×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Amazon Debuts Kindle Paperwhite, Kindle Fire HD In 2 Sizes

timothy posted about a year and a half ago | from the plus-they-wash-your-back dept.

Handhelds 307

Nerval's Lobster writes "Amazon used a Sept. 6 event in California to debut a range of products, including a front-lit [not back-lit, as originally reported] Kindle e-reader with a higher-resolution screen, an updated Kindle Fire, and the new Kindle Fire HD in two screen sizes. First, Bezos showed off a new version of the Kindle e-reader, the Kindle Paperwhite, complete with a front-lit, higher-resolution screen (221 pixels-per-inch and 25 percent more contrast, according to Amazon). The device weighs 7.5 ounces and is 9.1mm thin; battery life is rated at eight weeks, and the screen brightness is adjustable. He then showed off the updated Kindle Fire, before moving to the Kindle Fire HD, which features a choice of 7-inch or 8.9-inch screens, dual stereo speakers with Dolby Digital Plus, two antennas for better Wi-Fi pickup, and a Texas Instruments OMAP 4470 processor (which Bezos claimed could out-perform the Tegra 3). The Kindle Fire HD's 7-inch version will retail for $199 and ship Sept. 14, while the 8.9-inch version will cost $299 and ship Nov. 20. An 8.9-inch, 4G LTE-enabled version with 32GB storage will be available starting Nov. 20 for $499, paired with a $49.99-a-year data plan."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

307 comments

But it's not the google experience (1, Insightful)

alen (225700) | about a year and a half ago | (#41252001)

I want to feel warm and fuzzy and covered in the goodness of complete googleness

Re:But it's not the google experience (5, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41252177)

I want to feel warm and fuzzy and covered in the goodness of complete googleness

I picked up a Fire as a cheap 'Android' tablet while visiting the US. Once I got it back to the UK, it was pretty hopeless. No Amazon Marketplace over here and the odd hardware profile means most apps turn up their nose at it, even with sideloaded Google Market. I will be looking at the Nexus 7 or similar when I come to replace it. Sorry Amazon, nice try, but your walled garden isn't for me.

Re:But it's not the google experience (0)

cpu6502 (1960974) | about a year and a half ago | (#41252409)

>>>Sorry Amazon, nice try, but your walled garden isn't for me.

One could say the same about the BBC and their "walled garden". Why on earth did you think you could use an amazon tablet outside of its home country? I certainly don't expect to be able to hear/watch BBC outside of the UK.

Re:But it's not the google experience (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41252543)

That is just a bizarre comparison. BBC is paid for by the *government*, Amazon is a private company. I don't see why a Kindle couldn't work perfectly outside the US.

Re:But it's not the google experience (5, Interesting)

Jethro (14165) | about a year and a half ago | (#41252601)

It is absolutely trivial to transform a Kindle Fire into a regular Android tablet. My mom did it. I got a refurb one specifically for that purpose. It is currently running Jelly Bean pretty smoothly.

Re:But it's not the google experience (4, Insightful)

WaywardGeek (1480513) | about a year and a half ago | (#41252795)

Amazon's walled garden is the #1 strength of the Nexus 7. Also, the latest Android is nice. I have the Amazon Kindle app, the B&N Nook app, Google's Play Books app, and of course an audio-book player which is what I use most often. I was wondering what Amazon could offer that would make me wish I had a Kindle Fire HD. Looks like nothing.

On the positive side, the $300 price point for the larger device is eye-opening, though I'm pretty happy with my 7". My family keeps stealing it, and my wife travels with it, even though she has an iPad. The Nexus 7 is simply a better e-book reader than any current iPad.

Re:But it's not the google experience (2)

cpu6502 (1960974) | about a year and a half ago | (#41252307)

Does Google include 10-20 dollar books that can be borrowed for free? Or Fantasy & Science magazine for a mere $12/year? Or e-ink that is easy on the eyes? Or free 3G web surfing? My kindle has all of that.

Re:But it's not the google experience (2)

h4rr4r (612664) | about a year and a half ago | (#41252367)

and a nice horribly slow refresh rate, no games, no netflix, or any other useful application.

Eink is not a tablet replacement.

The crossover (1)

SuperKendall (25149) | about a year and a half ago | (#41252451)

and a nice horribly slow refresh rate, no games, no netflix, or any other useful application.

Not true of the Fire which fixes all of those problems and still gives you the first two things listed (lending and cheap SF).

The eInk kindle cannot replace a tablet, no, it simply makes for a great companion to a tablet...

And if you like the eInk Kindle why would you not start to consider the Fire?

Re:But it's not the google experience (5, Insightful)

dffuller (200455) | about a year and a half ago | (#41252471)

Nor is a tablet a suitable replacement for an Eink reader.

Re:But it's not the google experience (4, Informative)

h4rr4r (612664) | about a year and a half ago | (#41252759)

Actually it is. I use one in that fashion regularly.

Re:But it's not the google experience (0)

RocketRabbit (830691) | about a year and a half ago | (#41252801)

If you want to read in the dark, an e-ink reader is completely useless. I often read in bed for an hour or so, and if I turned on the light my wife would not be very pleased with me.

Aside from this, no e-ink reader has anything even remotely close in function to Goodreader on the iPad. If you are content to digest dime-store novels and such in .epb format (or whatever proprietary formats are used on your e-ink reader of choice) then knock yourself out. Meanwhile, I'm able to do thinks like open huge schematics and zoom into parts with no bullshitting around.

No, a tablet isn't a suitable replacement for an e-ink reader. It totally eclipses them in almost every way.

Question - is your computer monitor e-ink as well? Most folks spend a lot more time staring at the computer monitor than they do their tablets or e-ink readers.

Re:But it's not the google experience (1)

ottothecow (600101) | about a year and a half ago | (#41252519)

no games, no netflix, or any other useful application

I think you are forgetting about the incredibly useful application that millions of e-ink kindle owners are incredibly satisfied. Or do you need all of your entertainment spoonfed to you through a bunch of blinky lights?

Re:But it's not the google experience (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41252597)

lots of apps and amazon instant video which is cheaper than netflix. and it has this cool ability to rent a movie right there that's not in the instant video catalog. unlike netflix

Re:But it's not the google experience (0)

cpu6502 (1960974) | about a year and a half ago | (#41252607)

>>>Eink is not a tablet replacement.

Strawman Argument. Who said it was? (Certainly not me.) I don't want a shitty tablet that has no keyboard. I'd rather have a laptop, but I can't carry that in my pocket can I? I want the kindle with easy-to-read epaper, free web surfing, cheap F&SF magazine, free loans, and only cost me $50.

Re:But it's not the google experience (2)

Bryansix (761547) | about a year and a half ago | (#41252501)

The Kindle app is in the Google Play marketplace. I don't know what this has to do with anything.

Re:But it's not the google experience (5, Interesting)

nospam007 (722110) | about a year and a half ago | (#41252701)

"My kindle has all of that."

Mine too. I own all the models but the touch has a problem in country life.
Each time a fly lands on it, there's a page change, back or forward, depending on the landing zone.
Sometimes the fly also looks-up a word in the dictionary.

Like the multi-user features (4, Interesting)

SuperKendall (25149) | about a year and a half ago | (#41252011)

Kindle has a nice idea of how the device can be used in a family, where the parents can control time spent by kids.

It'll be interesting to see if Apple has anything up and comping to address this same problem, until now they have kind of ignore this.

I think Amazon could do very well with the new Fire, and also the new PaperWhite kindle - that's the first e-ink Kindle that appeals to me, the others were just too low contrast for me. And even iPad owners could easily be enticed to buy a cheaper e-ink Kindle... that could well help cement them as the leader in e-Books (not that they were not already pretty cemented).

Re:Like the multi-user features (3, Insightful)

Robadob (1800074) | about a year and a half ago | (#41252055)

I would have thought, apples plan is that every user in the house owns their own iDevice, rather than sharing them.

Re:Like the multi-user features (3, Interesting)

SuperKendall (25149) | about a year and a half ago | (#41252153)

That probably is Apple's plan. It was easy enough to carry forth when there were no good competitors. But instead of getting each of two kids an iPad, a single Kindle Fire for both is viable... it'll be interesting to see uptake on this vs. Apple's plan, or if Apple decides that in fact they should think about more of a multi-user approach.

Apple is even sort of well positioned to take up multi-user stuff if they want to thanks to iCloud, each kid could have a different iCloud account and the device could easily switch home directories based on the current iCloud user setting. They just don't make that easy to do right now (I think it would re-sync the device every time you switched users).

Indeed, Amazon could probably not have managed this this family thing without the Whispersync stuff in place themselves...

Re:Like the multi-user features (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41252355)

You've met any siblings? If one wants to do something, the other will want to do the same thing, just because the other does it. Time share plan is a good idea in theory... practice on the other hand ... not so much.

Re:Like the multi-user features (2)

SuperKendall (25149) | about a year and a half ago | (#41252401)

That's a great point but it comes up hard against the economic reality of many families not being able to afford an iPad per kid.

I know a number of families that make kids share an iPad, it builds character after all. But with a multi-user approach a brother could not screw with his sisters games.

Re:Like the multi-user features (5, Insightful)

kybred (795293) | about a year and a half ago | (#41252465)

But instead of getting each of two kids an iPad, a single Kindle Fire for both is viable...

I'm guessing that you don't have two (or more) kids. Share is typically not in their vocabulary.

Re:Like the multi-user features (5, Insightful)

RocketRabbit (830691) | about a year and a half ago | (#41252839)

That's because of shitty parenting. Proper parenting results in sharing. Shitty parenting results in kids that are rutted and who simply grow, like a cow or a vegetable. Proper parenting involves raising children so that they understand the concepts of sharing, respect, playing nice, etc.

Re:Like the multi-user features (1)

Beorytis (1014777) | about a year and a half ago | (#41252491)

...the parents can control time spent by kids.

Wow, they can use the device to make sure kids read?

Re:Like the multi-user features (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41252549)

My 4 year old absolutely loves my ipad, and there are many excellent free preschool apps available. He does really well with minecraft. (his favorite thing to play actually). However what I'd like to be able to do is lock out certain apps and settings while he's using it. For example it's simply way too easy to delete entire apps by touch-holding from a home screen and going into "edit" mode. I wonder if the Kindle multiuser support addresses this kind of thing as well.

Re:Like the multi-user features (0, Offtopic)

future assassin (639396) | about a year and a half ago | (#41252683)

>It'll be interesting to see if Apple has anything up and comping to address this same problem

Of course there will be. It'll be an Apple original idea...patented.

Re:Like the multi-user features (1)

andyn (689342) | about a year and a half ago | (#41252841)

Kindle has a nice idea of how the device can be used in a family, where the parents can control time spent by kids.

Yeah, books teach kids revolutionist ideas so it's better to reduce their exposure to any potentially dangerous material.

Price on data plan is suspect (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41252019)

$49.99 a YEAR for data? Uh, what?

Re:Price on data plan is suspect (3, Informative)

alen (225700) | about a year and a half ago | (#41252085)

250MB per month before you have to pay more

Re:Price on data plan is suspect (1)

crazyjj (2598719) | about a year and a half ago | (#41252323)

Hey, that's over 8MB a day. That's right, 8 *Mega*bytes, bitches! And it's "Mega" so you KNOW it's gots to be big! Let's see someone else top THAT!

Re:Price on data plan is suspect (1, Interesting)

clarkkent09 (1104833) | about a year and a half ago | (#41252365)

In other words that's about twice as expensive as $20 for 2GB that I pay to my cell phone company.

nope.jpg (2)

wasabioss (1196799) | about a year and a half ago | (#41252633)

In other words that's about twice as expensive as $20 for 2GB that I pay to my cell phone company.

Your calculation is wrong, but even if your calculation was right, it would certainly not be the case. People don't use up to their limit all the time. $20 for 2GB, $10 for 1GB or $5 for 500MB or $1 for 100MB are certainly not the same plan. I would be super happy to have a $1 for 100MB, pretty upset with $10 for 1GB and feel ripped off with $100 for 10GB.

Not suspect, that was the highlight (2)

SuperKendall (25149) | about a year and a half ago | (#41252223)

They made a big deal in a comparison slide about how the data plan was just $50 for a year of 256mb/month data. I believe that was even global!

That's a pretty impressive arrangement.

I do wonder if it will be undercut a bit by shared data plans the carriers are just starting to offer. Bringing a 4G iPad into a home that already has two iPhones means only $10/month extra device fee... that's still $120 though.

Re:Not suspect, that was the highlight (1)

farble1670 (803356) | about a year and a half ago | (#41252743)

That's a pretty impressive arrangement.

not so much.

on my phone, i use 250MB in 3 days or so. i just checked my nexus 7, and it has used 2GB is a week, and it's sitting idle 90% of the day. if you just left a tablet idle for a month it'd use over 250MB (because of various apps that are performing background data transfers ... like email, IM, weather, news, and other basic things everyone has on their device).

250MB is enough to download e-books and read email occasionally. you are SOL of you have ideas of downloading music or movies or streaming anything or playing online games.

Re:Price on data plan is suspect (1)

Overzeetop (214511) | about a year and a half ago | (#41252271)

That's a winner for me. I use so little data - I just need a little information most of the time. Give this baby a custom interface for an in-dash entertainment system and I'm all over it.

They've done the statistics (1)

ruckerz2k (653900) | about a year and a half ago | (#41252343)

250mb a month is way too low. The telcos are looking to profit on the very high probability of overages charges on this one.

Re:Price on data plan is suspect (1)

fermion (181285) | about a year and a half ago | (#41252443)

This may be for real, and may be a good model. Amazon already pays a blanket fee to distribute books to the kindle. They are probably not marking up what they pay for data very much to the end user. The device is the same price as the iPad, so they appear to be leveraging their bulk data buying to attract consumers.

This will certainly be a good selling point. I have 250MB limit on some of my devices. Given that most of my time is spent in WiFi vicinity, I don't really go over. For most people who are not going to watch movies on the road that will be enough. I do wonder if streaming from amazon is going to be including in the limit, or if they want to push the cloud enough to make it not count against the limit. If Amazon did allow you to stream movies that you bought without penalty, that would be a good reason to buy the kindle.

It is also interesting to compare this strategy against the Google strategy. Amazon has well priced good products with a customized Android interface backed by a cheap data plan and lots of content. The OEMs working with Google to put out chrome books and tablets tend to not have the content, are not leveraging data plans that Google certainly has the power to acquire, and in the end are not selling product. Look at the chromebook lease deals. $30 a month for a computer that will not work without an internet connection, and often does not include mobile connectivity options.

Software Quality (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41252053)

My main question: Will they get the software right? My Kindle Touch has some truly terrible software running it.

Re:Software Quality (1)

squiggleslash (241428) | about a year and a half ago | (#41252333)

Kindle Touch is an entirely different OS, it's not Android based like the Fire range.

My comments, marginally related to yours:

One thing I really like about the Kindle Fires is that Amazon actually has something that Apple and Google do not: a vision for how their devices will be used. Apple and Google are trying to create a "useful touch-based computing device", while Amazon have already said "OK, it's a device for playing games, watching movies, and listening to music, etc." and are working on creating something they consider optimal for that.

While, personally, I suspect if I got a KF HD I'd do the same thing as I did with my existing KF (install Jellybean on it and use it as a normal tablet), it's at least interesting to see what Amazon are trying to do with their stuff.

Re:Software Quality (1)

Cinder6 (894572) | about a year and a half ago | (#41252667)

The only things I dislike about the Kindle Touch software are that it shows books as a list of titles rather than cover art, and it doesn't show you how much left you have in a chapter (oddly, the non-Touch Kindle does show you this data). The first looks like it might be remedied, at least from screenshots, and in the presentation today, Bezos said that the Paperwhite tells you how much time you have left in your current chapter. Yes, time, not pages or "locations" or percentage. It tracks your reading speed. Pretty neat.

I'm preordering the thing as soon as it goes up. I'd hoped the release would be today (in a perfect, pipe dream sort of world) or at the most a week out. The wait until October will be agonizing.

I have a Nook Simple Touch with GlowLight and, while I like the thing well enough, the contrast is low compared to similar Kindles (due to the anti-reflective film on it) and Amazon has far superior syncing capabilities than BN. But most of all, not all books on the Nook allow you to change fonts, and you're stuck with the default font that I despise. Couple that with awkward formatting, and it's a real irritation. I could live with the other issues, but that's a deal-breaker.

Amazon also has me considering keeping my Audible.com subscription, which I'd planned on canceling this month. It syncs up with your ebook location, so you can read, then listen at where you stopped, or vice versa (or even listen while reading, like those proctors want you to do during standardized tests in high school). Now, if an Audible purchase automatically conferred an ebook download, I'd definitely keep it. But if I have to buy the same book twice, I'm not sure it's worth it.

Paper White!! Wait, what? (0)

DeTech (2589785) | about a year and a half ago | (#41252069)

I saw paperwhite and was hoping this was a resurgence for E-Ink. Sadly no, it's not.

Re:Paper White!! Wait, what? (1)

BorgDrone (64343) | about a year and a half ago | (#41252143)

Was e-ink ever gone ? No LCD beats it for long reading sessions.

I'm actually looking forward to that illuminated display.

Re:Paper White!! Wait, what? (3, Interesting)

SuperKendall (25149) | about a year and a half ago | (#41252315)

Was e-ink ever gone ? No LCD beats it for long reading sessions.

I didn't find that to be the case for previous e-ink kindles, the lower contrast was like looking at dirty paper and bothered me enough I preferred LCD's for hours of reading.

The new Paperwhite display looks like a winner to me though, finally realizing the full potential of electronic paper along with a great lighting solution. I think it could be the first e-ink I really do find preferable to an LCD, and it has a decent PPI for rendering text.

Re:Paper White!! Wait, what? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41252145)

What are you talking about? It IS E-ink. There's just a built in light that you can either use or not use.

Are you sure it's not e-ink? (1)

SuperKendall (25149) | about a year and a half ago | (#41252181)

I thought it was e-ink with a special kind of backlighting.

But I can't really tell from the story link, it doesn't say lcd or e-ink...

Re:Are you sure it's not e-ink? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41252219)

Of course it is e-ink. Damn thing has an 8-week battery life.

Base line kindles have always been e-ink

Great point (1)

SuperKendall (25149) | about a year and a half ago | (#41252261)

Now I remember why I thought it was e-ink.

The backlighting is not like LCD backlighting. It looked really interesting from the displays, and they claimed it was just like having ambient light on a page.

Re:Are you sure it's not e-ink? (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41252241)

it's e-ink with a "fiber optic" layer that lights from above.

Re:Paper White!! Wait, what? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41252251)

It *is* e-ink, what do you mean?

Re:Paper White!! Wait, what? (1)

aliquis (678370) | about a year and a half ago | (#41252267)

It's not a higher res somewhat higher contrast e-ink kindle?

I thought it was. Why don't you? Are you misunderstanding anything? Am I?

Surely it's a regular 6 inch Kindle? Just better?

Re:Paper White!! Wait, what? (1)

Kinwolf (945345) | about a year and a half ago | (#41252349)

It is e-ink, with a frontlight. The summary is wrong in saying backlight.

Re:Paper White!! Wait, what? (1)

DeTech (2589785) | about a year and a half ago | (#41252807)

Yup definitely e-ink, thank you confusing article... Let's not mention the most distinguish feature of the display and just start spooging numbers like apple owns this joint.

Re:Paper White!! Wait, what? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41252509)

I read it as paper weight, which is probably exactly what happens if you try to root it.

kindle color would have been nice (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41252077)

color kindle screen where art thou

Poop (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41252093)

Mike Bezos is penis-length-impaired.

Great (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41252131)

Now if Amazon could only stop telling me they have a book only to inform me two weeks later that they don't have it, I'd be even more happy.

Backlit?! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41252151)

Backlit means that it's not e-Ink, which means IT'S NOT AN E-READER. God damn it, Amazon, I trusted you! Give me a real Kindle, not a series of iPad/Nexus knockoffs!

Re:Backlit?! (3, Informative)

Pahroza (24427) | about a year and a half ago | (#41252193)

It's NOT BACKLIT. Submitter wasn't paying attention. It's an illuminated display, you can turn it off.

Re:Backlit?! (1)

SilverJets (131916) | about a year and a half ago | (#41252423)

Article claims backlit as well.
"But first, Bezos showed off a new version of the Kindle e-reader, the Kindle Paperwhite, complete with a backlit, higher-resolution screen (221 pixels-per-inch and 25 percent more contrast, according to Amazon). "

Has anyone on Slashdot actually seen one? Is it front-lit or back-lit?

Re:Backlit?! (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41252681)

I watched the live presentation. It is a front lit display using a new technology to light the front of the display using nanoimprinted light channels in the glass. It acts like ambient light but it is not a backlight in any way shape or form. It also claims 8 weeks of battery life with the light on. I guess the closest thing you could call it is redirected side lighting? The live blog from gizmodo has a picture of the tech as it was show on the bigscreen. http://live.gizmodo.com/page5.html.

Re:Backlit?! (1)

Dr_Barnowl (709838) | about a year and a half ago | (#41252255)

I always thought you could do backlit e-ink by making the white component flourescent and providing a UV LED backlight ; I wonder if that's how it works.

Re:Backlit?! (1)

binarylarry (1338699) | about a year and a half ago | (#41252303)

The Kindle Fire was the original successful 7" android tablet.

Apple is going to be releasing their Fire knock off soon and the nexus came out a few months ago.

8 weeks instead of 2 months battery? (1)

cpu6502 (1960974) | about a year and a half ago | (#41252225)

Interesting change in wording. That means 56 days of reading 1-hour per day instead of 62 days. Meanwhile Barnes advertises "over 2 months" for their nooks.

Also the 4G version probably won't have free web surfing (like the kindle keyboard has).

Re:8 weeks instead of 2 months battery? (5, Informative)

oji-sama (1151023) | about a year and a half ago | (#41252419)

Interesting change in wording. That means 56 days of reading 1-hour per day instead of 62 days. Meanwhile Barnes advertises "over 2 months" for their nooks.

Are you quite sure?

Barnes on Nook Glowlight:
Read for over 1 month on a single charge with GlowLight on (based on a half hour of daily reading time)1 Read for over 2 months with GlowLight off (based on a half hour of daily reading time)1

Amazon on Kindle Paperwhite:
"So we worked on our power management — Kindle paperwhite can get eight weeks of battery life even with the light on.

Re:8 weeks instead of 2 months battery? (1)

Kinwolf (945345) | about a year and a half ago | (#41252599)

That's one thing I love about the Kindle line, they always had incredible battery life. It's only major con is lack of native Epub support.

Re:8 weeks instead of 2 months battery? (1)

cpu6502 (1960974) | about a year and a half ago | (#41252675)

Thanks for the correction. :-) Sounds like amazon's glowing ebook lasts about 3 weeks longer than the Nook Glow. Ya know..... it would be simpler for customers if they just used "hours":

"The Glow last over 30 hours with glowlight; over 60 hours without glowlight." - "Amazon Paperwhite lasts 56 hours even with the light..... almost double that without."

Re:8 weeks instead of 2 months battery? (1)

oji-sama (1151023) | about a year and a half ago | (#41252765)

Ya know..... it would be simpler for customers if they just used "hours":

"The Glow last over 30 hours with glowlight; over 60 hours without glowlight." - "Amazon Paperwhite lasts 56 hours even with the light..... almost double that without."

It would be simpler for us, but I believe that for most customers that half an hour a day value (I hope they at least have the same daily amount) does give a better estimate on how long they can actually use the device without recharging ^.^ Actually, a value over 20 hours is all I would need...

Re:8 weeks instead of 2 months battery? (1)

c++0xFF (1758032) | about a year and a half ago | (#41252855)

Also, Bezos says it's 2 months with the light turned on. Which is quite simply amazing, and much more than what B&N advertises.

Backlit? Frontlit? (2)

Overzeetop (214511) | about a year and a half ago | (#41252243)

I think the terms you are looking for are frontlit and thick. Still, I'm a bit disappointed that the DX is such an ugly stepchild. Certainly there's a market for a reasonably priced larger format e-reader.

I'm thinking about returning my recently acquired kindle gen 4 since I may not get to use it much in the next month, and a built in light is a major feature.

$49/year plan has 250MB data cap (0)

crazyjj (2598719) | about a year and a half ago | (#41252265)

Just thought I should add that the $49/yr plan has the same 250MB/month data cap that they've already put into place for existing Kindle 3G's. So don't go thinking that $49 is going to get you much.

Re:$49/year plan has 250MB data cap (1)

cpu6502 (1960974) | about a year and a half ago | (#41252535)

>>>250MB/month data cap

Only applies when you're outside the U.S. While I'm inside the states I surf on my kindle keyboard 3G as much as I want..... reading facebook, ebay, wikipedia, etc.

All this technology... (1)

JThaddeus (531998) | about a year and a half ago | (#41252295)

...and computing sales tax on a state-by-state business is too difficult for them. Bah!

Re:All this technology... (4, Insightful)

h4rr4r (612664) | about a year and a half ago | (#41252347)

Sales tax is not state by state, it is county by county or in some states town by town.

I have been involved in projects to do this and it is a huge PITA. State sales tax is easy, town or county are hard since zip codes and other such normal address data do not tell you if they are within a town/county or not.

Shut Your Filthy Whore Mouth (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41252603)

We're not interested in paying additional sales tax.

We want government spending to be cut and cheap stuff from Amazon. So, shut your filthy whore mouth.

Re:All this technology... (1)

cpu6502 (1960974) | about a year and a half ago | (#41252733)

>>>computing sales tax on a state-by-state business is too difficult for them

Actually Amazon collects use* tax in ~10 different states, so you're hitting them without reason. Weird observation though: They only charge me 1.5% instead of the full 6%. Guess the computation IS difficult after all.

*
*It's called a "use" tax not a sales tax when the product originates from a non-resident seller. And it only applies to Amazon not the private sellers.

I first read that as.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41252311)

the Kindle "Paperweight" =P

WAY too little too late. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41252373)

The iPhone 5 and the mini iPad are going to eat lamedroid's lunch. So long, all you lamedrod zealots! At least you wont be alone, you can comisserate with all the freetards who still think linsux is worth anything. LOL.

Think different.
Think BETTER.
Think Apple!

Re:WAY too little too late. (1)

Bryansix (761547) | about a year and a half ago | (#41252551)

Why would I give up one walled garden to go to another? With Android you have choice. With iWhatever you have the current Generation and the old Generation. I want choice.

OMAP 4470 can't do shit (2)

bluefoxlucid (723572) | about a year and a half ago | (#41252411)

OMAP 4470 "Can outperform the Tegra 3"? The Tegra 3 has 1.2-1.7 GHz QUAD CORE ARM Cortex-A9 application-optimized cores with NEON. The OMAP 4470 has 1.5-1.8GHz DUAL CORE ARM Cortex-A9 application optimized cores with NEON. You know that means the slowest Tegra has 1/3 more processing power available than the fastest OMAP 4470, and its single-core speed is 2/3 that of the OMAP? If you went with the Tegra 3 T33 used in the Asus T700 at 1.7GHz, you'd have 95% of the single core speed and 90% more total processing power available.

There is no way you can outperform the Tegra 3.

Re:OMAP 4470 can't do shit (1)

msauve (701917) | about a year and a half ago | (#41252553)

You don't understand systems, do you?

Re:OMAP 4470 can't do shit (1)

bluefoxlucid (723572) | about a year and a half ago | (#41252843)

I understand that both of these things use the same processor core design, and that they're within 5% of each other in terms of raw single core speed, and that one of these has twice as many cores available and so if you ever DO peg the system with a couple threads or have it under enough continuous load that you might have to wait a moment to halt a process and state save and context switch out to the interrupt handler and new process (i.e. screen draw, etc) that you won't get lag and jerky responsiveness.

Of course a modern phone currently won't load an OMAP 4470 enough for this to be an issue. But really, they're the same thing, just one at its highest tier clocks its execution unit 100MHz slower than the other, and the other at its highest tier has the ability to concurrently run only half as many execution threads. The half as many threads thing is the bigger of the two. FFS they're SOC with integrated memory controllers and north bridges and such, everything is right there, they're both well-tuned systems.

This is like saying a dual core 3.0GHz Core i3 Intel outperforms a 2.8GHz Core i5 Intel. It's a dumb statement from the more-gigahertz crowd who measure everything by FPS in Doom 3 and think 100MHz is massive.

Re:OMAP 4470 can't do shit (2)

Bryansix (761547) | about a year and a half ago | (#41252577)

I know its 2012 and all but not everything is multi-threaded for quad core optimization. The faster clockrate may in fact yield better results in some cases.

Re:OMAP 4470 can't do shit (1)

bluefoxlucid (723572) | about a year and a half ago | (#41252693)

Yes but in this case the nominal clockrates are the same and the fastest clockrates are a whopping 5% away from each other at 100MHz distance. If you have a single task keeping your processor pegged above 95% for any appreciable time (a few mS for an interactive task like drawing the screen), you have other problems or you're doing a batch task that should only take a few seconds anyway.

The fact of the matter is having 4 cores helps when your phone is your media player and you want the OS to be able to do housekeeping in the background, respond quickly to user inputs, keep the screen updated, continue animating that live wallpaper, get your e-mail, download a text message, etc. Hell, watching video is insane because you have to de-encapsulate the video (i.e. out of the OGG/AVI/Matroska container) and then simultaneously decode audio and video in real-time (called Demuxing). If you tap the screen and have to wait 40mS for free processing power instead of 1mS, the phone lags ever so slightly and you say it's "a little jerky". You can no longer smoothly slide the system bar open from the top.

Between the two, 5% CPU power isn't going to make a damn bit of difference and 2 extra cores is going to make your phone way more responsive if it ever does happen to be loaded in a way that makes that 5% suddenly important.

Steve jobs would never have allowed this (3, Funny)

alen (225700) | about a year and a half ago | (#41252447)

Steve jobs would never have allowed this to happen

He would have had bezos killed by his secret ninja assassins a long time ago

Re:Steve jobs would never have allowed this (1)

PolygamousRanchKid (1290638) | about a year and a half ago | (#41252823)

He would have had bezos killed by his secret ninja assassins a long time ago

No, Apple would have sued Amazon, because they have a patent on the shape of Jeff Bezos' head.

Hardware good, software not so much (1)

JDG1980 (2438906) | about a year and a half ago | (#41252461)

The hardware seems good for the price, but I'm not at all thrilled with Amazon's custom software. The Kindle Fire HD might be a good deal if they get CyanogenMod working on it. A resolution of 1920x1080 on a 8.9-inch tablet doesn't quite match Apple's 10" @ 2048x1536, but it comes pretty close and is $200 cheaper. Strangely, no articles seem to say what the resolution will be on the smaller 7-inch Kindle Fire HD.

Re:Hardware good, software not so much (1)

ThatsMyNick (2004126) | about a year and a half ago | (#41252525)

HD usually means 1920x1080. Unless they got the naming wrong (and get sued for misleading advertising), the 7" should be 1920x1800 too.

Re:Hardware good, software not so much (1)

cpu6502 (1960974) | about a year and a half ago | (#41252829)

>>>A resolution of 1920x1080 on a 8.9-inch tablet doesn't quite match Apple's 10" @ 2048x1536

The Kindle Fire is designed to consume Amazon product: Books, music, and video. It does not need to be higher than their highest-res product (1920x1080 video).

HD? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41252627)

They rename it HD and noone has thought to list the new screen's resolution? Is it HD or not?

No page turn buttons :( (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about a year and a half ago | (#41252695)

Why why why Amazon? Pretty much everything about the new Kindle sounds great except for the lack of page turn buttons. I'm still using my 3rd generation Kindle and I'd love to upgrade it to a higher contrast screen with built in lighting, but touchscreen-only navigation is a killer. It makes one handed reading more difficult and uncomfortable, will cause screen smudges, and will be nearly impossible to operate with gloves.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...