Slashdot Mirror
Reviews of Kindle Fire Are a Mixed Bag
MrSeb writes "Ahead of tomorrow's full-scale launch of Amazon's new wunderkind, panacea, and lynch-pin of its continuing distribution domination, initial reviews of the Kindle Fire are starting to trickle in... and they're not as fantastic as we had hoped. Unsurprisingly, not a single review is denying that the bright screen, solid construction, and $200 price point make for a perfect holiday season outing — but to actually win the hearts of consumers, to steal those throbbing, Cupertino-captivated organs away from the iPad, the Kindle Fire has to be amazing... and it isn't. Throughout almost every review, one particularly telling observation rears its ugly head: the Kindle Fire can be sluggish. Page turns can lag. Menus can be slow to load. Screen touches can be unresponsive. For a device that is entirely about media consumption, the Fire will live or die depending on its perceived alacrity. If an E Ink Kindle or Nook is better for reading books, and a smartphone or iPad is better for watching movies or listening to music, what space is there for the Fire?"
Let it get rooted, and optimized by XDA devs and we can see what the tablet can really do.
It's sole purpose is basically "grab that and look up x" device for the living room and game night in the kitchen. It's not for games, certainly isn't for reading (I have a real kindle for that), and sure isn't meant to replace my laptop for media consumption.
$200 isn't that bad for a little net portal.
I hope you die painfully and alone.
A $200 tablet is unresponsive and sluggish? Shocker.
Adding the content for Amazon Prime members is enticing... but really, work on how the product feels in the hands of the user (user experience). Then you *might* take some users away from the iPad.
"For a device that is entirely about media consumption, the Fire will live or die depending on its perceived alacrity."
Really? Given that previous Kindles have been relatively slow to turn pages, and that Hulu and Netflix playback on devices like XBox 360s, Blu-Ray players, and PS3s presents a somewhat less-than-seamless experience, are we confident that "good enough" isn't good enough?
Not everyone needs everything to be absolutely smooth and stunningly fast. It's nice, but it may not be worth more than doubling the price. Keep in mind that most Americans (and, really, the worldians) aren't geeks. Delays may be okay.
Will I buy a Fire? Probably not, but I still get that my relatively high standards for devices are relatively high.
What are they doing? Using it to spy on the reader?
Based upon how long you spent on Page 327 of Cocking the Snook, which contained a lot of words we've run through our aggregator, here are a pile of books you also might enjoy...
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
The most embarrassing part is that, like many Android devices, the Fire can't scroll smoothly despite having a dual core processor. Scrolling between pages is pretty important for an Amazon tablet. What is it about this task is so difficult? iOS 1.0 handled it back in 2007 on less powerful devices.
Kindle Fired. There, fixed.
So, it comes to this.
I know this is a shock to the fanboys who demand that companies arbitrarily lower prices because they don't want to pay $500 for a tablet, but if you strip something down to a cheap price, there are tradeoffs. You lose some of what people want. OF COURSE it's not as good as an experience as something costing twice as much. Why in the world is this a surprise? If you don't mind the cheaper experience, buy the Fire. If you want something excellent and you think it's worth paying the money, get an iPad. Those are your choices. You can't expect an iPad experience at a Kindle Fire price. Decide whether you want cheap or good, but don't complain that reality won't let you have both.
I'm not saying tablets are a "fad"- they will be around for the foresable future. However, the public's response to tablets at the moment is "fadish".
It's the cool thing to have- especially for anyone wanting to look yuppyish and in the in-crowd. Not saying they don't have function for many people (although most people would still be more practically served by a netbook).
So someone needs to fill the niche for the majority of people for whom Apple and other quality tablets are just too expensive.
So regardless of whether kindle fire is any good- it will sell because there is a need for less wealthy people to feel "with it".
"That's the way to do it" - Punch
The blurp looks like an advertisement for the iPad, or at least a 'do not buy a Kindle Fire' ad. Is this really worthy of /.?
-- Cheers!
The problem is people comparing it to an iPad2. It's not an iPad2. I don't feel sorry for anyone buying one thinking it's a cheap iPad2, nor do I think any reasonable people thought they would or should be competing for the same audience.
Stupid sexy Flanders.
Are they suggesting a $500 item might be better than a $200 item? I'm shocked!
The fact that a $200 item is competitive feature wise with a $500 item should make it the better value, no?
http://blindscribblings.com - Tasty pop-culture in conceptual fashion.
If an E Ink Kindle or Nook is better for reading books, and a smartphone or iPad is better for watching movies or listening to music, what space is there for the Fire?
A $200 device that will do both.
People who disagree with you are not automatically evil, greedy, or stupid.
Yes. Clearly Amazon is trying to compete with Apple by stripping out some of the features and specs of the iPad to deliver a less expensive device. It's not intended to be a perfect facsimile of the iPad, just a device which can offer a somewhat similar experience for substantially less money. People will expect less out of a $200 device than they do out of a $500 device, and Amazon is hoping that they cut costs in the right places to make a device that people will buy.
Reminds me of the joke about futons, "a not that comfortable couch that turns into an even less comfortable bed, wow both those things in one!"
People were probably hoping that Amazon was selling the Fire at a loss and that they were actually getting a $500 tablet.
Remember, You are unique...just like everyone else.
Mom, everyone knows that everything but Apple is stupid. I've got a better idea. Why don't you go across the street and buy some condoms because we should at least be safe if you're going to fuck me, mom.
Foot placed squarely in mouth since 1983.
The comparisons to the iPad are ridiculous. I do expect the Nook Tablet to be a better device and The Nook Color has the least reflective LCD display I have ever seen on a mobile device and the only LCD display I consider good enough to read on.
However the iPad is a horrible reading device. Anyone who thinks an iPad is a reading device doesn't read much.
- the iPad has much lower pixel density than the Nook Color/ Tablet and Kindle Fire. You can see it. And peopel who read books aren't going to have much love for pixelated text.
- the iPad screen is horribly, unusably glossy. Basically the only situation in which you are not dealing with awful reflections is indoors when you manage to position the iPad so that no lights are reflected in it. Outdoor use? Forget it. The Nook Color as I said does a lot better.
- the iPad is big and bulky for reading. It's not about strength or being too weak to hold up something as light as the iPad, holding something iPad size at arms length for a while gets old really really fast.
- the iPad is not portable, it is nothing like a book. The Nook Color and similar sized devices like the Kindle Fire fit easily into a jacket pocket or a handbag, the iPad is a pain to carry around in comparison. The iPad is a coffee table device, not a true mobile device.
What we want from the Kindle Fire and Nook Tablet is something that is easier and better to read on and carry around and is a lot cheaper than an iPad. An iPad is a luxury, \anyone who does any seirous work will also have a laptop. The iPad is osmething you pull out when a laptop is inconvenient. Well, 7" tablets are even more convenient, and a lot cheaper than an iPAd which costs more than a basic, extremely competent laptop does.
The other reason people will buy the Kindle Fire is the same reason people bought those junk $100-120 Android tablets. It's cheap enough to not have to think about. An iPad for a lot of people is a luxury, and something it's not hard to have second thoughts about. 7" tablets will give another reason to not buy an iPad. They are completely different devices, which will actually be more suitable for a lot of people.
The ipad isn't "excellent" in my books. It's over-hyped and overpriced. I use a Nook Color right now and it is fine. I'm going to wait for something similar to the Nook that has a camera and a $199 price. Bingo!
I am a long time Amazon customer but when it came time to choose a multimedia ebook reader, the Nook Color was just the best deal for me. And to make it more attractive, it's easy to through android on there (though I prefer the stock firmware) and has the ability to let you increase the storage space via a microsd card. It's a great value and I've loved it so far. I heard about this new Amazon device and got excited that I might be able to do all the things I love from the nook, but now with Amazon. But no epub support, no microsd slot expansion, no thanks.
I have no use for any locked-down toy computers. I disregard any such devices once I learn of their nature, although sometimes I take an interest again if they can be hacked (like the Nook Color).
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
The difference will be the price point and ease of use. Sure- the iPad can do it all better, but for 2.5 times the cash. Other devices might be better ebook readers. But getting all of it for under $200? Technology history is full of better devices and technologies losing to "good enough". And the reviews seem to be saying it isn't stellar, but also seem to be saying it will do the job. And how many non-techie people read through all the comparison reviews? I doubt the typical Slashdot reader is Amazon's main intended demographic.
I wouldn't count it out yet.
I haven't read a single review yet -- not a single one -- that's come down on the side of not thinking the Kindle Fire is an excellent device. What I have come across is reviews warning the reader that you're not going to get an iPad-level device for $200. That sounds like a fair statement to me. This article seems to be setting the Kindle Fire up as if it's already a disappointment.
Where's the objectivity?
Did you read any of the reviews? They all say it holds its own against what the iPad does. Offers quick access to web and email, listen to music, and watch videos. Fire does it just fine for $200. iPad does it just fine for $600. Gee, wonder which one people will end up buying?
No, that's NOT what all the reviews say. Some of the reviews say it does a poor job on really basic things, such as page turns. If you like that -- and want a cheapo experience -- buy it. But don't expect an iPad experience for Fire prices. It won't happen.
I say this as somebody who doesn't have an iPad and can't figure out why people want one...
Apple really has pulled something off with the iPad that I think hasn't happened in a long time. There are finally serious competitors to the first iPad, but they're more expensive and not quite as slick. The Galaxy Tab is probably the closest right about now, but it's just not as good. Nothing comes close to the second one in terms of performance, and it's still just $500. This is aside from all the user-interface things that don't figure into the specs.
I've never seen anything like it. Apple released the first iPad almost 2 years ago and there aren't really any serious competitors. There are serious competitors to the first one, but they came out only just before the release of the second one! A brand new Galaxy Tab is still $500, is a lower resolution, and slower than it's also-$500 competitor!
The iPad is honestly the cheapest option, but the best anyway. A pretty interesting thing for Apple, even though their high prices are mostly a myth anyway (the cheapest laptop for the specs I wanted was a mac). As we see here, by cutting the price back (and even eating a loss) you lose functionality very quickly.
I have developed a truly marvelous proof of this comment, which this signature is too narrow to contain.
It's the cool thing to have- especially for anyone wanting to look yuppyish and in the in-crowd. Not saying they don't have function for many people (although most people would still be more practically served by a netbook).
I don't have one.
I'd like to get one - but I won't because I'm too cheap.
Why I won't get one - there's really no reason to get one. All of my reading material is still available at a better value on dead trees.
Why I want one: new gadget; eliminate all the clutter of magazines and books in the house; hacking programming interest - all in that order.
In other words, no pressing reason and I don't give a rat's ass about how I "look" - yuppy or otherwise.
"Yuppy"? Dude, it's 2011! Not 1981! Geeze!
Oh no, not page turns. The end of the world. This matters not. It doesn't justify $400 price premium. If you can read books, browse pages, check email, listen to music, and watch videos for $200, it can do everything the iPad does for $400 less. Everything. None of the reviews say its unusable. None say its horrible. None say its not worth buying. All the reviews DO say it's the first iPad competitor they've seen, and mark it highly.
The E-Ink versions of the Kindle do what they are supposed to do very, very well. If I sit down to read a book on an E-Ink screen, I can read for several hours without eyestrain. The Kindle E-Ink UI is sluggish, but it is generally consistently sluggish, and my brain soon ignores the sluggishness. The slow page-turning stops mattering after a while -- it takes some time to flip a page on a physical book, too! -- and the lack of glare, easy-read screen, and ability to read in sunlight combine to create a pleasant reading experience.
I cannot sit and read for hours on my iPad. After a two or three-hour reading session on the iPad -- even with regular breaks! -- the world around me is fuzzy and I'm often nursing the beginnings of a headache. The Barnes & Noble Nook Color shared the same problem. I don't expect any different from the Fire. Close-range LCD creates eyestrain in many people, despite manufacturer claims to the contrary. I can't read an LCD comfortably outdoors in the sunlight, and the glare is horrendous in many situations.
The Kindle Fire, for me, would only be interesting to me as a replacement for my iPad. So what would I get for $200? A device that isn't a great book reader because I can't read for longer than an hour on it without eyestrain. And now reports claim it shares the same problem every Android device I've used so far suffers from as well: inconsistently sluggish performance. That's the very reason I own an iPad 2 instead of one of the many excellent, high-spec Android tablets out there. UI sluggishness bugs the heck out of me most when it's inconsistent, and I suspect I'm not alone in that observation. The human brain is an organ of prediction, and performance must be predictable to take advantage of that fact.
The Kindle Fire? Meh, I'll pass, while once again pondering the thought of selling my iPad 2. That is, until the next time I play Dungeon Defenders, want to surf quickly without firing up the laptop, or watch a movie when the kids are using the big screen. The Kindle Fire might survive in that ecosystem and might not. I see no compelling reason to pick one up.
Matthew P. Barnson
I learn what I think when I read what I write
I wonder how much of the sluggishness is due to the browser funneling everything through Amazons servers? If you want a consistent user experience the local hardware needs to handle retrieving and rendering, not a remote server. I don't want my browsing dependent on how much traffic Amazon is experiencing.
Can another browser be used on the Fire besides Silk, one that works like a traditional web browser?
"For a device that is entirely about media consumption, the Fire will live or die depending on its perceived alacrity."
No, not at all.
That's the measure about whether it's an iPad.
It's not.
The fact is that (I believe) many people will be happy to save $hundred$ in exchange for a little menu-lag. The Fire will live or die depending on its perceived VALUE.
HP Touchpads failed as a market product, but FLEW off the shelves at a lower pricepoint. That has NOTHING to do with how 'quickly' it displayed stuff....that didn't change between the earlier and later sell-rates.
Capitalism 101, for those of you in academia.
-Styopa
The kindle is fine and great at what it does. The kindle somewhat encroaches onto Apple's turf; fine, great.
The second Amazon stops the kindle from what it does best to grab more of Apple's market share . . . well, every crap reader is 'in tehr base killin their d00dz'.
Seriously, the touch looks like a good next step, the fire, if an overstep, needs to distance itself before it sullies the Kindle's reputation.
Disclaimer: I'm a Mac, the Wife(tm) is a PC . . . she has an iPad, I have a Kindle.
Believe whatever you want to, but the reviews aren't as positive as you claim. The reviews bear out that if you buy something cheap, you get a cheap experience. If that's what you want, you can save some money. I don't see what that would offend you. You don't get a premium experience for a cheapo price -- not in anything.
Amazon don't release final products. The Fire sounds like buggy incomplete software like the Touchpad. The difference is HP were complete morons and released the Touchpad for 600. For 200 the Fire will sell like hot cakes any way and Amazon will bring out a software patch in a month or two. The hardware inside the Fire is very potent, and 512MB of RAM is enough for Apple so it is enough for anyone. Amazon have done a poor job of 'improving' gingerbread. But at $200, they have time to fix it. Silk is a stupid idea though, tablet and phone browsers handle current websites fine, so I don't see why we need Silk and its privacy issues.
Mom: "Listen, you little shit, if a condom didn't break twelve years ago we wouldn't be having this argument. If you think you can bitch and whine about me spending two hundred dollars on you that could have just as easily gone towards whiskey and a new vibrator, you'd better start paying rent. You want the five hundred dollar tablet, you pay for it."
Wait, we think the iPad is a "premium experience"?
Nice try, Apple marketing guy.
I've got my fire-sale HP TouchPad as a couch companion. I don't read as much as I should, but buying DRM-hobbled ebooks (with their inevitably limited virtual 'shelf life') just doesn't appeal to me.
If you don't think so, then don't buy it. But there's a reason all the other tablets are still compared -- unfavorably -- to the iPad. That's not exactly a controversial assertion.
You obviously don't understand consumers. If the page load is just a fraction of a second slower, they will pull out their wallets and spend an extra $400 on an iPad.
Are these devices designed to just die in a year or two when the batteries decay? And will they "function" at all when they are running off of supplementary power? My Nook Simple, seems to go braindead when its plugged in. It goes into a "charging" mode.
I realize this crowd probably wants to use the Fire as a tablet and not as an e-reader. But its being sold as a e-reader and a "replacement" for books. Well, books dont stop working after a few years. What is the max lifetime we can expect from these devices?
The Netflix app [is] slow as two-legged dog on my iPad
And that's an insult to two-legged dogs.
1. Claim reviews are trickling in
2. Only link to your own review, and repeat your own thoughts in the summary.
3. Profit.
No missing step required. MrSeb submits a link to a review written by someone named Sebastian. Coincidence? I think not.
Good word choice.
One "space" that his could do well in, is those who want to read digital comic books. E-Readers can't do color. Phones are too small. Other tablets are too expensive for this.
I understand this is a small segment of the marketplace, but I would really like to see digital comic books take off.
And how many people bought the HP Touchpad after it dropped to $99? How many people(myself included) bought the viewsonic G-Tablet for only $200? Either device can give an iPad a run for it's money and is considerably cheaper than the iPad. So please don't hold the iPad(1/2) as the holy grail at $500+, when there are cheaper(and just as good) devices out there.
Let's be honest about this. The price of the Kindle Fire may be $200 but people who buy this will also find themselves buying Amazon Prime which is $80. This is relevant because an iPad comes with the iCloud for free. Amazon has unbundled the package and Apple has not. For a few people the unbundling is nice: if you own multiple devices then you only buy Amazon Prime once. But one should recognize the $200 is somewhat illusory.
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
We've got an e-ink Kindle, my SO uses it constantly, and I wasn't unusually impressed by the battery life, so I went and looked it up: The battery life of the e-ink Kindle is, according to Amazon, 30 days with 1/2 hour of reading every day, or a total of 15 hours, with the radios off. My iPad hits 15 hours no problem at all with the radios (both 3G and wifi) off when I'm reading. Static text display with occasional page turns aren't very tough on the hardware. Of course the iPad has much more battery capacity in order to accomplish this. We have ordered the Fire, and it'll be very interesting to see how long it holds up, reading. Since it's smaller than an iPad, the foregone conclusion is that the battery capacity is less. The question is, what's the power consumption of that smaller backlight? Proportionally less, enough to keep it in that 15 hour range, or... ???
As for the usability of an LCD display for reading, it's very high indeed. I don't even use our e-ink Kindle, because mostly, I read in bed. I laugh every time I see people dissing LCDs for reading. It's either confirmation bias or outright nonsense. Both e-ink and LCD are fine for many hours of reading. There's no flicker on an LCD screen, they can be turned down to extremely dim for comfortable use in darkness, they're *way* faster than e-ink, and they're usable in situations where the e-ink fails, such as in the bedroom with someone who is trying to sleep -- and while e-ink is indeed readable in full sunlight, if I actually try to read in full sunlight, I suffer some serious eyestrain in very short order, so that's of little use to me.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
One, if you don't have an iPad, you can get a relatively low-cost tablet that is a decent e-reader (though not as good as a Kindle) and a decent movie/music device (though not as good as an iPad). It's all about price.
Two, maybe you have an iPad, but you want a non-Apple tablet. It's a lot easier to justify a $200 Fire than a $500 Galaxy or Xoom.
Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
The problem with defining a fad is that those on the inside of the fad rarely want to be considered simply part of a fad, and those outside, for whatever reason often appear bent on making the fad look bad by calling the fad a fad.
So calling something a fad is little more than an ad hominem attack on the device or market itself when you don't list the factors as to why it's a fad. It's also a good excuse for people who look at it and don't like it or don't find it useful to denegrate it, when that specific person is in no way a target for that device.
Reasons why it could not be considered a fad:
1) The LACK of a keyboard is actually pretty useful, because it's far easier to carry around and hold.
2) Businesses like it because it's a generic touch screen, much like the ones you see at restaurants and food establishments that already use touch screens to take orders.
3) It's easy to retrieve information on, and like a PC, keeps all the information at your fingertips. Salesreps like this because they can hold it like a clipboard but yet have even more info, and airline pilots like it because they can manipulate charts with their fingers and review data but only have a single device with everything rather than several pounds of paper.
4) Reading anything or watching anything on a tablet form factor is generally more comfortable than trying to get a laptop balanced on a surface or even your own lap. Holding a book for many people is simple and natural, and holding a tablet is roughly the same thing as holding a book.
So there's plenty of evidence against your idea that they are a fad, but no real evidence supporting that they are a fad, except people who don't find them useful and don't have a reason to buy them. People used to call computers in the 70s and 80s a fad as well so don't use the term lightly.
"All great wisdom is contained in .signature files"
Unless you're using the tablet as a primary device (which most wont)
I use Xubuntu on my Dell netbook as if it were any other laptop, just with a 10" screen. I even do some light Python coding on it because I can carry it on the bus a lot easier than a full-size laptop, and I have little else to do on a half-hour commute to or from work. But I guess I'm not part of Amazon's target audience (except perhaps Amazon MP3, which is bundled into Ubuntu).
Many netbook keyboards are also gimped.
And my netbook runs GIMP. At least on a netbook I can feel where my fingers are over the keys, and I don't find it prohibitively uncomfortable for typing.
So which major brand Android device cannot scroll smoothly?
Is it Sony Tablet S? Nope, it rocks.
Is it Samsung Galaxy Tab, thinnest, lightest tablet with best tablet screen ever released according to toms (http://media.bestofmicro.com/benchmarks-review-samsung-galaxy-tab-10-1,G-1-305137-13.png)? Nope, it rocks.
Yes, there are cheapo devices, that, at fraction of cost, are a bit sluggish. But is it something to wonder about?
However the iPad is a horrible reading device. Anyone who thinks an iPad is a reading device doesn't read much.
You've already identified where the iPad is less functional than a Kindle/Nook, but let me round that out by pointing out areas where it is better (note this is in comparison to my Kindle3, which I also love)
So yeah, the iPad isn't the perfect reading device, but then again it does about 100 other things that an e-ink device cannot (some of these pros/cons are shared by the Fire, since it also is backlit and doesn't have e-ink).
Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
If I wanted an iPad I would buy an iPad, they are great at what they are, but they were never what I wanted. What I have been looking for is and eBook reader plus. I want somthing that is inexpensive that I can thow some books, on that I can read a comic book on, and if I feel the need that I can watch a movie on, or if I get completly bored of all that I can fiddle around with a silly game.
Guess what this fills that niche. This device needs to replace 20 paper back novels for me to get my money's worth. That I can get back into comics is a plus, that I can watch an occasional move is a plus. This this device lets me do more is a great thing, but its not an iPad killer. For me the ipad never lived, I never had a use for it, this on the other hand looks like it will fit my needs and replace my paperbacks with an reasonably priced multi use device.
I think you are confusing "netbook" and "notebook"
A netbook is a laptop with a 10" screen and no internal optical drive.
Yes, 8GB was included on some models
My first netbook came with a 4 GB SSD, and some time later I upgraded to a 32 GB that held all the things I needed to carry with me at the time.
Think of your usage in a vehicle. Unless your in an airplane, you likely don't have a "table". You have a crampt space.
I have a lap. If I'm doing laptop things on a cramped bus, I want a laptop that will fit on a cramped bus, and netbooks just work for me.
But adding a bluetooth keyboard to my iPad made it about a million times more useful to me.
I'm glad you as a writer find it useful. But in order to do the same things on an iPad that I currently do on my netbook, I'd need to VNC to my computer at home, and that'd need an expensive data plan.
If Steve Jobs had not been so arrogant in rejecting the 7" form factor and Apple released a 7" iPad, they might have ruled the tablet market completely for a veery long time, but they did not and we shall now see that there is indeed a huge market for 7" tablets. B&N Nook Color did not receive the media attention it deserved, but I think this time, thanks to Amazon's Kindle Fire, the Nook Tablet will turn out to be the surprise hit of this holiday season.
The only thing I don't like about the Nook color is:
Some people might recommend that you root your Nook Color and CM it.
So which major brand Android device cannot scroll smoothly?
Is it Sony Tablet S? Nope, it rocks.
Is it Samsung Galaxy Tab, thinnest, lightest tablet with best tablet screen ever released according to toms (http://media.bestofmicro.com/benchmarks-review-samsung-galaxy-tab-10-1,G-1-305137-13.png)? Nope, it rocks.
Yes, there are cheapo devices, that, at fraction of cost, are a bit sluggish. But is it something to wonder about?
All of them scroll very jerky, there is not one exeption. But obviously you are to android biased to admit it or you have never used an iDevice. Once android gets smooth you will know what we are talking about .. Till then ignorance is bliss.
No they can't "give the iPad a run for it's money". The Touchpad was a complete and utter failure, and cost HP
a fortune. *you* may think they were "just as good", but obviously most people don't.
All the reviews DO say it's the first iPad competitor they've seen, and mark it highly.
This is the *first* iPad competitor they've seen? What the heck were the Galaxy Tab, Playbook, Asus Transformer and other post-iPad tablets? Or do they mean the first "respectable" (i.e. non-Chinese knock-off) competitor at a much cheaper price, with all the warts that go with it?
Less space than a Nook Touch. Lame.
My Nook Simple, seems to go braindead when its plugged in. It goes into a "charging" mode.
I assume by "Nook Simple" you mean the original Nook? The only time mine says it's in charging mode is when I've let the battery run completely down. And even then it only displays that message until it gets to a minimum level of charge to function, at which point it operates normally (albeit tethered to its short power cable).
Well, books dont stop working after a few years.
They don't? You must be one of those Luddites then. Don't worry, the firemen will be there shortly to help you with your problem, and then you can find some nice new shiny books that *do* time out after a few da^H^H^H^H^H long time.
Signed, Mr. Burns: RIAA / MPAA / Copyright Office (Tm) / Clones-R-Me / 0% dictator-for-lifes.
So far it works pretty darn well for casual web browsing (including Flash!), media consumption, and videoconferencing. Kindle reader app works well, though something that could deal with Adobe digital editions would be nice.
So far I'm not really seeing anything (for my usage) where spending 4x the money on an iPad would make much difference.
Most people were given the full retail price of $500, and at that point, why not just get the iPad. But at $99, the comparison obviously changed. At $99 in the first place, they would have sold out all of them, like they did when they had that sale.
But the Nook and Fire are pretty similar devices, save for some bumps in spec, and the Nook is $50 more expensive. That might be a significant factor in people choosing.
The one where it costs half as much as its competition, that's what space it can occupy...
I have a touchpad. Compared to my 14" laptop with core i3 and a couple gigs of RAM, the tablet is much lighter and smaller, has longer battery life, turns on faster, and is less likely to be damaged by my toddlers' grubby fingers poking at it. The tablet can be held in one hand while poking at it with the other.
I use my tablet for late-night reading with a kid sleeping in my lap and the lights turned low. I can watch movies on the airplane when there isn't enough room in economy to properly open up my laptop. I can watch movies on a long trip without needing an inverter.
Sure, it's no good for serious work--for that I have another machine with many gigs of RAM and a couple of large displays. But for some things it's great.
They are universally disappointing.
This is just another typical attempt to take users away from the iPad by being cheaper. The problem is ... people don't ACTUALLY WANT CHEAPER if it means bad experience. There are plenty of posts on this page saying 'people don't care that its laggy!' ... yet ... you're missing the FACT that ... EVERYONE IS BITCHING ABOUT IT BEING LAGGY. From a technical stand point it doesn't stop you from doing anything, but every single time it happens it stands out in your mind and it takes away from the experience. It doesn't take too long before that makes you loath the device. Watch older generation iPhone owners as they upgrade to new versions of iOS that require more CPU and thus start to run noticeably slower on 3G and 3GS devices. They will use them less and less just due to the little bits of lag that ruin the feel of it.
Why is it that on slashdot someone says 'I don't like YYY about XXX' that the response is universally 'Well, people don't actually care about YYY about XXX' ... someone says 'i don't like it' and you guys respond 'you don't know what you're talking about!'
Listen too me again ... People aren't willing to pay less for less in this case. It is NOT UNIVERSALLY TRUE that people want the cheapest price. There is a minimum acceptable level of performance that is required in order for something to be comfortable and usable, when you fall below that level, price won't save you. You guys can sit around and discuss all these reasons why 'the reality distortion field' keeps people buying Apple products, but the fact of the matter is, its you that lives in a reality distortion field. No other rational reason for so many people hear to be so oblivious to the world around them.
Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
Um, li-ion batteries loose about 20% of their capacity each year. They don't die after "a year or two". I remember picking up what as the time a 5 year old iriver ihp-120 and playing some music for a few hours. Definitely not dead.
As for the nook simple touch, it can be used plugged in as long as it's not plugged in to a computer.
Oh no, not page turns. The end of the world. This matters not.
Yeah, it's not like you'll be doing something like that over and over again, multiple times per hour, while using the device or anything...
It doesn't justify $400 price premium.
$300, but what's being off by 33%? Given your inclination to not sweat the little things, I'm sure this matters not...
All the reviews DO say it's the first iPad competitor they've seen, and mark it highly.
I see the money you've saved on buying a Fire has allowed you to invest in rose-colored glasses. That's not what the reviews say at all. Most, in fact, say pretty much the opposite. That they had high hopes and that it really had a lot of potential, based on the launch event, but that it fails to live up to the iPad. At best, they say it's a great $200 tablet, but in no way is a proper iPad competitor. The screen isn't even the same size category!
The Fire isn't an iPad competitor, but it's a great original Kindle competitor, with some understandable compromises.
"But don't expect an iPad experience for Fire prices. It won't happen."
Why exactly? The Fire seems to have more powerful hardware than the first generation iPad. It arguably should be able to provide a better experience than Apple's 1st gen experience.
Iphone had hardware acceleration since launch. Android finally got it with honeycomb but the app developer had to invoke it to use it. From what I've read ice cream sandwich has it enabled for all apps. Finally. Like just under the wire of 2012 finally whereas iphone had this in 2007. Yes Iphone is just one hardware platform which makes things easier but still. Android should have had this a long time ago.
So unless it has a monster cpu you're not getting a smooth as glass experience on ANY android phone/tablet that's gingerbread or earlier.
I bought an iPad2 and had it for about 3 weeks before I returned it and got the Transformer with keyboard dock. I have never looked back.
There's no need to look back when you are already behind.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Unfortunately, the answer for me is "neither". I will not buy a tablet that doesn't have a very quick touch to response rate and I will not buy a "walled garden" tech toy. I *want* to buy a tablet, but for what I want to use its not worth $500. $200 is a good price point for me and I'll pay more if I perceive the value is there.
However, I absolutely won't purchase something slow and clunky and that's exactly what a B&N nook color felt like to me. I'm afraid from the reviews that that is what the fire will feel like also. So, as much as people say that sluggish performance is not a deal breaker, it is for me and I believe it will keep android devices from succeeding in the market place unless do better.
When it came to android phones, I waited until the Nexus One appeared because the G1 seemed sluggish when I played with it. The Nexus One was the first android phone IMO that succeeded with a good responsive UI. This also correlates to when Android really started take off in the market place. Perhaps history will still repeat itself.
d
all language nazi's will burne in heil!
Actually I'd say that thanks to iDevices, a huge percentage of the population have heard of rooting a device, and a whole lot of people consider it normal or even necessary to use the device. In the past couple of years I've seen plenty of less tech-savvy people get a new android phone, and then immediately start asking how to root it, despite not having a single benefit to them that they can list. They just know that iPhones need it to unlock full functionality, so androids must too.
How Amazons walled garden will stack up against Apples remains to be seen.
The Kindle Fire is nothing more than another cheap E-pad made in China! Slow, unresponsive and is not compatible with many Android Apps. At least the E-Pad I can get fro around $100 vs. the $200 Kindle Fire.
I've got one of those E-pads. The Kindle Fire is nothing like that. E-pads come with crappy app stores (e.g., SlideMe), have non-multitouch screens, don't come with good software pre-installed, and don't come from good companies with quality support.
If you want quality you need to fork over more money, or wait for another deal like the HP Touchpad to come around.
Have you read anything about the TouchPad? I used to be a WebOS user, but it's dead. Dead. And even when it was alive the TouchPad had like 300 apps total.
And waiting for a deal like the TouchPad to come along is a losing proposition. There's no $99 fire sale in any tablet's immediate future. Even if a company wanted to throw product away like that, people have already been burned by the $99 "deal", and won't be so quick to grab one up again.
To read the linked article, you'd think the reviews were lukewarm to negative.
Then you click on one of them, the PC magazine review and it gives it "4/5 with its "bottom line" summary as "The first easy-to-use, affordable small-screen tablet, the Amazon Kindle Fire is revolutionary." Verge was slightly less positive, giving it 75%, but finishes with "Still, there's no question that the Fire is a really terrific tablet for its price. "
"Waste not one watt!" - CZ
Would that be a Fire Sale?
Thanks, Slashdot.
It's basically a 7" tablet that runs a locked-down and obsolete version of Android and has any and all useful features stripped out of it.
Puny 512MB memory is less than what my phone has, no camera, no SD slot for expanding the tiny 8GB of flash in it, no bluetooth, no HDMI, no USB port, no 3G, no nothing.
They bill it as a media consumption device, but it doesn't really have the horsepower or storage to accomplish that. Books? Sure... anything else? Forget it.
Yeah but those people aren't very bright.
I don't understand how an electronic mini book like Kindle could ever replace the joy of reading a real book. it's simply uncomparable! I'll probably never going to join the hype ~Babylon Lingerie http://www.babylonlingerie.com/
I wish:
it Android Ice cream Sandwich.
for Next version:
3G
Bigger screen size 10 inch
it has Micro SD card Reader
I played around with it some more and you are right.