Apple Welcomes Kindle Fire Tablet and More Android Fragmentation

[Michael CM1]

I see the Kindle as its own product and eco-system. Sure it runs Android, but I don't think of Android nor will most consumers - they'll just see Amazon (which is a winner for them).

I would agree. I use my Kindle app for iOS because Amazon has the best selection. If I didn't own an iPad, I would own a Kindle.

When this story mentioned Android fragmentation, I had to think to recall what OS this device ran. I didn't even know. I knew it would read Kindle books, play Amazon MP3 songs and Amazon videos. I didn't equate it with Android one bit.

I think the Kindle line is really a different market from iPad and tablets right now. You've got a $200 e-reader on steroids versus a $500 tablet that does about anything you can think of. It's almost a bit like the desktop vs. notebook markets.

 

[spazzcat]

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)

Apple lost me as an iPad customer as soon as the Fire was announced. Why?

- Amazon Prime ($30 something a year since I'm a student after my 6-months are up)
- Cheap e-book versions of textbooks. I can keep my current Kindle Keyboard in my bag and be able to load it on the Fire aswell.
- I have $1,000 worth of their content I've bought in the last few years. They always have really good special. My Kindle with Special Offers have saved me loads.
- And it's a nice sized screen that isn't TOO big (least for me)

The iPad is good for those who are new to Apple based products. It's good for those who want to have the greatest experience possible with mobile based apps, and it's good for everything else. But as an iPhone owner, there's no need for me to own both. Especially when you're now expected to have the same apps with iCloud.

If you are using it for textbook why would you want to go to a much smaller screen? You get use all the Kindle books on your iPad?

 

[za9ra22]

I forget where, but it was announced they are selling this at about a $10.00 loss. There is more to a tablet than just the parts. Assembly, packaging, testing, etc. need to be factored in too.

I think it was Piper Jaffray's Gene Munster who calculated the cost per unit at $250 - but nothing official from Amazon. I'm sure that calculation includes estimates of development and fixed costs associated with the product.

 

[jca666us]

Apps are a very big part of what the iPad is.

A $199 tablet with a 7" screen isn't a good comparison to the $499 iPad.

I love how people are comparing the ipad - a known quantity - to the currently unreleased kindle fire and proclaiming that "Kindle Fire does what the iPad does for $300 less"

No one knows how good - or bad - the kindle fire will be until its been released.

Best to judge each device on their own individual merits, until:

a. Amazon release 9.7" kindle fire.
b. Apple releases an iPad mini

Apple needs to find a way to get around the fact that if you ignore apps, the Kindle Fire does what the iPad does for $300 less in a much more portable form factor.

In other words, once the Kindle Fire gets upgraded to ICS to run any Android app possible (more specifically apps with a tablet-oriented UI), fragmentation won't matter. People will see the $200 price tag and buy away.

 

[spazzcat]

And this folks is why *I* welcome anyone getting into the tablet market. Thanks Amazon!

Apple welcomes more tablet payers. Indeed.

They will do what they did with the iPhone, sell the old models for less....

 

[za9ra22]

I'm trying to get what you don't see as Tim Cook not understanding the situation with the Kindle Fire. You keep saying "Tim Cook knows best". Frankly, I think Tim Cook was talking FUD.

Kindle Fire fragments Android about as much as a Ford Fiesta fragments things for a GMC Canyon.

Really? Because whether it runs Android or not, a $199 tablet, from a major ecosystem provider, dropped into a confused and competitive market, won't have any impact on the sales volume of other $100-$300 devices that as far as the majority of consumers are concerned do pretty much the same thing?

Ok then.

 

[vitzr]

I'm sure that was a very amusing argument, but it rather misses the point. To use your automobile analogy, imagine there are 100 people wanting to buy a car, and only two manufacturers offering 2 models each. Statistically, each manufacturer will gain 50% of the market, with each model at 25% share. Lots of profit.

Now, imagine the same 100 buyers, but instead of 2 models each from 2 manufacturers, there are 40 manufacturers with each building a range of 2-6 automobiles. Statistically no individual model will gain a significant proportion of market share, thus each manufacturer sells fewer vehicles as a whole, and fewer of any individual model. And since each vehicle costs the same to develop and build, each manufacturer makes much less profit.

Scale that up to fit the actual market and you see what has been demonstrated over the past few years in the US - that manufacturers have had to drop brands and lots of models in order to reverse the market fragmentation that had already taken place. That's what fragmentation is: too many diverse products in a limited market place. Fragmentation is good for the consumer in the sense it provides a wealth of choice, but bad for business because it lowers sales volume on any individual product, and thus with fixed costs, also reduces profits.

Not a bad counterpoint argument.

Hey, at least we got our thoughts out to the group

 

[PracticalMac]

Which might be a serious problem.

These also-rans seem to have a serious product-positioning problem.

If they position their device directly against the iPad, it usually becomes glaringly obvious that it is nothing like an iPad, which is often a big problem.

If they deliberately position it away from the iPad, it will become glaringly obvious that it lacks everything that makes an iPad (and thus what is expected from a tablet) great.

But this is an industry-wide problem. Most of these tablet makers are noticeably confused, and have been since the iPad hit the market.

What I have been (clumsily) saying all along.

Anyone marketing Fire as an iPad competitor will loose out.

On top of that the real lack of unique software for Fire greatly diminishes its value. I would by an eInk Kindle and pock the remaining $100.

 

[*LTD*]

Who said they are making it at a loss? MR posters? Last I read - costs were about $150-$160 to make the device - so there was some profit being made.

http://www.slashgear.com/amazon-profit-dip-predicted-over-kindle-fire-loss-leading-25190552/

Amazon profit dip predicted over Kindle Fire loss-leading

Amazon’s loss-leader strategy with the Kindle Fire ereader tablet, as well as a growing US sales tax bill, could lead to significantly reduced income this quarter analysts have predicted. The retailer is expected to announce earnings figures today, but already there are concerns that Amazon’s net income may be just half of Q3 2010, according to an estimate average crunched by Businessweek. Part of the issue is the $199 Kindle Fire, hardware sales of which Amazon is believed to be taking a loss on, and instead relying on subsequent digital media sales to buoy profits.

iSuppli estimated that Amazon spends almost $210 making each Kindle Fire, the 7-inch Android-based tablet it announced in late September. Although Amazon has used Google’s mobile OS, the software has been heavily reskinned and modified to integrate with the retailer’s cloud storage, streaming media services and Kindle ebook platform. That, the company is betting on, will make owners more likely to purchase content and offset any hardware sales losses.

The sales tax issue will be tougher to crack, however. An increasing number of US states are demanding that Amazon hand over sales taxes, a shift that could see Amazon either increase prices to offset the losses, or swallow the shortfall in profit themselves. Either way, the market is expected to react negatively, with predictions of a 19-percent drop in 2012 profit if prices go up.


http://www.informationweek.com/news/personal-tech/tablets/231700101

Kindle Fire Teardown Shows Tablet A Loss Leader
Total cost of components in the Kindle Fire is $209.63, says iSuppli. Amazon is selling the tablet for $199.

 

[ftaok]

When this story mentioned Android fragmentation, I had to think to recall what OS this device ran. I didn't even know. I knew it would read Kindle books, play Amazon MP3 songs and Amazon videos. I didn't equate it with Android one bit.

I think the Kindle line is really a different market from iPad and tablets right now. You've got a $200 e-reader on steroids versus a $500 tablet that does about anything you can think of. It's almost a bit like the desktop vs. notebook markets.

You can't really compare the average consumer with for people who frequent tech forums. We're not normal people. I'm sure most of the forum members get phone calls and emails from friends and family asking about a particular new device. I know I do. Most of the time, I'm surprised how much peripheral information my non-techie friends have.

Back when the iPad was first gaining steam, I got so many calls asking whether the caller should buy an iPad or wait for an Android version. They tell me about how the new Sammy can do flash because that's what the Verizon guy told them. It goes on and on.

When the Fire starts to get some mainstream press, I'm gonna guess I'll get lots of calls asking about the Fire vs. iPad. I betcha that these callers will mention Flash, Android apps, Kindle books as the pluses for the Fire. I'd be willing to bet that most consumers will "know" that the Fire runs on Android, because that's what they'll read on news sites and see/hear on ABC news.

ft

 

[MacCurry]

Yup. It's a sort of "divide and conquer" observation. Google is clearly going the route that Microsoft went down - and Apple rightly applauds this.

I agree.

It took Microsoft nearly 10 years to go from XP to Windows 7 (which is good), but with a lot stumbling by MS in between. Then MS will stumble again with Windows 8 which looks like an OS for banner ads and spam.

With Android, they have been improving up to version 4.0 ICS in a little over 3 years, and each version has been better than the past. It will be fragmentation, but the overall product is improving. You can't say the same for MS.

 

[vitzr]

Not gonna lie... I pre-ordered a Kindle Fire, and I'm pretty excited about it .

I did too, and I'm very excited. A voracious reader that has found a Kindle ten times better than I ever expected.

While I cannot speak to the Fire until it's in my hands, I've had every generation of Kindle and they get better and better. I bought the original on a lark, just to see if it was any good. Wow! was my first and continual response when asked by others.

Especially outside. After going to the beach to surf, I return nicely exhausted and lay on the beach in the bright sun reading a Kindle book, it's unaffected by sunlight unlike a laptop or iPad.

And believe me I really enjoy my iPad but for reading it pales in comparison.

You've got to see them side by side.

 

[dBeats]

At least Amazon came up with something reasonably original. Unlike those Samsung blood suckers.

Where the rubber hits the road is will it be as good of an experience to use a Kindle Fire as an iPad. I think many people miss the reality, that the iPad is so good because people really like to use it, whatever they are doing with it.

 

[za9ra22]

Not a bad counterpoint argument.

Hey, at least we got our thoughts out to the group

Well, hey, a thumbs up and sorry about the snipe at the beginning, but these Apple v rest-of-the-world threads get a bit tiresome!

 

[Winni]

Yeah, I'm pretty sure that Apple "welcomes" the first true competitor to their ecosystem. Just like they had the "Welcome, IBM. Seriously." ads back when the first IBM PC was shipped. The only thing that got fragmented after the IBM PC, DOS and later Windows came out was Apple.

The Kindle Fire is NOT about Android. The Kindle Fire is the first Amazon Kindle that runs Android, but rumors have it that it is only an interim solution and that later Kindles might not even run Android anymore, but an own OS.

Whoever buys a Kindle Fire does not care about the operating system anyway - the Amazon services and offerings are the reason to buy a Kindle. So for the consumer, this is about the Amazon ecosystem versus Apple's ecosystem - or, just as likely, about owning a Kindle AND an iGadget. Because depending on what you want, the Amazon ecosystem is MUCH richer than Apple's. Amazon sells everything from canned food to digital content and the Fire was designed as a frontend to everything that Amazon does.

Also, unlike Apple, Amazon does not need their mobile gadget to be a success that obliterates the competition. Amazon is a multi-platform company and their software is also available on Windows, Mac, non-Amazon Android and iOS. While Apple exclusively relies on their iGadgets to lock customers into their ecosystem, Amazon chose to be available for every major platform. Offering an own mobile hardware platform is just an additional customer service for them. And Amazon's services are awesome.

Apple should be worried. There is a new player on the market that has the muscle, the product AND the content to make their life hard.

 

[PracticalMac]

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)

Apple lost me as an iPad customer as soon as the Fire was announced. Why?

- Amazon Prime ($30 something a year since I'm a student after my 6-months are up)
- Cheap e-book versions of textbooks. I can keep my current Kindle Keyboard in my bag and be able to load it on the Fire aswell.
- I have $1,000 worth of their content I've bought in the last few years. They always have really good special. My Kindle with Special Offers have saved me loads.
- And it's a nice sized screen that isn't TOO big (least for me)

The iPad is good for those who are new to Apple based products. It's good for those who want to have the greatest experience possible with mobile based apps, and it's good for everything else. But as an iPhone owner, there's no need for me to own both. Especially when you're now expected to have the same apps with iCloud.

What are you expecting Fire will give you that iPad cannot?

What is wrong with sharing your apps library among 2 devices?

The one item I will agree is 10" iPad is a bit big for doing a lot of foot travel, but is it that big of an issue for you?

 

[*LTD*]

At least Amazon came up with something reasonably original. Unlike those Samsung blood suckers.

Where the rubber hits the road is will it be as good of an experience to use a Kindle Fire as an iPad. I think many people miss the reality, that the iPad is so good because people really like to use it, whatever they are doing with it.

It's the User Experience talking. Enjoyability, pleasure and delight are key elements of it. Something the competition doesn't quite grasp.

----------

Also, unlike Apple, Amazon does not need their mobile gadget to be a success that obliterates the competition.

Except that at this stage they might very well need that.

At some point the Apple product in the category will gain such traction and such mindshare (it already has), that any competitor hoping to not turn into a Xoom/Playbook/Slate crap-fest needs to completely change the game all over again.

So far with the iPad, we have an iPod situation on our hands.

 

[PracticalMac]

Also, unlike Apple, Amazon does not need their mobile gadget to be a success that obliterates the competition. Amazon is a multi-platform company and their software is also available on Windows, Mac, non-Amazon Android and iOS. While Apple exclusively relies on their iGadgets to lock customers into their ecosystem, Amazon chose to be available for every major platform. Offering an own mobile hardware platform is just an additional customer service for them. And Amazon's services are awesome.

Apple should be worried. There is a new player on the market that has the muscle, the product AND the content to make their life hard.

So why Amazon take a huge gamble on such a bet when they do not need to?

Conversely, the Internet provides lots of free content and socializing tools better done on iPad

 

[parapup]

given it represents yet another platform

No. It doesn't represent yet another platform on the technical level. And users don't care what the "platform" is called. All Android apps will still work on the Kindle Fire - just that they will come from Amazon's app store. And people who care about that will just root it like they did with the Nook Color.

People who don't understand Fragmentation are doomed to redefine it - poorly, to their own advantage.

 

[ibri]

Welcome Amazon. Seriously.

 

[blackcrayon]

Andy Rubin was asked this question at the AsiaD conference and his responsed that there really is no fragmentation as far as Apps are concerned because they all built to the Android APIs no matter what version.

Granted, Andy Rubin knows a lot more about Android APIs than I do, but doesn't the API become enhanced with each new version of Android? Isn't it fragmentation when brand new different hardware runs different versions of Android? If I write an app that uses whiz bang fancy new APIs newly available in Android 4.0, how is it going to work the same way on a device stuck on 2.2?

 

[guch20]

i'm very excited about the kindle fire.

I think apple should be VERY concerned.

Like their iPod division should have been concerned when a company released great new CD players?

The Fire isn't an iPad competitor. It's a Nook competitor.

There's a reason it's only $200:

1. You are limited to only 8GB of storage. Yes, you can use the cloud, but that's useless if you're travelling and want to bring lots of movies with you because,

2. You're limited to Wifi only.

3. From everything I've read, you can't get movies and music onto the system through USB. It appears the USB port is there only to charge the device. If true, that means that every time you want to put something on the device, like say a movie, you have to take it from the cloud. That may be fine for streaming at home (if you have a good Wifi connection), but out in the wild, you're at the mercy of whatever connection you can find. Also note that if you plan on throwing a bunch of movies on the Fire for a trip, it's SO much slower to download them every time via Wifi than putting them on there via USB.

4. No Bluetooth. So if you want to connect headphones or a keyboard, you can't. You're stuck with the onscreen keyboard, which may or may not be a good thing, depending on how you feel about typing on a 7" touchscreen (I personally have no problem with it).

5. No GPS. Location-tracking is generally a no-go.

6. No microphone. No audio recording. No voice memos. No Skype.

7. No camera. No ability to take pictures or videos, and again, no Skype.

8. It appears the Fire has no access to the Android Marketplace. Even if it does, it's limited to apps that still run on the old version of Android that make up the backbone of the Fire (many don't), and any apps the Fire runs can't make use of

9. Accelerometers and gyroscopes. The Fire has neither, so many apps that require either or both can't be ported over. Sure, you can play Angry Birds for the ten billionth time, but there are a lot of apps that need some combination of the camera, microphone, accelerometer, gyroscope, and GPS data that the Fire just can't use.

What it can do is give you access to your Amazon books and movies and TV shows. That's great, but it does not make it an iPad-class tablet. And it's not trying to be. It's trying to further dominate the ereader market that Amazon is already on top of.

 

[idunn]

Two different animals

I suppose I heard somewhere that the upcoming Kindle Fire was Android based, but hardly cared, and if anything that association possibly a negative.

I primarily view it as an Amazon device with direct access to their vast library and services. To the extent that the greater public does Amazon may succeed brilliantly with it. However to the extent they expect this device to tightly integrate the entire Android universe, then frustrated.

Among the other enticing features Amazon advertises are "thousands" of popular apps and games available, all "Amazon-tested" for the best experience. But Amazon is walking something of a fine line here, because if their customers are expecting easy access and play from every game and app Android-based, then likely disappointed. Moreover, although they advertise this as a key feature, anyone focused on games and apps would be better off with an iPad for its greater capability which the Fire may well never have.

As for all the developers, they might be happiest dealing with a tightly integrated Apple and iOS then what is from their perspective an increasingly fragmented Android market. This might be transparent to the end user, save when all does not work seamlessly, but surely a pain for those writing code. Or they may fragment as well, with a good many attaching their star to the large ship of Amazon exclusively.

I see a lot of enticements in the Amazon Fire. Without it in hand, hard to say, but it may have a pleasant textural feel and size. Importantly it will be lighter than an iPad, which is no small thing if one wishes to do a lot of reading. It should do brilliantly at that, and with video as well. The screen may or not seem small in that regard, but notable that it apparently can sync with HDTVs to utilize their larger screens. Accessing the web may work well as well. In just content consumption it may prove a near perfect device, all the more at that price point.

Those looking for more will probably wish they had elected to use an iPad. But if thinking of purchase now probably better waiting for the iPad3. It will likely be lighter and more powerful, and only tangentially in the same realm as the Amazon Fire.

 

[NachoGrande]

I would never buy a droid tablet, but my niece wanted a tablet for her birthday. No way would I drop 500 for a 11 year old, but 200 was the perfect amount. So I think they'll gain traction in that type of market....

 

[guch20]

No. It doesn't represent yet another platform on the technical level. And users don't care what the "platform" is called. All Android apps will still work on the Kindle Fire - just that they will come from Amazon's app store. And people who care about that will just root it like they did with the Nook Color.

People who don't understand Fragmentation are doomed to redefine it - poorly, to their own advantage.

No "all Android apps" will not still work on the Fire. Only those that don't require a camera, GPS data, a microphone, more than two fingers for multitouch, an accelerometer, or a gyroscope will work. And only if Amazon approves them.