Consumer Reports give Kindle Fire HD an excellent review.

[sirmaru]

See this link for the Consumer Reports review of the Amazon Kindle HD:

http://www.wptv.com/dpp/news/nationa...ew-kindle-fire

""The Amazon Kindle Fire HD may not meet the company's goal of creating 'the best tablet at any price,' our tests suggest. But it's a fine performer that improves markedly on the first-generation Fire," reads the site's review

It is a vast improvement over the Kindle Fire 1st Generation but not quite up to an iPad yet. Its supposed to have 8 hours of battery life before a recharge.

[grvthang]

I've had the original Fire since day 1 of its release. I got to fool around with a friend's Fire HD at length the other day.

Overall, the HD is definitely quicker and sharper-looking than the original. But it's not enough to make me run out and buy one (although but I'm not the type that has to have the latest greatest thing).

[robertc88]

Trading in the original made it an easy decision for me.

[WillysJeepMan]

Originally Posted by robertc88

Trading in the original made it an easy decision for me.

Same here. I hate stockpiling gadgets. When I buy something to scratch that periodic gadget itch, I like to trade stuff in or give it away.

[Blossom]

Originally Posted by WillysJeepMan

Same here. I hate stockpiling gadgets. When I buy something to scratch that periodic gadget itch, I like to trade stuff in or give it away.

Hubby will get the KF1 so we'll all be happy.

[WillysJeepMan]

Originally Posted by Blossom

Hubby will get the KF1 so we'll all be happy.

Ah, the old "hardware food chain"... i love it!

[wizwor]

Originally Posted by sirmaru

See this link for the Consumer Reports review of the Amazon Kindle HD:

http://www.wptv.com/dpp/news/nationa...ew-kindle-fire

""The Amazon Kindle Fire HD may not meet the company's goal of creating 'the best tablet at any price,' our tests suggest. But it's a fine performer that improves markedly on the first-generation Fire," reads the site's review

It is a vast improvement over the Kindle Fire 1st Generation but not quite up to an iPad yet. Its supposed to have 8 hours of battery life before a recharge.

Again, I'm asked to accept as credible a review by someone who could not discern that Bezos was referring to the as yet unreleased 4g fire as the best tablet at any price. LMAO.

[SteveEisenberg]

From the OP link:

Its supposed to have 8 hours of battery life before a recharge.

Supposed to have? Isn't Consumer Reports supposed to test to see if vendor claims are true?

Perhaps they feel under pressure from criticism that their reviews are out of date. I would rather they take the time to be thorough.

Consumer Reports tested the 7-inch Fire HD, which is the same size as the current Kindle Fire and is scheduled to ship on Friday.

Then where did they get the unit from?

If from Amazon, it's a hand-picked unit and the review is tainted. The current example of how hand-picked units make a difference is the Kindle Paperwhite, which is getting rave reviews from tech journalists despite many here finding their units have uneven lighting.

[~Kate]

Originally Posted by grvthang

I've had the original Fire since day 1 of its release. I got to fool around with a friend's Fire HD at length the other day.

Overall, the HD is definitely quicker and sharper-looking than the original. But it's not enough to make me run out and buy one (although but I'm not the type that has to have the latest greatest thing).

Same here.

[tomsem]

I think the 'best tablet at any price' quote was in reference to the 8.9" Fire HD, not the 7" one. And we haven't seen that one yet.

[jsh1120]

Originally Posted by tomsem

I think the 'best tablet at any price' quote was in reference to the 8.9" Fire HD, not the 7" one. And we haven't seen that one yet.

You're correct. Bezos was talking about the 8.9" model. One can argue that that claim is faulty but the great echo chamber among tech journalists suggests that few of them were actually taking notes, much less paying attention, in the original presentation.

[andrys]

Originally Posted by jsh1120

You're correct. Bezos was talking about the 8.9" model. One can argue that that claim is faulty but the great echo chamber among tech journalists suggests that few of them were actually taking notes, much less paying attention, in the original presentation.

jsh1120, Agreed 100% I wrote a fairly long article about exactly that, re TheThree and how Reuters and other syndicated compilers have chosen to just quote THEIR odd focus on the 7" $199 model NOT being "the best" and writing paragraph after paragraph showing how the $499 iPad 3 is better. Pogue/Mossberg/CR (though CR is fair).

I see how those not paying attention (or maybe not even there) got it mixed up though if reading or hearing a phrase jump out at them and not analyzing it in context.
Since when would the $199 model of a LINE that goes to $599 be "The Best Tablet" of the bunch or any bunch.
By the time anything comes out these days it won't be the best anyway :-)

However, I found a bunch of more-serious reviews that went into detail on specifics and compared the Kindle Fire to the Google Nexus 7", and it's illuminating what some found about the WiFi capabilities.

Superficial 'webpage loading' "tests" were done by two of TheThree despite the WiFi descriptions during the 9/6 announcements being about streaming of fat-file HD files and the 'buffering' that can often occur during them.

There are tests by other reviewers of how far in a building or home the WiFi picked up a strong enough signal vs other devices...

That's at http://kindleworld.blogspot.com/2012...t-goal-of.html

English blog-entry title:
Jeff Bezos: What was that about the goal of "The best tablet" ? - Less-seen reviews of Kindle Fire HD - Comparisons with Google Nexus