some Kindle Fire reviews are already in

[bangup22]

Definitely pretty lukewarm reviews. If I buy a Kindle, this is the one I'd want:

www.amazon.com/gp/product/B005890G8...&camp=201-243-8-20-01&creativeASIN=B0481XGQLI

As for the Fire, would wait for v2 at least.

 

[thejadedmonkey]

And since know one really had a concept of apps then, no one knew what they were missing. You really want to compare an original device that started this whole revolution, to one today? i wonder if you can comprehend this discussion?

Whoa whoa whoa, lets not re-write history here. Apps existed long before the iPhone. I was downloading apps on my S/E w300i, which was a craptastic flip phone from 2005 or something. And before that, there were apps for Windows Mobile, and lets not forget that apps existed for OS X before iOS, too. If you look at the extension of an app on your mac, it's APP_NAME.app. Lastly, Windows 3.11's product manual refers to applications, too. I didn't even mention Palm and their Palm OS, which had millions of apps.

Just look at the home screen of the iPhone (originaly) and you'll see how much space is there, for apps that it was missing. And Apple knew it was missing, otherwise they would have designed the home screen differently.

 

[banana22]

Apps are old, although the App Store is Apple's idea.

 

[*LTD*]

But you can bet it'll be an awesome fire-sale! Amazon's already taking a loss on them.

 

[NicoleRichie]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A405 Safari/7534.48.3)

I'm getting one as an ereader. I figure $199 is much better than the $499 iPad price. Love the iPad, but this will only be an ereader for me nothing else.

 

[jsh1120]

Pretty much what I expected. 80% of the iPad functionality at 40% of the price.

() Taking the various reviews together, many of the knocks focus on the 7" screen compared to a larger display. On the other hand, many customers will be happy to trade the smaller screen for greater portability and less weight. And with millions of Fires out there, providers will customize their content for the form factor, just as they've done for the iPad. Can I read the latest copy of the New Yorker more easily on the iPad than the Fire? Yup. Can I read it even more easily on my 23" monitor? Yup again.

() The most troubling knock I saw was the criticism of the Silk web browser in the Wired review. Interestingly, though, no other reviewer had the same problems. I suspect that will be the achilles' heel if there is one. A smooth and comprehensive browsing experience is critical to the Fire's success.

() Lack of apps? No access to the Android marketplace? Not problems for the market Amazon is targeting. The fact that Amazon will offer only one or two tip calculators rather than 25 is not a deal breaker. Nor is the fact that Amazon won't be offering a de-featured spreadsheet a la "Numbers."

() Ease of setup. Ample sources of video and audio content and excellent playback of both. Fits in a purse. Weighs 30% less than an iPad. Handles email with automatic setup of Google mail accounts. Cost is 40% of an iPad.

() All in all, they'll sell millions and if the web browsing experience isn't problematic as the Wired review suggests, they'll have millions of happy customers.

 

[Mac.World]

Whoa whoa whoa, lets not re-write history here. Apps existed long before the iPhone. I was downloading apps on my S/E w300i, which was a craptastic flip phone from 2005 or something. And before that, there were apps for Windows Mobile, and lets not forget that apps existed for OS X before iOS, too. If you look at the extension of an app on your mac, it's APP_NAME.app. Lastly, Windows 3.11's product manual refers to applications, too. I didn't even mention Palm and their Palm OS, which had millions of apps.

Just look at the home screen of the iPhone (originaly) and you'll see how much space is there, for apps that it was missing. And Apple knew it was missing, otherwise they would have designed the home screen differently.

I was referencing the mobile arena, not pc's. If you want to discuss pc's, then we can go all the way back to punch cards and tape to discuss the first apps. I know, cause i remember using them.

When it came to the smartphone, an app store and a multitude of highly organized, general and specific apps, that could be utilized on a million color display just didn't exist. Sure, we had phones like the Motorola Razr that could download basic things like ringtones and the like, but apps in the cell phone arena just didn't really exist until Apple made the app store popular. Then everybody jumped on the bandwagon.


Now, that said, let's try to stay on topic.

 

[jsh1120]

But you can bet it'll be an awesome fire-sale! Amazon's already taking a loss on them.

Not necessarily. As the Wall Street Journal put it...

“Clearly there are other costs,” adds Andrew Rassweiler, an IHS iSuppli analyst. “By the time you really look at total cost, they are clearly subsidizing it.”

But UBM TechInsights, another specialist in the field, on Wednesday produced a $150 cost estimate that indicates the hardware turns a profit on its own. That figure doesn’t include fees associated with manufacturing, which the firm estimates might take the total to slightly above $160.

“We are pretty confident that they are making a little bit of money,” said Jeffrey Brown, an analyst with the firm.

http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2011/09/30/two-views-on-the-cost-of-amazons-kindle-fire/

The claim that Amazon is losing money on the Fire has been repeated endlessly, as often happens in the echo chamber that is the web. That doesn't make it true.

 

[rdowns]

The claim that Amazon is losing money on the Fire has been repeated endlessly, as often happens in the echo chamber that is the web. That doesn't make it true.

I'd think Amazon's guidance on a loss for the quarter (xmas quarter no less) speaks volumes.

 

[Mac.World]

Pretty much what I expected. 80% of the iPad functionality at 40% of the price.

() Taking the various reviews together, many of the knocks focus on the 7" screen compared to a larger display. On the other hand, many customers will be happy to trade the smaller screen for greater portability and less weight. And with millions of Fires out there, providers will customize their content for the form factor, just as they've done for the iPad. Can I read the latest copy of the New Yorker more easily on the iPad than the Fire? Yup. Can I read it even more easily on my 23" monitor? Yup again.

() The most troubling knock I saw was the criticism of the Silk web browser in the Wired review. Interestingly, though, no other reviewer had the same problems. I suspect that will be the achilles' heel if there is one. A smooth and comprehensive browsing experience is critical to the Fire's success.

() Lack of apps? No access to the Android marketplace? Not problems for the market Amazon is targeting. The fact that Amazon will offer only one or two tip calculators rather than 25 is not a deal breaker. Nor is the fact that Amazon won't be offering a de-featured spreadsheet a la "Numbers."

() Ease of setup. Ample sources of video and audio content and excellent playback of both. Fits in a purse. Weighs 30% less than an iPad. Handles email with automatic setup of Google mail accounts. Cost is 40% of an iPad.

() All in all, they'll sell millions and if the web browsing experience isn't problematic as the Wired review suggests, they'll have millions of happy customers.

I think you meant to say 40% of the functionality at 40% of the cost. Even with the reviews telling you that the Fire is a pos, you are still holding on as a staunch supporter. This will be a flop just as soon as e real consumer start using it and then returning it.

The Fire got even the most basic things wrong with this that are going to drive people nuts, like touch sensitivity (or lack thereof) and not being able to distinguish when or if the Fire has registered the input. As another reviewer stated perfectly, "You feel every bit of the $200 price tag with every swipe of your finger."


So, when do you plan to buy one? Can't wait to see your frustration set in.

----------

Not necessarily. As the Wall Street Journal put it...

“Clearly there are other costs,” adds Andrew Rassweiler, an IHS iSuppli analyst. “By the time you really look at total cost, they are clearly subsidizing it.”

But UBM TechInsights, another specialist in the field, on Wednesday produced a $150 cost estimate that indicates the hardware turns a profit on its own. That figure doesn’t include fees associated with manufacturing, which the firm estimates might take the total to slightly above $160.

“We are pretty confident that they are making a little bit of money,” said Jeffrey Brown, an analyst with the firm.

http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2011/09/30/two-views-on-the-cost-of-amazons-kindle-fire/

The claim that Amazon is losing money on the Fire has been repeated endlessly, as often happens in the echo chamber that is the web. That doesn't make it true.

This was the only analyst to make a claim that the Fire wasmaking money, and i love how you keep reposting it. As if you are "willing" the Fire to be a success. While no one knows exactly how much Amazon is losing on each Fire, we will know for sure in a coupe of days. Only realistic estimates are based off of The Playbook, which is what the Fire was moulded from. And based off those parts, the Fire is losing money.

 

[bruinsrme]

The can only be one tablet dammit.

The reviews seem to be comparing it to far more expensive more functional higher price tagged devices.

I think there will be a lot of previous owners upgrading.

 

[*LTD*]

Whoa whoa whoa, lets not re-write history here. Apps existed long before the iPhone.

Strange. Barely anyone noticed or cared.

Post-iPhone, people noticed and cared.

The app situation was vastly different before Apple re-defined and re-imagined it, to the degree that what came before fell into oblivion in consumer consciousness, and what came after was treated as completely novel. It's what happens when you get someone in there who actually does the entire ecosystem and distribution model right.

----------

The can only be one tablet dammit.

The reviews seem to be comparing it to far more expensive more functional higher price tagged devices.

Same as how consumers will be comparing it. It all gets compared to the iPad anyway. The industry and pundits are already doing it. Mainstream media outlets are already doing it. There's no avoiding it.

 

[TrollToddington]

To me these early reviews state the obvious: you get what you pay for. I'm sure real-world experience will confirm this. It doesn't mean the Fire will not work for quite a lot of people.

 

[qtx43]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A405 Safari/7534.48.3)

I'm getting one as an ereader. I figure $199 is much better than the $499 iPad price. Love the iPad, but this will only be an ereader for me nothing else.

Then get an e-ink one. The only thing great about the fire is the price, everything else is mediocre to good, or not there at all. If you really want color or 7 inches, wait for reviews of the nook tablet.

 

[m3coolpix]

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (iPhone; CPU iPhone OS 5_0_1 like Mac OS X) AppleWebKit/534.46 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/5.1 Mobile/9A405 Safari/7534.48.3)

I'm getting one as an ereader. I figure $199 is much better than the $499 iPad price. Love the iPad, but this will only be an ereader for me nothing else.

Bought one for my wife for Christmas.....pre-ordered on launch day....got the shipped notice this morning. Yay.

While it is not an iPad (I have an iPad 2)....in her situation (for the next 1 maybe 2 years) it's a great fit @$199 because:

-fits in her purse (huge bonus)
-it will work great for her surfing habits (even has flash)
-has email access
-enough on board memory (music/movie)
-Prime account access streaming
-Netflix streaming

The only thing I don't directly see is a Slacker streaming app (which she uses on her iP4 while working out).

She doesn't play games and she doesn't do e-books. So the screen and elitist spec list isn't an issue.

So....basically it's going to do for her what my iPad 2 has done mostly for me. A great device that almost eliminates our need for 95% of smart phone features of the iP4 (or iP4s or IP5 or whatever). I'm seriously thinking smaller cellular data plans are in our future, and that's a good thing!

 

[jsh1120]

I think you meant to say 40% of the functionality at 40% of the cost. Even with the reviews telling you that the Fire is a pos, you are still holding on as a staunch supporter. This will be a flop just as soon as e real consumer start using it and then returning it.

The Fire got even the most basic things wrong with this that are going to drive people nuts, like touch sensitivity (or lack thereof) and not being able to distinguish when or if the Fire has registered the input. As another reviewer stated perfectly, "You feel every bit of the $200 price tag with every swipe of your finger."


So, when do you plan to buy one? Can't wait to see your frustration set in.

----------


This was the only analyst to make a claim that the Fire wasmaking money, and i love how you keep reposting it. As if you are "willing" the Fire to be a success. While no one knows exactly how much Amazon is losing on each Fire, we will know for sure in a coupe of days. Only realistic estimates are based off of The Playbook, which is what the Fire was moulded from. And based off those parts, the Fire is losing money.

POS?

From the Wired review...

"...And, yes, the Fire is pretty good bargain for anyone who’s only comfortable with cautious toe-dipping in our presently murky (and expensive) tablet waters. At $200, the Fire crosses an impulse-buy threshold — albeit a steep one — that Apple’s $500 entry-level iPad 2 can’t even approach..."

From the Engadget review...
Wrap-up

The Kindle Fire is quite an achievement at $200. It's a perfectly usable tablet that feels good in the hand and has a respectably good looking display up front. Yes, power users will find themselves a little frustrated with what they can and can't do on the thing without access to the Android Market but, in these carefree days of cloud-based apps ruling the world, increasingly all you need is a good browser. That the Fire has.

So, the Kindle Fire is great value and perhaps the best, tightest integration of digital content acquisition into a mobile device that we've yet seen. Instead of having a standalone shopping app the entire tablet is a store -- a 7-inch window sold at a cut-rate price through which users can look onto a sea of premium content. It isn't a perfect experience, but if nothing else it's a promising look into the future of retail commerce.

From Gizmodo...

Should you buy it?

If you like what Amazon Prime has going on in the kitchen, the Fire is a terrific seat. It's not as powerful or capable as an iPad, but it's also a sliver of the price—and that $200 will let you jack into the Prime catalog (and the rest of your media collection) easily and comfortably. Simply, the Fire is a wonderful IRL compliment to Amazon's digital abundance. It's a terrific, compact little friend, and—is this even saying anything?—the best Android tablet to date.

From C-Net

The Kindle Fire is a 7-inch tablet that links seamlessly with Amazon's impressive collection of digital music, video, magazine, and book services in one easy-to-use package. It boasts a great Web browser, and its curated Android app store includes most of the big must-have apps (such as Netflix, Pandora, and Hulu). The Fire has an ultra-affordable price tag, and the screen quality is exceptional for the price.

From TheVerge

Still, there's no question that the Fire is a really terrific tablet for its price. The amount of content you have access to — and the ease of getting to that content — is notable to say the least. The device is decently designed, and the software — while lacking some polish — is still excellent compared to pretty much anything in this range (and that includes the Nook Color). It's a well thought out tablet that can only get better as the company refines the software. It's not perfect, but it's a great start, and at $200, that may be all Amazon needs this holiday shopping season.


These are from each of the reviews cited at the beginning of this thread. Even the Wired review (by far the most critical) doesn't come close to your "eccentric" reading.

As for the endless reposting of the claim that Amazon is losing money on the Fire, you'll find that they all come from the same source. It's a perfect example of the web as an echo chamber. Simply put, no one outside of Amazon knows whether they are making money on each Fire sold. But even if they are not, as has also been pointed out endlessly, the long term success of the Fire does not lie in a profit on the initial sale.

Finally, will I be buying one? No. I'm not even remotely in the target market for the Fire, same as you. That doesn't mean, however, that there aren't millions of consumers who are. And just like those who can't afford Porsche 911's and buy Mazda Miata's instead they'll be getting close to the same sports car "experience" in a car that is not a POS.

Apparently you feel that anyone not willing or able to shell out what you do for a tablet is woefully ignorant of what they "should" be spending and the functionality they "should" value. I don't share that arrogance.

 

[Confuzzzed]

"So, the Fire is a fine rendering machine, not the fastest in the world but able to keep up with the best without any ugly dithering or visual artifacts to indicate the content's remote-rendered nature. However, if we move past pure rendering speed, interacting with pages definitely seemed occasionally sluggish. Pinch-zooming was a bit jumpy and scrolling somewhat laggy. It's not a bad performer, but Silk doesn't quite live up to its smooth name."

This is what I waited on to tell me I needn't bother. I'd sooner get an iPad original refurb for a little bit more money that won't ruin my day by being slower than my phone. Bye bye Fire. I would have bought one so that it can sit on the coffee table for browsing and the kids to play the occasional game but with these review, I won't bother. I'm going to have to share my iPad 2 with the rest of the family a while longer...and hope it doesn't get dropped

 

[guch20]

Man, check out the videos up on Engadget. Everything about this tablet is sluggish, even the Silk web browser, which was supposed to be its strongest point! It's much slower than the iPad 2 and it even lags behind the Galaxy Tab, for crying out loud.

It looks like this thing was just designed as another way to get you to buy Amazon stuff. This is an important point, since anything you get through your Amazon Prime membership isn't owned by you, and therefore has to be streamed through this device--no movies or television shows can be downloaded to it unless you pay full price for them. That's to be expected, but I've read comments from others saying they'll love taking their Prime content on the road with them for long drives, but with Wifi only, that just can't happen.

The only positive review for this thing I could find was from Gizmodo, with glowing praise and warnings for Apple to look out, as Amazon is hot on their tail. Of course, coming from a company that Apple has sued and banned from press events, I take anything they say with a grain of salt (sad how journalistic integrity goes right out the window when you piss off the wrong people).

----------

POS?

From the Wired review...

"...And, yes, the Fire is pretty good bargain for anyone who’s only comfortable with cautious toe-dipping in our presently murky (and expensive) tablet waters. At $200, the Fire crosses an impulse-buy threshold — albeit a steep one — that Apple’s $500 entry-level iPad 2 can’t even approach..."

From the Engadget review...
Wrap-up

The Kindle Fire is quite an achievement at $200. It's a perfectly usable tablet that feels good in the hand and has a respectably good looking display up front. Yes, power users will find themselves a little frustrated with what they can and can't do on the thing without access to the Android Market but, in these carefree days of cloud-based apps ruling the world, increasingly all you need is a good browser. That the Fire has.

So, the Kindle Fire is great value and perhaps the best, tightest integration of digital content acquisition into a mobile device that we've yet seen. Instead of having a standalone shopping app the entire tablet is a store -- a 7-inch window sold at a cut-rate price through which users can look onto a sea of premium content. It isn't a perfect experience, but if nothing else it's a promising look into the future of retail commerce.

From Gizmodo...

Should you buy it?

If you like what Amazon Prime has going on in the kitchen, the Fire is a terrific seat. It's not as powerful or capable as an iPad, but it's also a sliver of the price—and that $200 will let you jack into the Prime catalog (and the rest of your media collection) easily and comfortably. Simply, the Fire is a wonderful IRL compliment to Amazon's digital abundance. It's a terrific, compact little friend, and—is this even saying anything?—the best Android tablet to date.

From C-Net

The Kindle Fire is a 7-inch tablet that links seamlessly with Amazon's impressive collection of digital music, video, magazine, and book services in one easy-to-use package. It boasts a great Web browser, and its curated Android app store includes most of the big must-have apps (such as Netflix, Pandora, and Hulu). The Fire has an ultra-affordable price tag, and the screen quality is exceptional for the price.

From TheVerge

Still, there's no question that the Fire is a really terrific tablet for its price. The amount of content you have access to — and the ease of getting to that content — is notable to say the least. The device is decently designed, and the software — while lacking some polish — is still excellent compared to pretty much anything in this range (and that includes the Nook Color). It's a well thought out tablet that can only get better as the company refines the software. It's not perfect, but it's a great start, and at $200, that may be all Amazon needs this holiday shopping season.


These are from each of the reviews cited at the beginning of this thread. Even the Wired review (by far the most critical) doesn't come close to your "eccentric" reading.

As for the endless reposting of the claim that Amazon is losing money on the Fire, you'll find that they all come from the same source. It's a perfect example of the web as an echo chamber. Simply put, no one outside of Amazon knows whether they are making money on each Fire sold. But even if they are not, as has also been pointed out endlessly, the long term success of the Fire does not lie in a profit on the initial sale.

Finally, will I be buying one? No. I'm not even remotely in the target market for the Fire, same as you. That doesn't mean, however, that there aren't millions of consumers who are. And just like those who can't afford Porsche 911's and buy Mazda Miata's instead they'll be getting close to the same sports car "experience" in a car that is not a POS.

Apparently you feel that anyone not willing or able to shell out what you do for a tablet is woefully ignorant of what they "should" be spending and the functionality they "should" value. I don't share that arrogance.

I've read four of the full reviews and most of the time, the negatives outweigh the positives or it's all about even. Even the quotes you've posted have caveats like "good for the price".

I'm sure it's good at some things, but this thing is not the reported iPad-killer many were hoping for.

 

[aristobrat]

FWIW, Fortune has their synopsis of some of the tech reviews:

Consumer Reports: "In our first look, the Amazon Kindle Fire was a fine performer, especially if your priority is to get Amazon content including movies, TV shows, music, and books. The display is smaller than the iPad's, and the app market is more limited, but for $200 you're getting a full-featured tablet that performs well."

The Verge's Joshua Topolsky: "The design of the Kindle Fire is anything but inspired. It would be one thing if the device were simply a black rectangle with a high gloss screen (spoiler alert: it is). But what's more striking about the device is just how identical it looks in comparison to a product we've seen before. Namely, the BlackBerry PlayBook. I can't overstate how similar these two products seem. They are a similar size (their dimensions closely match), both feature a 1024 x 600, 7-inch display on the front and have a plastic, soft-touch casing on the sides and back, and both weigh 0.9 pounds."

Mashable's Lance Ulanoff: "This is a product I wanted to love. The Kindle Fire's unveiling was so impressive. Jeff Bezos hitting all the right notes in true Jobsian fashion, telling the tale of a product vision so clear it made my eyes tear up. Instead, now I'm discovering it's a somewhat flawed gadget — a product that literally does not always know which way is up."

The New York Times' David Pogue: "Most problematic, though, the Fire does not have anything like the polish or speed of an iPad. You feel that $200 price tag with every swipe of your finger. Animations are sluggish and jerky — even the page turns that you'd think would be the pride of the Kindle team. Taps sometimes don't register. There are no progress or "wait" indicators, so you frequently don't know if the machine has even registered your touch commands. The momentum of the animations hasn't been calculated right, so the whole thing feels ornery."

Fortune's JP Mangalinden: "The Kindle Fire takes Amazon's wildly popular services and presents them in a solid piece of hardware with a responsive, easy-to-understand interface that works. It doesn't have the iPad's extra layer of polish and sheen, but with the Amazon brand, a wide ecosystem of services at its disposal, and that $199 price point, it doesn't really need it. In that sense, Apple's tablet just met its first real competitor."

Engadget's Tim Stevens: "When stacked up against other popular tablets, the Fire can't compete. Its performance is a occasionally sluggish, its interface often clunky, its storage too slight, its functionality a bit restricted and its 7-inch screen too limiting if you were hoping to convert all your paper magazine subscriptions into the digital ones. Other, bigger tablets do it better -- usually at two or three times the cost."

CNET's Donald Bell: "Amazon's triumph isn't just about making cheap hardware. The Kindle Fire is a product that stands on Amazon's years of hard work building out its e-book and digital media offerings, its app store, and its Cloud storage and processing technologies. But as much as I like this tablet, the Kindle Fire isn't getting our best rating or an Editors' Choice. There's no doubt that I would choose an iPad 2 over a Kindle Fire in a heartbeat. In fact, I'd take an original iPad over a Kindle Fire.

Wired's Jon Phillips: "The Fire isn't a dud, but its real-world performance and utility match neither the benchmarks of public expectation, nor the standards set by the world's best tablets."

Chicago Sun Times' Andy Ihnatko: "The Fire is a marvelous device. And Apple and Amazon couldn't have created a more complementary pair of tablets if they'd colluded on it. Want a tablet that does everything, and which does books exceptionally well? Buy an iPad. Want something more compact, and you're not terribly interested in much more than content consumption? The Fire is aces. I feel as if every potential tablet consumer will recognize themselves in one of those two descriptions."

http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2011/11/14/amazon-kindle-fire-the-reviews-are-in

 

[Yr Blues]

One thing they almost got right is the minimalism and intuitive home-screen.

The Fire 2 would benefit from some german aesthetic refinement. A thing that 99% of the competition just fail to understand. I really don't like the asymmetrical bezel, but I do like that there's no home button on it.

I'm sure the first few OS updates will greatly improve the software. Amazon seems to run a tighter ship than Google.

 

[guch20]

FWIW, Fortune has their synopsis of some of the tech reviews:

CNET's Donald Bell: "Amazon's triumph isn't just about making cheap hardware. The Kindle Fire is a product that stands on Amazon's years of hard work building out its e-book and digital media offerings, its app store, and its Cloud storage and processing technologies. But as much as I like this tablet, the Kindle Fire isn't getting our best rating or an Editors' Choice. There's no doubt that I would choose an iPad 2 over a Kindle Fire in a heartbeat. In fact, I'd take an original iPad over a Kindle Fire.

http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2011/11/14/amazon-kindle-fire-the-reviews-are-in

Freaking ouch.

Also from the same reviewer:

"Writing CNET's official review of the Kindle Fire was probably the toughest assignment I've had all year. This is a tablet that wears its price tag like a bulletproof vest. The standby criticisms don't work. Holding it up to an iPad, I may as well be comparing a Vespa to a Mercedes."

Double-freaking ouch.

 

[monkeylui]

I bought my mom an iPad. In retrospect I would have gotten a fire and saved $300. Sure, the Fire cant do everything the iPad can but normal users dont care as much as we do.

I would have done the same thing. Well my dad bought the iPad for my mom, I helped him. But then again I think of the bigger screen for her eyes is better. I don't know, it could go both ways. I absolutely love my iPad, but I did order the Fire, plus the Kindle Touch. Look forward to checking it out when it gets here in the next day or so.

 

[Winni]

Just as i predicted, the reviews aren't positive. If anything they are saying, the Fire sucks as a tablet, but at $200 it's okay for surfing the net and reading a book. But don't expect much more than that.

It actually wasn't meant to be more than a media consumption device for content from Amazon.com, and unlike most of those moronic reviewers, the Fire's target audience is very well aware of that fact and buys the Fire BECAUSE of it.

Besides, this is just an entry-level device and it is very safe to assume that more powerful versions of that platform will soon follow.

Regarding the apps: The iPad didn't have any native apps either when it was launched, but that didn't keep the people from buying it. Amazon is a powerful player with a very rich content ecosystem that will attract many users and the developers will go where the users are and no developer can afford anymore to focus on just one mobile platform.

As soon as Amazon begins selling the Fire outside the US, I'm betting that in a year from then on Amazon will have become at least the second largest player in the tablet market. Nobody will care whether their platform runs on Android, WebOS, Tablet Ubuntu, Windows 8 or something nobody has ever heard of - the name "Amazon" is what will sell their platform, not the underlying operating system. People buy tablets because of the content that is available for them, and Amazon is the first real competitor for Apple who has a content ecosystem that is on eye level with iTunes.

 

[jsh1120]

Freaking ouch.

Also from the same reviewer:

"Writing CNET's official review of the Kindle Fire was probably the toughest assignment I've had all year. This is a tablet that wears its price tag like a bulletproof vest. The standby criticisms don't work. Holding it up to an iPad, I may as well be comparing a Vespa to a Mercedes."

Double-freaking ouch.

And from the same reviewer...

"...But as much as I like this tablet, the Kindle Fire isn't getting our best rating or an Editors' Choice. There's no doubt that I would choose an iPad 2 over a Kindle Fire in a heartbeat. In fact, I'd take an original iPad over a Kindle Fire.

But I don't live in a fantasy world where people are offering me free iPads. I live in a world where even $199 sounds like a lot of money. In that world, I applaud Amazon for making the best tablet value on the market.."

Read more: http://reviews.cnet.com/tablets/amazon-kindle-fire/4505-3126_7-35022491-2.html#ixzz1dhQ0t29A

I have to say that many of the comments here do sound like Mercedes owners offended that anyone would think of buying a Vespa. Or even a Toyota.

Is it really a surprise to anyone that a $199 tablet doesn't offer the same functionality and performance of one that sells for a minimum of $500? Have to say that the near hysterical defense of the iPad seems to reveal more about the insecurity of some iPad owners than about the nature of the Fire.

How DARE anyone purchase a device that doesn't do everything the iPad does? Don't they realize that that additional $300-$500 I spent on the iPad was worth it? It WAS. It REALLY WAS.

 

[trip1ex]

It is a sht device. But America loves cheap crap.