Teardown: Inside Amazon's Kindle Fire

11/18/2011 2:47 PM EST

Did you expect much more?

11/19/2011 4:01 PM EST

Personally, I think its brilliant. Also, a healthy round of kudos to TI for a great design win.

12/5/2011 1:30 AM EST

@hm, Amazon is not worried about innovation because it will sell the hardware at very less price, they might sell those tablet's in loss but it will make money by selling the content for those tablets.

11/17/2011 10:52 AM EST

I don't think Amazon's play here has anything to do with making money on the Kindle Fire tablet. It appears that the company has set things up so that it will break even on the sales, maybe make a couple of bucks. But the real motivation here is that Amazon saw what was happening with Apple and feared that as more people got their hands on iPads they would buy more books, music, apps, etc. from Apple. Amazon needed to get into customers' and potential customers' hands a device that would increase the chances that they would buy media directly from Amazon. You can say what you want about the design--I'm sure it's not as elegant as the iPad--but it's a brilliant move because the cost--less than half of an entry level iPad--will entice many a buyer and Amazon will at the very least put a speed bump in iPad's momentum.

11/26/2011 3:35 AM EST

EXACTLY! Except it's doubtful they're making anything at all selling Fires--in fact, it appears they LOSE about $4 on each tablet sold--more if they're sold at a B&M like Best Buy or Target.

11/28/2011 5:23 PM EST

I have an iPad and I buy most of my "books" from Amazon, not Apple.

11/18/2011 2:48 PM EST

cheap,

11/26/2011 3:32 AM EST

iSuppli, who are usually more accurate, did a teardown of an actual Fire and placed BOM at ~$183, with a total cost to manufacture at ~$203, or about $4 OVER retail. Amazon's strategy is to be the Gillette of content and give away tablets to sell content. That's much is obvious, because you can't increase profits by selling more products you're losing money on.

11/17/2011 12:40 PM EST

I'm not sure why you say that. It's a low-cost Android tablet. Yes, customized to make it easy for users to buy ebooks from Amazon, but still a tablet -- not just an eReader.

Personally, for reading books, I prefer the e-ink display of the regular Kindle. But I use a tablet for web browsing, email and general media consumption. For consumers who want just one device for all of that, they will want a tablet rather than a dedicated eReader. And for $199, the Fire is within reach of many more consumers than other tablets, especially the iPad.

11/26/2011 3:39 AM EST

Have you used one? It's not REALLY a tablet, so much as a content consumption device. It brings movies and (better supported) music to the Kindle environment. Its tablet functionality is severely limited. It's a Kindle, not really a tablet.

11/28/2011 5:26 PM EST

Kindle Fire appears to be much like the original iPad is a content consumption device. One of the key principles in the design of iPad 2 is that it be a content creation device as well. So you could say that the Fire is at least one gen behind Apple.

11/18/2011 9:32 AM EST

Another important consideration is that, as a Kindle, this qualifies for the new Lending Library. Frequent readers will easily recoup their investment if they use that feature, and it's not available to those using the free Kindle app. So... that $199 gets you a modestly powered but sufficient-for-many tablet that also has access to free books. I see it as being very appealing to a number of Amazon's customers.

11/19/2011 9:28 PM EST

Ipad is too expensive, simply.

11/18/2011 9:35 AM EST

When everything is in the Cloud, yes. You only need enough to carry you over between WiFi connections. Storage is primarily used for apps, music, and books... and the FIre pulls those over the wire as needed. So... yes, 8GB is more than enough for most people. It's like comparing what you need to pack when you're going to spend a week at your parent's house vs what you need to pack if you're going to spend a week in a cave.

11/18/2011 4:23 PM EST

This is the first capacity reduction I've seen in a product, thanks to the cloud. Stocking for the cloud is going to be very different from stocking for consumer devices. You can market features to a consumer, but to the cloud?

11/19/2011 6:20 PM EST

Does Amazon provide cloud storage for each tablet?

11/19/2011 10:21 PM EST

Yes, I read at Amazon that it was 6 GB. So Amazon is effectively telling users they do not need to handle so much data for their sufficient satisfaction. By projection, they wouldn't even need so much on the cloud.

They should have marketed this as something strictly for kids, especially with the reading emphasis, instead of the average consumer.

11/20/2011 8:34 AM EST

In fact looking at it, it is quite a good strategy. Some people do not need so much space so users can have a choice of purchasing more storage from the cloud.
Amazon can do a lowcost phone for the next move.

11/21/2011 12:10 AM EST

The only value this first Amazon Kindle tablet has for me is to bring up whether more resources should be put in the hands of the consumer or in the cloud. A cheaper consumer device means a more expensive cloud. And since cloud resources need the most advanced cooling, it can never be cost effective.

To be honest, though I have stuff stored on the cloud, I hardly look at them, because of the additional login. Even Facebook photos will pass into oblivion. So I don't think purchasing cloud storage will work, unless maybe it is insured to be highly maintained (better than myself) and guaranteed backup.

But why I won't buy any Amazon screen is I thought general advice was not to stare at a screen for more than a half-hour at a time. That's why paper books will always be healthier.

11/26/2011 3:43 AM EST

Unlimited for content bought from Amazon, 5GB for content you upload. You can buy additional.

11/26/2011 3:41 AM EST

That's further reason not to think of it as a tablet. 8GB is plenty for a KINDLE, since you stream all of Amazon's video and music content to it.

11/18/2011 4:12 AM EST

Actually, laptops that are cheaper than even the Kindle Fire are available right now. The only attraction that a tablet additionally provides is the portability. If one is satisfied with using a laptop (or netbook), then there should be no additional incentive in buying a tablet.

11/18/2011 9:37 AM EST

Don't underestimate the allure of that portability, though. This tablet is one you can stick in a coat pocket and can use on a crowded train. There is nowhere you can use a laptop that you couldn't or wouldn't use this, but there are many places and situations where you could not or would not use a laptop but could use this.

11/20/2011 7:43 PM EST

Okay, I'm convinced. I'll ask for one for Christmas.

11/26/2011 3:46 AM EST

That's pretty misleading. You might find a very low powered netbook for less than $199 ON SALE, you won't find ANY notebooks for that price.

11/18/2011 9:44 AM EST

"...and probably sell your passwords as well." Yes, exactly. I mean, what could Amazon possibly stand to lose by selling passwords? Surely nothing, right? Do you have any proof that https-accessed sites are preloaded anyway?

You can disable the pre-loading if you're paranoid.

11/26/2011 4:32 AM EST

Disabling isn't necessary. SIlk doesn't route https: through Amazon's servers. SSL traffic is directly connected.

11/18/2011 2:55 PM EST

ewwww, barf...

11/26/2011 4:30 AM EST

From Amazon's description of how Silk on the Fire handles SSL:


"What about handling secure (https) connections?

"Amazon Silk routes secure (SSL) web page requests directly from the Kindle Fire to origin servers so they do not pass through AWS servers. As an additional security measure, Amazon Silk encrypts all web traffic between the Kindle Fire and our AWS infrastructure, even where traditional browsers would not encrypt."


NOTE: They "DO NOT PASS THROUGH AWS SERVERS."

Paranoid much?

11/18/2011 9:46 AM EST

I think it's "we're trying to boost ad revenue and hoping you'll accidentally click on one while trying to go from one minimally-commented photo to the next."

11/18/2011 4:14 PM EST

I totally agree with your opinion Mr. Charles.
That's a crucial point that many people have forgotten about...to get everyone to start reading again =]
Cheers,

11/19/2011 4:24 PM EST

Forgive me for chuckling at the notion of servicing tablets in this price range. For a top end iPad with 64GB and 3G at $999, yes, I can see paying to replace the battery when it wears out. But for a $199 tablet like Kindle Fire? I think that in this price range, I think if anything goes bad after the warranty period -- even something as innocuous as a worn-out battery -- you recycle it and buy a new one...by then it will be Kindle Fire 2, which most users of the first version would rather have anyway.

11/20/2011 9:08 AM EST

http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/news/2011/11/dont-hand-it-to-junior-just-yet-kindle-fire-lacks-key-purchase-controls.ars