This place should be called Amazon News.
Amazon Curtails Development of Consumer Devices
31–40 of 135 posts
Re: Amazon Curtails Development of Consumer Devices
#32> Still in the works is a high-end computer for the kitchen—code-named Kabinet—designed to serve as a hub for an Internet-connected home and capable of taking voice commands for tasks like ordering merchandise from Amazon.com. Will this be a competitor to the Google router?
Probably a more-capable version of Amazon Echo.
I think the more pertinent question is "will the Google Hub become a competitor to the Echo anytime soon?".
Re: Amazon Curtails Development of Consumer Devices
#33> Still in the works is a high-end computer for the kitchen—code-named Kabinet—designed to serve as a hub for an Internet-connected home and capable of taking voice commands for tasks like ordering merchandise from Amazon.com. Will this be a competitor to the Google router?
It's amazing that Amazon thinks a useful feature is "ability to purchase stuff from Amazon faster". I don't make my decisions about products based on 1 touch ordering of supplies. If it solves a problem I have, great, but I certainly don't have an "Amazon ordering problem".
Re: Amazon Curtails Development of Consumer Devices
#34This place should be called Amazon News.
Why?
Re: Amazon Curtails Development of Consumer Devices
#35I flew up in First Class on Virgin to Seattle next to a key lead on the fire phone. We had a nice long talk about the project and what happened. He vehemently defended the Fire Phone and touted its great and unique aspects while I examined it and admired the hard work he put in. 3D modeling, gyroscopic-driven interactions, an universal activity feed -- some interesting stuff was there... But there were some serious p…
That's life. Companies make bets, hire people to execute, and when things don't work out, plans change and staffing sometimes need to adjust. No reason to bash Bezos for taking gambles. They certainly didn't risk the company.
Re: Amazon Curtails Development of Consumer Devices
#36Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why is this always the case? I've been on a couple of projects that were complete flops, devs are always first to go. Meanwhile the idiots who actually wasted all the money and bloated the feature set start working on version "2.0".
Those "idiots" are now the ones that learned an expensive set of lessons to apply to that v2
Still doesn't answer why engineers are let go. It's not like they didn't learn lessons too, and their expertise could be used for "that v2".
Re: Amazon Curtails Development of Consumer Devices
#37Re: Amazon Curtails Development of Consumer Devices
#38Earlier quoted context omitted.
No need to wait! Amazon lowered the price to $130 today - http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00OC0USA6 It still comes with a year of Prime membership, so if you're a Prime customer anyway, it's essentially a $31 contract-free phone. I wonder if it's an aggressive attempt to acquire some users, or if they've given up on the product and they're just getting rid of inventory?
interestingly, I just had one in my cart, and now they are "currently unavailable".
Yea, I then added it to my Wish List and it says $130 and "In Stock August 29th" but adding it to your cart does nothing.
Re: Amazon Curtails Development of Consumer Devices
#39"In essence, we were not building the phone for the customer—we were building it for Jeff" http://www.fastcompany.com/3039887/under-fire
It seems not quite different from what Jobs did. The real difference is the degree of vision associated with reality.
Re: Amazon Curtails Development of Consumer Devices
#40I flew up in First Class on Virgin to Seattle next to a key lead on the fire phone. We had a nice long talk about the project and what happened. He vehemently defended the Fire Phone and touted its great and unique aspects while I examined it and admired the hard work he put in. 3D modeling, gyroscopic-driven interactions, an universal activity feed -- some interesting stuff was there... But there were some serious p…
Even if everything you say up to the last clause is perfectly true, it doesn't follow that he blames them for the failure. He simply and objectively doesn't need them if the product they were skilled to do is a flop and has no future.