Apple Says Kindle Fire Is Great For Apple

The Kindle Fire is almost here, and a lot of folks are excited about what they think will be iPad first true challenger. Except that Apple execs say the $US200 Fire might actually benefit the iPad. Holdonwhatnow?

That's the preemptively defensive spiel from Apple CEO Tim Cook and CFO Peter Oppehheimer, according to Barclays analyst Ben Reitzes, who met with both. Their point, according to Reitzes, is that the Fire is an Android device that departs sort of drastically from stock Android. That could mean even more Android fragmentation, and more people driven toward Apple's more stable platform. Translation: Run away from the Android tablet, little developers. Come work in the warm embrace of the Apple mothership. Or, boiled down and transitive properitied around: "Android is bad for Android."

Look, of course Apple's going to say they're not worried about the Kindle Fire. What else are they going to say? And their points do make some sense, in that when you're buying a device you're buying into its whole ecosystem — a whole state of mind, even. But most of the excitement behind the Kindle is mostly that it looks like a good tablet at a price that's darn near impulse-buy territory, and that's still something the iPad can't touch. [Business Insider]


    So the first real iPad competitor is only even in contention because "doesn't suck" and it's cheap? People who settle, isn't Apple's market anyway.

    Its good for apple because they will get to sue someone else....
    come on apple.. why cant you be like microsoft.. and ask for a licence fee instead of locking people out.

      Microsoft don't make hardware. Unless you include the Zune (which was an ipod clone). Don't you think its fiar that if you but thought and effort and money into designing something new, that you get the benefit of it? The benefit to the buyer of coyright protection means there is more variety and creatifity in the products on the market, rather than the current state of coppies of apple stuff that are all the same...

        A few things on this page look like hardware to me...

    So just another android device lining up for fragmentation. Why can't google get its act together and get full software support to all device users? Or is it just a ploy to get people to buy the latest device just to get an OS update? And fandroids say Apple is evil. I wouldn't accept this rubbish if Apple did it.

      You might not fully understand the whole concept of Android. Google gives it away for free so that ANYone can create a device (expensive and as good as iPhone or cheap and as good as a dumbphone) either way Google makes profit from search through the phone and the OEMs make money from sales.
      This also allows people without $600 for a phone to get themselves a respectable and simplified internet phone with apps.
      The only people who lose are the ones who spend a lot of money on a phone without realising what they actually want from it. I like using my phone without any Apple software on my Windows PC so I got a high-end Android and I couldn't be happier. Other people will go for an iPhone because they prefer apple's design or software quirks.
      Fragmentation really isn't a problem for people who know what fragmentation is. High-end Androids get updated (so will the Kindle Fire). Low-end phones and tablets (purchased by people who don't care about software) are sometimes not updated. But either way most consumers get what they wanted.

        Er, LOTS and LOTS of high end Android phones don't get updated. Can you say Xperia?

    I think people are putting far too much credence into the OS. I don't really know anyone of my non-tech friends or colleagues who give a toss. If it works and they can understand it, they'll buy it. I'll guarantee you that the vast majority of Kindle Fire purchasers won't even be aware that it uses Android, just as no-one cares whether their car's touchscreen entertainment/nav screen is powered by MeeGo or Linux or Windoze CE. It simply isn't relevant.

      Agreed. When you jump to the next level of having home gear that all needs to talk (rather than just being a piece meal consumer), and, as a user, you can make that happen (rather then your knowledgable friend)... Then it becomes more relevant. If it is easy (and Amazon will be going as close to lowest common denominator) then... it is easy... Consume away...

        I actually think that only applies to Apple products. Most other manufacturers go out of their way to use existing standards so that their equipment will work seamlessly with other brands. e.g. Imagine a world where your Samsung TV would only work with a Samsung home theatre system and a Samsung DVD player. People would avoid Samsung like the plague but for some reason Apple get away with it time and again and I really can't understand why/how. Its like they hold their customers under some kind of spell or hypnosis or something.

          Apple get away with it because its products are far superior to its competition.

          Sure, people may say the iphone4S is old tech, and that android had the same functions a long time ago, but Apple products work so much, much better than any android phone.

          in my opinion, android will own the market share simply because its available on hundreds, maybe thousands of devices. Apple only has several, but those several are near perfect compared to android.

          they get updates, at least until two successor models are out... mind you, the 3GS is still getting updates like iOS5, yet android devices maybe get 1 or 2, patches on the software...

            "android had the same functions a long time ago, but Apple products work so much, much better than any android phone"

            Bull*#$t, Apple products work differently than Android and depending on your point of view and what you want from your phone they may suit you better.
            The differences between iOS and Android have largely been a matter of taste for at least the last 2 years. I wouldn't trade my Nexus S for a iPhone 4s but this is largely because I like the flexibility of Android not because I am blind to what iOS has to offer.

            "mind you, the 3GS is still getting updates like iOS5" But how well does it actually work? No Siri either which is about the only thing I've seen with iOS5 that isn't catch up to features from other platforms.

              3GS actually works faster and smother with iOS5

            No they aren't. In what way is an iPod Touch superior to a Zune HD? In what way is an iPhone 4S superior to a Galaxy SII? And Apple's computers have never been more than mid-range, yet they used to insist on bespoke monitor plugs and krap like that.

            The fact is that if you do any research into your purchases you will have no trouble finding a better alternative, usually at a cheaper price. The reason Apple do so well is that almost no-one bothers, they just buy the first shiny bauble that attracts their attention.

          Marketing. Apple Store "Geniuses". Telling people what they want, then giving it to them.

          Kinda like a religion, really :--P

            Its funny and sad seeing people praise Apple to no end. EVERY product has flaws (IOS5 batter drain anyone?) nothing is perfect, Iphone's are FAR from perfect, they lack in any significant form of customization and a great many mobile consumers enjoy features such as this. Android platforms are generally (in my experience) for much more tech saavy users.

            As a long time Iphone user (i have owned every model up to 4s) I have found that the platform and proprietary obsession apple has to seriously detract from my enjoyment of the device. Switched to an android based S2 and have to say I enjoy it much more, sure its got its quirks, the media player is rubbish and you have to use a lot of third party applications to do everything you want to do.

            there's my $3.50

            At the end of the day this entire ANDROID/APPLE debate is completely moronic, people should be using the device that best suits THEIR needs, neither platform is better than the other, they are merely different ideological presentations of a technology.

      I agree, that the OS really isn't important, so long as it works. Kindle Fire isn't going to contribute to fragmentation whatsoever, because Amazon is simply using Android as a platform for their own Amazon ecosystem.

      Amazon already has their own online Application store; their own media distribution service and infrastructure; an established hardware presence (which, incidentally, uses Linux as its OS. Not that anybody cares...); and a solid reputation that basically translates to "if it's sold online, you can probably get it (or something like it) from".

      The new range of Kindles (including Fire) plays to existing Kindle strengths and brings all the advantages of Amazon's whole offering to a personal, mobile and affordable device.

      Do. Want.

        That's the perfect illustration - I have no idea at all what OS underlies my Kindle. All I know is that it works (much, much better than I thought it would, actually).

        I'd say it still fragments the experience as developers still have to develop for the device which differs to other Android devices; so the issue is still there. Amazon having their own store doesn't really change that, and if you are a developer it arguably adds to the issue.

        While it's nice in theory that Amazon has its own store, ultimately developers likely won't create Kindle specific versions of their applications so you'll get applications with interfaces that differ to the interface of the OS on the specific device, wasn't tested with the Kindle in mind etc etc. It's also plausable that Amazon will accept app submissions for versions of Android the Fire doesn't yet support since they are also trying to sell the applications to owners of other devices via the standalone Amazon Marketplace.

Join the discussion!

Trending Stories Right Now