for people who want to hack things. Plus, if you hack standard Android on it, it isn't like you'll lose any of the Amazon functionality, except the browser, which does look very quick.

[Spheric Harlot]

This take on the Silk "browser" is pretty horrifying to me:

Fire - cdespinosa's posterous

what this means is that Amazon will capture and control every Web transaction performed by Fire users. Every page they see, every link they follow, every click they make, every ad they see is going to be intermediated by one of the largest server farms on the planet. People who cringe at the privacy and data-mining implications of the Facebook Timeline ought to be just floored by the magnitude of Amazon’s opportunity here. Amazon now has what every storefront lusts for: the knowledge of what other stores your customers are shopping in and what prices they’re being offered there. What’s more, Amazon is getting this not by expensive, proactive scraping the Web, like Google has to do; they’re getting it passively by offering a simple caching service, and letting Fire users do the hard work of crawling the Web. In essence the Fire user base is Amazon’s Mechanical Turk, scraping the Web for free and providing Amazon with the most valuable cache of user behavior in existence.

Of course they can afford to offer the Fire at zero profit.

[imitchellg5]

Amazon can figure out what where people are shopping and competitor's prices on their own...

[Eug]

Originally Posted by chabig 

Surf the web and read book? Yes. But otherwise, it has nowhere near the number of apps the iPad does. Nor does it have AirPlay (which is huge IMO). Also, it may be 2/5 the price, but it's also only about 2/5 the size.

As long as it has a decent browser function, it should sell well.

BTW, one of my biggest pet peeves about surfing on the iPhone and iPad is all the websites telling you to download their apps. I DON'T WANT YOUR IDIOTIC APPS JUST TO BROWSE YOUR SITE.

[Macfreak7]

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot 

This take on the Silk "browser" is pretty horrifying to me:

Fire - cdespinosa's posterous



Of course they can afford to offer the Fire at zero profit.

QFT.
And considering the number of Facebook users out there, I don't think many will give a rats a$$.

[Eug]

I couldn't care less either about the history analytics, as long as its anonymized, and as long as it doesn't interfere with my browsing experience.

In fact, if it means I can pay $199 for a decent tablet as opposed to $399 or $599 for that matter, I'm all for it. BTW, I used to say that $199 (or at most $299) was the key price entry point that makes the most sense for a tablet... and now Amazon has just hit that.

Given what I know now about the iPad (after having bought one several months back), I would not have bought the iPad. I would most definitely have considered the Fire though.

BTW, this makes all those WebOS HP Touchpad purchases seem even more foolish now. Yeah, the Touchpad is cheaper, but it's also a completely dead product line with no support. It would have made sense if the HP Touchpad had some killer feature or was necessary to make use of already purchased media, but otherwise it really makes no sense.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by mduell 

Sure, except for the complete lack of any indication of screening/filtering.

This is the same way Opera Mini works.

Doesn't Opera Mini do some funky thing with taking screen shots or something?

AFAIK this system makes dynamic decisions about whether to fetch the assets from the server requested or from EC2, it's brilliant, and may represent the future of how popular websites are served.

This kind of thing can also reduce the costs of these large websites and their bandwidth requirements, which is also interesting...

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot 

This take on the Silk "browser" is pretty horrifying to me:

Fire - cdespinosa's posterous



Of course they can afford to offer the Fire at zero profit.

I absolutely understand your concern, but I think this is much different than the data mining that takes places with GMail or the like. With GMail companies can target stuff to you based on your demographic information. With Silk it's basically just "random IP wants web page" - they know nothing about the visitor.

[macintologist]

It's not Apple that's in trouble, it's all the other Android tablet makers. They are toast.

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally Posted by Eug 

I couldn't care less either about the history analytics, as long as its anonymized,

The Point of this device, AFAICS, is that it's not.

[Lateralus]

Originally Posted by imitchellg5 

I think having less apps is actually a good thing. Amazon's Appstore is strictly curated, so you don't have to sift through the crap that you get on the Android Market and App Store to find gems.

Ditto.

My main aversion to Android is the haphazardness of its software ecosphere. Having somebody come in and put their foot down with a controlled environment is very tempting.

As long as it's got Angry Birds...

[Spheric Harlot]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

I absolutely understand your concern, but I think this is much different than the data mining that takes places with GMail or the like. With GMail companies can target stuff to you based on your demographic information. With Silk it's basically just "random IP wants web page" - they know nothing about the visitor.

Amazon knows everything about the visitor.

Google builds a profile and sells that info, anonymously, to people who can sell you stuff.

Amazon builds a profile and uses it to sell you stuff. In addition, they actually see every webpage you visit, as you must go through their proxy.

Huge differences.

[Eug]

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot 

The Point of this device, AFAICS, is that it's not.

Well, I think it's OK if they can target advertising to your specific unit, but I don't think it's fine if they take your name and email address and send it to their partners. AFAIK, they are not doing the latter.

[Shaddim]

Eh. It looks cheap, and for $200 I can see why. This isn't going to appeal to iPad buyers. The 2nd 10" design, due to be released in the first half of 2012, that's the actual threat. Full Kal-El with 32GB of storage for $350 could take a considerable bite out of iPad sales, if Amazon doesn't drop the ball somehow.

[Thorzdad]

Originally Posted by Eug 

Well, I think it's OK if they can target advertising to your specific unit, but I don't think it's fine if they take your name and email address and send it to their partners. AFAIK, they are not doing the latter.

Seems to me, if they're caching everything that you do in their browser, they absolutely have the ability to scrape anything you enter in the browser. Name, email, address, phone, etc. As long as it's unencrypted, it's fair game to them.

There's an option to turn-off the cloud service, and surf without the caching and acceleration. I'd love to know how much slower surfing is without the cloud acceleration.

[Eug]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

Eh. It looks cheap, and for $200 I can see why. This isn't going to appeal to iPad buyers.

It appeals to me, and I own an iPad. I just think the iPad is too much money for what we use it for, which is basically just to surf and check email.

I'm curious as to what the 10" model would cost, and there are readability advantages to a 10" unit, but then again, I find the iPad quite awkward to hold.

Originally Posted by Thorzdad 

Seems to me, if they're caching everything that you do in their browser, they absolutely have the ability to scrape anything you enter in the browser. Name, email, address, phone, etc. As long as it's unencrypted, it's fair game to them.

I'd be surprised if that's true. If true, that'd bother me of course, but I don't see it flying. Privacy advocates would have a coronary. It's one thing for that to go through their servers, but it's a completely different thing to package them up and sell it advertisers, completely with private email addresses and phone numbers and the like.

There's an option to turn-off the cloud service, and surf without the caching and acceleration. I'd love to know how much slower surfing is without the cloud acceleration.

Probably similar to any other dual 1 GHz A9 Android machine.

[imitchellg5]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

Eh. It looks cheap, and for $200 I can see why. This isn't going to appeal to iPad buyers. The 2nd 10" design, due to be released in the first half of 2012, that's the actual threat. Full Kal-El with 32GB of storage for $350 could take a considerable bite out of iPad sales, if Amazon doesn't drop the ball somehow.

It's based off of the Playbook hardware, which actually has a very high-quality feel to it. No regular consumer will care about Kal-El. You seem to be arguing that basically a normal Android tablet that shouts about its specs is more appealing to consumers than an easy to use product tied in with the services they already use.

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

So? I bet most iPads sold are WIFI only as well. I think I've heard that the 32 GB WIFI iPad is the most popular iPad.

The Fire lists in its specs as "can not connect to ad-hoc WiFi networks." Does this mean tethering to your iPhone is out?

Originally Posted by imitchellg5 

I think having less apps is actually a good thing. Amazon's Appstore is strictly curated, so you don't have to sift through the crap that you get on the Android Market and App Store to find gems.

You should get a Playbook then. It has no apps.

Seriously, not having to sift through crap is desirable, but not having the apps you want to use is another thing.

Originally Posted by Lateralus 

Is 7" ideal? No. But the fact that this thing will do practically everything the iPad does at 2/5 the price and has Amazon's renowned customer service behind it...

Practically everything? It has up to two finger touch, no accelerometers, no cameras, no GPS, and a small screen, no 3G (and can't connect to ad hoc WiFi). That says to me inferior experience and many apps just can't be implemented on this thing.

Don't get me wrong, it's a fine $200 mini-tablet, and is worth the price. But that's all it is. It's a Nook killer and it's a budget Android tablet killer. Even a Playbook has more hardware features - we'll see if it ever gets the software.

[ort888]

It may do 2/5 of what an iPad does, but for most people, that's more then enough.

People are saying that this isn't an iPad competitor, but it totally is.

People are going to look at Kindle Fires and iPads and buy one or the other. There is real overlap in what they do and they will compete.

[Eug]

Originally Posted by hayesk 

Practically everything? It has up to two finger touch, no accelerometers, no cameras, no GPS, and a small screen, no 3G (and can't connect to ad hoc WiFi). That says to me inferior experience and many apps just can't be implemented on this thing.

That says to me I'd probably use it the exact same way as my iPad.

I never use the accelerometer, camera, GPS, and 3G. (I have a WiFi-only machine.) The ad hoc WiFi part seems a bit odd, but that doesn't affect me either, since my iPad never leaves the house. Since the iPad does not support MS Office and doesn't have a real keyboard, I take my laptop with me when I travel for work.

As for multitouch, as long as it has pinch and zoom I'm happy.

[mduell]

Originally Posted by Spheric Harlot 

This take on the Silk "browser" is pretty horrifying to me:

Fire - cdespinosa's posterous

Of course they can afford to offer the Fire at zero profit.

The cloud acceleration in Silk is optional - you can always go off-cloud for a slower browsing experience like the iPad has.

[imitchellg5]

Originally Posted by hayesk 

You should get a Playbook then. It has no apps.

Seriously, not having to sift through crap is desirable, but not having the apps you want to use is another thing.

The Amazon Appstore has plenty of apps. What more do you want? It's not like you can't get anything on the Fire.

[Eug]

Rumour: An analyst said on Thursday that BlackBerry maker Research In Motion may have halted production of its PlayBook tablet computer and canceled additional tablet projects.

---

P.S. I won't be buying the Fire, as it's not available in Canada, and I already have an iPad 2 (with a similar CPU).

However, if (and that's a big "if") I buy another tablet, then a successor to the Fire with upgraded specs and a more recent Android OS version will definitely be in the running if the browsing is good and it gets some traction. I just can't justify dropping $499 on another tablet. The price point for the Fire is perfect.

Originally Posted by imitchellg5 

The Amazon Appstore has plenty of apps. What more do you want? It's not like you can't get anything on the Fire.

I didn't say you couldn't get "anything." But there are several apps that I have on my iPad that aren't available on the Amazon app store. I don't believe I'd be the only one in this circumstance either.

Originally Posted by ort888 

People are going to look at Kindle Fires and iPads and buy one or the other. There is real overlap in what they do and they will compete.

That depends entirely on Amazon's marketing. If they don't do it right, the Kindle Fire will be seen by many as just a colour eBook reader.

[Sealobo]

Amazon Kindle Press Conference - September 28, 2011, New York City - YouTube!

Watching the conference...

the amazon products are great... but the presentation is very, very boring...