Amazon Introduces 8.9-Inch and 7-Inch Kindle Fire HD at $299 and $199, Updated Kindle Fire Drops to $159

[samcraig]

Yeah, I don't get how anyone could complain about cheap data. It's not a huge amount but it's quite a discount. Maybe that same discount gets applied towards the higher packages.

I would doubt it. I imagine Amazon is subsidizing the bill on that one to ATT and that above and beyond is at the rack rate.

I see the 250mb a a nice bonus/perk and backup for when you don't have wifi near by and want to check email/etc. Wasn't the big complaint of the original fire that there was no cellular radio? That it was "useless" if you didn't have a wifi connection?

Amazon listened and not only put in a great radio - but they "gifted" a small data plan to get you started.

Again - there can't be anything possibly negative to say about this. Unless someone wants to insist it should be completely free. Which is a little absurd.

 

[sushant08]

meanwhile on android forum fandroids are eager to LAUGH at what apple has to offer
http://forums.androidcentral.com/sa...ger-laugh-what-apple-has-offer-sept-12th.html

This is just sad i really hope there is a turnaround ,even if apple has only got this slighlty taller iphone it desperately needs One more thing...I mean come on imagine they launch ipod nano/touch at 149 or 199 or an ipad mini at 299 ,you can get a these awesome kindle fires with 3g/4g 7.0/8.0 inch 16/32/64gb loads of choices out there now.

 

[samcraig]

meanwhile on android forum fandroids are eager to LAUGH at what apple has to offer
http://forums.androidcentral.com/sa...ger-laugh-what-apple-has-offer-sept-12th.html

This is just sad i really hope there is a turnaround ,even if apple has only go this slighlty taller iphone it desperately needs One more thing...I mean come on imagine they launch ipod nano/touch at 149 or 199 or an ipad mini at 299 ,you can get a these awesome kindle fires with 3g/4g 7.0/8.0 inch 16/32/64gb loads of choices.

Apple will have a strong showing. People will be divided as they always are and the products will sell very well like they always do.

As for Android Central - I'd expect nothing less in their posts just like I don't expect people here to rave about Android. Fortunately there ARE several people on both forums (and others) who aren't in either "camp" and just enjoy talking about technology and both the good and bad of all platforms without being extreme

 

[Xiroteus]

250MB is nothing amazing, likely enough for those times someone does not have access to wifi and at $4.16 a month on average I can see this being appealing for those who do not require several GBs.

 

[Tiger8]

Should be rephrased to "playable on any decent device that isn't crap."

Incorrect statement again. Are you saying the Bose system that comes as an option in luxury car, and costs thousands of dollars is crap?

Why don't we just agree that the only truly universal format is MP3, and anything else has the risk of being not playable on all devices? Geez.

 

[rdlink]

You might make your choice based on interface beauty, but most people I know, don't. Kindle may not have every book, but it's still a lot more than Apple has.

The point I was trying to make is that content is the key to getting consumers to buy your hardware. That's why no other hardware manufacturer has ever been able to slow down Apple. It takes a content provider to do that. One who can also create good hardware. Google has the potential with Google Play, but they're not there yet. Amazon is the closest yet. Again, as an AAPL shareholder this is something I will be watching REALLY closely.

I would venture to say that most people you know DO make their digital content purchase choice based on interface. The assumption I'm making is that, by and large Apple has just as many choice in content as Amazon does. I know that's not true with books, but my point, which I perhaps should have made more clearly is that digital books that I want are often not available from anyone. I concede that Amazon generally will have them if anyone does. This is not true for music and video. Apple is going to have it if Amazon does. With all of that being true, the consumer of the media is generally going to shop price, and there is no real advantage on that front for any provider. So Apple, who provides a better, smoother experience in the purchase and download arena, wins.

Amazon does "get it" much better than Google at this point. But still not as smooth an experience as Apple.

 

[samcraig]

I would venture to say that most people you know DO make their digital content purchase choice based on interface. The assumption I'm making is that, by and large Apple has just as many choice in content as Amazon does. I know that's not true with books, but my point, which I perhaps should have made more clearly is that digital books that I want are often not available from anyone. I concede that Amazon generally will have them if anyone does. This is not true for music and video. Apple is going to have it if Amazon does. With all of that being true, the consumer of the media is generally going to shop price, and there is no real advantage on that front for any provider. So Apple, who provides a better, smoother experience in the purchase and download arena, wins.

Amazon does "get it" much better than Google at this point. But still not as smooth an experience as Apple.

And there are several people who understand that if they buy from Amazon (book or movie) they can watch on their tv, their portable device, computer, etc including Apple products.

If you buy a movie or book from Apple - you can only view it on an Apple. Which is fine if your home is "all Apple" - but many homes are hybrids and having cross-functionality wins. I know it does in my home and that of both my parents and inlaws.

Content is key. Being able to access that anywhere, everywhere and on any device is a big plus.

 

[Rogifan]

Hmm...does Apple say thank you to Amazon for cutting off OEM's at the knees? If the new Fires end up being all that who will care about Samsung, Asus, HP etc. Android (or Windows) tablets?

 

[rdlink]

You must not be reading the whole thread. Or you're just being obtuse.

It's 49.99 first off.

Second - you get $10 towards the app store.

So that's basically 40 for 250mb per month for a year. That works out to about 3.33 a month.

If you buy an iPad - that same 250mb per month is $15.

You can also get the same 3 and 5gb plans which I am sure will cost the same thing as it does for the iPad.

So please explain to me your exact complaint?

Actually, I did more than read the whole thread. I went to Amazon's website and read their marketing materials.

They made a big deal out of the "$49 for a whole year of connectivity" aspect of it. But for that $49 they're giving you 250MB. That works out to 3GB, divided up over 12 months. I use, on average about 4GB per month on my iPad, and I pay $80 per month to share 6GB across three devices.

So my point, since I must apparently spell out the math to you is that the $49 for a year of service is not the groundbreaking pricing that Amazon makes it out to be. In fact, for those of us who live in the real world of 4G digital consumption it's worse than the typical share plan, because it limits consumption to 250MB a month, which is unrealistic.

I won't even go into the fact that it's 250MB a month on AT&T. No thanks.

 

[samcraig]

Actually, I did more than read the whole thread. I went to Amazon's website and read their marketing materials.

They made a big deal out of the "$49 for a whole year of connectivity" aspect of it. But for that $49 they're giving you 250MB. That works out to 3GB, divided up over 12 months. I use, on average about 4GB per month on my iPad, and I pay $80 per month to share 6GB across three devices.

So my point, since I must apparently spell out the math to you is that the $49 for a year of service is not the groundbreaking pricing that Amazon makes it out to be. In fact, for those of us who live in the real world of 4G digital consumption it's worse than the typical share plan, because it limits consumption to 250MB a month, which is unrealistic.

I won't even go into the fact that it's 250MB a month on AT&T. No thanks.

You missed the point of Amazon's message and purpose. Good for you. The package is a great little one for many people who aren't like you. Imagine that - people not like you. And they still offer larger plans.

Again - you can say that 250mb won't work for you. But to say it's not a big deal or a good deal is just ridiculous. Apple made a big deal out of their contract free $15 a month for the same plan. Were you ranting about Apple then too?

 

[rdlink]

And there are several people who understand that if they buy from Amazon (book or movie) they can watch on their tv, their portable device, computer, etc including Apple products.

If you buy a movie or book from Apple - you can only view it on an Apple. Which is fine if your home is "all Apple" - but many homes are hybrids and having cross-functionality wins. I know it does in my home and that of both my parents and inlaws.

Content is key. Being able to access that anywhere, everywhere and on any device is a big plus.

Incredible statements here. You don't have to be "all Apple" to use Apple content on your TV or computer. And exactly how would you be able to watch an Amazon movie on your TV if you don't have a device that supports Amazon's streaming? By hooking up a computer to your TV? Well, you can do the same thing with Apple content.

Look, I'm not trying to be an Amazon basher here. But I currently own, and have owned numerous devices that support Amazon media streaming over my TV, including Roku, "Smart" TVs, TIVO, Blu-Ray players, etc. I've never bothered to use them beyond the cursory "check it out" stage. Because their interfaces are kludgy and unreliable compared to Apple's.

Lots of devices are sold every day that have Amazon streaming capability. But the vast majority of people who buy them don't know it when they buy. Most of them only discover it when they stumble upon it later, or in many cases never at all. In contrast, EVERYONE who buys an Apple TV does so with purpose.

Why do you think that is? I'll tell you: Because they know that their experience will be better and easier with the ATV.

Yes, content is key. But making the interface intuitive and aesthetically pleasing is every bit as important for widespread adoption.

 

[rdlink]

You missed the point of Amazon's message and purpose. Good for you. The package is a great little one for many people who aren't like you. Imagine that - people not like you. And they still offer larger plans.

Again - you can say that 250mb won't work for you. But to say it's not a big deal or a good deal is just ridiculous. Apple made a big deal out of their contract free $15 a month for the same plan. Were you ranting about Apple then too?

I didn't miss the point of Amazon's message. I just pointed out that it's misleading, and (IMO) potentially hobbling to the users who sign up for it. It's not necessarily a ripoff. It's just not some groundbreaking watershed moment in data delivery, like they're implying.

And since you're asking, no, I didn't rave about $15 contract free 250MB a month when Apple introduced it (over two years ago). Because it was on AT&T. Nothing on AT&T is a good deal. I wouldn't use AT&T if they offered me 10GB for $10 a month.

But let's compare apples to apples here: Apple offered $15 a month, no contract at a time when nobody was offering data with no contract, on a groundbreaking device, on a 3G network, when consumable media was much more limited. No, not just a groundbreaking device, but a groundbreaking new TYPE of device.

Amazon is selling, for $49, 3GB of data, divided up over 12 months, on a device that is being sold to compete with Apple's groundbreaking device, on a (claimed) 4g network, with many more choices in content consumption.

So yes, I am saying it's not a big deal. And I'm right.

 

[Obi-Wan Kubrick]

I can't wait to take a look at the Kindle Fire HD in the store.

Amazon nailed the naming of the product with simple Kindle Fire HD. I could care less about Droid phones that come out 5 times a month and have huge boring names with triple digit numbers attached.

The Kindle Paperlight looks great too!

 

[ILikeTurtles]

If Apple users have learned anything, it is the integration of hardware AND software that makes for a good user experience. The software on the first Fire was crap. For this to succeed, long term, there needs to be a significant improvement on that end as the hardware specs and data possibilities only give you joy until you start using a product with crappy software.

You said it! The apps avail on the Fire were all horrible (don't even get me started on how painful google integration is on the Fire), and most of the apps in the Amazon store are games. It may be a great device, but Amazon has a lot of work to do on the usability side of things.

 

[samcraig]

Incredible statements here. You don't have to be "all Apple" to use Apple content on your TV or computer. And exactly how would you be able to watch an Amazon movie on your TV if you don't have a device that supports Amazon's streaming? By hooking up a computer to your TV? Well, you can do the same thing with Apple content.

Look, I'm not trying to be an Amazon basher here. But I currently own, and have owned numerous devices that support Amazon media streaming over my TV, including Roku, "Smart" TVs, TIVO, Blu-Ray players, etc. I've never bothered to use them beyond the cursory "check it out" stage. Because their interfaces are kludgy and unreliable compared to Apple's.

Lots of devices are sold every day that have Amazon streaming capability. But the vast majority of people who buy them don't know it when they buy. Most of them only discover it when they stumble upon it later, or in many cases never at all. In contrast, EVERYONE who buys an Apple TV does so with purpose.

Why do you think that is? I'll tell you: Because they know that their experience will be better and easier with the ATV.

Yes, content is key. But making the interface intuitive and aesthetically pleasing is every bit as important for widespread adoption.

Relax. Can you read an ebook from Amazon on an iPad or iPhone. Yes. Can you read an iBook on a kindle? On a computer? No.

Can you watch a movie from Amazon on the iPad. Yes. Can you watch an iTunes movie on a Kindle fire or other non-Apple device. No.

You can argue UI all you want. My point was that if someone wants to access their content on as many different devices as possible - Amazon's media works. Apple's ecosystem does not. That's factual - not judgmental or critical.

----------

I didn't miss the point of Amazon's message. I just pointed out that it's misleading, and (IMO) potentially hobbling to the users who sign up for it. It's not necessarily a ripoff. It's just not some groundbreaking watershed moment in data delivery, like they're implying.

And since you're asking, no, I didn't rave about $15 contract free 250MB a month when Apple introduced it (over two years ago). Because it was on AT&T. Nothing on AT&T is a good deal. I wouldn't use AT&T if they offered me 10GB for $10 a month.

But let's compare apples to apples here: Apple offered $15 a month, no contract at a time when nobody was offering data with no contract, on a groundbreaking device, on a 3G network, when consumable media was much more limited. No, not just a groundbreaking device, but a groundbreaking new TYPE of device.

Amazon is selling, for $49, 3GB of data, divided up over 12 months, on a device that is being sold to compete with Apple's groundbreaking device, on a (claimed) 4g network, with many more choices in content consumption.

So yes, I am saying it's not a big deal. And I'm right.

Your opinion. Lots of what Apple and other tech companies promote aren't groundbreaking or amazing. There's nothing MISLEADING about their messaging. What's misleading?

Obviously there's little that would please you. Especially since the data is offered on ATT. Enjoy your bitterness.

 

[tbrinkma]

P.S. Yes, Kindle is on the iPad. iTunes is on Windows. Remember how that worked out for Microsoft?

Yes, I think most of us do. Remember the Microsoft's 'Plays for Sure' initiative? Or how about the Zune?

Those were Microsoft's attempts to step into the ecosystem serviced by iTunes.

I had direct experience with a 'Plays for Sure' MP3 player through someone I worked with at the time. Over the course of a week, she bought tracks from several of the vendors at the time, and less than half would actually play on her player. (She tried 3 different brands of player without significantly better luck before she gave up completely and went with an iPod.) I'm sure that ratio is probably a statistical outlier, but of all the people I know who bought into PfS, none of them actually felt like they could count on their music collections to all work on the same player.

And then they got the ultimate kick in the pants when Microsoft abandoned PfS for the Zune. Different DRM, old DRM now unsupported, their collections from back then now don't play on *any* modern device as most of the authentication servers simply shut down without providing DRM-free versions of their music in exchange.

 

[tbrinkma]

That probably explains why it sells so well and why it is so hard to find negative reviews outside of fan-pages for Apple products...

Every review I read for the original Kindle Fire mentioned that the hardware was too weak to provide a smooth experience. Most of them were net-positive reviews, qualified with "for the price".

Compare that to the original iPad reviews, where they noted the smoothness of the experience and people were shocked at the price being as *low* as it was. (Remember, prior to the announcement, people were expecting the iPad to be in the $800-1000 range.) Analyst-estimates on the return rate of the original Fire were shockingly high (as high as 26% IIRC). Sure, Amazon never mentioned their return numbers (who does?), but it's not a good sign.

Basically, at release, the Kindle Fire was acceptable so long as you didn't expect to use it for more than reading e-books, and watching videos. It may have improved since then, but I haven't heard it from anyone I know who owns one.

Then there was the supreme idiocy of Amazon shipping a device already configured with access to the person's Amazon account, complete with credit card access, and no way to disable or restrict the ability to make purchases on it. (All *after* Apple had already taken heat for not requiring IAP passwords *all the time*.)

 

[bawbac]

I'm not sure I could handle any more ads. Every model will have ads on the lock screen. Not worth it to me.

Wow.
1. Activate screen with button press(same step as iPad).
2. Unlock
Where did the ad go?

Now was that hard?

 

[tbrinkma]

Relax. Can you read an ebook from Amazon on an iPad or iPhone. Yes. Can you read an iBook on a kindle? On a computer? No.

Can you watch a movie from Amazon on the iPad. Yes. Can you watch an iTunes movie on a Kindle fire or other non-Apple device. No.

You can argue UI all you want. My point was that if someone wants to access their content on as many different devices as possible - Amazon's media works. Apple's ecosystem does not. That's factual - not judgmental or critical.

Sounds like the right plan, for people who "want to access their content on as many different devices as possible", is to buy Apple devices, and get their content from wherever they prefer.

 

[bawbac]

will be nice to see Apple respond, rather than lead, for a change.

and respond they will have to.

"The iPad is Ad free!"
*But we'll data mine the phook out of your usage."

 

[samcraig]

Sounds like the right plan, for people who "want to access their content on as many different devices as possible", is to buy Apple devices, and get their content from wherever they prefer.

Never suggested otherwise. I was "arguing" ecosystem in this case. I would also argue that many people love amazon in general so if they already enjoy buying their content on Amazon - that buying an Amazon branded device could be an easy decision.

Different strokes for different folks. People have different priorities, budgets and use cases.

 

[Allenbf]

Bottom line: In the tablet market, there's Apple...then there's everyone else. These Kindle tablets will compete well with the Nexus 7, but if/when Apple releases the iPad mini, it's game over.

This isn't me speaking as a fanboy, it's just a simple fact. Most of the people I know, work with, talk to, on a daily basis, they love my iPad. There is only one barrier, really. Cost. Many people aren't going to be able to justify spending $500 on a tablet.

The iPad mini will remove that barrier for most people. $250? $299? "I can have an iPad, the Apple ecosystem, Facetime, etc etc, all of that, for less than $300?"

Not to mention the education market. Game over, folks. I'll say it again, Apple will dominate the 7"-ish market just like they have the 10"-ish market.

 

[samcraig]

Bottom line: In the tablet market, there's Apple...then there's everyone else. These Kindle tablets will compete well with the Nexus 7, but if/when Apple releases the iPad mini, it's game over.

This isn't me speaking as a fanboy, it's just a simple fact. Most of the people I know, work with, talk to, on a daily basis, they love my iPad. There is only one barrier, really. Cost. Many people aren't going to be able to justify spending $500 on a tablet.

The iPad mini will remove that barrier for most people. $250? $299? "I can have an iPad, the Apple ecosystem, Facetime, etc etc, all of that, for less than $300?"

Not to mention the education market. Game over, folks. I'll say it again, Apple will dominate the 7"-ish market just like they have the 10"-ish market.

a lot hinges on a) price (which is what I said on page 1) and b) what features it has (i.e. if it is a 1:1 match to the iPad but just smaller or if it doesn't have, for example a front facing camera in v1.0, etc)

 

[alent1234]

Bottom line: In the tablet market, there's Apple...then there's everyone else. These Kindle tablets will compete well with the Nexus 7, but if/when Apple releases the iPad mini, it's game over.

This isn't me speaking as a fanboy, it's just a simple fact. Most of the people I know, work with, talk to, on a daily basis, they love my iPad. There is only one barrier, really. Cost. Many people aren't going to be able to justify spending $500 on a tablet.

The iPad mini will remove that barrier for most people. $250? $299? "I can have an iPad, the Apple ecosystem, Facetime, etc etc, all of that, for less than $300?"

Not to mention the education market. Game over, folks. I'll say it again, Apple will dominate the 7"-ish market just like they have the 10"-ish market.

most people are just fine using products and software from different ecosystems

music from amazon works on my ios devices
i can control my x-box from my iphone and ipad
etc
etc
etc

unless the ipad mini is $199 i probably won't buy it. for a second tablet i want something to read on most of the time and a few apps

 

[verniesgarden]

Even if they did apple will just steal it back in a few weeks

I dunno, I really fel this could be a major blow to the iPad market

----------

Bottom line: In the tablet market, there's Apple...then there's everyone else. These Kindle tablets will compete well with the Nexus 7, but if/when Apple releases the iPad mini, it's game over.

This isn't me speaking as a fanboy, it's just a simple fact. Most of the people I know, work with, talk to, on a daily basis, they love my iPad. There is only one barrier, really. Cost. Many people aren't going to be able to justify spending $500 on a tablet.

The iPad mini will remove that barrier for most people. $250? $299? "I can have an iPad, the Apple ecosystem, Facetime, etc etc, all of that, for less than $300?"

Not to mention the education market. Game over, folks. I'll say it again, Apple will dominate the 7"-ish market just like they have the 10"-ish market.

you really don't understand how appealing the new kindles are to the education market. they are more cost effective, more durable, and features setup just for kids, (content timers for one) the new textbooks with inquiry built in its just something thats really cool.

why would a school district go with iPads if they can get twice as many units for the same price as the iPad? plus, the kindles are more rugged, hand's down.