Amazon Kindle Fire Review
by Anand Lal Shimpi & Vivek Gowri on November 29, 2011 3:31 AM EST- Posted in
- Tablets
- Mobile
- Amazon
- Kindle Fire
- Kindle
Final Words
The Kindle Fire is probably the best tablet you can buy at $199. Amazon has effectively defined the new price point and specs for entry level tablets, anything comparable shouldn't even bother with a price tag greater than $199. I'm sure this won't come as welcome news to players in the Android space looking to enjoy Apple-like profit margins, but sometimes the truth is hard to hear.
At $199, Amazon is giving you some of the fastest mobile hardware money can buy today. The reason the Kindle Fire isn't a must buy for everyone is because the software experience layered on top of the hardware isn't yet perfect. The OS is clean and easy to navigate but the UI isn't always smooth, interactions aren't always responsive and the browser isn't as pleasant as what you can get from iOS or newer versions of Android.
The counterpoint is that for $499 you can get this software experience, while at $199 you obviously have to give something up. I'd argue that you shouldn't have to give anything up. Much of the software experience I'm asking for is already baked into current or close-to-shipping versions of Android today. Amazon picked an earlier point in the curve to fork from Android, but what I'm asking for is technically possible today. Amazon did the right thing by including the best hardware possible in the Kindle Fire, it simply needs to follow through on the software side to truly unlock it.
Amazon does deserve points for a job well done in a number of areas. First and foremost, the Kindle Fire's version of Android is really well executed. While there are some navigational hiccups, the experience overall is quite good. I would strongly encourage major players in the Android space to look at what Amazon has done when they are considering their own customizations to Google's OS. Yes, sometimes less is actually more.
As much as I'm not a fan of the Silk browser today, I can see where things could go. I do believe that Amazon really wants to deliver the full tablet experience in a device the size of a regular Kindle. Moore's Law will eventually give us that reality, but Amazon may be able to speed things up by moving much of the heavy lifting into the cloud. I do hope this is the future Amazon is working towards and Silk's cloud-side caching isn't solely a power grab for behavioral data.
The integration of Amazon Prime video streaming and the Amazon stores is extremely well done. If you're an Amazon addict, the Kindle Fire will likely do horrible things to your bank account.
I feel like Amazon believes in the Kindle Fire and thus we will see the software get better over time. As with most tablet recommendations lately, if you can wait, doing so would be wise. Don't assume that things will get better, wait for Amazon to make them better and then reward the company with your hard earned dollars.
That being said, more concrete recommendations are always nice so here we go:
1) If all you do is read eBooks, grab a regular Kindle. The reading experience is far better on those devices. Sure response time is noticeably longer than on the Kindle Fire, but you do get better battery life, a display that's easier on your eyes, etc...
2) If you already have an iPad/Honeycomb tablet, look elsewhere. I appreciate you reading this review but don't buy a Kindle Fire. If you really want something more portable to read books on, see point 1.
3) If you need an entry level tablet, the Kindle Fire is as good as they get for $199. You get the same general purpose compute and memory as an iPad 2, at a far lower price. GPU performance isn't a knockout but as long as you're not a hardcore 3D gamer (do those exist on Android yet?) or high end game developer this isn't an issue.
I'm curious to see how this plays out. The e-ink Kindle has a unique (perfect?) form factor and delivers a pretty good experience. The Kindle Fire has a more generic form factor (perhaps too small for certain uses?) and delivers a varied experience depending on what you're doing. I appreciate what Amazon is trying to do here: good tablet experiences shouldn't cost as much as much higher performing computing devices, and cheap tablets shouldn't sacrifice everything to get there. The Kindle Fire is Amazon's first attempt at bridging the gap between those two extremes. It's the best out today given its price point, but it's not the best Amazon could have done. I'm waiting for round two.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
70 Comments
View All Comments
Fincanejoe - Tuesday, November 29, 2011 - link
I will try to correct you but you are so turned around a far off the path that this may be difficult.I own a Kindle 2 as well as a Kindle Fire and have owned a ipad and android tablet:
* No one who owns a Kindle (non Fire) would ever suggest Kindle Fire, ipad, or Android tablet could ever replace the passive - not light emitting - Kindle as a reader. Anyone who has stared at a computer screen for too long and/or Kindle owners understand this.
* Kindle Fire is not trying to accomplish all the tasks the ipad or android tablets are trying to accomplish. That's just it "trying to accomplish".
The ipad and droid tablets are tweeners trying to accomplish what laptops do well and cell phones do well all in one device. The problem is none of the tablets does the job very well at his point and. They are "cool" devices but one the cool wears off and reality sets in you realize a tablet is not as good as a laptop (for what laptops do) and not good enough as a cell (for what cells do) to replace either. That's why I returned my ipad and adroid tablet after the cool factor wore off (couple of days).
The Kindle Fire does not try to bite off such a large chunk of the pie. It fills a smaller niche and does it well. I use my google account (mail,docs,etc) and Amazon account for storing content. What the Kindle fire does is manage and connect me to all this content exceptionally well with a better screen, much longer battery life, smaller footprint. ipad is too big, this device is just the right size for this purpose. And yes if I want to read a book in a pinch amazon sync bookmarks where I left off on my real reader, Kindle 2.
Lets not for get this small item either - K Fire sets you back $200 while the ipad sets you back at least $600 until the next great device comes around in about 6 - 12 months.
This is how Kindle Fire is an Apple ipad market share "stealer" not killer. Sure there will be the Apple fanboys but aside from that, the practical people will stick to their laptops, cell phones, and Kindles.
solipsism - Tuesday, November 29, 2011 - link
Lots of hate for tablets. You might want to rethink that for a more objective position.Sabresiberian - Wednesday, November 30, 2011 - link
Ummm - well, if he hates tablets, I say he has a right to, since he has actually bought them and used them. He at least had an open enough mind to try them out before he decided that they don't work very well.;)
joshv - Wednesday, November 30, 2011 - link
"No one who owns a Kindle (non Fire) would ever suggest Kindle Fire, ipad, or Android tablet could ever replace the passive - not light emitting - Kindle as a reader. Anyone who has stared at a computer screen for too long and/or Kindle owners understand this."Incorrect. I love the passive Kindle display, but I also read a lot in bed, and I hate the hack of an external LED (clipon or otherwise). The Fire works great in bed, and I suffer no eyestrain whatsoever. It's pixel density is also quite high, so text looks smooth and clear.
I've really never understood the LED eyestrain thing. It just seems like a self-perpetuating meme. People hear it, and when their eyes hurt they go "yeah, must be because I stare at an LED screen all day long".
wicko - Wednesday, November 30, 2011 - link
Yeah, I seriously doubt it's the LCD screen that's causing eye-strain or headaches. I look at LCDs 10-12 hours a day, as do many others, and I don't have any problems like that. Sure, there are some more sensitive to light then others (I have brown eyes, which are the least susceptible to problems like that), but it isn't a general thing that happens to everyone, and I see no proof that it's the LCD itself. I start getting headaches when I play Battlefield 3 for too long, and I imagine it's because I'm getting blasted with colour, fast moving objects, and, probably the main cause, sounds of explosions and weapon fire. But I don't have these problems when I'm programming/browsing/etc.wicko - Wednesday, November 30, 2011 - link
Also forgot to mention, when I'm playing BF3 and I get those headaches, it's because I've been playing for 4-5 hours straight. If I took breaks in between, I wouldn't need to take tylenol :pReflex - Wednesday, November 30, 2011 - link
You just said you have no problems with LCD's, but then you listed your problems with LCD's.I think you've missed the point. On eInk there is no need for a break after an hour or two. The screen does not fatigue the eyes. Even if it were in full motion, 3D with color as rich as a LCD, it would not fatigue the eyes to watch.
joshv - Thursday, December 1, 2011 - link
I can read my Fire and stare and LCD monitors all darned day long. No headaches, no eyestrain.Finraziel - Thursday, December 1, 2011 - link
Nope, with e-ink I get a neckstrain because I lie in uncomfortable positions keeping the damn thing within the light... I was actually going to post because I was surprised at Anand/Vivek so boldly stating that e-ink is better than LCD for reading, it's not that simple and just because a lot of people prefer e-ink does not change the fact that it's a matter of preference.I myself gave my e-ink device (not a kindle but a sony pocket edition, unfortunately I'm on the wrong side of the atlantic, can't get a fire either...) to my mom because I found that I actually preferred reading on my phone(!) to using the e-ink device, exactly because I usually read in dim/dark conditions and as good as never in direct sunlight.
genomecop - Thursday, December 1, 2011 - link
Couldn't agree more.