Kindle Fire - Full Color Kindle with 7" Multi-Touch Display, Wi-Fi | Hacker News Reader

Kindle Fire - Full Color Kindle with 7" Multi-Touch Display, Wi-Fi

amazon.com

144 pointssant0sk194 comments

Well at $199 with that kind of integrated experience there is little room for complaints! ($300 would be a different story.) Plus it supports Flash and most Android games/apps from Amazon app store.

If people put up a better email client on Amazon store for decent price it would be even better. For someone who already has Prime but no tablet - this is a no brainer.

Thinking of all this - I think this will eat into the iPad sales. There are going to be many people buying this instead of the iPad - price, weight, integration etc. Q4 iPad sales would be worth watching.

The new Kindles also seem to be blazing the new trail - high quality low price. $79 is just an awesome price and so is $99 for the touch Kindle. (Bezos took a jab at Apple in two ways - cabled sync/backup and companies that work hard to make customers pay more vs. companies that work hard to make customers pay less!)

If people put up a better email client on Amazon store for decent price it would be even better.

k9 mail (free, open source) is already available on amazon's android appstore, and it's a much better client than the stock android email app.

K9 is much better than anything I've seen. It's all I use, all the time.

Darn, the Kindle DX is still $379. Everything else got a nice price drop. I've been waiting for a hardware/software update to the Kindle DX and a possible price drop for quite a while now, but I'm not sure I'll ever get it at this point.

From what I've heard, it's incredibly difficult to manufacture the screen at that size.

Why do you want a Kindle DX? Reading PDFs in the sunlight? I've always wonder who's buying the DX, because at price, you might as well get an iPad.

As a Kindle DX owner, it's all about the form factor and readability.

Back lit screens cause eyestrain for those of us who read quite a bit. With my DX I can read for hours on end in any environment I could read a dead tree version in. And with the battery life measured in page turns, even when reading at a crazy clip I can go more than a week without charging.

Form factor was the other huge sell. If I want the ability to read my collection of technical PDFs without a microscope (or awkward panning) the large size is needed. Even with non-PDFs I like the hardback size font and character count on lines.

The DX is the only game in town to get both of those right.

As a former marketing manager I think you simply wrote the most wonderful product pitch I have ever read. You rock!!!

I work in front of a computer and read 1-2 books a week on my ipad.. if I have eyestrain I'm not noticing it.

No one has figured out a way to objectively measure eyestrain so it's a completely personal decision.

As a developer I too spend all day reading and writing text on a screen and I can can tell you that there are so many things that go into what causes me eyestrain personally that I'm sure making any of it objective would be tough.

I have tons of problems with eyestrain when reading black-on-white text for long periods of time, so the kindle works great for me. I'm sure with a sufficiently configurable reading app I could tweak it until I could stand it, but I don't know too many PDF readers that allow you to start messing with background colors and the like.

The DX was launched before the iPad got a grip on the market. They probably keep selling the DX because, even at the price, there are doubtless some people willing to pay, and it probably doesn't cost them much to keep selling it.

There are legitimate reasons to chose the DX over the iPad and other Kindles, too. PDF's is a big reason to chose it over smaller Kindles; the reading experience of e-Ink, battery life and light weight are reasons to chose it over the iPad.

I'd like to be able to read outside or on the bus next to a window comfortably. I don't really want an iPad since I'd rather have a device optimized for reading documents than watching youtube.

As for Kindle DX vs regular Kindle - I don't have the best eyes so I usually prefer bigger screens. I have a Droid X rather than an iPhone or another Droid because the screen is easier for me to use. I'm also very tall and have large hands. Bigger products are usually more comfortable for me to use.

The Kindle DX is a niche device. As of now, Amazon probably just wants to charge as much as they can, as long as it still sells.

With that said, I'm also interested in the DX. The only problem is that I can't justify that price when I can get a TouchPad for the same price (or less).

I've used both the Kindle and Kindle DX for an extended period of time. When a friend offered to buy me one or the other as a housewarming gift, I chose the smaller one. The DX is just too big for its purpose, IMHO. The fact that it is outrageously expensive, relatively speaking, is just another reason to skip it. I love my little Kindle, and even if the DX were similarly priced, I wouldn't choose it.

I'm sure everyone has different tastes...but, I'd recommend trying them both before buying. You might find, like I did, that the regular Kindle is just a better form factor.

Same experience here - bought a DX then stumbled upon a regular kindle a few months later. DX sitting on the shelf these days, untouched (couldn't find a buyer)...

I can't help but think of the Kindle commercial on the beach where the iPad owner asks the Kindle owner, "It works in sunlight?"

Funny tip: It was only last weekend I discovered than an iPad works with polarized sunglasses on, IF you use it in landscape mode.

That was a major d'oh realization. I hope for Amazon's sake, the Fire works in sunlight.

Great tip. Does that work in general (switching a device to landscape)? If so, this is something that should be more widely known.

I'm not sure. I was told that it has to do with the polarization inside the IPS display, so this tip may work the same for other devices with an IPS display. Supposedly, it's polarized in landscape orientation, but not landscape.

That said, I don't know if this explanation is factual as I don't understand modern display technologies to a deep level.

In my experience, the polarization angle varies a great deal. Some devices are polarized vertically, some horizontally, and some at about a 45-degree angle. So, there's no set angle that works for everything, but what will work for everything is rotating until you find the right spot.

At that point you may end up with your head at a weird angle and decide it's not worth the trouble, of course.

In my experience, displays are usually polarized diagonally, so portrait and landscape both works. My current (Galaxy S2) and previous (Desire) both do this. I'm surprised the iPad doesn't.

It may not work consistently in landscape, but in general, if you look at an LCD with polarized glasses and can't see anything, try rotating the display (or your head) 90 degrees. Or just take the glasses off.

This works because of the way LCDs function. An LCD actually uses polarization to turn pixels on and off, so introducing polarized optics at an angle perpendicular to the orientation of the LCD polarization means you see nothing.

(Warning, lots of ads in this link)

http://electronics.howstuffworks.com/lcd2.htm

There's a good breakdown of how LCD monitors work with polarization here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jiejNAUwcQ8

(I'm amazed that a series of videos by "the Engineer Guy" have done so well on YouTube. He makes surprisingly accessible videos.)

Curiously, the iPhone 4 works in both modes with polarized glasses.

Weird. My iPhone 4 only works in portrait mode with polarized glasses, the glass turns opaque in landscape.

IIRC It depends on the direction of polarization of you glasses.

Nice to know, but my iPad lasts no more than 10 minutes in direct sunlight. The thing starts burning up, and there is an early warning of impending doom when the display starts dimming.

This has such a competitive price point that I think it'll do relatively well. I know it can watch movies, play music, browse, etc., do all these tablet things, but I'd definitely like to see it A) execute on those things (especially the browser) and B) have the apps so I don't feel left out for owning a non-iOS device all the time. I'm hoping this gets a high enough market share that Android developers start porting more iOS-only apps over.

The issue with the Android platform, and these new low cost devices perpetuate, is that Android users spend significantly less on apps. Android is getting good traction in the low end smart phone market, but those people just aren't buying apps. The Amazon product seems to be centered around Amazon's offerings, making it more of a media device than an app device. If having access to lots of high quality apps is important to you, iOS is the platform for you.

I don't believe your statement is true, do you have any stats?

http://www.bgr.com/2011/04/05/mlb-com-ceo-android-users-less...

The Android platform offers a broad range of possible devices. There's a plethora of low end devices that account for almost no purchases. If you're looking anecdotally, more developers are likely to have high-end androids (i.e. people you're likely to see). Those aren't representative of the android demographic as a whole, which is less likely to pay for apps.

Pretty weak stuff, here is a counter example http://blogs.computerworld.com/17941/android_ios_app_profit

Not weak at all. There's a bias on the Android platform to the top games (or apps). It's probably not surprising at all that a top app would do well there. But overall the platform is less lucrative for the majority of developers.

There's several reasons why there's less developers focusing on Android. One of the biggest is the way the Android Marketplace updates their most popular app lists. The list changes much less frequently than iOS. With an overall bias of all users towards checking out apps on the top list, it's just more difficult to get seen on Android. Beyond that, there's less demand for apps outside the top 10 list on Android. Big app companies will continue to support the platform. Indie developers will continue to make it less of a priority since they don't make as much money there.

It's obvious you're an Android supporter. There's nothing wrong with that. There's a lot to like about the platform. If someone's criteria for a tablet is access to lots of high quality apps, Android is not the platform for them. There's a reason Disney chose to support iOS for their new Cars interactive app. That's where the majority of the money is for developers, and where most developers will focus, for at least the near term.

http://www.pcworld.com/article/238375/android_users_only_hav...

As someone who sells apps on Android and iOS, this has been my experience

I do have an iTouch, and was looking to get an iPad but at $199 the Fire is too attractive. If it can get Hulu Plus, HBO Go, and the like. I'll be happy. As it stands, you are right, I'm best with iOS.

What a confusing name. Why do they have "Kindle" in it. For a second I thought it was a coloured E Ink display.

Unlike the other Kindles, the Fire is not available outside the U.S. I had decided to one, but sadly it looks like that won't happen (at least not as soon as I hoped).

same situation counts for the other kindles, too. I bought one last year, using an extra shipping service.

I don't get it: I bought a kindle from amazon US and they shipped to europe in two days.

when? it was being shipped to only usa last january.

I got it in spring I believe. Sorry, I read the previous comment's "counts" as a statement about current kindle shipping policies.

I had one shipped to Greece last year. I had to send it back, because customs wanted an additional $300, but they do do it.

I'll definitely pick one up once it runs CyanogenMod. My NookColor has quickly become my bedside tablet of choice.

I'm assuming it will be available in retail outlets shortly after release. Hopefully the reading experience is decent, since I've been holding off on a Kindle purchase until this update. I didn't see any mention of ePub support ... any news on that?

> does not support connecting to ad-hoc (or peer-to-peer) Wi-Fi networks.

That struck me as a little odd at first, but after considering it for a minute, I think it's probably a smart move.

Quite, there is no situation where a muggle isn't about to get pwned that involves an ad-hoc network.

why?

The majority of the time I've seen people connected to ad-hoc wifi, they thought they were getting free internet access and didn't understand why it didn't work.

Also, as I understand it, to only plays local content and internet content - nothing from the local network.

wait, where did you read that about not playing local network content? how can it really know the difference?

I wish they would put out info on the development situation for it quicker. Clearly they've given access to large publishers early, giving first mover advantage to the incumbents.

Interesting. They said that the Kindle Fire will be pre-registered with your Amazon account out of the box. How do they do that?

Maybe it associates the Serial Number (or a UUID) of the device with your account when you buy it, and then when it first boots, it asks Amazon for the account attached to the device's UUID.

8 hours reading :(

(vs 3 weeks for e-ink)

This is not a replacement for an e-ink device. It's not even a competitor.

Which is why I am excited for color e-ink.

Don't forget:

7+ hours video (vs 0 for e-ink)

Nonsense! The e-ink does video.

http://gigaom.com/2011/07/08/how-do-you-get-video-on-kindle-...

It just has a very low frame rate. And no sound ;)

What do you mean "no sound"? Displays don't play sound either.

Good point! I wonder if there's a way to play an mp3 in sync with page turns. I know there's TTS that turns the page for you, and also independent mp3 play but both...not sure.

I think the battery will be a big drawback of Fire compared to E-ink "traditional" kindle.

"Supports Adobe® Flash® Player."

You'd think they'd mention which version of Android it uses.

That'd be important if they were positioning this as an Android device, but other than a brief one-word mention, they're not.

Amazon is clearly trying to create their own Apple-esque eco-system around this. And they'll probably do rather well.

IIRC it was forked from 2.1, but you'll have to look around to confirm that.

This article mentions 2.3 (but it's a tech blog, so who knows):

http://thisismynext.com/2011/09/28/amazon-kindle-tablet-pict...

I wouldn't think so, any more than Apple mentions how fast their iOS processors are clocked or how much RAM they have. It's an implementation detail and their target audience doesn't care.

Why wouldn't they mention the RAM it has?

Why wouldn't they mention what wireless chipset it has?

Why wouldn't they mention the amount of internal storage?

I can answer all these questions, as well as the hundred other ones that geeks will ask:

Because none of this matters to the millions of people who will buy them.

To understand the difference between a company that "gets it" and your average geek who wonders why they don't publish these detailed specs, just have a look at the bullet points Amazon chose to lead with on the Kindle Fire page:

* 18 million movies, TV shows, songs, magazines, and books

* Amazon Appstore - thousands of popular apps and games

* Ultra-fast web browsing - Amazon Silk

* Free cloud storage for all your Amazon content

* Vibrant color touchscreen with extra-wide viewing angle

* Fast, powerful dual-core processor

* Amazon Prime members enjoy unlimited, instant streaming of over 10,000 popular movies and TV shows

Notice what makes the top of the list: content. Notice what makes-up the bottom (with the exception of the last one): Specs.

* Customers don't want a tablet, they want to watch/read their favorite TV show, movie, magazine, or book. (18 million content items)

* Customers don't want an Android tablet, they want to to play that cool game they saw in a commercial (curated Amazon Appstore)

* Customers don't want a Javascript rendering engine, they want access to their favorite websites, and fast. (ultra-fast Amazon Silk)

* Customers don't want to worry about how much space they have left on their device, they want easy access to everything they've purchased. (Cloud storage)

* Customers want to feel secure that the device they're purchasing will look good to their eye. (Vibrant display; iPad is referenced later in the copy, so they can identify with something they know)

* Customers want to feel confident that the device will be responsive. (apt use of the "dual-core" buzzword)

This is how you take on the iPad.

Well actually they don't mention what version of Android because they have modified it so much it probably doesn't matter. On the other hand, they DO mention how much ram and internal storage it has.

Where do they call out the amount of ram?

They don't. They told the tech blogs (512MB), but it's nowhere in their marketing materials.

it does matter to all the developers that will be submitting apps to their appstore. amazon has probably changed the interface a bit and made their own apps look nice, but if they want to remain compatible with all of the apps currently in their appstore, they will not have changed any of the underlying android api and what version they based it on is important for app developers.

Yeah Steve Job's famous line was, "To get to the heart of the customer, you don't talk about Mips and Megahertz." Finally another company that gets it.

I wonder if customers will care about the lack of privacy by default? http://bit.ly/oz2RZL

micro/SD slot?

I guess after xmas they wil introduce the 3G version with other subtle improvements - surprised they aren't going to use their whispernet.

Up to this point, Whispernet gets relatively little traffic per-device (initial book download being the biggest bandwidth use). While there is the experimental browser in the Kindle, it had limited functionality and is fairly well hidden. With the introduction of Video on Demand and full web browsing in the Fire, I'm sure Amazon's 3G provider is hesitant to allow lifetime access to their network for a one time fee of $50.

Does anyone have much experience with the browser? I've been thinking about buying a kindle 3 3G, with one of the major motivations being the free worldwide web access. I know it is limited and slow, but it would at least allow for email access / chatting / google voice.

It's an alright browser that will do in a pinch. It's fine for google mail, hacker news and simple sites like that. What's great is that you don't need to recharge it every night with moderate use, so it's great while travelling.

I have a Kindle 2 with cellular access. I used it for GMail communication while bicycling down the Pacific Coast last year. Rendering glitches aside, it's tolerable for reading email, though writing takes a ridiculously long time due to screen redraws. Also, it absolutely sucks battery life down if you do much writing. I can't imagine using it for chatting, and I don't know how GVoice could be used at all.

Unless the Kindle 3 is radically different, I can't see how it would be a significantly different experience.

I was just thinking of using GVoice for sending/receiving SMS messages. The Kindle 3 has a webkit browser that is supposedly better than previous versions:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OzIlYEp_kDo

the kindle3 browser is quite good in and of itself, but it's severely limited by the kindle's slow processor speed and d-pad navigation.

I use it from time to time. It's ok when you need to read something on the go, but it's not pleasant to use, and it renders like crap, often incorrectly. It's ok for reading HN.

Chatting and Google Voice don't work well because those are relatively real-time activities, and the Kindle can't handle those well. E-mail, however, will work just fine.

It's free worldwide whispernet access, not web access. Web access doesn't work in Greece, for example (it can access Wikipedia, though, which is very useful too).

From what I can tell, what you get access to depends on where you bought the kindle more than where you are. Did you buy your kindle in Greece?

No, the UK. It depends on where you are, as I can access the web in the UK but not in Greece.

However, last time I was in the UK, they barred access there too, which was odd. It definitely worked the first time I got it.

Sorry Tim, but looks like Bezos is the new Steve Jobs

I think it's not a good move for Amazon. E-Ink kindles are much more useful and friendly for book readers. They would choose to improve it with an html5 application platform (check this out; http://www.flickr.com/photos/azer/5966867029/)

> E-Ink kindles are much more useful and friendly for book readers.

In some sense, you could use that same rationale to discount the possibility of the Kindle succeeding against books. E-ink is arguably nicer for reading, but on the flip side, access to video, apps, and the web is a big selling point. I think it's up against the iPad, not the Kindle, and I think it stands up pretty well.

On the other hand, they announced new e-ink version of the standard Kindle (Kindle, Kindle Touch). It seems they understood that the e-ink is a must to keep.

http://www.amazon.com/Kindle-Touch-Wi-Fi-Ink-Display/dp/B005...

Kindle is a book device. Fire is a movies/pictures/web device. Neither really compare directly to an iPad.

Just the other day there was a discussion on HN about how the biggest uses of time on the iPad are email and web browsing. This doesn't have email and it remains to be seen how well the "cloud web browser" thing works in practice.

Actually it does have built in email.

So it does! My bad.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com