Live data from Hacker News

Launching the Kindle Fire was a mistake

plus.google.com

81–90 of 94 posts

Re: Launching the Kindle Fire was a mistake

#81
post #11

Many of his main points are vacuous at best. "Adding insult to injury, it’s an extremely simple and ugly unlock-gesture, just the sweep of a mono-color bar from right to left." Since when is a function being simple a problem? And he's comparing it to a Windows phone, where the entire interface is based on "mono-color" tiles. The Fire is a $200 tablet, and aside from a misplaced On/Off button (not sure how that got pa…

> But here's the thing: They can improve the software.

Here is the other thing: the software is the only thing that matters. I can forgive an awkwardly placed on/of button, I hit it a couple of times a day. Lost touch events and the like, are an absolute deal breaker. I would never buy a car that regularly ignored throttle input or turns of the steering wheel, why would I buy a touch-interface device that regularly ignores touch events?

Re: Launching the Kindle Fire was a mistake

#82
One of the arguments I'm seeing here is that people shouldn't have such high expectations because it's a $200 device. You don't really want the reputation of releasing a device that's cheap because it's crappy, rather than cheap because it's limited.

From a customer's point of view, for $200 they expect a smaller screen, less storage, less features, less ability to run the latest games. They do not expect less fit and finish. See the car industry for an example. You expect less bells and whistles from a Toyota Corolla than you do from a Lexus, less power and less luxurious materials, etc, but you don't expect that the dash will have large gaps in it, the steering will be unreliable, etc.

Re: Launching the Kindle Fire was a mistake

#83
post #76

I couldn't agree with this more. My grandma recently bought one and I spend all of Christmas getting it set up for her and teaching her. She's gotten really frustrated and would probably return it if it hadn't been free from her company. This part especially is what I agree with: "Yet, the drive to quickly release a product in a hot field is almost irresistible. Amazon believes growing marketshare is more important t…

> She's gotten really frustrated and would probably return it if it hadn't been free from her company. Is this actually a problem with the Fire though, or would she react the same way to an iPad?

Good question. She hasn't used an iPad so I can't fairly compare to that. The Fire's touch motions were tough for me though too at times so I'm assuming she would have an easier time with an iPad. That might not be a fair assumption though. Next time I see her I'll have her try an iPad.

Re: Launching the Kindle Fire was a mistake

#84

The only thing that killed the Fire for me (and sadly I now own one, got it as a gift), is they reneged on their 1 year of Amazon Prime free deal. Now, you only get a month. Screw that, the tablet is next to useless without Prime unless you like buying movies/tv shows that are DRMed up. Also, why the hell does it have stereo speakers that are only on the left side of the device in landscape orientation? What use is s…

To those saying Amazon initially announced one month: no, this is what they switched it to when it was finally available for purchase, after already having told every tech site that when it launched it would come with a year.

Some websites out there that contain historical information still reference it, so Google for it and look around.

I feel that it is a bait and switch. Even if the news did not originate from Amazon or Amazon was misquoted, Amazon did nothing to correct these sites and has profited it,

Re: Launching the Kindle Fire was a mistake

#85

The only thing that killed the Fire for me (and sadly I now own one, got it as a gift), is they reneged on their 1 year of Amazon Prime free deal. Now, you only get a month. Screw that, the tablet is next to useless without Prime unless you like buying movies/tv shows that are DRMed up. Also, why the hell does it have stereo speakers that are only on the left side of the device in landscape orientation? What use is s…

When did Amazon ever claim to offer one year? The initial announcement of it was one month of free prime ( http://www.wired.com/epicenter/2011/09/amazon/ ). If your LCD is defective, contact Amazon and they will take care of it - that's what the warranty is for :)

Yes, I have contacted Amazon. However, the device does not look like it was damaged in shipping, it looks like it is a manufacturing error.

Amazon is not gaining any points from this, at any rate.

Re: Launching the Kindle Fire was a mistake

#86
post #80
post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While they must be included for accuracy, I found that well over half of the 1-star reviews were written by people who knew that they wouldn't like the Kindle Fire, yet ordered one anyways. There were an awful lot of people who complained that it wasn't as nice as the iPad 2 that they explicitly stated they also own. What logical person buys a low-end tablet when they already have what is arguably the best tablet eve…

sometimes reviews at amazon are annoying. I was reading reviews for a men's gps watch. somebody gave it 4 stars and mentioned that (s)he would've given 5 stars, if "the product had women's model too". It doesn't make any sense. it is clearly mentioned that the model is for men - why write the review at all? people have weird expectations

What's more infuriating is when people give 1 star reviews to products they've never purchased for bogus reasons like "the price is too high" or "this is not out in my country".

Re: Launching the Kindle Fire was a mistake

#87
post #75
post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You keep mentioning the price. The price is not an excuse to ship a crappy product. The iPod Touch starts at $200 and it's a great product.

Most people these days don't want an MP3 player, they want a tablet. Many people also look at the iPad and think "I could buy a damn good laptop that suits my purposes for $500, why would I pay $500 for an iPad?" At the same time, these people still wanted a tablet, they just refuse to pay so much money for one. Basically, the market demands a cheaper tablets. Unfortunately for consumers the average $500 tablet conta…

I don't think the distinctions you are making between market segments really match the way "the market" actually approaches these purchases. The market for "MP3" players is dwarfed by the market for iPods, and recently, something like 50% of iPod sales are for the iTouch, which, in theory and practice is more than a music player. Up until this point the market for "tablets" has been dwarfed by the market for iPads.

It is undoubtable that there is a market for an iPad-like device that is cheaper than the iPad. As you note, such a thing isn't possible, which brings us to the Kindle fire. It is much cheaper, but it is cheaper in part because it is less "powerful," in part because the hardware is less "refined," but most of the reason it is cheaper comes down to the fact that it is smaller and sold for a loss. That it is smaller makes it, on the one hand, more portable, but on the other hand, less good for many types of reading and interaction.

How will people feel about those tradeoffs. You seem to think that a lot of people will find them compelling because, well, why? Because of price? Price is clearly not the only consideration for people, as the iPod's success demonstrates. Portability? The iPod Touch isn't just a music player, and at least part of the market understands that already, as Apple will likely sell ~7M this quarter. It is more portable than the Kindle fire, and used for many of the same tasks. Taking both price and portability into account leads one to look at another alternative: the smartphone the consumer either already has, or is likely to acquire in the next six months.

People were faced with a similar choice a few years ago. Should they buy a netbook, or a "real" laptop. Netbooks sold well, for a little while. Some people loved them, others wanted to love them, but found their compromises too limiting. I borrowed from work, but it ended up just being a curiosity, and when I got an iPad, I realized it was better for both reading, because I could rotate the screen, and writing, because the on-screen keyboard could compensate for errors introduced by its small size in a way the netbook's keyboard could not. The netbook market is now in decline, while the market for the iPad seems to exceed Apple's ability to supply them.

I don't pretend to know how this will turn out, other than to guess that Apple will continue to sell a lot of iPad's at a healthy profit. I also expect that Amazon will sell a healthy number of Kindle Fires, and its successors. Further, I expect that the gap between the capabilities of the Kindle Fire and the iPad will grow for the foreseeable future, as Amazon "spends" most advances in technology to lower costs, and selling prices, while Apple uses most to drive upgrades and maintain margins.

Re: Launching the Kindle Fire was a mistake

#88

Consumers are snapping the Fire up because it’s $200, but they expect a tablet . Not a black brick that plays movies. Some do. But a lot expect an e-reader that also plays movies. That's how Amazon is marketing it: just one of their many kindle devices. My mother-in-law has a Kindle and reads a lot of books, and I keep trying to tell her that it's more similar to an iPad than her Kindle, but I don't think it sinks in…

I'm curious as to how this positioning will play out. On the one hand, its a better Kindle because it can play movies, etc, but its also the most expensive, heaviest Kindle with the shortest battery life and a worse screen for reading.

Re: Launching the Kindle Fire was a mistake

#89
post #87
post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most people these days don't want an MP3 player, they want a tablet. Many people also look at the iPad and think "I could buy a damn good laptop that suits my purposes for $500, why would I pay $500 for an iPad?" At the same time, these people still wanted a tablet, they just refuse to pay so much money for one. Basically, the market demands a cheaper tablets. Unfortunately for consumers the average $500 tablet conta…

I don't think the distinctions you are making between market segments really match the way "the market" actually approaches these purchases. The market for "MP3" players is dwarfed by the market for iPods, and recently, something like 50% of iPod sales are for the iTouch, which, in theory and practice is more than a music player. Up until this point the market for "tablets" has been dwarfed by the market for iPads. I…

I mostly agree with you. I don't really think that Apple's technology gap will expand though. Over the next 6 months I can see it happening, but not for the long term. Amazon is supposedly planning on releasing an 8.9-10" tablet in the first quarter. If Apple releases a significantly improved iPad 3 on Steve Jobs' Birthday like the rumors suggest, then whatever Amazon releases around the same time couldn't possibly compete with it. However, Amazon has shows signs of trying to establish a regular release cycle just like apple has. If this is the case then eventually they should be able to catch up a little. Having said that, I think we have a long long time before Amazon makes a tablet that matches the overall experience delivered by the iPad.

Re: Launching the Kindle Fire was a mistake

#90
post #86
post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

sometimes reviews at amazon are annoying. I was reading reviews for a men's gps watch. somebody gave it 4 stars and mentioned that (s)he would've given 5 stars, if "the product had women's model too". It doesn't make any sense. it is clearly mentioned that the model is for men - why write the review at all? people have weird expectations

What's more infuriating is when people give 1 star reviews to products they've never purchased for bogus reasons like "the price is too high" or "this is not out in my country".

ha, that is funny. I can't afford a ferrari, so it must be a bad car, super logic !!

I've also noticed this - complaining about a product "not being waterproof" when the product makes no mention of being water proof, drivers not available for Mac when the product clearly mentions windows only etc.

Amazon should allow reviews only from people who actually bought the product, that will reduce at least a bit of stupid reviews.

Post reply on HN