# Fire vs. iPad - Amazon's reductionist genius



## jonathanmoeller (Apr 19, 2011)

I read a lot of tech news, so when the original Kindle Fire came out and the new Fire HD arrived, I was amused by the reaction of many tech reviewers. In particular, how they seemed offended that the Kindle Fire was not an iPad.

This quote from a review by David Pogue is a good example:



> Well, let's see now. The Fire HD has no camera on the back, no GPS navigation, no speech recognition, no to-do list or notes app. It trails the iPad in thickness, screen size, screen sharpness, Web speed, software polish and app availability. It can only dream of the iPad's universe of accessories, cases and docks.


All this is true. The Kindle Fire is a substantially simpler device than the iPad, and it can do less stuff. But that's not significant, because it overlooks a key point.

Namely, that tablets are _first and foremost consumption devices._ The vast majority of tablet users don't use their devices for work or content creation, but the passive consumption of media - web pages, videos, games, and so forth.

More specifically, people who buy a tablet generally use it for five things:

-Recreational web browsing.

-Watching videos.

-Playing games.

-Checking email/Facebook/social networking.

-Light ebook reading.

The iPad can do a lot more than all that. If you get a Bluetooth keyboard dock for it, you can practically use it as a full-fledged PC device. You can do spreadsheets on it, you can VPN into your office, you can hook it up to a projector and do presentations, you can take pictures and videos and edit them, all kinds of things.

But!

I'd wager that a significant majority of the people who buy an iPad _actually _use it for recreational web browsing, watching videos, playing games, email/social networking, and occasional ebooks. Practically speaking, if you want to get an iPad dock and use it for work, you're really better off getting a lower-end laptop for around $300 and $400. It will do everything the iPad can and more. But if you just want to sit on the couch at night and browse the web (as the majority of tablet users do) why spend $499 on a device to do that? Especially when you can do the same thing for under $199.

This was the excellent idea behind the original Kindle Fire. Amazon took the core functionality of a tablet - media consumption - and pared it down to a $199 device. Sure, you could do some extra tablet-y type things with it, but the main focus was media consumption. The original Fire only got middling reviews at best in the tech press, but Amazon sold millions of the things anyway. Technical reviewers care about features like Bluetooth and GPS, but the average tablet user didn't want an iPad killer. The average tablet wanted a cheap device for media consumption.

The Kindle Fire HD as a refinement of this underlying concept. It's still a bare-bones tablet designed primarily for media consumption. This time Amazon added a few additional features - Bluetooth, more storage, a Skype client, better speakers - but it's still basically a device designed for passive media consumption and casual web browsing. The iPad can do more - but most home users who buy iPads wind up using them for passive media consumption and casual web browsing. Some do wind up using their iPads essentially as laptops, but most do not.

So Amazon's idea has been to refine the tablet down to its essential nature - media consumption - first in the Fire and then in the Fire HD. I suspect that while iPads will remain popular with more technically-minded (and wealthier) users, the Fire line will continue to do just fine.

-JM


----------



## Lord Mahoney (Sep 19, 2012)

I would highly recommend that those reviewers watch Jeff Bezos' presentation, in particular the part where he explains how Amazon plans to make money with the updated Kindle product family.  The point is not to sell you a new shiny gadget, but to give you the best hardware for the money that will enable you to consume Amazon products and services.

And the hardware is amazing compared to the first-generation Kindle Fire.  It's going to give full-featured 7-inch tablets a run for their money.


----------



## jonathanmoeller (Apr 19, 2011)

> The point is not to sell you a new shiny gadget, but to give you the best hardware for the money that will enable you to consume Amazon products and services.


Yes. A tablet is not a PC, and it's a category error to view it as such.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

I have always agreed that to compare the original Fire to the iPad was completely wrong.  I got the Fire for media consumption, and that's how I use it.

I DO use my iPad in place of my computer.  I barely turn on either of my PCs anymore....  So, while I work on the iPad, I'll put Amazon Prime or Netflix on the Fire.  

I'm looking forward to the Fire 4G I ordered and comparing that to the iPad; I expect it to be more comparable and possibly replace the iPad when I'm out and about....

Betsy


----------



## larryaiello (Sep 15, 2012)

It looks like Amazon wants to bridge the gap with the ipad which is what they've done with the latest releases of their HD kindle.  I'm guessing they want to get in the middle market between the $199 price and the ipad price.  It might force the ipad prices to come down if Amazon is successful.


----------



## jonathanmoeller (Apr 19, 2011)

> I have always agreed that to compare the original Fire to the iPad was completely wrong. I got the Fire for media consumption, and that's how I use it.


Precisely. The iPad could, properly used, replace a PC. It's a bit more expensive, though. 



> I'm guessing they want to get in the middle market between the $199 price and the ipad price. It might force the ipad prices to come down if Amazon is successful.


If the rumors about an iPad Mini are true, that's precisely what's going to happen.


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

jonathanmoeller said:


> Precisely. The iPad could, properly used, replace a PC. It's a bit more expensive, though.


It definitely has replaced mine for about 95% of what I use my PC for. And more expensive is a trade off for the ability to carry it with me in my purse. Laptops are generally more expensive then the comparable desktop system, too. But for me, when compared to a laptop/netbook, the tablet has advantages--can be used very easily while standing on a subway or street corner, quick to boot up, light.

It doesn't completely replace my netbook or PC, but, as I say, I seldom turn either on unless I have intensive graphics or spreadsheet work to do. (The iPad spreadsheet "Numbers" kinda sucks, though I do use it for really simple stuff.)

I don't think I'll give up the iPad, but I'm interested in seeing how I use the Fire 4G in comparison with the iPad.

Betsy


----------



## Michael Cavacini (Aug 2, 2010)

I think all of your points are valid. I have an iPad, but I bought the Fire HD for two reasons: 

1.) I love Amazon and wanted to get a device that would seamlessly bring together all of its services.

2.) Despite owning several Apple products, I can't justify regularly upgrading their devices - like I do with Kindles. They are far too expensive, and not as remarkable as people would lead you to believe. For example, I, and my coworkers, have had numerous problems with MacBook Pros over the years. As far as I'm concerned, functionally, they are no better than Windows-based laptops.


----------



## Ann in Arlington (Oct 27, 2008)

FWIW. . . .I have an android tablet -- it also is perfectly capable of replacing a PC or laptop if necessary -- for most things, as Betsy says.

But I really like my Fire HD -- and I think I'll like the larger one even better.


----------



## jonathanmoeller (Apr 19, 2011)

> For example, I, and my coworkers, have had numerous problems with MacBook Pros over the years. As far as I'm concerned, functionally, they are no better than Windows-based laptops.


Yes. And when MacBooks break, they break _hard_. Most PC laptops, replacing the hard drive is onerous, but doable. Replacing a MacBook hard drive is about as difficult as breaking into Fort Knox, but with more non-standard screw sizes.



> They are far too expensive, and not as remarkable as people would lead you to believe.


Very true. If you just want a tablet to browse the web and watch videos, why not go for the $199 device over the $499 one?


----------



## sosha (Feb 9, 2010)

I am typing this on an iMac.  I have an iPhone (will be getting the 5 in the mail today ), and am looking at getting a MacBook Air.

All that said, I sold my iPad on Craig's list, and bought 2 kindles with nice leather cases.

I think they're different animals, each serving their own purpose.


----------



## JimC1946 (Aug 6, 2009)

jonathanmoeller said:


> If you just want a tablet to browse the web and watch videos, why not go for the $199 device over the $499 one?


My thoughts exactly. And for the best combination of functionality and portability, my choice is a 7" tablet. I think for the next year or so, the 7" tablets are going to be the hot sellers.


----------



## jonathanmoeller (Apr 19, 2011)

> I think for the next year or so, the 7" tablets are going to be the hot sellers.


Yes. My first tablet was 10 inches, but I switched to 7 this year, and like it much more.


----------



## Broadus (Nov 29, 2010)

I bought an iPad 3 about a month or so ago and returned it after a week. It could not serve as a laptop replacement for my needs and I kept thinking of all the things I couldn't do with it. I bought the 32GB version and, after a week, I simply decided I wasn't $600-worth-of-happy with it.

A 32GB 7-inch or 8.9-inch Fire HD, though, may just hit the sweet spot for what-it-will-do and what-it-will-cost, so I'm thinking seriously about a Fire HD. For me, though, I'm not that interested in the Amazon store tie-in. I'm thinking about basic tablet usage with a screen that displays crisp fonts that doesn't cost $600. Plus, replacing it in a couple of years isn't quite as traumatic price-wise for the Fire HD as it is for an iPad.


----------



## Cyanide5000 (Aug 30, 2010)

IMO the iPad is over hyped, over priced locked down rubbish. And before all the Apple fan boys jump on me, I actually own an iPad (I had two!) and i hated both of them. Woo I can play angry birds on a bigger screen. Amazing.
Web browsing and reading, dont really need a tablet to do much else.


----------



## Ann in Arlington (Oct 27, 2008)

Well, a lot of people use the iPad for way more than web browsing and reading.

My son has an app on his that allows him to control the lights in the theater from anywhere in the house. So, for example, if he needs to adjust direction -- which in the old theater has to be done manually by climbing a ladder or walking the catwalks -- he doesn't then have to go back down the ladder and climb up to the lighting console to turn the thing on and see if it's aimed properly. He can do that from his iPad while up next to the light and and get it right much more quickly and with much less climbing up and down.

AND I know several musicians who have their whole playlist loaded into an app on the iPad. . . .they use it for performance -- in their case, music during Mass. Because they have EVERYTHING stored there, if a song is changed, they can quickly pull it up for accompaniment -- no need to go back to the music storage area and rummage around for a paper copy. We have a guy in our group that uses it. It really offers flexibility for the director because if the priest draws on something specific during his homily, he can signal Bob to look up a particular song and have him play, even though it wasn't planned and most of the other musicians won't have the paper music handy. Because he can hook his iPad up to a larger monitor, the other guitarist can actually share his music in a case like that as well.

That said. . . .I've been HUGELY happy with my HD7. . . . . I like it so well I'm becoming ambivalent about my order for the HD8.9. I don't _think_ I'll cancel it, but if I was in the position that I had to for monetary reasons, I would not be totally bummed out. I never thought I cared much about screen quality, rationalizing that a relatively clear picture was nice and a perfectly clear one wasn't necessary. But I DO enjoy videos on the HD7 -- and I didn't use the original Fire much for that at all.


----------



## jonathanmoeller (Apr 19, 2011)

> My son has an app on his that allows him to control the lights in the theater from anywhere in the house. So, for example, if he needs to adjust direction -- which in the old theater has to be done manually by climbing a ladder or walking the catwalks -- he doesn't then have to go back down the ladder and climb up to the lighting console to turn the thing on and see if it's aimed properly. He can do that from his iPad while up next to the light and and get it right much more quickly and with much less climbing up and down.


I did one of those for a client last year. He preferred to use his iPod Touch, though, since he could keep it in his pocket and therefore prevent the interns from mucking about with the lights. 

I do think there's a difference between the work use of a tablet and home use of a tablet. Like, if you require a tablet for some work-related function, either your employer (or you, if you own the business) will simply have to pay whatever it takes for the hardware and necessary app. But for home use, I think the vast majority of tablet purchases are recreational (i.e., web browsing, video, and games), so why not a Fire HD for $199 instead of a iPad for $499?


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

I lusted after the iPod Touch for about a year before the iPad came out.  I liked a lot of things about it, including what I'd seen of the ability to sketch, etc, on it.  (I do art quilts based on photographs, by the way.)  

But when the iPad was announced, I immediately transferred my lust to it. (I'm easy...  )  The larger size is perfect for what I use it for professionally.  I can show clients a picture of a quilt that they don't have to squint to see and can easily zoom in on detaiils.  PDF portfolio pages which include a text description of the quilt are also a perfect size to show clients.  And, of course, creating sketches on it is even easier with the larger size.

In addition, it's my primary computer for email, web browsing and blogging.  I wouldn't literally live on a 7" format (though I loved my Fire for media consumption) the way I do on the iPad; but I would use it for while I'm out and about.

I've ordered the Fire 4G and I'm eager to see how it compares to the iPad and whether it can be my main computer like the iPad is now.  

But I agree, if all you want to do is play Angry Birds on a device, the iPad is overkill.  

Betsy


----------



## kdawna (Feb 16, 2009)

I thought long and hard before canceling my order for a large HD Fire with 4 G. I have had an iPad 1 and use it so much.....for personal use. Which is often since I am disabled. I decided instead to buy the I-pad 3. I  personally do not like the carousel or to have my extreme # of books on my "main" device. 
Everyone has different uses for their devices and I did want a clearer display(than the I-pad1) and the camera and Siri are items that appealed to me. I didn't like the high price.... but the new Fire wasn't for me. I have the original Fire and plan to give it to one of my sons. I love my Kindle 3! It was what spoiled me by getting the Whispernet/3G, so I have to have this on my devices.....more $$$ but I live in the country. We are all different and have different wants and needs!


----------



## Betsy the Quilter (Oct 27, 2008)

Exactly.  Well put, kdawna.  

Betsy


----------

