Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Kindle Fire Seen Slowing Some Previously-Planned iPad Purchases
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
It also depends quite a bit on the display size. Just packing in more pixels on a smaller display won't do it. Look at the iPhone 4, it's got outstanding resolution (and PPI) and yet I find it tedious to web browse on it.
I've only had a tiny amount of time with a 7" tablet, but in the ~1-2' viewing distances, it's noticeably smaller. I also found the portrait mode KB entry much easier on a larger tablet.
Well see when I get some extended time on the KF (hello shipping date?) and compare it directly to our iPad.
You said it won't replace your current iPads. That you still love your current iPads.
Btw, it is funny to say you still love them as if you already own a Fire and have compared the two.
Last edited:
Yes, there is an iPod Touch that has only 8GB but then there is also one with 32GB and 64GB. The difference here is that people can choose to spend more if they feel that more on board storage would be better for their needs. I like the way some people tout how choice is good then then dismiss it to better their own arguments.
I also stated it was replacing iPads that were going to be purchased.
It is a direct competitor, no ifs ands or buts about it.
Looking forward to Release Date.
It's a good argument. The best in fact. Alongside the 'hassle' factor of most real people in replicating their Apple ecosystem which for many began amassing 10 years ago with their first ipod. But before we conceded the point entirely, let me ask you this, do you know what proportion of iPad sales are wifi + 3G?
You clearly have never owned an iPad. Yes it's 3rc place BUT this is a real category in its own right. I have amazing desk tops, lap tops and smart phone. But for ease of surfing the net straight off the coffee table, one click away you can't beat a tablet. Also excellent on productivity with Evernote in particular a real must in business. Social networking is also better in an iPad than a smartphone. Ditto casual gaming.
And with Apple's ecosystem I am also able to use the tablet to 'create'. Yes, if I need anything processor intensive, I'll reach for my laptop but 90% of the time when I am on the go, the iPad will do me fine.
Can't imagine going back to life without a tablet. This category is here to stay and it will cannibalise laptop sales. My wife, for instance, does not need a laptop for her computing needs any more so when the 'house' laptop dies, it will nt be replaced.
Last edited:
You don't know know performance of Fire at all. It hasn't been released. It is very likely to be worse. We are dealing with a device that is substantially lower in cost. Still we just do not know yet.
We do know the screen size and based on the screen size alone it will not be a similar web browsing experience. It will be worse.
To understand this all you have to do is put an iPad in portrait mode and cover half the screen. Mosey on over to MacRumors then imagine the text to be roughly half the size of what is already small text on the ipad in Portrait mode. And you get a Fire.
People love to love devices that aren't out yet. It is all that potential. Combine it with a low price point and many can't help themselves.
7" screen size is too small to be a comfortable Internet browser. The web just isn't made for that small of screen.
At home I use iPad to surf more than my computer. If it had a 7" screen I do not think that would be the same. It would be more of a pain the ass. and I would migrate back to my laptop. Too much zooming in and out.
A 7" screen for surfing will win out over an iPad only for those that want to surf while standing on a train or for those that only want to spend $200.
----------
I typed that on an iPad.
Now what were you saying?----------
Yes all the iPads you were going to purchase. You walked by them in the store the past 6 months and you needed additional ipads so much that you didn't buy them.
If you think it is a direct competitor then so is the Touch. And actually you have to have a product on the shelf to be a competitor. So really at this point it isn't even an indirect competitor either.
Last edited:
By that definition, every non-essential item in the market place is competing with every other non-essential item in the market place for consumers disposable income. And that is true, but also a tad broad for this discussion.
I think you have it right though when you say the Fire and iPad are not directly comparable, but it's clear from other posts here that not everyone agrees with that statement.
My first post on this thread was to say that it's yet unknown how the Fire will affect iPad sales because I think too few consumers understand the stark differences between the Fire and the iPad. The Fire may be an Android device but it's hardly an open one. It also doesn't have half the power or storage of an iPad 2. A lot of people see the headline "$199 color tablet" and think "wow," but don't realize it's $199 for a reason.
Yes, but that is classic indirect competition. If the Fire is a better fit for a particular consumer he or she isn't really considering the iPad. To use the meat analogy again, some people buy ground round, others sirloin. Both are similar products in that they are meat, and both are viable independently. They don't really compete directly. People that want hamburger are not going to buy sirloin and vice versa.
Last edited:
Apple caters to the top 10% to 20% of the market, the people who recognize quality, have money, and are willing to spend it.
The Fire is targeted more at the middle, those don't want to pay as much for a higher quality product. Chevy buyers, vs. Lexus/BMW buyers.
Thus, iPad market share may slowly decline to below half, but Apple will still keep the majority of all the profits that can be made in this market segment, just as they are currently doing with mobile phones, by selling to people with money.
The Fire is targeted more at the middle, those don't want to pay as much for a higher quality product. Chevy buyers, vs. Lexus/BMW buyers.
Thus, iPad market share may slowly decline to below half, but Apple will still keep the majority of all the profits that can be made in this market segment, just as they are currently doing with mobile phones, by selling to people with money.
Only you can't do that because it's only wifi. But I am not going to dismiss the surfing experience on a 7" tablet yet. I surf ok (not iPad ok, but ok) on my 4S so why shouldn't 7" be doubly as good?
I don't know, something besides treat it like a hard drive like EC2? Like Cloudfront? Like SimpleDB? Like RDS? Like Route 53?
Yeah, because creating instances of 2 nvidia Fermi GPU to make a high performance cluster is using the cloud like a hard drive
That's funny, I didn't realize the Kindle Fire was aimed at enterprise and developers. I guess you think people will be buying Kindle Fires because it will let them program relational databases in the cloud.
Yeah, that's the context since the Fire is a consumer device. I guess you could make a case for Silk but that's nullfied by the fact Fire is wi-fi only. Ironically 3G would be the scenario where Silk would be the most useful but they wanted to keep it cheap.
So with the Fire I get a tablet with wi-fi only access and wi-fi only Silk. Apple has a better app selection. iTunes has a better music store. Netflix has a better streaming service. Amazon has a better eBook selection but they already gave it away by releasing it cross-platform. The only plus I can think of is that it's cheaper.
I like how you rebuttal by posting nothing
Enjoy your budget tablet
Well the trains in Boston have wifi.
. But good point. The surfing will suck on a 7". But yes, assuming the Amazon browser etc are up to snuff,...
there is a good possibility it will better than surfing your smartphone.
That's funny, because your post in response a comment about Amazon cloud computing was:
I didn't realize that Fire or tablet words hiding between your words.
Next time check what I'm rebutting
Context was the Fire vs the iPad in a thread about Fires vs iPads. Not which company has the better cloud dev kit
It's 'voilà'. I'm no spelling pedant but I'm a little incredulous at 'wha la', frankly.
Interesting numbers, you get what you pay for though! I can't justify the Fire as being something I can depend on for a tablet. Too small of a screen for my note-taking needs
For me its the exact opposite, given that i already have a 13" mba. In fact, this feeling of mine only gained strength as my GF bought an ipad a few weeks ago.
----------
you need to take a stats class.
----------
Exactly.
----------
I wouldnt be surprised if this actually surfs the web faster than the ipad, thanks to the silk browser. One thing is sure, it'll be fast enough regardless.
----------
We dont know that Amazon is subsidizing squat. You're right though, this product will be a hit. Which reminds me, why havent i bought AMZN yet? Stupid short attention-span.
----------
1) The Kindle Fire didn't slow me down from buying an iPad, I just purchased my iPad 2 maybe a week ago, And I didn't even consider a Kindle.
2) I don't think Apple is worried about Kindle's competing products.
Why? (In my opinion)
One word.
Marketing.
Apple markets their products better than almost any other company I've seen, I certainly have not seen Kindle ads that make me REALLY want to buy a Kindle.
Instead, I've seen *a few* Kindle ads that make me REALLY want to buy an iPad.
This all being said, I use the Kindle app for my iPad, I love that Kindle is multi-platform. But when it comes to Kindle as a stand-alone device..
..Nah
2) I don't think Apple is worried about Kindle's competing products.
Why? (In my opinion)
One word.
Marketing.
Apple markets their products better than almost any other company I've seen, I certainly have not seen Kindle ads that make me REALLY want to buy a Kindle.
Instead, I've seen *a few* Kindle ads that make me REALLY want to buy an iPad.
This all being said, I use the Kindle app for my iPad, I love that Kindle is multi-platform. But when it comes to Kindle as a stand-alone device..
..Nah
Then I apology you and I stand corrected about the context
But what's make different Apple and Amazon cloud use?
Last edited:
Intel is just giving a roadmap, something that I know is alien to Apple followers. By nature, they have several generations of processor in the pipeline. Apple works that far ahead too; they just don't tell you about it. Next year is Ivy Bridge. The following year is Haswell, the Broadwell, Skylake, and Skymont. It's nice, because it lets you make intelligent decisions about future purchasing plans.
----------
I agree. So why all the bragging when Apple stuff is a few ounces lighter? I'd be embarrassed to consider what a tablet weighed...
----------
Btw, it is funny to say you still love them as if you already own a Fire and have compared the two.
Almost as funny as everybody saying it's cheap junk as if they've already used one.
----------
You're doing a subtle shift. Anyone would rather eat a good steak than ground chuck. If I got an iPad, though, they much-bragged accelerometers and gyroscopes would sit idle. Not that I can live without them to reduce the price, but that all I want out of a tablet is reading, Netflix, email, and web browsing. Your meat analogy is inaccurate.
----------
1) The Kindle Fire didn't slow me down from buying an iPad, I just purchased my iPad 2 maybe a week ago, And I didn't even consider a Kindle.
2) I don't think Apple is worried about Kindle's competing products.
Why? (In my opinion)
One word.
Marketing.
Apple markets their products better than almost any other company I've seen, I certainly have not seen Kindle ads that make me REALLY want to buy a Kindle.
Instead, I've seen *a few* Kindle ads that make me REALLY want to buy an iPad.
This all being said, I use the Kindle app for my iPad, I love that Kindle is multi-platform. But when it comes to Kindle as a stand-alone device..
..Nah
Are you really saying "I bought an iPad because it's well-marketed, not because of technical merits" without shame?
I was in the market for a reader. Almost placed an order for a Kindle Touch, then thought about the Fire; a week later I went out and bought an iPad. It is so much more capable as a device. Much better to have a tablet than an e-reader, plus, I love iOS.
For readers who prefer a smaller unit, e.g. one that can fit in a fanny pack, the new Nook Tablet certainly extinguishes the Kindle Fire. Indeed the 32GB microSD alone allows one to be off the grid and still maintain a fair library. But, comparing the iPad to these half-weight media friendly tablets is really comparing Apples to oranges especially when one considers the +10 hour runtimes and anti-glare efforts focused on the tablets to specifically improve text readability. But, for individuals who have been dual purposing their iPod Touches as readers, these newer tablets provide a comparably priced upgrade particularly so as Apple did not upgrade the Touch. It will be interesting to see how many developers jump onto this low cost tablet venue and begin to concurrently produce cross-platform apps.
Far as tablet integration
Amazon = hard drive in the cloud
Apple = sync service + hard drive in the cloud
Both are integrated into their respective music stores but Apple also has a music match service
So yeah the Kindle Fire has crappier cloud tech. Not to mention no 3G so you gotta be near a router to even get to the cloud in the first place
Self selecting surveys of already interested customers are statistically worthless.
Survey people on the Apple iPhone 4S website with a poll on what mobile phone they are most likely to purchase, and what do you think the answer will be?