I’m getting a Kindle Fire for Christmas. The thing is, I want an Ipad 2 eventually, as well.
My friend, however, cannot understand why I need both. He insists that there is no difference between an iPad 2 and a Kindle. He asked me to name the differences.
And me…well, I couldn’t. I didn’t know what the difference between the two of them were myself. I know there must be differences, though, due to an iPad costing about 400 more dollars than the Kindle Fire.
Anyone want to shed some light on the subject for me?
The Kindle Fire looks like it would be more aptly grouped with the swathe of other Android tablet devices out there - none of which can really be reasonably described as having ‘no difference’ to an iPad 2.
One important difference appears to be the way the browser works - that is, the Kindle Fire is different from the iPad and most/all other tablets in thisregard:
I have an iPad 1 and a Kindle Fire. My mother has an iPad 2 that I’ve used quite extensively.
They are Apples and Oranges.
The Kindle:
is first and foremost, a reader. It is optimized for reading books - when you boot it up, the home screen shows your latest books/magazines. It has a lot of controls around changing font size, screen brightness, and finding/buying new books.
is pretty good at showing videos from Amazon, YouTube, and Netflix.
is an OK web browser. The small size makes many web sites hard to read. You can zoom them, but then you get into a pan-and-scan kind of thing.
does not have standard tablet features, like a built-in calendar app, a camera, Bluetooth, or GPS. It has an email client, but it’s a bit clunky.
does not support all Android apps. You can’t, for example, use alternative keyboards like Swype.
The iPad
is first and foremost a Web-access device. Most websites look great on it.
has built-in functionality for email, calendars, photo taking/viewing
can be used to read books, but the large size of the device makes it awkward
supports tons and tons of iPhone/iPad apps
is a general purpose device in a way that the Kindle is not.
supports external devices like Bluetooth speakers
I like both devices, and will probably continue to have both. They’re just two different things, both good at their own strengths.
The Fire has no iTunes, no Apple App store, much smaller third party ‘ecosystem’ for add-ons, accessories, etc and I believe has a shorter battery life (not 100% sure about that one).
I’ve looked at both. We have two original iPads and are considering an upgrade (if only to get our back from the kids or to at least let them borrow the originals permanently).
The main issue working against me switching from the iPad system to the Fire is iTunes. We have a godawful amount of GB of stuff purchased from iTunes (movies, tv shows, books, apps and so forth) that wouldn’t port over to the new system. That’s a significant barrier to switching.
That’s not what I asked, since I quoted someone mentioning the Fire accessing those things. I asked if an iPad can access Amazon visual media for Prime members.
If you are an Amazon Prime member you can access books, audio and videos via Fire, a PC, Mac or even your TV. Amazon does not explicitly state access via an iPad.
Ah - it looks like Amazon does not have a VOD app for iOS. However, you can access it via PlayOn (a subscription-based program you install on your home computer) while you’re on your home network. That’s not a perfect solution, obviously.
On the other hand, reading magazines and PDFs is much easier on the iPad thanks to the extra real estate. I particularly like the magazine experience (Zinio and Newsstand publications specifically) on the iPad and found the same type of reading to be a bit grim on the Fire in the limited amount of time I had to play with it.
Magazines are grim on the Fire, I agree. But I differ from you in that I think they’re grim on the iPad as well. I despise any magazine that’s simply a scan of the paper version, which is what Zinio was last time I looked, and it’s what Amazon sells as well. Totally stupid IMO.
National Geo does have an iPad app for their magazine, and they format it for the iPad. I really like that, and hope to see more magazines doing it that way soon.
The iPad is not a full-on computer on it’s own, but could be seen as a hand-held extension of a Mac.
The Fire OTOH is a full-color e-reader that does tablet-like stuff. At it’s heart it is basically a dedicated handheld gateway to Amazon and all the wonders contained within (that you can buy).
To me, the Fire isn’t nearly as intuitive as the iPad. I’m not sure how I’d use an iPad, but I REALLY don’t know what I’d do with the Fire - it’s a crappy e-reader compared to the e-ink Kindle, although I hear it does video well.
I’ve had a Kindle from the very first release, and I still have my Kindle 2 (and don’t plan on giving it up. Sometimes I want to read outside in the sun.)
So given that I have both the Fire and the e-ink Kindle (and, for what it’s worth, a Kindle Touch that I bought to evaluate but is going to be returned pretty soon), and can read on whichever one I want, I find myself grabbing the Fire more often than the old Kindle. Here’s why:
Turning pages is much faster. The eInk version is fookin’ slow at turning pages. Sometimes I want to go back 5 pages and double check something, and that was painful on the older Kindle. For what it’s worth, the Kindle Touch (the latest eInk Kindle) is even SLOWER than my Gen 2 Kindle at turning pages. The animation is smoother, but it takes longer.
Looking up definitions of words and reading annotations is WAY faster. I rarely even do this on my eInk Kindle because it’s so slow. Which was very annoying when it came to annotation; I often want to read those, but not so much that I wanted to wait for the old Kindle to show them, the go back to the page. The Fire does this quickly and well.
Doing quick web searches from books. I read biographies and histories a lot, and I’ve often found myself thinking “Croatia… where is it exactly? Can I see a map?” or “Boy, I’d like to see a picture of this historical figure.” With the Fire, I can highlight a word or name, and easily and quickly do a web search on it. Read the website, hit back, and I’m back reading my book. I like that a LOT. The Kindle Touch/Gen 2 don’t even have this function as an option.
The Fire shows the front of the book I’m reading. Maybe I’m in the minority, but I really, really like seeing the cover. I tend to remember books more when I can say “Oh yeah, that was the one with the red cover” or whatever.
About the only things I can think of that the eInk versions do that I like better than the Fire is that the screen itself is a bit easier on the eyes, and you can read it outside. One caveat: the Touch’s screen is VERY dark. Like black words on a grey background. Not sure why they did that, the Gen 2 is much brighter - black words on an off-white screen. Oh, one more thing, the eInk versions are nice & light, too, easier to hold in one hand. But the Fire isn’t so awkward or heavy that it’s a problem.
So, my verdict is: I like the Fire the best of all the Kindle readers. And I’m a reader, it’s not like I only pick up one book every couple weeks or something. I read anywhere between an hour and 3-4 hours/day (when I can… I don’t often have the time for that but I wish!), so I can honestly say I’ve used them all quite a bit.
