This article was published on Yahoo and it's all about Kindle's misfires.
Opinions vary of course.
Printable View
This article was published on Yahoo and it's all about Kindle's misfires.
Opinions vary of course.
I do own a Kindle Fire, but I do not use it for browsing. It is slower than my laptop. Mostly I use it for reading and playing games. Sometimes I'll use it for checking mails.
People are amazed at browsing on phones, and do it all the time. Yet somehow this 7" screen is not enough.
Is that the only thing you've got out of it? :rolleyes: Read it again...
If I read it again it would be the first time I'm reading it.
Those are the only other grievances listed in the article. I would wager a bet the majority of these problems will be fixed with an OTA update. The fat fingers thing is a crap argument because that will hold true for any tiny device. The complaint about non mobile websites not displaying correctly is also crap, again its a tiny device so what did you expect? I own an iPad and sometimes browsing on it is a miserable experience in itself and it has the 10" screen.Quote:
A few of their many complaints: there is no external volume control. The off switch is easy to hit by accident. Web pages take a long time to load. There is no privacy on the device; a spouse or child who picks it up will instantly know everything you have been doing. The touch screen is frequently hesitant and sometimes downright balky.
All the individual grievances — recorded on Amazon’s own Web site — received a measure of confirmation last week when Jakob Nielsen, a usability expert, denounced the Fire, saying it offered “a disappointingly poor” experience. For users whose fingers are not as slender as toothpicks, he warned, the screen could be particularly frustrating to manipulate
It's a first gen device honestly, it's going to have some growing pains. Amazon has been super successful with the original kindle line I really doubt it's going to be any different for the fire. If they can solve the major complaints with the device (of which I would place laggy/slow response with the touch screen at the top of the list) then it has the potential to be a very affordable and popular entertainment device.
Fair opinion.
I don't have it but based on advertised size I don't find Fire to be tiny - you can fit 4 iPhone-like devices on its perimeter so the "fat finger" argument could be a "fat" problem for many users.
Given the fact that it came out recently Amazon could've learnt on everybody else's mistakes. Instead, they've chosen to make their own.
Btw, I have very pleasant experience browsing on iPad (and iPhone).
Most of the times browsing on the ipad is just fine. iOS 5 fixed many of the major issues I hated about using the iPad to surf, but one thing that really bothers me about using my phone to browse is the fact that it reloads the web page every time I switch between them. It gets really annoying when you have to re-scroll to get back to where you were. There are also some sites I visit which do not have a mobile version and are really not optimal to view on my phone. Requires a lot of pinch to zoom to enlarge a super tiny link which is nestled in a bunch of other links. Minor annoyances for sure, but they tend to detract from the browsing experience sometimes.
True, 7" is a decent amount of real estate to work with. Compared to a desktop monitor (or in the consultants case, the iPad screen) it is definitely smaller. However I look at it like this: the device is primarily meant to be used to read books. If the screen size is optimal for reading an ebook and has worked with their other devices, why fix what's not broken? If you're buying the device to be used to surf and watch videos and other stuff, then its probably not the best choice to buy. If you're buying it to mainly read books and occasionally use the other features, then the screen size will most likely not be an issue.Quote:
I don't have it but based on advertised size I don't find Fire to be tiny
As far as I've seen its gotten stellar reviews when it comes to using it for reading books, and for me (as a person who views this as an e-reader, not a tablet) that should be the most important thing.
I guess you pinpointed - they shouldn't mixed the two but apparently they wanted to get piece of pie too.Quote:
Originally Posted by BackWoodsCoder
Who's they and piece of what pie?
No comments...
Someone mentioned in an article that amazon provided no security when it comes to linking your amazon account to the device. So, if you lose the damn thing, it's essentially like losing a credit card in that the person who finds it can just start purchasing what they want using your account.
That was pretty alarming to me, wonder why it wasn't mentioned in the article you linked. I'd be more up in arms about that than what they mentioned about your browsing history being easily read.
Well, the author mentioned "privacy" issue:
It [privacy] basically means "no security" and you can easily replace "spouse or child" with "anyone". That is a major pitfall for any user.Quote:
There is no privacy on the device; a spouse or child who picks it up will instantly know everything you have been doing.
I guess you could extend it to that. I read that more as anyone could pick up your device and figure out what you've been doing with it, not that anyone could pick up your device and use it like a credit card on amazon.
Amazon just released a figure, albeit a bit broad, that they've been moving 1 million kindle units per week (I believe that's all three models combined, with the fire being the highest seller). Funny thing is they lose about 20$ per device sold (at least with the fire), so technically while they're moving a lot of hardware it's at a huge loss. Granted that loss will be made up with book sales, but I'm left wondering just how much they have to sell to the user just to make up for the loss on the hardware sale.
The overhead on an e-book has to be near zero, so the profit margin is probably mighty high. That should cover their hardware losses pretty fast.
Why would amazon need an advanced tablet if they target e-book readers mainly? They already had solid devices just for that. This really makes no sense.
Ever heard of branching out? There's also a large e-magazine industry that doesn't really work well without color.Quote:
Originally Posted by RhinoBull
I think they were trying to capture the low end of the iPad market while upgrading and expanding their existing Kindle market. They are a non-trivial player in the streaming/downloading for-fee video market, they sell MP3s as well as "hard" CDs, etc.
Non-eBook media is probably seen as a growth area for them. The "apps" market is like the razor/razorblade pattern too: lose a little on the proprietary handle and charge through the nose for blades.
Why write VS2010 when VS2008 was quite good?Quote:
Originally Posted by RhinoBull
You build a base, then you add new features so that your base will buy a new device, and perhaps you can attract new users of your base. Sure, they may be selling at a loss now, but once you own the marketspace...will they still sell at a loss?
Shaggy,
you're comparing apples to oranges. Kindle File does not attract new customers. And Microsoft should stop making new releases every two years - that's insane but I don't want to change the subject.
Amazon is under fire because of lousy attempt at making e-book reader a tablet - it's basically the same as trying to turn a plane into a space shuttle.
Why are they trying to "make" it a tablet? Would you feel better about it if they completely removed the option to install apps on it or run a web browser? No, you'd ***** (complain) about why it doesn't have them. What they made is a device that's primarily an ebook reader but can also run apps and be used for browsing as an additional feature. And the wide screen makes it very suitable for viewing movies as well. So, I don't see why you feel it doesn't deserve to be called "a tablet". What can other tablets do that the Fire can't? It just has a different primary purpose.Quote:
Originally Posted by RhinoBull
@baja:
couple of things for you:
- no need to be nasty so try not to curse next time...
I never said that.Quote:
Originally Posted by baja_yu
They work much better and offer more functionality and options.Quote:
Originally Posted by baja_yu
Read entire thread once more to understand why I opened it (if you want of course).
You didn't say it, but you're implying it pretty obviously there.Quote:
Originally Posted by RhinoBull
A pickup truck offers much more functionality than a small city car or a sports car, yet people buy those by the millions as well. Why do you think that is? Is it so hard for you to accept that different people want different things out of a tablet, or do you feel one all round iPad should be enough for everyone? Maybe we should all drive the same car, just imagine how much cheaper parts and service would be.Quote:
They work much better and offer more functionality and options.
Actually, I was comparing Apples to Amazons, but only implicitly. I removed the bit of your quote about MS, because I'd kind of like that to be true, too, but I also realize it won't be happening, so that's that.Quote:
Originally Posted by RhinoBull
Why do you say that the Kindle Fire does not attract new customers? Do you feel that it doesn't because it was poorly done, or do you mean that it wasn't intended to attract new customers? I think it was intended to attract new customers, but I don't know what you meant by that, so I'm not sure whether I agree or disagree.
Ultimately, I think Amazon would be thrilled to undercut Apple and end up with THE tablet to have, though I am not nearly familiar enough with the whole thing (being pretty much anti-tablet) to know whether that is their objective.
Nice. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaggy Hiker
Although I can't quote it I recently saw one study about KF (we have nice info screens in the all elevators - they display quotes from different sources for few seconds) and the numbers looked quite awful.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaggy Hiker
Then I asked some tech people in the office (those are real geeks :)) about this device and pretty much everybody said "useless". I also asked few ordinary people (non-geeks if you will) and responses were not in KF favor either.
That was last week, few days after creating this thread. So, to answer your question the article, the study, my co-workers responses make me believe KF does not attract many new customers - they sell but likely not as much as they planned. Amazon may have different idea about this.
And as far as MS (one more time) they probably believe that Win8 will be great success... but let's leave that alone for another year. :)
No-one's mentioned the display?
For me the main attraction of the Kindle was always the "e-paper" display — it's so much nicer to read from than an LCD. One of the best places to read a book is outdoors in the sun: impossible with an LCD display.
I haven't used or even seen a 'Fire', but from what I've read, it seems that Amazon took the Kindle, added some tablet functions, and threw away its best feature, so that what they are left with is a device which fits into quite a different market space in which they are some way behind the competition. Curious strategy really.
I could agree with that if Amazon discontinued the eInk Kindles, but instead they made two new ones. Also, the only thing Kindle Fire shares with the previous (eInk) Kindles is the name.Quote:
Originally Posted by penagate
The Kindle Fire is a loss leader. For each one that they sell, they lose somewhere between $50 & $125... in fact, the entire Kindle line is a loss leader... because they know they will make it up in sales after the fact. I know they've made back the loss on my Kindle and then some, I buy a lot of ebooks from them. They make it too easy. Really? that's all I need to do is click? *click*
Anyways, with the Fire, they're able to expand their offerings to include multimedia... movies, interactive books and magazines, apps... things that can't be offered on the "traditional" Kindles. It was this multimedia aspect of it that caused me to look at it... I've since decided that it's not for me though. Lack of expandable storage and lack of an HDMI port (even a mini-HDMI) being the key reasons.
Regarding security/privacy on the KFs... it's no worse than current Kindles... my wife could just as easily pick my Kindle up and see what I'm reading... so I'm not sure what the deal is... besides, if that's your biggest worry, then maybe you shouldn't be using your Kindle to look up divorce lawyers. And for the "anyone else" category... the KFs only work on WiFi in the first place... and if yours does get stolen, first thing you should be doing is heading over to Amazon.com, login and "Manage Your Kindle" and uncouple it from your account.
It was inevitable that Amazon would come out with something like the KF. B&N has had the color Nook for a while now, and that's what the KF is really competing against... not other general tablets and the iPad... but rather the Nook.
-tg
Rhino,Quote:
Originally Posted by RhinoBull
That's what the Nook eBook reader is. I suppose Amazon wanted to catch up that. I do know one area where the Nook stands out. The Nook lets you borrow books from other Nook users for free. Amazon lets you do that provided you subscribe to Prime Membership.
I am a new customer since I never owned a Kindle before.
Also if you visit the amazon home page it says the Kindle Fire is the highest gifted product on Amazon. I suppose a lot of people out there are giving it a shot.
If you want to read the Fire in the sun, you need to buy one of those plastic thingies that will fit over the screen. It is nowhere close to the ePaper display, but it is a workaround.Quote:
Originally Posted by penagate
I suppose that's what tablets offer in general: workarounds for things that you can do much more easily using devices meant for that.
Browsing the internet, playing games, clicking photos, reading books, watching movies and checking your mail.
All of these activities can be done on the tablet, but your experience will be adequate.
If you want to have an enhanced experience, play games on the XBox or the PS3, click photos using a SLR, read books on the original Kindle or a real book, watch a movie in a cinema hall and browse the internet and check your mail on the desktop.
Dude, that's REALLY bad for your eyes. Why don't you just stick with traditional techniques. Read tea leaves, tortoise shells, tarot cards, or even the entrails of a sheep. Those are just as reliable, and won't blind you.Quote:
Originally Posted by abhijit
@RB: Ok, I'm with you there. I thought you were saying that Amazon wasn't trying to sneak into the tablet market, but you're just saying that they missed whatever mark they were trying for. From what I have heard, I agree. They will make LOTS of sales, and have, but not what they would have done had the product not had those flaws. Still, if the follow-up is well thought out, I think they can recover from this stumble.
Not if you get up early in the morning and do it. That's how ancients discovered sun spots.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaggy Hiker
I thought ancients discovered liver spots.
That too and then they came up with Liv-52
That might be true... Some of you may remember Ford Taurus as best selling car in America in the mid 90's. :eek:Quote:
Originally Posted by abhijit
The truth to that however was that Ford was "selling" Taurus to its own Hertz car rental company.
A quote from MT magazine from few years ago (here is the link):
Is it similar with Amazon? Likely not. But then again... Who knows...Quote:
Yes, Ford sold 7 million Tauruses between 1985 and 2006, but how many of them were filtered through Hertz and Avis and Enterprise, first?
I wouldn't doubt amazons claim. Nearly all of my friends and co-workers have bought one for themselves or family members, lots of my own family members have made them a gift to others, and I see lots of FB and G+ posts about buying one. Definitely seems like one of the bigger electronic gifts this year.
I wonder if this is true though. If you factor in infrastructure costs and maintenance and licensing fees from publishers, the profit margin may be a little slimmer than you would think. Still profit per e-book is most likely much greater than profit from a hardback. I was actually quite surprised to see how expensive the e-Books were, I figured they would be priced much lower than hardcopy editions but a lot of the books I was interested in were priced the same as the hardcopy ones.Quote:
The overhead on an e-book has to be near zero, so the profit margin is probably mighty high. That should cover their hardware losses pretty fast.
The "gift" is the key here - actual measure will be number of returns (of course some of them won't have anything to do with device quality).Quote:
Originally Posted by BackWoodsCoder
If Amazon had their way, eBooks would be priced in the sub $5 range. In fact, when they first started the eBook trade, most books were about a buck-99... But then the publishers got involved and through a series of shenanigans, and a lawsuit or two, prices are now set by the publishers. That's why eBooks are still somewhat high-priced... publishers are still trying to protect their dead-tree side of the business.Quote:
Originally Posted by BackWoodsCoder
-tg
Ah, yes, I do remember that vaguely now. Stupid move on their part IMO, books are going down the same path as other physical media forms are. I love the idea of being able to cart around an entire library of books on a tiny device, much like I love the fact I no longer have to cart around crates of records and can fit months worth of records on something that weighs less than a pound.
With both scenarios I really do cherish having an actual object to touch and collect. However, I now buy MP3's instead of vinyl because MP3's (even lossless formats) now cost me $.99 - $2.50 where a single vinyl copy can run me from $7-20$ plus shipping. I don't get that same value savings with an e-book, in most cases I've seen the e-books were the exact same price as a physical copy. So in my mind there's no incentive to purchase an e-book and a reader. So I don't understand why they're so resistive to making the digital copies cheaper. All of my favorite record labels have been doing this for years now and are making lots of cash. The producers of the music are happy because their music reaches a wider audience quicker, and me as a consumer has more incentive to visit the store each week since I can now afford to buy more music per paycheck then before.
I dunno, maybe I'm missing something here, but it seems that while you may make less profit per book overall sales would increase because people can now buy 2-3 books for the same price they would pay for a single book. It's weird but price is seriously the major force behind me not adopting to this technology, there's just no value in it for me so I'll continue to buy the 1-2 books I do buy occasionaly instead of the 10-15 I might be buying if it was cheaper.
I'm considering a Kindle Fire, but I'm not sure about it yet. It's a pretty great deal but if I do decide to get it I'll wait until the ICS rom for it is up and running. Article has been pulled too.