Originally Posted by afv011
The Nook Color was ahead of the curve, I don't think there's any doubt there. They had about 1 year of free reign while Amazon scrambled to come out with something that could compete with the Color. There were other tablets out there, but there were more expensive, the Color was the right tablet at the right time, but BN didn't follow through, the Nook Tablet was a poor update to the Color, and the locked down store was another bad decision.
But since Amazon sold more Fires in one week than Nook sold NCs in that whole year (25-35k) that lead wasn't all that significant.
Of course, one could also argue that Nook was just copying Pandigital in selling underpowered Android tablets as ebook readers. (And at its peak Pandigital sold a lot more than 35k units per year.)
A more realistic assessment of Nook hardware performance would be to say they have spent most of their 5 years in the business behind the curve and made some misguided/ill-timed efforts to leapfrog Amazon that have produced mixed results; usually getting more headlines than sales.
Note that they came to market two years after Kindle, almost missing the 2009 holiday season with their late november launch and losing a lot of sales because of the buggy software. Then they were almost a year behind in Pearl screen deployment and kept launching new product in the spring instead of the fall, with most other reader and tablet products, which meant their 6 month "old" readers kept going up against "new and improved" during the critical holiday shopping season. Which is how they ended up with the crippling ST "underperformance".
The hardware per se was rarely at fault but the way it was managed showed a lack of understanding of the business that kept it from selling as well as it should've. And the story on the ebook side was no better.