Daring Fireball: Amazon's New Kindles | Hacker News Reader

Daring Fireball: Amazon's New Kindles

daringfireball.net

137 pointskrishna2136 comments

I don't understand this:"The iPad is a credible laptop replacement for many people and with iCloud and another year or two of hardware improvements, that’s going to be true for more and more people. The Kindle Fire is a laptop replacement for almost no one. It’s a peripheral, not a second computer and it’s priced accordingly. " What is it that makes the iPad a possible laptop replacement, but the Fire not? To me, the primary market for people replacing laptops with a tablet are casual users, many of whom care more about content and entertainment than producitivity, in which case it would seem the Fire would be equal to, if not beating, the iPad.

What is it that makes the iPad a possible laptop replacement, but the Fire not?

I don't think the iPad is that much more a real laptop replacement than the Fire. I think people bill it as one to themselves to help justify paying for an iPad.

It's not so much a real laptop replacement as it is a "computing device while on the go". Whereas four years ago you'd get a netbook, now… you kind of need a good reason not to get an iPad/Fire.

It's a subset of computing. I have my main work laptop, which I'm not going to take camping or up to the cottage. In this space, a tablet is perfect but we used to settle for a "meh laptop".

What you say would be very astute, if the iPad price range was not $500-800, compared to the $380 I paid for a relatively high-end dual-core netbook with discrete graphics not 6 months ago, or the $300 I paid for a middle-of-the-road dual-core netbook for my parents.

I also really needed a keyboard, but that's not even the main issue.

<I also really needed a keyboard, but that's not even the main issue

Well, considering the iPad lacks a keyboard, I'd say that's a pretty big issue at least.

>for my parents.

PERSONALLY, I would happily pay the premium if it means I never have to field a support call ever again.

Tradeoffs! Also your parents might not appreciate playing games or watching movies on the couch as much as other people might, yadda yadda.

This line of thinking ("netbooks offer more capability for less money") makes sense to some customers, but not to many others: Apple is predicted to sell ~40 million iPads this year.

That does not imply that: 1) those same people would have bought a netbook had the iPad never come out and 2) those people view it as a laptop replacement.

I need a good reason to buy a netbook over an iPad? A proper SSH/NX client, full keyboard, full (and choice of) operating system, input/output ports, all for less money?

You're a small, if not tiny, segment of the market. Most of the market doesn't even know what SSH is, let alone require a SSH client in a portable device.

And most people don't produce content on their personal computers, yet this thread screams of people scrambling to justify the purchase of $500-$600 devices that are built to consume primarily and I suggest near exclusively (and dismiss the Kindle Fire because it makes no bones about being media-based). There is this auspice of them being used as "productivity tools" but I can only think of rare occasions where I would agree and they're very highly specialized apps where again, a cheap commodity ARM device could be produced, run Linux and run the application just as easily without major costs to the organizations that are paying Apple an arm and a leg to have a flashy device.

Most people don't produce content? Hello most people are emailing, writing things out on 'Pages' or other Word Processors, perhaps even Google Docs. I don't understand what you mean by most people don't produce content. Hell the iPad has two cameras which product content.

Most of the world doesn't need an ssh client, they hardly type much at all, don't care that they can put uber-linux 2.8.7.rockin-beta.rc18 on it, never hook anything more than a camera up to it and, well, yes, there is the money bit.

I'm a developer and the last thing I want when i'm relaxing on the couch, on a trip, etc. is a laptop that gets hot, has a tiny screen, and has a horrible form factor for consuming the tubes. The Fire is a credible alternative for most of that with the possible exception of casual gaming (which i love to do).

No, no, you misunderstand me. Tablets are absolutely superb at consuming content. I make no bones about that. I have an Android phone that is used almost exclusively for consuming content and I picked up a TouchPad to surf the web with on my balcony. I just don't get the people here trying to act as if they're productive with their iPad in a way that is impossible to do on the Fire.

Misunderstanding reconciled!

I think "laptop replacement" isn't talking about me and you, it's talking about my mom who spends all her time on facebook or email and casual games and doesn't do a whole lot of other things.

I can use google docs on my iPad, I can type emails, I can consume. That's about all 80% of home computer users need generally, so that's why it's a laptop replacement. Not sure you'll have a lot of luck making a presentation on a Fire or updating a spreadsheet, but those things are doable on an ipad even if they are a little cumbersome. (80% obviously made up!)

I have to disagree with you on form factor while sitting. I find a laptop better than or equal (larger screen + supports itself at a wide range of viewing angles)

It's all personal preference. I hate the laptop form factor in general, but once you add the heat they put off it's a deal breaker for me.

You can get SSH clients for iPad. If you need a keyboard, Apple sells one for the iPad and they and several other manufacturers make bluetooth keyboards that are perfectly adequate.

I chose not to go that route because I wanted more power and storage. But it was definitely under consideration.

The screen size is important. If you've tried to use the web on a nook its lucky to be an average experience, generally its actually pretty horrible as its so small. The iPad as a slightly better experience due to size alone, but even still I don't like using safari.

Anecdotally most people I know with iPads have stopped using laptops outright. Disclaimer here that the majority of owners are older.

The interesting thing to see is how the Silk browser addresses the issue of terrible web experience on small screens.

The Kindle Fire has nearly the same resolution as the iPad--1024x768 for the iPad and 1024x600 for the Fire. The Fire is higher res (because it's smaller) so text will appear sharper. There is simply no reason that the iPad is a laptop replacement but the Fire is not.

In fact, there is a good reason that it would be the other way around--the iPad requires a computer but the Fire does not. Open an iPad up new in box and you'll need to find a copy of iTunes to use it. The system requirements for the Fire? "None, because it's wireless and doesn't require a computer."

I also think the iPad requiring hooking up to a computer is an odd requirement, but a) any Apple Store will do that step for you and b) I expect it to go away now that iOS 5 has over-the-air patching.

Its not the resolution thats the issue, its the actual physical size thats the problem. The iPhone 4 is 960x640, not too far behind either device pixel wise. But the 3" screen or what ever it is where the problem is.

The tethering is a thing off the past as of next week, its a legacy thing that was left over due to the evolution of the product range.

> -the iPad requires a computer

may not be true for long

"... so text will appear sharper..."

It will also appear smaller. Much smaller. And the Fire requires Amazon. So instead of being tied to a computer you are tied to a website.

Why would it appear smaller unless Amazon wanted it to be? It will just appear sharper at smaller sizes. My iPhone is much smaller than either device and has much higher resolution (326ppi!). Text looks great and is sized just fine.

Of the 10-or-so iPad users I know (all from different industries), about half of them use it as a replacement for a laptop, but not necessarily as a desktop replacement.

Anecdotal, yes, but compelling in that those it's a replacement solution for have been strongest in their iPad evangelism.

That doesn't make any sense. If people had a hard time justifying purchasing an iPad, it wouldn't be the astounding success that it is.

Marketing, screen size and apps. Amazon for now, as far as I can tell, is positioning it as a "Amazon content consumption device" instead of a "lifestyle companion".

Mind you, I don't disagree. I think you'd have to be a little ridiculous to own both a Fire and an iPad, and a 10inch Fire is likely inevitable in a couple of years. On the other hand, I'm about to buy the old Kindle and am aiming to maybe purchase an iPad3 down the road.

I love this because it gives Apple competition. Finally, a viable tablet competitor.

10 inch model is rumored next year. Also Amazon hinted that one will be coming.

Well, the iPad has many more apps (at least for the moment) and a bigger screen, both of which make it more suitable for light-to-medium work stuff.

For example, I can perfectly imagine (and there are many cases of this) a college student passing up on buying a laptop for class and opt for an iPad with a bluetooth keyboard instead. In this scenario, this setup can effectively replace a computer for most students most of the time.

However, I don't see how a kindle fire can fit into that context.

Also, an iPad has a camera and mic - which makes it a viable option for keeping in touch with people. Video calling is something you expect to do from your computer today.

How does one type on a seven-inch tablet? Typing on the iPad is bad enough, but at least its long dimension is about the right size.

Presumably typing on a seven-inch tablet is reminiscent of typing on the iPad in portrait mode. Which is annoying. To the point where I'd rather type on the iPhone, where at least I can reach everything with thumbs alone.

There are Swype, SlideIT and ShapeWriter sliding inputs available for Android devices that you can't get for iOS devices. I use the (unfortunately discontinued) ShapeWriter on my Desire phone, and it's awesome. The keyboard for the iPad is a chore to use.

The iPad is not a laptop killer for people who want to be productive on it. Period.

If they want to make the iPad a laptop killer, they first need to make it more like Asus's Transformer, with a keyboard dock, and second, they need to get more apps on iOS that can replace people's need for Windows apps.

>they first need to make it more like Asus's Transformer, with a keyboard dock

These already exist from Zagg and Logitech.

>they need to get more apps on iOS that can replace people's need for Windows apps

This takes time. Hardware and software will progress to allow this.

In fairness, "productive" is highly domain-specific. If your version of that is something like reading legal briefs, or drawing free-hand sketches, or collecting survey results from passersby, an iPad could be very productive indeed.

"If they want to make the iPad a laptop killer, they first need to make it more like Asus's Transformer, with a keyboard dock"

Not only does Apple actually make a keyboard dock: http://store.apple.com/us/product/MC533LL/B?fnode=MTc0MjU4Nj... but the iPad can also connect to a Bluetooth keyboard, which I've actually used in the past.

"and second, they need to get more apps on iOS that can replace people's need for Windows apps."

They've obviously released some with the iWork suite. There's also simple text editors (and more sophisticated ones, but I'm not a fan). I can easily see the iPad as a laptop killer for some.

I love the Kindle, and I've already pre-ordered the Fire, but I can't see how it's a decent laptop replacement compared to the iPad. First off, there's no 3G, which is one of the major reasons people like using the iPad as a portable computing device. Also, while it does have a browser and email clients, I'm guessing it won't have nearly the level of support from Exchange and other corporate email systems that the iPad does. Beyond that, I doubt it's going to have any of the "Office" type functions (besides maybe working with Google Apps) that the iPad has via the iWork suite.

Amazon's not position the Fire as a computer replacement, and they're not really providing the components necessary to use it that way. Apple clearly views the iPad as a a laptop alternative for either ultra mobile, or casual, users.

From what I've heard, the iPad WiFi models outsell the 3G models, so it can't be that important. Also, the premium you pay for 3G is more than half of what the entire Fire costs. (And for that matter, the 3G iPad premium fee is also just $9 less than the entire 3G Kindle, which shows you how much of a rip Apple's 3G premium is.)

Old school Kindle 3G usage is minimal, though. Downloading books, awkward web browsing.

iPad 3G usage is a whole different thing.

It's certainly possible for it to be a laptop replacement but I don't think it's ideal with a 7" screen and aspect ratio. The shape of this device lends itself to be used more towards consumption of content.

Why would the Fire beat the iPad for "people who care more about content and entertainment"?

Aren't these the people who want the bigger screens, better graphics, cameras, longer battery life? I guess there's price but that didn't seem to be the argument you were making.

I agree with your larger sentiment, the Fire should be a laptop replacement for some people. Heck I think the smartphone is a laptop replacement for some (smaller amount of) people. I guess Gruber is arguing that fire-laptop group to be a rounding error. I don't have any confidence either way.

You don't understand because it's bullshit from a notoriously biased source. The iPad is high end, Fire is low end. But if the iPad "replaces laptops" so will the Fire. There's no argument.

Here's an argument:

Newegg offers 127 netbooks.

Newegg offers 2 netbooks with a screen under 9 inches, 1 with a screen under 8 inches.

Netbooks are also constrained by a usable keyboard size, and when you've made the machine that big, might as well put in the same size screen.

What is it? It's raw, unfiltered bias of course.

There's very little reason why the Kindle Fire won't be a strong iPad competitor. Tablets are primarily used for browsing, reading, and casual gaming. It seems like Kindle Fire will succeed in hitting each one of those bullet points.

Did you even read the article? He's very complimentary of everything Amazon's doing here.

Leave it to HN to zero in on the one critical thing he says and blow it up as HUGE BIAS TYPICAL GRUBER FANBOY.

Yes, he's complimentary, but as someone who often agrees with Gruber, even I found that part a little jarring. I think he's mostly right on this one, but if anything, too conservative about the potential for the Fire.

Sure, he's very complimentary, in an "imma let you finish, but the iPad is the best laptop replacement of ALL TIME!" sort of way, which is to say rather derogatory at the same time. He tries to place the iPad and the Fire as distinctly different products serving distinctly different market segments: the iPad as the high-end "laptop replacement" the Kindle Fire as the low-end, low-cost, blue collar, half-assed substitute which lures users into buying it through content delivery rather than device or experience excellence.

That's not terribly complimentary when you boil it down. My take is that the Fire, keeping in mind this is a 1st gen product too, is a quite suitable iPad competitor head-to-head. It will provide a high-quality browsing experience similar or superior to the iPad and it will provide a high-quality e-book reading experience similar or superior to the iPad. The Fire's lack of dependence on any sort of syncing with a PC is also a point where the experience is outright superior. The biggest difference is the size and perhaps the hardware / performance / efficiency, personally I don't think there's an objective reason to pick one or the other as obviously superior in this category. Perhaps an 11" screen is vastly preferred to a 7" screen, perhaps both are suitable, perhaps the 7" is more preferred, I don't know, and it's too soon to tell how well the Fire will stack up against the iPad performance wise. The other big difference is the app/game ecosystem. The iPad definitely has a head start and there are plenty of popular games and apps that are iOS only at the moment, but to be honest I don't think that network effect is big enough to drive the market a whole hell of a lot at the moment, especially in the face of a $300 premium on the iPad. The Fire doesn't have 3G, but it remains to be seen how important that is.

Overall, I think the Kindle Fire is a pretty strong competitor to the iPad, regardless of price. As I said, I think many people will find it to be a decent laptop replacement. Moreover, I think over the next year or so there are going to be a lot of moments where people who bought Kindle Fire's at or near launch will be having experiences that will make a lot of iPad 2 owners jealous.

"Sure, he's very complimentary, in an "imma let you finish, but the iPad is the best laptop replacement of ALL TIME!" sort of way, which is to say rather derogatory at the same time."

This is nonsense. It's a 21 paragraph, 1500 word piece and he spends exactly one on "laptop replacement", you're clearly the one hung up on those two sentences.

"He tries to place the iPad and the Fire as distinctly different products serving distinctly different market segments"

No he says they're attacking the market from different ends. Consumers in the middle would clearly have to choose between one or the other. That's distinctly different :p from what you're saying.

"That's not terribly complimentary when you boil it down."

Did you read the other 20 paragraphs? The article on the whole is very complimentary of Amazon's effort, his experience with the e-ink Kindle, even the ads (a lot of people seem up in arms that Amazon's keynote prices are for the ad-supported versions, compare Marco.org).

He has a lot of very nice things to say, certainly, but the actionable thing he says is the most derogatory. How can the Fire and the iPad both service the same market if one is a laptop replacement and the other is not?

Yes he dresses it up with a lot of really nice sounding verbiage, but at the end of the day this is a "well, she's really good at {math,sports,engineering}... for a girl" sort of backhanded compliment. It's like saying that the Model T is a really, really nice car, almost as good as a Hispano-Suiza... but it's not a horse replacement.

I still can't figure out why you're hung up on this 'laptop replacement' thing as though he dropped trou and took a dump on right on the Kindle Fire itself by saying that. It's not a huge derogatory criticism, it's an observation. You're certainly free to disagree, I do as well somewhat (below) but you're massively missing the point if you think two sentences about laptop replacement is the only "actionable thing he says" and that it's derogatory.

My wife hasn't picked up a laptop since we got the iPad at Christmas. She uses the iPad daily. More than I do. And she's the one who gave it to me. Meanwhile, I have a MacBook and a Cr-48 and use them both daily. I also have a TouchPad that neither of us use. (tangent: I really hope cyanogen mods gets ice-cream sandwich running on touchpad).

What is it that makes the iPad a possible laptop replacement, but the Fire not?

The iPad has an SDK and app store. The Kindle has an SDK that's been in closed beta for something like two years and a bookstore that also happens to sell apps from a handful of companies.

"The iPad and Kindle Fire are emblematic of their makers. Apple’s primary business is selling devices for a healthy profit, and they back that up with a side business of selling digital content for those devices. Amazon’s primary business is as a retailer, including as a retailer of digital content. They back that up with a side business of low-cost digital devices that are optimized for on-the-fly purchasing of anything and everything Amazon sells. The Kindles are to Amazon what the printed catalog was to Sears a century ago."

That's the best articulated philosophical breakdown between the two products and the two companies that I've seen. The two devices look similar at a glance, but the reasoning behind their numerous differences boil down entirely to those two different philosophies. Apple wants you to buy an iPad to buy an iPad -- they get you to do that by pointing out how it has apps and music for sale. Amazon wants you to buy a Fire to buy a ton of Amazon digital content -- they get you to do that by making the Fire itself cheap.

I'm amazed by the insight in this article. I'm not generally a huge Gruber fan (nor a hater, I just don't find "Apple released a new x, here's my reaction" very nourishing). But in this I felt like he really nailed the state of tablets and why the Fire will do well and the others won't. Really good stuff.

Sadly not analysed is that his central point, taken to its logical conclusion, gives you an obvious field for new iPad competitors. He's correct - nobody's going to beat Apple in hardware design. Nobody's going to beat Apple (for a while anyway) in app market size. What can they beat Apple at? Price and content.

Price and content means Sony, Nintendo, Disney, any of the big content players with an untapped market for specific tablets. I don't know if they'll go that way, but there's every reason to think they'd win out if they did.

He's crazy to assume that the Kindle Fire isn't competitive with the iPad, or that the $199 price point isn't going to at least partially inform the pricing of the iPad 3.

The days of the $700 tablet are over.

I agree. I also think that the damage is going to be more for current-android-tablet makers, such as Samsung, Acer, Asus, Viewsonic ..etc. More so to the ones who price their tablets above $400. Everyone's going to compare them to the Fire and say, "Why even consider anything when I can get this for half the price?".

Pretty safe to say, Amazon's tablet is going to beat all the other android-tablets.

It's hard to know what to do with that information in a world in which the current android tablet makers can barely give their devices away.

That makes no sense. I think $199 is a great deal for a 7" tablet, and they will sell like hotcakes. But anyone selling a $400+ tablet is offering a 10.1" screen. This is a completely different user experience, and very likely a different market. Persoanlly, I don't even understand the attraction of a 7" tablet. I'm quite OK with paying 2x the price for something that's about the same size as a sheet of paper or a textbook, however.

He's not crazy and that conclusion is not unique to gruber. The screen area of the iPad is nearly 2x that of the fire. Resolution is 1.3x but pixel density will increase on iPad3.

They are about as competitive as a 15" laptop is to a netbook: not very as they are physically quite different. The price difference reflects this.

Consumers are funny, though. They don't really care about stats; that kind of data is for geeks, who are not the target audience for this at all.

And don't forget Christensen's adage that the truly disruptive technology is typically a little bit worse and a whole lot cheaper than the incumbent technology.

One way or another, there are some big advantages to a smaller screen.

Consumes don’t care about stuff they can’t (easily) see. Pixel density, probably. 10" and 7" tablets are, however, sufficiently different.

No one buys tablets by the square yard, though. Lots of people seem to say that a 10" tablet is inherently better than a 7" tablet, but I think the market is still far too young to really know the winning form factor.

Actually, people do in fact choose tablets and laptops based on size. I'm not suggesting that either size is superior. They are clearly different.

Anecdotally, I find that the iPad size is great for a table/lap, but less great for holding, while I love the size/shape/weight of the Kindle2 for reading. I don't think any particular size will win out.

Let me quote something that was said about the iPod on its launch:

"No wireless. Less space than a nomad. Lame."

As soon as we see people getting work done on the Kindle Fire, I'll grant you that.

If your work involves a lot of writing, then the iPad isn't an obvious boon [1]. But if you can do your work more efficiently by treating data and actions as symbols, the iPad is just overflowing with potential, much of it already being realized. Musicians, artists, animators, logicians, teachers, doctors, researchers; the list of professions offered new ways to work is getting longer and longer. To these people, the iPad can be life-changing.

I don't think the Kindle Fire will change anything. It's just not in Amazon's DNA to make a product focused on anything other than buying and consuming content — and there's never been a shortage of ways to buy things.

[1] http://arstechnica.com/apple/news/2011/09/doable-or-not-my-e...

Logicians? I'm not seeing the iPad app to write math papers without, y'know, writing.

Logic is a game of symbols and relationships. The iPad is the best tool I've ever seen for working with symbols and relationships.

Being a practicing mathematician means generating and publishing results. I am interested to see your iPad app for diagonalization results or computability proofs.

Have you ever seen a whiteboard? I do anything remotely logic based on one.

My whiteboard even has a fantastic multi-user interaction system!

The Kindle is not for getting work done. It is for consuming content.

That’s the point.

The potentially interesting question is whether the iPad is actually good for non-consumption tasks. All the faculty in my research group purchase Apple products, and most of them are wandering about with iPads. They're all quite happy to use them for reading papers, reading email, etc. However, none of them, despite having been using the devices for some time (close to year for some) even feel comfortable using them for technical email, let alone writing lectures, presentations, or papers.

Again, I don't know whether the software to make those tasks workable _could_ exist; I simply have experiential evidence that it does not yet.

   Musicians, artists, animators, ???

Any serious professional will have a maxed out task specific equipment.

    logicians??

Lol I take it that you are not being serious!

teachers, doctors, researchers!

haha Doctors need to enter lots of information and prefer a laptop / proper keyboard. As far as researchers are concerned any serious researcher will be either using legacy software or cutting edge software that runs on specialized machine. And oh if you actually leave your hipster utopia you will realize that teachers get paid peanuts.

please iPad is a toy and kindle fire is a cheaper and much more affordable toy.

>Doctors need to enter lots of information and prefer a laptop / proper keyboard.

Any reference for that?

I would also be mildly skeptical about that claim; I think there have been some fairly successful uses of custom UIs in medicine.

Well, an anti-reference: The (admittedly few) doctors I know enter simple keywords into some predetermined fields - perfect for an iPad. For anything longer they record a message that someone else transcribes.

I have made a living as a musician, as a 3d animator, and as a software dev. My parents are both teachers. I did a lot of research in my University days.

In all of these areas, I can see the potential for multitouch-based applications that go far, far beyond what we're currently seeing, or have ever seen on a traditional mouse/keyboard computer. In fact, in my current line of work as a developer, I'm pursuing these very things.

If you're in a line of work where you're attempting to push the boundaries of what's possible with a computer, I find it hard to believe that you aren't fully aware of the realized and unrealized potential of multitouch devices.

Just because the iPad feels like a toy right now, doesn't mean it's limited to that sort of usage for all people, from now on. I just don't see Amazon playing any role in pushing user-facing technology forward. Silk is brilliant, but the Fire doesn't really enable anything that wasn't previously possible, and I don't see that changing. The iPad did.

I'm pretty sure by "feels like" you mean "is".

Maybe multitouch will make all kinds of exciting differences. Maybe it won't. As long as you agree that you can't point to any of these exciting results yet, we're on the same page.

One example: http://www.blogher.com/ipad-nearmiracle-my-son-autism

..and all the stories about grandparents getting iPads. These are all anectodes of course, and we'll have to wait for the peer-reviewed papers to come in some years from now.

You can call the iPad a toy all you want. I'm sure some Delta and United pilots will disagree (hopefully they don't allow games on the iPads they have).

Lots of people called the first Mac a toy with its silly mouse and GUI when it was released, yet here we are.

The problem with touch interfaces is that they're low-resolution. Most "professional" software allows manipulation of a large number of parameters. With a keyboard and mouse you can do this fairly efficiently but you just can't pack that many widgets onto a touch screen unless you make it much larger than 10". Compound gestures may be more expressive than mouse clicks but they're also more error-prone and much less discoverable.

  > much less discoverable

That's not necessarily an issue if we're essentially talking about power users. If the app is worth its salt, then professionals that can make use of it will learn the ropes (so long as there is sufficient material -- help docs, tutorials, screencasts, etc). A good example is to look at text editors like Vim or Emacs. Much of their functionality isn't very 'discoverable,' but the power locked inside drives people to learn. Especially if you plan on diving into a particular profession. You want to use tools that make your job easier, even if there is a steep initial investment of time to learn the system.

> haha Doctors need to enter lots of information and prefer a laptop / proper keyboard

You are just making that up, right?

Health care is the one area where tablets did very well even before the iPad, and iPads have proven to be popular among doctors.

To me the e-ink Kindle is life-changing ... it's what I wanted since 10 years ago, an affordable e-ink reader and access to the biggest library of books on earth, just one click away.

You mention researchers and logicians using the iPad. Can you give any examples?

I tried using the iPad, but the lack of support for LaTeX or papers in svn, git or mercurial repositories made it completely unusable for anything resembling work.

In my field (Information Systems), most papers are served as PDFs. My advisor has switched almost entirely to his iPad for most work, especially when reading/annotating articles.

Most journals in my field require Word docs, and don't use LaTeX. It's been my observation that the field is filled with business people who use computers, and relatively fewer computer people who ended up in business. Sure, there are some of each, but the former seem to outnumber the latter.

It seems useful to mathematicians: they spend most of their time reading, thinking and writing. An iPad can help with the reading, which is one activity out of the three!

Despite 10 years of evidence to the contrary people keep telling themselves that Apple is going to change their device pricing due to pressure from the rest of the market. Good luck this time.

Only ten years of evidence? I still remember the Performa lines costing twice as much as a comparable PC. I wouldn't go so far as to call Apple products Veblen goods, but they're pretty close, and I don't see iPad's $500 pricing harming it in any way.

Just using '10 years' as weak shorthand for the last time I could remember anyone was right about Apple cutting prices. Certainly they did in the clone era (-1997) and you can argue the original iMac as well (thru 2002 when the sunflower debuted).

Remember when people said the iPod was doomed because of cheaper competition? That didn't work out so hot, I hear.

And yet apple still released the shuffle... Weird huh?

Did they release it because they were losing money to competitors, or because they were leaving money on the table with their existing price points? I suspect the latter.

They were losing out on customers so they released an el-cheapo piece of crap. This is my point.

Losing out on customers to who? Or just missing out on selling to customers who wanted a cheaper option? Those are two very different things.

I don't think they release the shuffle because their higher-priced products were suffering in comparison to budget competitors. They released the shuffle because there was demand at the $100 price point that they could profitably address without undercutting their more expensive products.

Famous Steve story I saw last month when he retired about how people at Apple wanted to attack all the mp3 markets from the start but he forced them to focus focus focus on the one big model to get it perfect. Two years later they opened it up, something I take it we'll see with the low end phone and eventually with ipads too.

I think Apple's pricing in relationship to other brands is changing. They have historically been seen as a premium brand and were priced accordingly. These days though, they tend to be much more on price-parity or even winning on price. Take a look at how the iMac compares to other premium all-in-one machines? Fairly close. Then the iPad - when the Android competitors were coming out we kept saying how they'd have to be so much cheaper to compete and they weren't. Finally, the Air's $1000 price point is half of what Intel was positioning the Ultrabooks which has caused the other manufacturers to scramble cut their prices.

I think they're still the consumer electronics premium brand par excellence, but they've dominated their supply chains so thoroughly that they've found savings other companies just can't compete with.

You can still buy a laptop for a lot less than $999, though, and that's where other people will come out of the woodwork to show you loud, clumsy looking Acer and HP machines.

You can still buy a laptop for a lot less than $999, though, and that's where other people will come out of the woodwork to show you loud, clumsy looking Acer and HP machines.

Yup, that's why I specifically mentioned the Air vs. Ultrabooks, a $399 Acer isn't in the same class.

I agree, and I think that we're going to see a lot more of that now that Tim Cook, 'Mr Supply Chain', is in charge.

I agree, the HP Touchpad firesale, and the Kindle will have serious long term impact on the public's perception of what a tablet (any tablet) should cost.

According to some surveys[1], most people view the $500 price for a tablet as premium anyway, and it's about the maximum price they would pay, which might mean even though Apple sells most tablets right now, they're probably selling them only to that niche market that think a tablet is worth $500.

The $200 pricing range hasn't been explored properly yet, and I think when it will be, a lot more people will become interested in tablets. We'll probably see an avalanche of "good enough" $200 tablets next year.

[1] - http://gigaom.com/mobile/heres-how-much-consumers-will-pay-f...

One thing that I have a problem with is the complaints about the Kindle buttons. As much as I see people try and use the Kindle as a touch screen, I would not want it to be. I like the button press because I don't have to move my hand from holding the device. If I had to physically swipe my finger everytime I wanted to move to the next page I could see that being very annoying.

The two reasons I really love my Kindle are for the digital distribution and the form factor. I can no longer read paperback books. I find holding them to be just unpleasent and not near as enjoyable as the Kindle. And I think a swipe page turning mechanism is a backward step in how I move through my book.

Not sure how the Kindle Touch or Fire work, but iBooks and the Kindle app on iPad both have tap once to flip to the previous/next page (swiping is not required).

Kindle app on Android phones also uses single tap to page; it's extremely convenient (compared to the old Kindle with physical buttons which I also use). Touch for paging is certainly no worse than the old buttons, and--really--the keyboard and cursor control on the old Kindle are just about useless. ("Up, up, up, left, down, down, up, ..." is hard to take after having a touch device.)

The Kindle app on Android/iOS already solve this problem, you tap the side of the page and it switches to the next page in the book. I've been reading REAMDE on my Samsung Galaxy S and on my iPhone and it works fantastically. Exactly as you'd hope it would work.

Quick easy to switch from one page to the next, all the whole still holding it in your hand.

I am assuming that the same concept will be brought over to the new touch Kindles.

Funny that you complain about page turning... for hundreds of years, it has required an extended physical movement to turn the page.

Amazing the times we live in, that page turning has become an effort that becomes annoying. Combined with our tendency to be less physical active, we are heading to a (physically) stationary future...

Well, we've removed the 'annoyance' with the original Kindle, why make an effort to put it back in? What does touch add over the use of buttons (other than, "Look! We're using a new technology, therefore it's better and you should buy one!")?

Reminds me the overweight people on the WALL-E spaceship

> Amazing the times we live in, that page turning has become an effort that becomes annoying.

Or it always was, and people just didn't have a choice.

One of the things that I really liked about my first generation Kindle was the big buttons on the edges for page turning.

It meant that on cold nights, I could read holding the Kindle through my blanket in bed, and could turn pages just be bumping the side through the blanket with my other hand.

I really like how the Nook Touch handles it: subtle physical buttons (with little risk of accidental presses), or you can swipe, or you can tap on the screen. I use all three methods, depending on how I'm holding it in that moment. I don't even have to think about it, and the immersion of reading is unbroken.

From another daring-fireball article:

Q: How many times does the word “Android” appear on Amazon’s Kindle Fire page?

A: Once, in the following sentence: “Additional email apps are available in our Amazon Appstore for Android.” It’s a Kindle tablet, not an Android tablet.

On a side note, the Fire will not be able to download from the Google Android app store.

From a development perspective its an Android. Write once,.sell in two stores. Let's see how it goes

I think the Kindle light is a great idea. I just scooped one myself. I rarely used the keyboard on my original Kindle, plus this one is much slimmer and compact -- awesome. Can't wait for the light to come in.

Personally I think a touchpad Kindle with eink is overkill. The touchpad is nice, but I don't see why I would ever need it if I'm just casually reading. That plus I'm a sucker for slimness and the added dimensions killed it for me :)

Ditto. There've already been multiple posts saying "don't get the base model instead of the touch" that I don't understand.

Their "touch" screen uses infrared instead of a capacitive or resistive panel, and I anticipate lots of accidental and frustrating page turns. It looks like the touch model has no side buttons from the press photos, so tapping on the screen is necessary instead of applying slightly more pressure to the bezel you're already holding. This may just be me, but I find that to work just fine.

The battery life of the base model is half that of the touch model, sure, but it's still a month. Is that really a problem for anyone? They can't use an outlet or USB port four hours a month?

Trimming space by getting rid of the keyboard and speeding up page turn "flashes" are great upgrades to an already great device.

The one major advantage of the keyboard on the old models (and why I'm glad they are still being sold) is for students using ebooks in class. For my literature discussions we often have to reference specific sections so the keyboard, while crap, allows you to quickly search out a key phrase in the section under discussion. Page number mappings are still not all that available and often time off of weird editions that aren't even close to standard real paperback editions.

I think touch is useful, if you browse a lot. Using keyboard to navigate links is hard.

Not available outside of the US (except for the crippled non-touch version).

Poor, poor strategy.

That's essentially gifting the market to iOS/Android.

I sure as hell won't wait until Amazon deigns to offer one outside.

I don't think this is completely Amazons fault. The device is heavily centered around Amazon Prime and the various streaming content services they have. Most of these services are U.S. only thanks to requirements of the publishers. I'm sure Amazon would love to ship it worldwide, but it wouldn't be nearly as useful without the cloud services behind it.

"You can get a Kindle Fire and a new top-of-the-line e-ink Kindle Touch for less than the price of an iPad. It’s a very different take."

But few will want to carry both. This is the one problem with non-general-purpose tablets. Various discussions I've seen today imply, by intent or by chance, getting more than one tablet. To succeed in the long run, users must see the device as My One Tablet - which will include anywhere/anytime Internet connectivity (note the absence of a Fire 3G).

If I have the money, I'd be just as glad to separate my ebook-reading from everything else. When I read an ebook, I do want an eInk screen, ridiculous battery life, and no distracting apps or websites.

My problem is that I ultimately find an e-ink Kindle too limited as a reading device. I have a substantial number of ebooks in PDF format, and only a minority of them are effectively readable on my 2nd gen Kindle. (There are other use cases like comics and cookbooks where e-ink falls down on the job as well.)

Honestly, my Android phone with ezPDF is a better reader.

So something like this looks just about perfect.

My completely subjective personal preference is better than your completely subjective personal preference!

No, in all seriousness you make a good point about PDFs. I eventually realized that reading, say, a programming book was best done with a dead tree and that I should stop struggling with my Kindle. As a PDF, the text was a bit too small. As a converted document, the reflowed text killed the formatting, which was also no fun. Full-size PDF would be nice.

I currently carry around an MBP and a kindle. I could see (in some hypothetical, far-flung future where touchscreen keyboards weren't utter crap) dropping the laptop for a tablet, but I could never see dropping eInk for anything suitable for a general-purpose tablet. Barring some eInk-led hybrid, I simply can't see using a general-purpose tablet as a reading device. The kindle is simply far too good. I've been reading ebooks on my laptop for years, and I've read more books in the six months since I've gotten my kindle than I had in the 6 years prior. It's just that good.

The kindle isn't a tablet. It's your library in your pocket. Don't confuse form with function.

I currently have a MBP and an iPad but I really dislike reading on the iPad and I think it's quite likely my next round of devices will be a MB Air and e-ink Kindle. Ironically the new MB Air is so light and portable it undercuts most of the value of the iPad for me but I'd still like a comfortable reading device, preferably one I wouldn't be devastated to lose at the beach.

"tablet. To succeed in the long run, users must see the device as My One Tablet"

I do not think that is the only solution. Windows 8 aims for "a device that, on my request, can behave as if it is mine". That aims at a future where tablets/laptops/phones/ebook readers are plentiful, and, oftentimes, the only thing users carry around (if even that) is the key that makes those devices 'theirs' on demand (see also: Star Trek. Ever seen anybody there who said: hey, that's mine!?)

Strange that he does not mention Android at all, maybe its his disdain to the platform, but its a strong advantage .

I bet software in the Amazon app store will work right out of the gate, that's a ready made eco system in a new device

The fire will benefit from the Android development community. this is a great win. And that Gruber, is what it means that the platform is open. Everybody benefits, and the platform is agile enough to afford different business models

Any idea on details around this:

Over 100,000 movies and TV shows, including thousands of new releases and your favorite TV shows, are available to stream or download, purchase or rent - all just one tap away. Amazon Prime members enjoy unlimited, commercial-free streaming of over 10,000 popular movies and TV shows.

As a Netflix user, I know first-hand that quantity doesn't necessarily mean quality. Any idea on what this list actually contains?

It's probably all the same movies/tv shows available on Amazon. Note that the 100,000 includes all the ones you can purchase and rent. If you have amazon prime, the 10,000 subset is what you can stream for free to this device.

For the free options, the movie selection is decent, and the TV selection is pretty awful. Lots of back catalog stuff, like 270 episodes of Cheers, but only a few series from recent years.

But OTOH, I paid for Prime when it didn't have any streaming, and thought it was worth it, so I don't have high expectations.

I know it's subjective but I think they blew it on the size.

This is what I like to do on daringfireball posts: http://i.minus.com/iXy1JUUd4GGMz.jpg - and that's pretty much my opinion about them.

You do know that he (not them) called Daring Fireball a "Mac column"? What did you expect him to write about, oranges?

Not to mention that this post is a pretty bad example, since writing about a new tablet without talking about the one with the huge slice of the market would would be very strange.

Hell must be freezing over, Gruber isn't gratuitously bashing Apple's competitor? It's refreshing to read a new, insightful analysis of his for the first time in a while.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com