I did not want a Kindle to replace the experience of reading tactile books when I wrote about it in February 2009. The majority of your comments agreed with me.
Fast forward nearly three years and I still don’t want the thing.
The Kindle Fire is not for me.
Engadget reviews the Kindle Fire with a concise conclusion:
The Kindle Fire is quite an achievement at $200. It’s a perfectly usable tablet that feels good in the hand and has a respectably good looking display up front. Yes, power users will find themselves a little frustrated with what they can and can’t do on the thing without access to the Android Market but, in these carefree days of cloud-based apps ruling the world, increasingly all you need is a good browser. That the Fire has.
When stacked up against other popular tablets, the Fire can’t compete. Its performance is a occasionally sluggish, its interface often clunky, its storage too slight, its functionality a bit restricted and its 7-inch screen too limiting if you were hoping to convert all your paper magazine subscriptions into the digital ones. Other, bigger tablets do it better — usually at two or three times the cost.
So, the Kindle Fire is great value and perhaps the best, tightest integration of digital content acquisition into a mobile device that we’ve yet seen. Instead of having a standalone shopping app the entire tablet is a store — a 7-inch window sold at a cut-rate price through which users can look onto a sea of premium content. It isn’t a perfect experience, but if nothing else it’s a promising look into the future of retail commerce.
I am typing this sentence on an iMac. I also own a smartphone. And, when mobile and wanting something in between, I have a netbook computer. Where would a Kindle, or a Nook, or an iPad even, fit into my world of technology? To replace the netbook? If I go that route, then sure, I’ll consider something. But a tablet as in a book reader? Not for me.