Apple Welcomes Kindle Fire Tablet and More Android Fragmentation

[guch20]

No, I'm saying it's a good tablet that people can afford. Amazon has more than 6,000 apps on their site. Pretty sure that's enough for most people. It is missing features like GPS, Accelerometer, mic, camera. True, but for the people who don't need that and just want to watch TV shows, movies, browse the web, use apps for a low price, then it's good.

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on the tablet thing, because I think any true tablet needs to reach certain design and usability specs to be considered a tablet.

I'd prefer to call the Fire an amazing eReader or maybe some new classification like a "media consumption device," since that's all you can really do with it.

I remember before its release, people (read: media pundits) complained about the iPad being truncated because its users could not create media and could only consume it; however, that is not the case with the iPad but is definitely the case with the Fire.

 

[thenerdal]

And if you want to do email, web browsing, and Angry Birds, you don't need the Apple ecosystem and you're overpaying for the features you do want.

I agree with this. My friend has a Mac and he only uses it to browse the web and for Office. He could've gotten a netbook for like 400 bucks or less.

 

[chagla]

Fragmentation isn't really as big of a deal as people here are making it out to be. If you buy an HTC/Samsung devices, you aren't really buying an Android device. You are buying a Sense/Touch Wiz device.The only true android devices are the nexus line, and Google is doing a great job of keeping its devices up to date.

Like the Nexus One.. ...Oh..

indeed!
hey so where do i download ios5 for iphone1 and iphone 3g? do tell.

 

[*LTD*]

And if you want to do email, web browsing, and Angry Birds, you don't need the Apple ecosystem and you're overpaying for the features you do want.

No one *needs* the Apple ecosystem. Nobody *needs* Apple gear. Wants, however, are a different story.

If consumers perceive a better value proposition, they'll pay more. If they outright want it (user experience plays a major role here) they'll pay more. This is part of the reason Apple sold record numbers of Macs during a recession while the rest of the industry tanked.

 

[guch20]

The first iPad missed a lot of those, and you can still buy an iPad without 3G/4G and GPS. For some reason. the Apple fans on this site have a tendency to inflate the requirements to be part of a category to exactly what Apple offers, even if that's different from the previous month. "Smartphone" is another definition that's been inflated to a ridiculous degree here.

The first iPad was missing cameras. That's it. How exactly is that "a lot of those"?

As far as 3G/4G goes, you have the option of going without, but you can also buy a 3G-capable model if you so choose. That isn't the case with the Kindle Fire.

----------

indeed!
hey so where do i download ios5 for iphone1 and iphone 3g? do tell.

iOS 5 doesn't work on any iPhone before the 3GS, and on any iPod Touch before the 3rd gen.

I would list the thousands of Android devices that don't run the latest version of Android, but I don't have the years it would take to do so.

Comparing fragmentation between the two platforms is a waste of time since there's no comparison.

 

[thenerdal]

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on the tablet thing, because I think any true tablet needs to reach certain design and usability specs to be considered a tablet.

I'd prefer to call the Fire an amazing eReader or maybe some new classification like a "media consumption device," since that's all you can really do with it.

I remember before its release, people (read: media pundits) complained about the iPad being truncated because its users could not create media and could only consume it; however, that is not the case with the iPad but is definitely the case with the Fire.

You think a true tablet need to reach a certain design and usability specs to be considered a tablet? But that's not what a tablet is.

A Tablet is basically a computer with a touch screen, no keyboard and you use your fingers to navigate it. That's it.

Anything more is just add-ons.

 

[voonyx]

indeed!
hey so where do i download ios5 for iphone1 and iphone 3g? do tell.

Two phones being compared to probably 200+(some of them released like last month) that don't run the latest Android version. Nice.

 

[samcraig]

No one *needs* the Apple ecosystem. Nobody *needs* Apple gear. Wants, however, are a different story.

If consumers perceive a better value proposition, they'll pay more. If they outright want it (user experience plays a major role here) they'll pay more. This is part of the reason Apple sold record numbers of Macs during a recession while the rest of the industry tanked.

Not everyone can pay more. Not everyone wants to pay more. Some people are invested into Amazon's ecosystem. And the $200 price difference - if you're only interested in media - buys quite a few books, movies and music. We should at least be able to agree on that.

No one needs ANY of these devices. They are LUXURY items. Sure there are some people who will insist that you can't live without them (especially after having one) but they are luxury items.

 

[guch20]

And if you want to do email, web browsing, and Angry Birds, you don't need the Apple ecosystem and you're overpaying for the features you do want.

You forgot to mention you'd lose the hundreds of thousands of apps, basic tablet functionality (Bluetooth, accelerometer, gyroscope), the ability to use it without Wifi, the ability to put media on it via USB, the ability to take pictures or record movies, the ability to use Skype or anything else that requires a microphone, etc.

 

[apolloa]

I believe a valid argument needs to be based on something real, not idle gossip from people who don't know anything much about what's going on. Apple will produce what they believe to be the right product and release it at what they believe to be the right time. It will sell, regardless of what gossip mongers and the rumor industry have given us to expect in advance.

Apple have almost always had low-priced competition with solid ecosystem. The Mac was sold at premium price against cheap knock-off PCs running Windows and a whole raft of junkware/freeware and it still sold - still sells that way even now. Surely it is not beyond the power of imagination to realise that Apple's track record, sales volume and profitability - given that in every category they are selling devices at premium prices against cheap competition - means they have some notion about what they are doing, and are in fact succeeding where you seem to believe they can't.

All the court case in Spain has proved - so far - is that Apple have not got a strong enough case to win, in that instance. If you believe that using the legal system to fight a legal case is an indication of arrogance, then it leaves very little basis for a rational discussion. What other venue is there? It costs Apple money to fight these cases, and if there is no merit in a suit they bring, no court will proceed with it. Apple might be prepared to bring frivolous suits to chill the competition, but swift dismissals would quickly end that and actually result in the competition gaining much better traction. Again, the Spanish court saw sufficient grounds last year to grant Apple's injunction, meaning there were grounds for the case.

Ok, so you come on a rumours website, and then state they have no idea what they are talking about? I do believe that these 'idle gossipers' or 'analysts' actually earn a living from reporting on 'gossip mongers' :roll eyes:
And I also believe they have been pretty accurate with the 'gossip' on more then one occasion, so I shall use the story's for arguments thanks.

"and are in fact succeeding where you seem to believe they can't."

Why are you putting words in my mouth? I never stated they can't succeed, I stated they cannot handle competition and the biggest threat so far is the Kindle Fire? How can you possibly state Apple is not successful with the iPad?
But on the flip side:
And some advice, using the PC sales market to prove a point isn't very good, worldwide Apple's share is so tiny I believe it's single figures. It really doesn't shout 'success' for Apple at all, in fact it shouts 'got slaughtered by the competition'?
Apple has only been successful with it's computers due to the massive mark up they have, it makes big profits on the sales. But they are in no way a success i market share terms.

Apple lost it's case, it also lost it's case of criminal charges that it tired to bring, in fact, reading the story's people have been quite shocked at Apple's 'arrogance' to try and file such baseless charges. The patent Apple lost against is also apparently the one it is using against Samsung, it is now expected Apple's case in Spain against Samsung has been weekend due to this ruling. Apple is being arrogant, it is not protecting it's 'intellectual property' it is trying to block competition to protect it's market share and sales, not it's patents and devices.

http://www.appleinsider.com/article...blet_maker_wins_patent_attack_from_apple.html
http://gizmodo.com/5855623/apple-fi...inst-a-spanish-tablet-maker-over-ipad-patents
http://www.cultofmac.com/127519/lik...small-spanish-tablet-maker-wins-ipad-lawsuit/
http://fosspatents.blogspot.com/2011/11/apple-loses-ipad-design-lawsuit-against.html

http://9to5mac.com/2011/11/02/david...suit-against-small-android-vendor-from-spain/

 

[voonyx]

I'm thinking that a large portion (not all) of those purchasing Kindle Fires wouldn't even know what "fragmentation" means in regards to the Android platform.

I'm guessing a large portion (not all) of those purchasing Kindle Fires wouldn't even know it's based on Android.

 

[guch20]

You think a true tablet need to reach a certain design and usability specs to be considered a tablet? But that's not what a tablet is.

A Tablet is basically a computer with a touch screen, no keyboard and you use your fingers to navigate it. That's it.

Anything more is just add-ons.

So again, a Kindle Touch has to be considered a tablet under that definition.

 

[samcraig]

The first iPad was missing cameras. That's it. How exactly is that "a lot of those"?

As far as 3G/4G goes, you have the option of going without, but you can also buy a 3G-capable model if you so choose. That isn't the case with the Kindle Fire.

----------

Well to use your example - the iPad doesn't have a camera but the iPad 2 does. So the same could be true for the Kindle Fire. The first might not have 3G/4G but the second one could.

----------

You forgot to mention you'd lose the hundreds of thousands of apps, basic tablet functionality (Bluetooth, accelerometer, gyroscope), the ability to use it without Wifi, the ability to put media on it via USB, the ability to take pictures or record movies, the ability to use Skype or anything else that requires a microphone, etc.

No he didn't forget that- did you READ the post you quoted.

He said "And if you want to do email, web browsing, and Angry Birds, you don't need the Apple ecosystem and you're overpaying for the features you do want."

Where does the rest of your laundry list come into play? It doesn't.

 

[Hulk12]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A334 Safari/7534.48.3)

This makes Apple sound so juvenile. We welcome it because we think it will make Android suck more? Come on Apple! Those are just cheap shots and arent' necessary from such a large company. If it wasn't for Android, Jailbreakers etc, Apple wouldn't be so far in it's innovation. These products and changes are what make Apple get off their c@cky arses and keep up with competitors. Jeeze, you don't hear of other big companies taking all these cheap shots.

Really you didn't read about the shots google and microsoft were taking at Siri because apples implementation of voice control was taken by a different approach. This is something all companies do its nothing new but some company's take more cheap shots than others i agree it's kind of childish though #

 

[Switcher2001]

Saying Fire is Android is like saying Mac is UNIX

I see the Kindle Fire more as "Amazon's tablet" rather than Amazon's "Android" tablet.

I can see from the number of thumbs up on the above post and others that I am not the only pro-Mac guy who's not anti-Android. I bought a Nook color a year ago because it was half the price of the iPod and because I thought I wanted an ebook reader more than a tablet. What I found is that I want a tablet that is a reader as well, and I feel too constrained by the Android based Nook. I bought a SamsungGalaxy so I could have a full Android tablet, but that's because I know what Android is and I'm a fan. As many in this thread have said, though, most Android based device users don't know what Android is. My experience with an Android based tablet and two pure Android phones (G1 and then Nexus One) has only strengthened my loyalty to Android, to the point where I bought a tablet as expensive as the iPad to get the OS I prefer.

 

[something3153]

The first iPad was missing cameras. That's it. How exactly is that "a lot of those"?

As far as 3G/4G goes, you have the option of going without, but you can also buy a 3G-capable model if you so choose. That isn't the case with the Kindle Fire.

I somehow thought it lacked a microphone. However, I have to argue with your belief that it matters whether a feature is available on SOME item in the product line - a 911 Carrera is not faster because a 911 Turbo exists. An iPad wifi does not have 3G/GPS because an iPad AT&T does. If those are required to be a tablet, iPad wifis are not tablets. I don't think anyone here is going to start suggesting that.

----------

No one *needs* the Apple ecosystem. Nobody *needs* Apple gear. Wants, however, are a different story.

If consumers perceive a better value proposition, they'll pay more. If they outright want it (user experience plays a major role here) they'll pay more. This is part of the reason Apple sold record numbers of Macs during a recession while the rest of the industry tanked.

You're going to try semantics between "need" and "want" when I used "want" at the end of my post? Please tell me what an iPad offers over a Kindle Fire for my use case: email, web, ebooks, and Netflix, smaller than my laptop but bigger than my phone. I'm really quite curious.

 

[divinox]

The Kindle doesn't connect to the Android Marketplace. So if you bought an app on the Marketplace, you have to buy it again from Amazon on the Fire.

Even if at some point Amazon decides to somehow let users download any Android Marketplace app, they'd still be limited to apps that support Android 2.3, and even further limited to those apps that don't require a camera, GPS, a microphone, 3+ fingered multitouch, a gyroscope, or an accelerometer.

As already stated: No, not necessarily. Yes, Amazon's store may not have a track of you purchasing said content from store Y, but that is not equivalent with you necessarily having to rebuy said content from store A. It all depends on how Amazon decides to tackle the issue, and how forthcoming developers are in allowing transition of apps. Either way, before information is out, everything is speculation - simple as that.

Whats clear is that it very well might make economic sense to Amazon - not - to double charge customers for content they already paid for on their Android (or iOS) devices. Whether or not they can sway the developers into feeling the same way, well, thats a different story - no different from buying a license for use on a PC and then wanting to transition it to a Mac (an analogous situation, really).

 

[guch20]

Well to use your example - the iPad doesn't have a camera but the iPad 2 does. So the same could be true for the Kindle Fire. The first might not have 3G/4G but the second one could.

That would be great if 3G/4G was the only feature missing versus more feature-complete tablets. It isn't.

The first iPad didn't have cameras, but that's really the only feature it was "missing" compared to the iPad 2.

 

[thenerdal]

So again, a Kindle Touch has to be considered a tablet under that definition.

No, because Kindle touch is used to read books. That's the difference from eReaders and Tablets. eReaders are used to read eBooks, while Tablets are used for a variety of things. Kindle Touch is just a eReader with a touch display.

 

[guch20]

As already stated: No, not necessarily. Yes, Amazon's store may not have a track of you purchasing said content from store Y, but that is not equivalent with you necessarily having to rebuy said content from store A. It all depends on how Amazon decides to tackle the issue, and how forthcoming developers are in allowing transition of apps. Either way, before information is out, everything is speculation - simple as that.

Whats clear is that it very well might make economic sense to Amazon - not - to double charge customers for content they already paid for on their Android (or iOS) devices. Whether or not they can sway the developers into feeling the same way, well, thats a different story - no different from buying a license for use on a PC and then wanting to transition it to a Mac (an analogous situation, really).

I think that depends on how the information is stored, which, correct me if I'm wrong, I believe is not stored by the individual developers.

In other words, even if Amazon wanted to see whether or not you had purchased app X from store Y, they probably couldn't find that information out without an agreement from Google and Apple, since they store the information as to who bought what.

There's no way they'd share that information with a competitor, so that means Amazon customers would have to re-buy those apps.

 

[divinox]

Can you provide any example of paid apps that are available for free on the Amazon Market as a result of being paid for on the Android Market?

Can you provide any example of an app bought from store X, that Amazon charges for on the Kindle? (Of course not, the Kindle isnt out yet).

 

[garylapointe]

No, because Kindle touch is used to read books. That's the difference from eReaders and Tablets. eReaders are used to read eBooks, while Tablets are used for a variety of things. Kindle Touch is just a eReader with a touch display.

I think most people would consider a true eReader to use eInk and the Fire does not.

Even Amazon ran ads like that. (The man and woman at the pool and the guy couldn't read his iPad in the sun).

Gary

 

[something3153]

You forgot to mention you'd lose the hundreds of thousands of apps, basic tablet functionality (Bluetooth, accelerometer, gyroscope), the ability to use it without Wifi, the ability to put media on it via USB, the ability to take pictures or record movies, the ability to use Skype or anything else that requires a microphone, etc.

I didn't "forget" any of that; I'm not interested. I had an iPhone and downloaded a few dozen apps I never used more than twice. I never used the microphone for anything more than using it as a phone. I'm constantly bathed in wifi and use ~30mb of data per month. Never use bluetooth. The accelerometer and gyroscope I've only ever used for a couple games, occasionally. I don't have any use for a camera on it - the phone is more portable and wieldy for low-quality pics, and I have real cameras when I'm willing to carry something larger than that.

Got anything else I "forgot"? So far you're listing a lot of things I don't need in a tablet.

 

[thenerdal]

I think most people would consider a true eReader to use eInk.

Even Amazon ran ads like that. (The man and woman at the pool and the guy couldn't read his iPad in the sun).

Gary

Kindle Touch does use eInk.

 

[*LTD*]

Not everyone can pay more. Not everyone wants to pay more.

They certainly decided to pay more to Apple and barely anything at all to Apple's competitors, when it comes to the iPad. And the iPad is probably as luxury as a luxury device can get (at least by some people's definition around these parts.)

Apple sells multiple times in a single quarter, what other tablet makers *cumulatively* have sold since they've been in the market. Thats astounding. And for perspective, quarterly iPad sales have surpassed Mac sales several times over, and there is some evidence to suggest they're even cutting into the notebook (that's notebook, not netbook) market. Not bad for "not everyone wants to pay more."

Of course not everyone wants to pay more, but consumers tend to mysteriously loosen their wallets when it comes to Apple. Of course, there isn't any mystery at all.