Amazon's Kindle Fire. Is it Worth $199?



Kindle Fire

It's official.  Amazon has a few new Kindles, and one is the color Android-based Kindle Fire. The press was stunned when the Fire's $199 price was announced.  The hardware specs are competitive but missing a few standard components.  Some estimate 5 million or so will be sold before the end of this year. The Fire isn't the first 7" tablet out there, and it isn't even the cheapest one. Walmart.com has a half dozen 7" tablets available for under $200. You can buy the Maylong 7" tablet for as little as $97.

Here are a few:

• Maylong M-250 7", $97
• E-Fun Nextbook 8.4", $168
• Kaser's Net'sGo 7", $138
• Boss Electronics 2182 7", $124
• Velocity Micro Cruz T301 7", $178
• Pandigital Planet 7", $178
• Naxa Core 7", $132,
• Coby Kryos 7", $148, Front camera 1.3mp

So what magic makes the press think Amazon's Fire will sell better than any of these?  Sure, most of these have worse specs than the Fire.  Yet many also have hardware features (Cameras, HDMI-out) the Fire doesn't include. All have WiFi.  All are touchscreen Android tablets.  All run apps including all of Amazon's apps. Lined up spec for spec the Fire doesn't glow for what it can do.  It blushes for what it doesn't do.

So what is the secret?   I'm blaming it on Respect.  Amazon, like Apple, has built up a reputation for treating customers well. They have both simplified the process of buying media and products from them. We respect Apple and we respect Amazon. They are both American originals. We surrender our beliefs to Apple in exchange for designful and productive devices we didn't know we needed. The press and Amazon fans have done the same concerning the Fire. I've pre-ordered mine out of the same respect.

Let's do a reality check though.   The Fire is a first generation device.  Remember the first wedge Kindle?   Original, but far from evolved. The second and later generations were better in every way.  My experience repeatedly demonstrates that 1st generation devices are poor investments. This is more often true for ground-breakers, and Amazon is a ground-breaker. Late comers/Followers can learn from the mistakes made by others.  I expect the second generation Fire to be thinner, faster, and have a few more features than this first gen Fire.  It may also be less expensive.  Previous Kindles have gotten cheaper each year since the first one came out at around $400.

So is the Kindle Fire a good investment?  I'm going to rate it a tentative "yes". From what I can tell the hardware is similar to the Blackberry Playbook. Made by the same manufacturer I'm expecting the Fire to be similarly well-made. The dimensions are a little different, but the details are very similar.  Each specification the Fire lists is equal to or better than the competition. A 1024 x 600 screen when many have 800 x 480 screens. Capacitive multi-touch when many have resistive single-touch input. A dual core processor when many have single core chips.  The Fire will have a liquid user interface (UI) and shouldn't stutter or pixelate displaying movies or photos. The screen will react instantly to your touch, and using it should become a mere extension of your thoughts.   I expect Amazon to do it right.  The Fire should delight the user. Should it not you can certainly expect the 2nd generation to.

Yes,  I believe the new Kindle Fire is worth $199.   The Blackberry Playbook and HTC Flyer are more capable tablets, and at $299 they are also priced proportionally correct given their additional features.  If you think you might want a Fire, don't wait. Reviews will be out before new orders are shipped and you can always cancel should you change your mind.

Comments are welcome.  Feel free to contribute.
4D


P.S.: If you enjoy my blog, please consider clicking on an Ad or two.  Thanks!

What is a Feature Worth?

Cell Phones and MP3 players now come with many more features than required for basic functionality. You don't need a camera to make a phone call, but your cell phone probably has a camera. You don't need a calculator to listen to music, but many MP3 players include a calculator.

I'm often asked what a player is worth, and find it a very hard question to answer. Many companies add unique features to their players to make them stand out from the crowd. You can do a simple comparison between two players by just counting features. If a feature has little real worth though (like a calendar you can't add appointments to), should it be given the same weight as an amazingly useful feature (like an email client that provides access to all your email accounts)? You may also discover two players with a feature, but only one with a version that is useful. The thorough calculator on my iPod Touch is FAR more useful than the basic calc (no mem, sq.rt., percent, +/-, 1/x, etc.) that comes on many of my Korean made players. You can't score both players the same for having a calculator.

Another consideration is "worth to you". A feature that is worthless to me may be incredibly useful to you. I don't care for any of the "social" apps out there, yet there are millions of FaceBook and Twitter and Linked-In members out there. Someone must find value in them. FM radio is common on many MP3 players. Some add RDS to it. The Zune HD allows listening to HD radio (if you can find any HD broadcasts in your neighborhood). Several player let you record off of FM radio, but they vary in what format and bitrate level (quality) is used. A few players will let you assign names (station IDs) to the preset stations by adding those names in a text file stored on the device. FM radio is very useful IMO, as local news, sports, and weather are often only available via local radio. Those extra features are where measuring gets tricky though. The Radio app may also only be used 2% of the total time the player is used. Should the features and quality of the radio app be compared equally with the features and quality of the Music app that may be used 85% of the time?

I could make a spreadsheet of course, and give each application a weight and sliding usefulness scale. I could grade each device on a point scale, with higher scores being better buys for the money being asked for them. It means some $20 players might get a higher score than some $200 players. It demands that price be considered, and that features have some monetary value to them. "Worth to you" is a variable I can't predict or control. It has to be stripped from the equation. That leaves a sterile result that you'll have to add your own relative value to.

The ability to play an MP3 file might be worth a standard 20 points, with how well it sounds to me reducing that to an A, B, C, or D grade. Or I could simply multiply 20 times the Signal/Noise ratio. The S/N number does usually relate to the quality of sound produced. The Samsung P3 has an 89 dB rating. The Cowon S9 has a 95 dB rating. I also think the S9 sounds better to me. By S/N rating the Samsung would get 89% of 20 points (17.8) compared to the Cowon's 95% of 20 points (19) for music playback value. Of course each player has other music properties, and they would be factored in as well. You can see how the math might get complicated.

Do you want a more detailed analysis of a players worth, or is a subjective grade enough?

4D.