Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Amazon Prime Will Knock $50 Off an Android Phone If You Watch Amazon's Lock-Screen Ads (recode.net)

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the interesting-moves dept.

It's no secret that Amazon's Fire Phone tanked on the market. But while the e-commerce giant is keeping a distance from smartphone manufacturing business for some time, it is not ignoring the platform. The company is now willing to offer its Prime members a $50 discount on two unlocked phone models should they agree to see ads on the lock-screen of their smartphone. Recode reports:Unlike the Fire Phone, which used Amazon services in place of Google, these two phones (the fourth-generation Moto G and Blu R1 HD) will include all the standard Google apps (Play Store, YouTube, Gmail, Chrome, etc.) along with Amazon apps for shopping, watching video and playing music. With the discount, the Blu phone will sell for just $49, while the price of the Moto G drops to $149. The move is clearly a modest one but could at some point become more significant, particularly if Amazon is willing to strike deals with other hardware makers to include its apps and services.The bigger news is Amazon finding its way into Google Mobile Services-powered Android smartphones. Most of the Amazon-branded devices don't have Google Mobile Services (Google Play, Google Play Services, Gmail etc).

107 of 153 comments (clear)

  1. Not nearly enough by JohnFen · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I presume that you must use Amazon's lock screen, which means no third-party ones. $50 off the purchase of two phones in exchange for no longer being able to use the lockscreen of my choice and having ads on it?

    I simply don't see the value proposition there.

    1. Re:Not nearly enough by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      Marketing translation: Amazon wins, you lose!

    2. Re:Not nearly enough by mlts · · Score: 5, Insightful

      With ads comes monitoring and analytics, not to mention browser fingerprinting. I'll pass.

      I wish Amazon would offer the opposite. Pay a bit more, get a phone with up to date specs, a MicroSD card, two SIM card slots, with the bootloader unlockable with fastboot oem unlock, like the Nexus series, and certified builds of CyanogenMod, and bloatware free ROMs, with source code for all SoC drivers available.

    3. Re:Not nearly enough by mrops · · Score: 1

      Is this a good will agreement?

      What is stopping me to change the lock screen or the OS completely if its tied down somehow?

    4. Re:Not nearly enough by AchilleTalon · · Score: 1

      There isn't, but that's not the point. Penis enlargement pumps are still selling despite everything that has been said on them. So, I suppose this proposition will get them some extra market share which is the goal.

      --
      Achille Talon
      Hop!
    5. Re:Not nearly enough by _UnderTow_ · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That is something they'll never do. All of their hardware exists only to channel users to their website.

    6. Re:Not nearly enough by cciechad · · Score: 1

      This must have a locked bootloader or such to prevent the software from being changed out. I personally hate these locked loader devices but at least Amazon is paying you here. Samsung locks their crappy telco provided image on their devices in the US and doesn't even give you a discount.

      --
      https://www.fsf.org/associate/support_freedom
    7. Re:Not nearly enough by JoeMerchant · · Score: 1

      Neither do I. However, there's a huge part of the population who think "$50 is $50, if I can get it for $50 less, that's $50 I can spend on ______". I'm guessing that it's not a majority, but with a potential customer base of Billions, even if Amazon only sells this to 0.01% of the world, that's a huge hit.

    8. Re:Not nearly enough by JohnFen · · Score: 1

      How often do you "watch" your lock screen?

      My lock screen gives me important information I use regularly, so I look at it frequently. But that's not even the point. The real cost, in my view, is the tracking that comes along with the ads.

    9. Re:Not nearly enough by hey! · · Score: 1

      The value proposition is as simple as can be, in fact you can quantify it: it's fifty bucks in your pocket.

      I took this deal on the Kindle Paperwhite, and I have to say it works for me. Whether this is a good deal for you on a phone depends on how attached you are to your particular favorite lock screen. I expect many people aren't.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    10. Re:Not nearly enough by Dog-Cow · · Score: 1

      That's because you don't see much value in $50. While it's nice to be so well-off that you don't have to consider the price difference, not everyone is so lucky. Whether those to whom $50 is a significant amount should be signing up for Amazon Prime and buying one of these phones is an entirely different discussion.

    11. Re:Not nearly enough by Dog-Cow · · Score: 1

      There is no additional tracking that comes with the ads unless you actually interact with it.

    12. Re:Not nearly enough by JohnFen · · Score: 1

      Maybe, maybe not, but I have no reason to trust that is true. This is a point ad companies are often deceptive about.

    13. Re:Not nearly enough by JohnFen · · Score: 1

      Actually, I consider $50 to be a lot of money. It's not that I don't think $50 is valuable, it's that I think that what Amazon is asking of me is worth a lot more (to me) than $50.

    14. Re:Not nearly enough by JohnFen · · Score: 1

      No, a "value proposition" is the total amount of value involved when you take the benefit (the $50) and subtract the value of what you're giving up for that benefit. That value, in this case, is completely subjective -- and for me, it's worth a lot more than $50 -- so the value proposition is negative dollars. Other people place a different value on what they're being asked to give up. For them, the value proposition is different. That's completely legitimate.

  2. Nightmare by Scottingham · · Score: 4, Insightful

    What a fucking nightmare!

    I wouldn't do this even if it made the phone completely free.

    1. Re:Nightmare by CohibaVancouver · · Score: 2

      nightmare!

      You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

    2. Re:Nightmare by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      A nightmare is watching your children burned alive in front of you. Looking at an advisement is a minor annoyance. Get some perspective, son.

    3. Re:Nightmare by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      But what if one of the ads turns out to be for a special oven that can be used to burn children alive ... AND YOUR CHILD IS STARRING IN THE AD!!!!

    4. Re:Nightmare by denis-The-menace · · Score: 3, Funny

      Let call it Phads (short for Phone Ads)

      --
      Obama's legacy: (N)othing (S)ecure (A)nywhere and (T)error (S)imulation (A)dministration
    5. Re:Nightmare by gnupun · · Score: 1

      If you interact with the lock-screen just five times a day, that's almost 5,500 ads in three years time (before most people EOL the phone). On top of that, you have to watch ads in apps, websites and TV. It's a nightmare... that's not an overstatement.

    6. Re:Nightmare by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      > A nightmare is watching your children burned alive in front of you.

      This *happened* to me! I see that little charred face every night in my dreams. Strangely he's often telling me about deals I can't miss out on. Perhaps the Amazon's much maligned afterlife AWS module is closer to completion than we thought.

    7. Re:Nightmare by sexconker · · Score: 1

      But what if one of the ads turns out to be for a special oven that can be used to burn children alive ... AND YOUR CHILD IS STARRING IN THE AD!!!!

      Do I get royalties each time they run the ad?

    8. Re:Nightmare by Cro+Magnon · · Score: 1

      A nightmare is watching your children burned alive in front of you. Looking at an advisement is a minor annoyance. Get some perspective, son.

      You must not be seeing the same ads I am.

      --
      Slow down, cowboy! It has been 4 hours since you last posted. You must wait another few hours.
    9. Re:Nightmare by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      A nightmare is watching your children burned alive in front of you. Looking at an advisement is a minor annoyance. Get some perspective, son.

      I have perspective: Burning children alive only destroys those children. Orwellian propaganda and tracking run amok could destroy our entire society.

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    10. Re:Nightmare by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      Where do I sign up?

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    11. Re:Nightmare by SeaFox · · Score: 1

      nightmare!

      You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

      You don't know how the concept effects him. I actually had a bad dream last night about my computer updating to Windows 10. I think the topic came up because of recent reading about that woman who won $10,000 for her business machine being borked. But anyway, yes. It was a literal nightmare about Microsoft.

  3. No Thanks by sexconker · · Score: 1

    Fuck Adazon.

    1. Re:No Thanks by narcc · · Score: 1

      I should probably point out that this offer is completely optional. You're free to pay the regular price for the phone if you don't want the one with ads.

      People who don't care can get a 25%-50% discount on their phone. Does it upset you that people you don't know are exchanging an ad-free experience for a discount on a low-end mobile phone?

      Honestly, what do you have to complain about?

      --
      Required reading for internet skeptics
    2. Re:No Thanks by sexconker · · Score: 1

      It's optional today, it's not optional tomorrow. Yes, this upsets me. Look at Samsung TVs. Look at cable TV. You seem to be very quick to defend advertisers. Are you one of them? Do you make money off of ads?
      Ads invade privacy, hog bandwidth, and present serious security risks. I'd rather swim naked in the Ganges.

    3. Re:No Thanks by Dog-Cow · · Score: 1

      We all wish you'd swim naked in the Ganges.

    4. Re:No Thanks by narcc · · Score: 1

      It's optional today, it's not optional tomorrow.

      Pure paranoia. They've been doing this for 5 years now without incident. What makes you think they'll force ads on full-price products, or not offer the ad-free full-price product at all? What could they possibly have to gain?

      --
      Required reading for internet skeptics
  4. Re:Uh, no. by Yvan256 · · Score: 1

    Didn't you see the previous story about Android malware? You really don't want to be a part of that?

  5. Re:Uh, no. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Because iOS is a childs toy and proprietary walled garden designed to lower your IQ and generally suck the money out of you in one hit.

    Android you can at least compile from source and opt out of the app store.

  6. How is this enforced? by mjm1231 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    What stops me from buying the reduced price phone, and then installing cyanogenmod on it, and avoiding the ads? I'm sure there will other simpler methods for disabling the ads as well.

    --
    Ideology: A tool used primarily to avoid the bother of thinking.
    1. Re:How is this enforced? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Locked bootloader.

    2. Re:How is this enforced? by TangoMargarine · · Score: 1

      50 dollars OFF. Do they sell $100 Android phones?

      --
      Unity? Screw that: XFCE. Slashdot Beta? Screw that: SoylentNews. Australis? Screw that: Pale Moon. UX developers DIAF
    3. Re:How is this enforced? by sglewis100 · · Score: 1

      With the discount, the Blu phone will sell for just $49, while the price of the Moto G drops to $149.

      Yeah. I guess they do.

    4. Re:How is this enforced? by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Well, it's a 100 dollar value...

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    5. Re:How is this enforced? by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      If that's all, that's acceptable. It's not like I ever see the background of the screen anyway.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    6. Re:How is this enforced? by JohnFen · · Score: 1

      You mean there are people who actually care about the EULA and warranty??

  7. Good solution but not incentive enough for me by butchersong · · Score: 1

    If you must have ads the lock screen is probably the ideal space but I'm not sure what Amazon is trying to achieve here. This plan would basically self select for only the poorest users that are not inclined to spend even 50 dollars more for a better experience -not the demographic I'd want to target my ads to.

    1. Re: Good solution but not incentive enough for me by Karlt1 · · Score: 1

      Or buying a cheap phone for a teenager....

    2. Re:Good solution but not incentive enough for me by sexconker · · Score: 1

      They show ads on the lock screen, but the rat's nest of baked in and locked down apps and services that feed you those ads will also be phoning home to the mothership and selling every single thing you do on your phone.

    3. Re:Good solution but not incentive enough for me by narcc · · Score: 1

      That's paranoid.

      Amazon has offered their customers discount ebook readers and tablets subsidized by ads for years. You can even unsubscribe from the ad supported service, though a small fee is assessed if you received a discount on the initial purchase of the device. (You can add ads to your lockscreen by subscribing to their ad service, and unsubscribe to get rid of them for free.)

      Since they started offering these discounts 5-years ago, none of the privacy hawks have complained about Amazon's policies. As far as advertisers go, they're about as responsible you can get. They don't share personal information with third-parties, like you claim. (The exceptions being obvious like shipping companies and third-pary sellers who need things like your name and address to ship your products.)

      You can opt to stay in fantasy land, and not believe their privacy policy. Though you'll need to find some actual evidence that they're lying. So far, none of the privacy hawks have managed to find a reason to complain!

      --
      Required reading for internet skeptics
    4. Re:Good solution but not incentive enough for me by JoeMerchant · · Score: 1

      Some people get to be (and stay) poor by having poor impulse control, particularly impulse buying. Brick and mortar snack shops attached to gas stations are a testament to this fact.

  8. Re:Uh, no. by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

    Because I routinely buy stuff from Amazon. As an Amazon customer, this offer makes no sense.

  9. Good, I hope it works by penguinoid · · Score: 1

    It's about time companies pay us for the privilege of showing us their crap. Though to be honest, I wouldn't expect lock-screen ads to be worth $50, nor conversely $50 be worth having lock-screen ads.

    --
    Don't waste your vote! Vote for whoever you want, unless you live in a swing state it won't matter anyways
    1. Re:Good, I hope it works by Hans+Lehmann · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Remember when grocery stores in the U.S. first starting giving "discounts" if you used your loyalty card, or whatever it was called at the time, that allowed them to track your purchases? Now they just raise the prices on select items far above the price of their competitors, then only sell it to you for the normal price if you hand over your personal data. The same thing will eventually happen with phones.

      --
      09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
    2. Re:Good, I hope it works by JohnFen · · Score: 1

      Yup. But there might be a sliver of hope here. I don't use loyalty cards, and I avoid shopping at places that offer them because of what you just said: the odds are overwhelming that everything in the place is overpriced. Instead, I go to a store that doesn't use loyalty cards (they aren't as rare as you might think, at least in my area).

      Or perhaps not. My personal expectation is the same as yours, that phones that don't unduly track me, or on which I can install my own OS, are going to be available but cost more and more over time. But I try, despite all evidence, to remain optimistic.

    3. Re:Good, I hope it works by narcc · · Score: 1

      the odds are overwhelming that everything in the place is overpriced.

      Yeah, you could play guessing games. I guess that could be fun. What a normal person would do, however, is compare prices for identical products across several stores in the area to see if the stores which offer discount cards have generally higher prices than their competitors.

      (Also, "the odds are overwhelimg"? How would you even go about computing such a thing? You're obviously using that phrase rhetorically, so I'm not nit-picking. I just wanted to point out that you're starting from a pretty cynical/paranoid mentality.)

      I've found that, in general, crazy conspiracy theories like this tend to fall apart the instant you try to prove their validity.

      But I try, despite all evidence, to remain optimistic.

      I'm not so sure about that. It looks to me like you're trying your best to stay paranoid despite the lack of evidence.

      --
      Required reading for internet skeptics
    4. Re:Good, I hope it works by JoeMerchant · · Score: 1

      Companies pay huge amounts to show you their crap. Advertising/marketing accounts for anywhere from 20% (bigger ticket) to 90% (more niche/fad oriented) of the cost of products on the commercial market.

    5. Re:Good, I hope it works by JohnFen · · Score: 1

      Yeah, you could play guessing games. I guess that could be fun. What a normal person would do, however, is compare prices for identical products across several stores in the area to see if the stores which offer discount cards have generally higher prices than their competitors.

      Now why would you think I hadn't done this? I have. The vast majority of stores in my area that use affinity cards tend to have higher prices across the board from those that don't. Not all of them do, but most. Enough that it works as a rule of thumb for stores I'm not familiar with.

      Also, there's no conspiracy theory involved here at all, let alone a crazy one.

    6. Re:Good, I hope it works by GuB-42 · · Score: 1

      Now they just raise the prices on select items far above the price of their competitors, then only sell it to you for the normal price if you hand over your personal data.

      Just go to the competitors. You don't have to buy everything at the same place.

  10. Low Ball by quicks0rt · · Score: 1

    Sorry, you will have to pay me more than $50 to watch ads on phone that I may keep for several years.

    1. Re:Low Ball by narcc · · Score: 1

      You can opt-out of the ads at any time.

      --
      Required reading for internet skeptics
  11. dumbest frickin' idea ever by swschrad · · Score: 1

    first Bezo wants you to buy his phone, with all kinds of "buy pallet of Kleenex now" buttons. at a premium.

    now he wants to pay you to put ads, probably from services taken over by malware, on the lock screen, so you can be pirated while it charges.

    probably bomb you with special offers when his rocket company starts sending up payloads. first guy who gets hit with a payload that didn't untie the bundle is going to sue until he owns the place.

    Bezo the bozo may have finally turned a real profit, but the evil force is strong in this one.

    --
    if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
  12. I'm good with this by EndlessNameless · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This is the right way to integrate advertisement.

    1. Let the user know before the sale

    2. Offer an incentive to compensate for the bandwidth/convenience/intrusion

    3. Allow the same equipment to be bought with or without the advertising

    While I would never buy in personally, I believe this is the first attempt to treat customers fairly when it comes to advertising and data collection.

    You should also be able to disable the advertisements after the traditional subsidy period has ended---so 2 years for mobile.

    --

    ---
    According to the latest ruleset, this post should be modded as Vorpal Flamebait +5.
    1. Re:I'm good with this by JohnFen · · Score: 2

      Yes, I agree. Amazon isn't doing anything wrong here as near as I can see. It's not even in the ballpark of anything I would personally be OK with, but nobody's being deceived or coerced.

    2. Re:I'm good with this by sexconker · · Score: 2

      They had a similar model with a Kindle a few years back. I actually ordered the Kindle as soon as it was available because I knew it would sell out. Then I read the description and shit and saw that what I got was a Kindle + adware. I canceled the order and never got a Kindle. Fuck ads.

    3. Re:I'm good with this by narcc · · Score: 1

      Ah, I see. You're upset because you didn't bother to read the description of the product you were buying and felt foolish. You blame Amazon, even though the product was very clearly labeled as being subsidized by ads, because you don't want to accept that you made a mistake.

      You could have opted-out of the ads, once you realized YOUR mistake, though you'd need to pay difference to cancel the subscription. The ads would have been disabled before the product even arrived at your door!

      Yeah, I get that you hate ads. What I don't understand is your hate for completely optional ads. No one is forcing them on you here. Get over it.

      --
      Required reading for internet skeptics
    4. Re:I'm good with this by JoeMerchant · · Score: 1

      We got the kindle with ads - it's not a big deal, the ads are 97% less intrusive than lead-ins on YouTube, or normal broadcast TV. I wouldn't want it on my phone, but for the 12 year old's tablet, yeah, it was a good financial trade.

    5. Re:I'm good with this by sexconker · · Score: 1

      I'm not upset, you clown. I canceled the order after finding out it had ads. It cost me nothing. It cost Amazon a sale.
      Ads are never optional. There was a time when cable TV had no ads because viewers paid for the content through their cable subscription. Now cable TV has ads out the ass. If you give them an inch, they will take a mile.

    6. Re:I'm good with this by sexconker · · Score: 1

      I know, but on release/reveal day the one on the front page for $199 or whatever it was was the one with ads.
      I was lucky to ad that to my cart and check out before it was gone.

      I would have paid $20 more for it as well. But the fact that they went into the ad game in that manner made them a no-go for me. Just like Samsung TVs. Fuck that shit.

    7. Re:I'm good with this by CronoCloud · · Score: 1

      There was a time when cable TV had no ads because viewers paid for the content through their cable subscription.

      You are confusing cable Tv with PREMIUM channels on cable TV.

      Before Premium channels existed, Cable TV basically re-transmitted Over the Air channels from further away than than a "normal" house mast antenna could receive over a wire...and that was it. And since those were OTA channels they had ads.

    8. Re:I'm good with this by sexconker · · Score: 1

      No, and I can tell you're under 40 years old. Cable TV used to have channels that had no commercial interruptions. They were not premium channels like HBO and Shotime are today. It was a major selling point.

    9. Re:I'm good with this by narcc · · Score: 1

      I'm not upset, you clown. I canceled the order after finding out it had ads. It cost me nothing. It cost Amazon a sale.

      Sure you were. You were upset with yourself that you failed to read the product description. It had nothing to do with them offering the product with ads. You blamed them for your silly mistake to protect your ego. Had you bought the full-price ad-free version initially, would you still have canceled your order had you discovered that they offered an ad-subsidized version? I doubt it.

      If you give them an inch, they will take a mile.

      Any evidence? They've been well-behaved for five years and counting. So far, there's no sign that they'll force ads on you. No sign that they'll force you to buy their ad-subsidized products either.

      You're paranoid.

      --
      Required reading for internet skeptics
    10. Re:I'm good with this by CronoCloud · · Score: 1

      Dude I'm 49. What you're thinking of are the very early incarnations of channels like AMC or Bravo, which saw themselves as being more akin to premium cable. In fact AMC WAS originally a premium channel. That didn't last. And if youd been paying attention you would have noticed the commercials on TBS, USA, MTV, etc. I most certainly saw commercials on cable in 1972. Cable's selling point wasn't zero commercials, it was having more than 3 or 4 channels

    11. Re:I'm good with this by sexconker · · Score: 1

      That's a little young to be going senile. I'm not thinking of premiums, I'm thinking of paid cable, which was a shock to many people. Why would you pay for TV and then pay for the channels? Because of the extra channels it carried, paid for by your subscription, and not ads.

      Of course I've noticed the commercials on cable channels. That's my fucking point. Cable WAS commercial-free. Now it's not. Amazon is making ads optional now. Tomorrow they won't be optional. Does anyone remember Hulu Plus?

  13. Fuck no... you should be paying *ME*. by mark-t · · Score: 1

    I will consider having a phone with ads on its lock screen when a company is paying me to own it, and that is over and above fully paying for the data plan necessary to deliver such ads to the phone.

    --
    File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
    1. Re:Fuck no... you should be paying *ME*. by Beavey · · Score: 1

      Right. It's a $50 discount off the price of the phone ($75 if you buy it today). They ARE paying you to own it. $50. That's kind of the point.

    2. Re:Fuck no... you should be paying *ME*. by mark-t · · Score: 1

      No... they are giving a *DISCOUNT*... it is not paying for it, let alone paying me to actually use it.

      --
      File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
  14. It's competition. by Futurepower(R) · · Score: 2

    "I simply don't see the value proposition there."

    Amazon is part of the competition. Microsoft, Apple, Oracle, and others are all competing to see who can be most abusive.

    My opinion, shared by others.

  15. Re:Uh, no. by sglewis100 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Because I routinely buy stuff from Amazon. As an Amazon customer, this offer makes no sense.

    To you. To others, however (you realize this isn't creimer.com but slashdot.org) it might. Not looking for either of those phones presently (a little on the low end for me), but I've spent years with ads on my Kindle lock screen, which saved me maybe all of $20 on a Kindle purchase. Never bothered me once, and even bought a couple of things when they were good deals. Discovered a good book to read, and got a great deal on a SanDisk SSD that was advertised with special pricing for Kindle with Ads customers. Personally, I've never used a third party lock screen, nor do I use the lock screen all that much, so yeah, I would consider it if the phone was right.

  16. absolutely no way by xorbe · · Score: 1

    Goodness knows what else they've modified, I doubt it stops at the lock screen.

  17. Re:Uh, no. by PCM2 · · Score: 1

    As an Amazon customer, this offer makes no sense.

    Correct. This offer is not for you.

    This offer is to entice new customers to sign up for Prime. In the market for a phone? Sign up for Prime and you can get a discounted phone.

    --
    Breakfast served all day!
  18. Re:Uh, no. by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

    To others, however (you realize this isn't creimer.com but slashdot.org) it might.

    You do realize that Slashdot exists to keep me amuse while I'm waiting for a script to finish at work?

    Correct URL: http://www.cdreimer.com/

  19. Note to Apple users: Not everything is about you. by OrangeTide · · Score: 1

    Why should I switch my iPhone to an Android phone again?

    If you're happy with Apple, and have already have an investment in iOS applications, then this product is not for you.

    --
    “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
  20. Re:Uh, no. by sglewis100 · · Score: 1

    I believe you are incorrect. It exists to let me get all flustered and pissy while avoiding doing work. Incidentally, I clicked on your cdreimer.com link, although since it's not slashdot, you'll get no pissy comments from me there.

  21. Re:Uh, no. by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

    This offer is to entice new customers to sign up for Prime.

    I had Prime back in the day when I practically bought something every week. Then it was $40 per year. These days I can wait to get free shipping.

  22. Re:Uh, no. by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

    Considering it is now July, how much fucking longer do we have to wait?

    What part of "later" don't you understand? :P

  23. Watch them, or just let them run? by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 1

    Do I actually have to watch them or can I just let them run and pretend I'm paying attention?

    Or can I root the friggin' thing and do away with the ads altogether? Inquiring minds want to know...

    --
    Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
    1. Re:Watch them, or just let them run? by wonkey_monkey · · Score: 1

      Do I actually have to watch them or can I just let them run and pretend I'm paying attention?

      No, you have to watch them. It comes with little robot arms that grasp your eyelids and keep them open, then it sprays you with CS spray if you don't keep your attention on the screen.

      --
      systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
    2. Re:Watch them, or just let them run? by JoeMerchant · · Score: 1

      I think when you root the phone they send you an "upgrade" bill, as their ad showing software won't be phoning home anymore.

    3. Re:Watch them, or just let them run? by JustAnotherOldGuy · · Score: 1

      No, you have to watch them. It comes with little robot arms that grasp your eyelids and keep them open, then it sprays you with CS spray if you don't keep your attention on the screen.

      Thank you for answering my question, Mr Bezos.

      Actually, I was wondering if, as some have mentioned about other ads, you'd have to answer some question about the content to prove you actually watched it. I should have made that clearer in my question.

      --
      Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
    4. Re:Watch them, or just let them run? by narcc · · Score: 1

      My wife has a Fire tablet with ads. They're completely unobtrusive. They don't interrupt or delay you in any way.

      --
      Required reading for internet skeptics
  24. Re:Note to Apple users: Not everything is about yo by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

    If you're happy with Apple, and have already have an investment in iOS applications, then this product is not for you.

    Actually, I don't. All the iOS apps I own also available for Android. I can't recall the last time I paid for an app.

  25. Amazon is clueless about phones, tablets and video by DickBreath · · Score: 4, Interesting

    When the Fire Phone was announced, I watched the presentation video live. I thought the tech was interesting. But then I began to notice something as they demoed more and more features of the phone.

    Everything about the phone is designed to sell me something. Constantly. Always. In my face.

    Hey, Amazon. Here's a free clue. From a customer who actually likes to purchase things through Amazon.

    The reason I buy a smart phone and a tablet: TO IMPROVE MY QUALITY OF LIFE.

    NOT to serve as your advertising billboard.

    Here is a follow on problem that develops from that. Since I therefore use Android, not fire phone, since the purpose of a smartphone is to improve my life, I naturally have a number of video apps. Netflix. Hulu. HBO. PBS. Others. And . . . I have Prime Video with Starz.

    BUT . . . in an anticompetitive move, Amazon won't put its video as an Android app in the Google Play store. So I can watch it on my Roku. But not on much else.

    I also own a Chromecast. When Amazon introduced the Fire Stick, Amazon stopped selling Chromecasts. And since Amazon Video doesn't have an app on Android, it also doesn't work on Chromecast. This is a strong disincentive for me to pay for Amazon Prime video or Starz. Amazon: you've ruined my trust in order to try to sell me a Fire Stick that I don't need, don't want, and all the while, I am *already* a subscriber to Prime video and Starz. What a dumb move. Make me lose trust in your entire business in order to boost the Fire Stick? Really?

    BTW, I hate monopolists or wannabe monopolists.

    --

    I'll see your senator, and I'll raise you two judges.
  26. Re:Uh, no. by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

    It exists to let me get all flustered and pissy while avoiding doing work.

    I loved trolling the trolls on Slashdot.

    Incidentally, I clicked on your cdreimer.com link, although since it's not slashdot, you'll get no pissy comments from me there.

    It's a statically-generated website. I got tired of 2,000+ hackers per day beating down my virtual doors from Russia and Asia IP addresses. Comments got removed in the process. I'm a lot happier these days as a website master.

  27. Trifecta by Dusthead+Jr. · · Score: 1

    In 2000 my older sister bought her first PC. She thought it was a bargin as all she had to do was sign up to some online service and get a $200 gift certificate, or something. The downside was you got a trifecta of shit. An eMachine running Win ME. And to top it off there was a persistent banner ad just below the taskbar. That was the condition of the deal. I guess she didn't mind it too much.

    1. Re:Trifecta by JoeMerchant · · Score: 2

      In 1997ish Nielsen services paid me something like $30 a month to put spyware on my PC and watch what websites I browsed. I think I played along for about 2 years, but then their software wasn't compatible with the new browser I wanted to use, so I dropped them. Seemed like a fair trade, it was 99% unobtrusive and I really didn't care if they watched what I did on the computer.

  28. Bwahahahaha by stevez67 · · Score: 1

    No.

  29. Re:Uh, no. by ZipK · · Score: 1

    Why should I switch my iPhone to an Android phone again?

    Analog headphone jack.

  30. Re:Uh, no. by EvilSS · · Score: 1

    Why should I switch my iPhone to an Android phone again?

    How else will Google track you outside your home? You know, so you get just the right ads for your lifestyle. Totally not also going to the NSA or anything.

    --
    I browse on +1 so AC's need not respond, I won't see it.
  31. Re:Uh, no. by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

    The sad part is that you're happy about being manipulated.

    How am I being manipulated? I got Amazon Kindle with advertising. How many ads have I ever responded to? None.

    Using Amazon is essentially cutting off your own nose just to spite your face.

    It's not like I can go to a brick-and-mortar store to get a book. Borders went out of business a long time ago.

    Congratulations, you've volunteered to be their slave and you're happy about it.

    I guess I'm a slave to 7-11 because there are three 7-11's in a mile radius from my apartment.

  32. Re:Uh, no. by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

    No, you enjoy misinterpreting responses to flamebait as sincere human interaction.

    Thanks for clicking on my troll bait. Have a nice day!

  33. Re:Uh, no. by JoeMerchant · · Score: 1

    Now now, people who buy iPhones "think different" - their kind of intelligence can't be measured with the same scale as people who do things like comparison shop.

  34. Re:For that you would have to give me. by JoeMerchant · · Score: 1

    Keep wishing.

  35. You mean like the Kindle's Lock screen? by bobbied · · Score: 1

    This is business as usual for Amazon...They've been doing this for the Kindle's they sell for ages...

    But why lock yourself into a kindle/phone that is locked to Amazon's store? Don't know, other than they are CHEAPER that way... Hmmm... Seems Amazon knows how to make money, maybe this will get them into the phone market too... I know I have TWO of those Kindle things in my house right now. Darn good tablets for the price.

    --
    "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
  36. How about by mrprogrammerman · · Score: 1

    They give you the phone for free and pay you $50 to watch the ads.

  37. A $50 unlocked rootable phone? Hell ya I want. by Nyder · · Score: 2

    Look, this phone isn't locked into shit. It's rootable. And from what I have read, you aren't even required a carrier or a plan when you buy it. I'm personally very tempted as I have a crappy dumb phone and honestly, this is a steal. But I'm a poor person and $50 is a lot of money. But I have no idea why the fuck most of you are bitching about being locked into Amazon when that isn't even true. Slashdot used to be about people who knew shit and understood that pretty much every cellphone released today is rootable. But I guess either all the old peeps are senile or their kids use their accounts now.

    tl;dr shit is rootable, you aren't locked into anything.

    --
    Be seeing you...
  38. Re:Note to Apple users: Not everything is about yo by OrangeTide · · Score: 1

    Just as you have no interest in Android, we have no interest in your opinion on the subject.

    --
    “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
  39. Re:Uh, no. by GuB-42 · · Score: 1

    Why should I switch my iPhone to an Android phone again?

    It probably doesn't matter to you now because you already bought the iPhone but the obvious answer is to save money.
    The cheapest iPhone is $400 but $700+ is more common. With Amazon's offer, you can get a $50 smartphone. Not the same market at all.

  40. Re:Note to Apple users: Not everything is about yo by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

    Just as you have no interest in Android, we have no interest in your opinion on the subject.

    A strange comment for an Amazon thread.

  41. Re:Uh, no. by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

    The cheapest iPhone is $400 but $700+ is more common.

    I got my iPhone for free. The accessories — clear case and screen protector — cost $81.

    With Amazon's offer, you can get a $50 smartphone.

    Why would I pay $50 more for a cellphone?

  42. Re:A $50 unlocked rootable phone? Hell ya I want. by Nyder · · Score: 1

    https://www.reddit.com/r/firep...

    Custom fucking rom on the Fire Phone.

    Seriously, this is what Slashdot has become? A bunch of dumbfucks who can't google?

    --
    Be seeing you...
  43. Re: Uh, no. by Karlt1 · · Score: 1

    Try compiling Android from source and see how useless it is without all of the proprietary Binary only drivers and Google's proprietary apps.