If you listen to most of the technology press, including this publication, the new Kindle announced today is a dollar short and two years behind the technology curve. In the age of iPads who wants a dingy old Kindle?
Our own Chad Catacchio put it like this: “Is Amazon bringing a Kindle to a gun fight?” His point, shortly, is this:
With all of that, today’s announcement [the new Kindle] just seems like a mercurial improvement, not the kind of industry re-inventing moment that the iPad launch was less than four months ago. As such, we’re disappointed.
No matter what Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos says about building one device that does one thing extremely well, or how light and cheap the Kindle becomes, the fact remains that it is another device that people have to carry. This isn’t just the Kindle’s or even a misgiving of eReaders in general – all dedicated devices face this same issue eventually. Who carries around a calculator anymore? Heck, people are even starting to leave their digital cameras at home in favor of their phones – even when they travel. Convergence, mobility and raw power are what people want: and that is exactly what smartphones and tablets are giving them.
So a new 20% smaller and cheaper Kindle every 18 months that brings a little better reading experience isn’t going to cut it if Amazon wants to stay in the device game. They have excellent iPad/iPhone and Android apps that we’ve been applauding, a tremendous library that continues to grow at reasonable prices, but it is really hard to look at the Kindle/Nook/Kobo right now without thinking, “do I really need bring that – and my iPad?”
Is a single use device horribly myopic? Is the Kindle an outdated gadget that needs to be sent out to pasture now that the iPad (and the soon coming slew of cheap Android tablets) are here?
Absolutely not, and this is why: the more tablets, be it iPads or what have you, that are sold the better it is for Kindle. The lens that you have to view the Kindle through is just this: it is designed not for the casual reader, but the voaracious book swallower. Therefore, the idea that it will lose favor to an iPad applies nearly not at all. The most serious reader will never leave their Kindle anywhere but on their person.
What about casual readers? Let them drop the Kindle reading device and head out with their iPad. In fact, I bet that nearly no casual readers own a Kindle, so let them just bring their iPad. The iPad after all is an amazing Kindle. So is that casual reader’s phone for that matter, be it Android, iOS, or any other major platform. Heck, do they really need to bring or buy an actual Kindle? If they did, they would sometimes have three Kindles on their person!
Now, Amazon does not want the Kindle to be as niche as it is now, so they are improving it and cutting the price. Two good moves to get more people onto the device, but that is hardly Amazon’s full game. To compare Kindle sales and Kindle portability and Kindle anything to any other single product or even group of products is to miss the point. If you want a multi-use device, by all means get one, and then run Kindle on it. I agree with Chad, a multi-use tablet is what I want, but that has not stopped me from spending more money than I should on Amazon’s Kindle store on my iPad. To be blunt, I think that iPad is the best Kindle. I’m not even being ironic.
Amazon is happiest when people buy a Kindle, it locks them into their electronic store, but there are many ways for Amazon to skin this cat.
My argument only holds together if people actually use Kindle on other devices. Very well, do they? Indeed they do. Kindle is the #12 most popular free application on iPad. It’s not as popular as iBooks, but it is still performing strongly on enemy turf. When Kindle came to Android recently, my Android using friends were far more excited than I expected them to be and so forth. Think of it like this: Kindle readers are popular, so are Kindle applications on every other platform. Therefore, how can Kindle lose by making simple, cheap e-readers? They get to have their cake and eat it to, being everywhere at once and only engineering a single time.
Why is Kindle performing so well on the iPad and elsewhere? Kindle is the brand name for e-books, around the world. That brand means that when people buy any device, if they want to read they search for Kindle. On the iPad, the usual suspect in Kindle murder posts, Kindle is the best reading software (so I humbly think). iBooks is pretty but ponderous to use. Until iBooks gets better, it is not even the best app on the device it is designed for.
Finally, if Amazon built a multi-use tablet like we all keep begging for, it would be terrible. The iPad is great, the Android tablets are going to rock, so why fight it? Amazon has no intention of losing those people, see above, but doesn’t want to make crap devices that no one uses. The Kindle device is pretty darn good, so they will continue to dominate that specific market. Apple and the other boys can slug it out on tablets, Amazon sells piles of books to their users, and everyone is happy. Why would Amazon want to fight Jobs at his own game?
To sum up, and this post is running on a bit long, the more Kindles sold the better it goes for Amazon, but the company is doing damn fine on the other platforms. An iPad sold is a potential Kindle customer created, period. iPad sales are good for the Kindle platform, and Amazon should keep doing exactly what they are: building a device for their biggest fans and catering strongly to the needs of casual readers who do not want a dedicated reader.
I certainly agree on the software/content side – I’m mean we’re talking about Amazon here, they had the vision to get this whole show started and they’re still very much at the top. And yeah, I agree that the iPad is the best Kindle. Honestly I think we’re pretty much in agreement on everything except that I think people simply will say – I want everything one device. That said, at $139 Amazon will certainly sell a boatload of these, but I’d bet that one day in the not-to-distant future, those same people will shelve their Kindles and just carry around their tablets.
Oh, and finally…sent from my iPad.
The numbers that I would kill for, are just how many Kindles have been sold, and how many of the new ones are moved. Dead. Curious.
Agreed! Comparing the Kindle to the iPad is like comparing a calculator to a computer – you wouldn’t buy a computer JUST for the built-in calculator; if all you need to do is add and subtract without extra frills attached, you don’t even need a computer. In the same way – if all you need is an eReader, the iPad is definitely not worth the money.
Bravo to Amazon for holding true to their market.
I felt that this article pulled me in one way and then the other, and the bottom line is I’m still confused…what really is the difference between reading Kindle on another device and reading it on a Kindle? If I had Kindle and an iPad, even if I am a voracious reader, which one would I take with me? Or to put it another way…why do I still want a Kindle if the iPad can do Kindle and other things too? Probably I admit, I’d rather use Kindle than iBooks, because Amazon is where I usually look for books, and if Kindle has more available books (because what I really look for is, can I read the book I want to read on this platform?–because maybe I’m not reading only the best of the bestsellers.) So does that mean Kindle on iPad (or Android) is inferior to the original dedicated kindle device? (Note: I have none of these devices because I’m still waiting for that convergence to arrive–because I’m indecisive, and I can’t afford or carry everything.)
agreed
Let me answer your question: Is a single use device horribly myopic? Yes, it is. The single use device is only good for casual multiple uses. They’re the jack of all trades, master of none. Sure my phone can play music, but the interface pales in comparison to my iPod. Sure it can take pictures, but the optics on these things are terrible. They don’t even come close to a cheap point and shoot, much less my DSLR. And as an e-Reader, sure for casual reading when I’m in a pinch waiting in a doctor’s office. But when I really want to sit down and read with no distractions, a dedicated e-Reader with e-ink beats it hands down. You give up a lot in each of these categories for the convenience of portability. And that’s ok, but that’s also the reason why the Kindle doesn’t and shouldn’t compete with any type of multi-function device. It’s not a mutually exclusive decision to purchase a Kindle/Ipad/Smartphone/Desktop computer. They all serve a unique purpose.
Oh, and until battery technology improves dramatically, the single use device is more of a pain than you’re led to believe. Playing MP3s, using the camera, using the GPS to navigate, etc. all put a serious drain on the battery. And by the time you’re done using all these multiple functions and want to sit down and read on the train ride home, you’ll find that your device is out of power.
The Kindle is £109, the iPad is £429.
The iPad has an LCD screen, the Kindle has an eye-friendly e-ink screen (don’t tell me it doesn’t make a difference for reading long-form content because my eyes will disagree every time).
I do most of my reading at home or on holiday, so the added bulk of having the Kindle makes absolutely no difference to me. Another gadget on the table or in the suitcase is no problem.
Battery life on the Kindle with wireless off? Around 3 weeks. All the pundits were raving about the iPad’s 12 hour battery life.
The list goes on. The two devices are *not* comparable in any way shape or form. Both are fantastic, but the Kindle is not a tablet, and the iPad is not a book-replacement.
The Kindle should have done magazines and news. We gave up as publishers after trying to make this work on the greyscale and feature limiting device.