Negative NYT Article compares Kindle Fire to the Edsel

[CyGuy]

Originally Posted by tubemonkey

If the Fire had a card slot, I would've picked up one. Less than 8GB of storage and no way to expand it on a video device is a deal breaker.

X3
Leaving off this must-have item makes it almost worthless, and certainly removes it from the "media player" category.

[elemenoP]

How come the Nook Tablet doesn't get this kind of "It's no ipad" press? Because it doesn't matter enough to get press at all? Or because it doesn't have the problems that the Kindle Fire does? I understand about the card slot and memory, but how about performance? Does it perform better (more responsive to taps, runs video better)?

eP

[jocampo]

Originally Posted by elemenoP

How come the Nook Tablet doesn't get this kind of "It's no ipad" press? Because it doesn't matter enough to get press at all? Or because it doesn't have the problems that the Kindle Fire does? I understand about the card slot and memory, but how about performance? Does it perform better (more responsive to taps, runs video better)?

eP

Yes,

In terms of screen's response and video performance, the Nook Tablet is better. I bought one (although. returned for other reasons) while still having my Fire, you can tell the difference when playing Netflix. I also like the reader a bit better than the stock Kindle Fire reader app. It also has dedicated volume controls which in my opinion, is nice.

The UI, while nicely designed, is still a very locked one. I would say, more lock than the Kindle Fire counterpart.

I guess is making news because is Amazon, you know, a bigger company, plus all the show and promo that Bezos gave to the tablet.

[carld]

The thing is, there's no news here. The article compares an extremely successful product, the Kindle Fire, to a product that didn't sell at all and vanished from the market immediately upon release.

[Grimm]

Honestly who cares about this article? If you have one and you like it, who cares what the New York Slimes has to say about anything? They aren't exactly unbiased in any other category, why should this be any different?

[SteveEisenberg]

Originally Posted by Grimm

They aren't exactly unbiased . . .

The natural bias would be in favor of the Fire because people can subscribe to the New York Times on it.

The article can be interpreted as a bit of a statement that, yes, we can do a hard-hitting profile even on a company and product that sends us a lot of revenue and is crucial to our future. However, it isn't purely negative. It's true that, as the thread title says, the Fire is compared to the Edsel, but the comparison is that the Kindle is more likely to succeed.

Full disclosure is that I am a near-lifelong New York Times reader, and current Kindle New York Times Latest News Blog subscriber.