Live data from Hacker News

The Fire phone debacle

fastcompany.com

21–30 of 188 posts

Re: The Fire phone debacle

#21
post #17

Jeff should spilit the Amazon in to two companies, Amazon.com and Amazon Research Labs. Amazon.com will be the old Amazon and he can continue his "copy the latest gadget or trend" in Amazon Research Labs. I think he should shut down everything and focus on AWS and Amazon.com only.

They do have research labs, eg lab 126 and a9.

Re: The Fire phone debacle

#22

I have a Fire Phone. I couldn't resist, when they were $199 and include a year of Prime (which I already pay for), it's $100 for a quite high end piece of hardware. And, the hardware actually is really great. Camera is great, display is great, touchscreen is great. 2GB of RAM and 32 GB of storage. It's very high end phone hardware at a very low end phone price. That said, it's an awful phone. The OS feels clunky and…

Interesting review. I haven't tried the fire phone and hadn't considered what would happen when amazon tried to redo the UI. I find the UI on amazon incredibly cluttered and nonsensical and sounds like the phone is similar in nature.

Re: The Fire phone debacle

#23
It is extremely difficult for large organizations to create the sort of innovative leaps that startups can create.

Amazon is attempting to do this. They have been successful in many different ways, but for every winner they create they need to create multiple losers. The fire phone seems to be one of these losers, but time will tell.

I really admire Amazon's tolerance for failure. Most large companies would never take such risks.

Re: The Fire phone debacle

#24
post #5
post #3

>"it now sells for 99 cents" (OP) // Where can I get one for 99c, in UK on ebay [new] they're about £200 (~$300) on O2 network or £250 unlocked. Lowest monthly for a contract is £28.

I'm going to guess that's 99c on contract. So not really 99c at all.

Exactly, it's a stupid thing to say. It currently sells for "$450 on a 2 year contract" - this is why people end up paying insane amounts for mobile phones.

"Have you seen my phone, it was free." [ie £45 a month for 2 years]

Re: The Fire phone debacle

#26
post #3

>"it now sells for 99 cents" (OP) // Where can I get one for 99c, in UK on ebay [new] they're about £200 (~$300) on O2 network or £250 unlocked. Lowest monthly for a contract is £28.

It says that's the price with a contract. So it's not really $0.99, it's $0.99 plus a monthly installment you agree to pay over the next two years, which will be rolled into the rest of your wireless service charge. US cellular providers have very opaque pricing so it's hard to tell how much those installments really are. But usually when you have the option to buy a phone with or without a contract, the spread's $40…

I quoted the article. It does make a correction of sorts at the end. The full sentence:

>"Originally priced at $199 (with contract) and intended as an iPhone competitor, it now sells for 99 cents, and Amazon has taken a $170 million write-down largely attributable to unsold Fire Phone inventory."* //

So they are comparing '99c' to '$199 (with contract)'.

Meh, I should know better than to expect realistic reporting.

[to avoid any doubt I'm not disagreeing with you in any way]

Re: The Fire phone debacle

#27
>Clearly, Amazon isn’t yet on the same side of the "loved" spectrum as the brands Bezos named in his memo. Devoted fans of Apple, Nike, and Disney will spend any amount of money just for a small taste of their products and culture. Amazon certainly isn’t in the same camp as supposedly "unloved" brands like Walmart—far from it. But Amazon just isn’t as cool or beloved as Bezos might hope.

People also fall out of love, as they have done at one point or another with many of the examples mentioned here. Be essential, that' s much better.

Re: The Fire phone debacle

#28

I have a Fire Phone. I couldn't resist, when they were $199 and include a year of Prime (which I already pay for), it's $100 for a quite high end piece of hardware. And, the hardware actually is really great. Camera is great, display is great, touchscreen is great. 2GB of RAM and 32 GB of storage. It's very high end phone hardware at a very low end phone price. That said, it's an awful phone. The OS feels clunky and…

Interesting review. I haven't tried the fire phone and hadn't considered what would happen when amazon tried to redo the UI. I find the UI on amazon incredibly cluttered and nonsensical and sounds like the phone is similar in nature.

It's not cluttered...but, it is nonsensical. You could almost say there is no UI on the Fire phone. Status bar is hidden by default, and only visible when you tilt the phone "just so". There is no back button or menu button. The "home" button has been returned to physical form on the Fire phone (it is the big button on the front bottom center of the phone, like an iPhone, I guess), which is fine, though the home screen is uselessly simple...it has a HUGE slider of the most recently used apps (takes up 2/3 of the screen) and 4 app icons on the bottom (I guess you're only supposed to use four apps regularly). There aren't multiple desktops where you can keep other frequently used apps. You always have to go to the full app list, which is just stupid.

The UI is minimalist, and non-configurable, to the point of feeling like a feature phone.

Re: The Fire phone debacle

#30
Amazon's simplified big picture strategy is the application of perfect execution to dominate a market. They're really good at it. They optimize the whole process from the website, to the box magically appearing at my door two days later. For books and food and ebooks and "stuff" in general, I find that ability to perfectly execute rather important, and they get lots of my business. They're the kings of detail orientation. Process failure is not an option.

They thought they could execute perfectly on designing and shipping phones. I believe they can. The problem is the market for phones doesn't care about flawless execution. Legendarily the existing network providers suck and the existing phones aren't too great either but people love them anyway and never make their buying decisions based on who's most likely to ship on time or least likely to crash.

They would fail exactly the same way if they tried to sell fast food or American cars or car insurance, where nobody cares about quality and only want low price. They would be a huge success in something like medical supply logistics (don't they already sell stuff like that?) or aerospace (spaceX better look out)

The challenge for them is trying to sell perfect logistics, perfect performance, perfect execution in general to markets where people currently really don't care. I think they are running out of consumer markets that they don't already dominate where people care about flawless execution.

Its interesting that all the stuff I use with my phone comes from Amazon. Case, bluetooth ear piece, BT headphones, charger, cable... I'd even buy a phone from them, although I'd buy the phone I want, not a fire.

Also note they're good at shipping a variety but not good at making anything. I never want Amazon's XYZ, ever. I want an XYZ, and Amazon is the best in the business at getting a XYZ delivered to me.

Post reply on HN