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.
I have no idea either, and there is obviously more than one way as you can install apps without using the store at all. As for accessing that data from Google or someone else, you, as a customer, should be entitled to a receipt of your purchases, no?
Bottom line is, there is no
have to . They might very well end up doing it, and Amazon might feel like Apple (or random dev) and say: Why should we care if you bought an app for X, this is Y. Point is, we dont know and there is no "have to" do this, or that.
----------
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.
Weird post.
First, the KF isnt even out yet, and based on leaked numbers, it sells (or sold the first 5 days, to be exact) very well.
Second, whether they will continue to do so (or go with the KF) is the argument here. The possibility that many will opt for the latter, is hardly a mystery either.
----------
Well...there already exists an Amazon App market and the Android market. And there is no cross-licensing between the two. Apps you buy in the Amazon market are not available for you in the Android market, and vice versa.
But yes, we don't know what kind of "market" Amazon is going to even have on the Kindle, so things can change. I would think this is more of a developer call like you said, then Amazon just giving away apps like that.
Amazon (Android) App market and Kindle market are not, and will not be, equivalent. As for cross-licensing, why would you need one? Do you need one between Bestbuy and Whatever-stores-you-might-have-that-does-the-same-thing?
As for the second part, Amazon would probably give them away gladly. Selling these apps will not be how they intend to make the lion share of their money. Whether or not they can convince/force developers to do the same. Time will tell.
either way... for 199, rather than 499, it leaves a big room for re-buying that handful of apps (10-15 bucks tops?) that you really need on your kindle anyway. :- )
----------
Why do you suppose it would be any different? Its not like Amazon is going to do a complete overhaul of their market for one product. The Amazon app market is hugely successful, and doesn't have cross-licensing. I think it's silly to think that suddenly Android app market apps are going to be freely downloadable on the Amazon app market.
Actually, they will. The KF doesnt support all apps sold in the Amazon (android) store. Why should they bother? See above.
And for clarity, i dont think they will suddenly allow free downloads of apps bought in store X from their data centers. There is really no need to. I guess they could add it to their Prime, but... why would they? Does anyone have any problem re-downloading the apps they bought from Android market (or anywhere else) - or what? (I dont own an Android device, so i wouldnt know).
----------
You may not need it in a tablet, but I'm sure there are a lot of customers who do, and a lot of customers who are expecting certain functions in their tablet that just aren't there in a Kindle Fire. In fact, I've read from a large number of people on various message boards who are saying they expect the same functionality out of this as they do an iPad, and for $300 less...
That's the problem with setting it up as an iPad competitor when it clearly isn't. It's a Nook Color competitor.
----------
If they release one with all of the same features at the same size and build quality of an iPad 2 (or 3, depending on when it's released), their major advantage (price point) will be out the window.
Ask your mom:
Mom, what would you do with an ipad? Then ask, how would that use differ if you had a Kindle. That is the crowd Amazon are marketing this to, not people hanging around on technology boards*.
(If your mom is one of the few tech-savvy ones, ask your neighbours mom!).
* have to say though, compared with an ipad the KF ticks 95% of my use cases (ignoring the smaller screen).
----------
If the iPhone and iPad run the same apps and has the same processor and same software (yes, some software is written for specific models).
Explain other than size, why isn't the iPhone a mini-tablet?
The iPhone even has a better camera with a higher-density display. They're virtually the same device.
Make me a 7-inch iPad but add a phone to it OR make me a 7-inch iPhone and there isn't much difference. If you made a 10-inch iPhone would it be a tablet?
A FaTablet?
Gary
p
There is nothing else, really. Phoning capabilities, perhaps, but we see that in tablets too nowadays (iPod would've been a better example). But yeah, it really boils down to size (now that everything is a computer).
----------
No, but we have the obvious example of Amazon and Android Markets as they exist now. As opposed to your baseless speculation.
Non-analogous and irrelevant, really. There is no real need for either Amazon or consumers to be able to re-download their apps from Amazon. There is, however, according to your post, a need for people who have purchased X from store Y to get it on his KF.
Ergo, its a strategic issue for Amazon in which there is no "have to" route.
(Anyhow, how is this different from anyone buying a Mac?)
----------
Companies decide which market they are targeting - the typical purchaser of goods or services to whom they aim and market the product. That some individuals from outside that target buy the product even so is inevitable, but no company in the mass market will modify the product to meet that kind of overlap unless it becomes clear a significant volume of sales is being lost. In that way you're right, consumers ultimately control the market by voting with their wallets and purses, but the likes of Apple (and Amazon of course) study the market and have a good grasp on who's wallets and purses open for what reason.
Companies also know there's a need to ensure their product is differentiated from the competition in some advantageous way. Amazon clearly are doing this by leveraging their own ecosystem and selling the device at a low price. Good for them, it's a great business model. Apple do it too however, and have proven rather good at it by building their 'whole widget' product and appealing to the luxury market.
I suspect that in some part, as Apple do lose some sales to Amazon, they'll also be ware that many of these were consumers who were not going to buy an iPad anyway, and that they will also pick up some sales from people who are attracted to the tablet market by the Kindle Fire but realise they want better features only available (for now) on the iPad.
Solid post.
----------
Yep.
Because doing those things faster on a larger screen with arguably better designed applications couldn't possibly be worth anything!
Sure it is, so is increased portability. Why nitpick?
----------
I think Amazon is betting on a bad business model. Selling the hardware at a loss and making it up with content and software isn't going to work as well on the Android side of things because those users tend to be more ideologically supportive of Free Libre Open Source software, hacking their phones to get stuff for free, and generally not paying as much for content or software. This is just my experience of the people I know, admittedly limited, but the iPhone/Android split seems to also divide people along the lines of more willing/less willing to pay for content and software.
It would be like making a hardware device intended for homebrew software makers, selling it at a loss, and expecting to be able to sell them commercially priced software to make up the deficit. I think Amazon is going to sell a lot of these Kindle Fires, but then find out that a large portion of the people who bought them say "Thanks for the subsidized hardware, Amazon! I'm going to have a lot of fun hacking it, but you're not getting another cent from me."
1) there is no evidence that they are selling these things at a loss.
2) they are not targetting the android crowd.
3) this wont be marketed as an android device.
4) if amazons projections are right, they can sit idly by while people hack them. 95% of their costumer base wont, and they will consume more content than ever from Amazons servers.
----------
Really comparing Oranges to Apples here. Amazon's warehouses are worked by Amazon employees, unless you know a story I don't you are complaining about Foxconn (and others) issues in the Chinese plants, those arent Apple employees. And since Amazon sells more Foxconn made products then Apple, all those issues are even more true for Amazon if we are going to be silly and blame a company for what one of their manufacturers does or does not do with their employees. Just wondering do you whine about this at HP, Dell and Microsoft sites as well?
No, im comparing capitalism to capitalism. If i pay X 10 bucks to rape Y. Am i without responsibility? No. I really dont want to get into politics here, but this whole "its not our factory, we just contract them"-******** have to stop. Accountability, please.
(And yes, i would, if someone said something as retarded).
----------
What functionality will a Windows 8 tablet have that an iPad 2 or 3 won't? "Running Windows" doesn't make it superior, and in many people's minds is actually a mark against it.
And please don't act like it'll have the ability to run all the best new games like Windows desktop does, since it appears it'll only run what comes from its app marketplace, and the Windows app marketplace is embarrassingly tiny.
----------
Trust me, I've been there lol
1) Wrong. x86 tablets are, and will, basically run every single Windows program ever made. (ARM-tablets will have no legacy support, and rely on the store).
2) MSFT has the single largest developer ecosystem in the world. If you think their app store will be without content you are sadly mistaken.
