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.
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.
Amazon entered into tablet market that also seems with a lowest profit. Will he be able to provide free services efficiently during the warranty period? Are their plans are strong enough to service tablets after warranty period? we need to watch the future.
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?