Amazon.com criticising new iPad on homepage

http://www.amazon.com/?iPad

by dutchbrit • 14 years ago

205 198 14 years ago

duiker101• 14 years ago

I believe that what Gizmodo says is actually true and something that Apple "forgot" to mention when comparing(highlight the "good" things while omitting all the other things) the Nexus 7 with their new iPad so I do not blame Amazon for pointing it out to a wider public. If Apple wants to play this game, they must be ready to get fought back.

EDIT: also, I still have no idea why isn't that thing Retina. I mean, they have putted it on everything, iPhone, iPad and Air, why not this? the Retina might be still the only great feature of iDevices and they have removed it? Why ? to put it in the next model to double the sales? To make it cheaper? It is not. This things make me really dislike Apple.

mbesto• 14 years ago

I suspect Mini "2" will have Retina.

axx6• 14 years ago

yeah, so all the idiots ran to the next apple store to replace their one year old iPad mini FINALLY!!11 with a Retina one. I HUGE INNOVATION IN DISPLAY TECHNOLOGY!

I was an Apple "Fanboy" for years, and all my computers are macs, but from time to time i get the feeling i need to switch to Unix or something else...

smackfu6• 14 years ago

OTOH, if you use the iPad as a model, that would mean it gets slower and thicker and heavier. Which was kind of OK in the iPad but probably wouldn't fly with the iPad mini.

polshaw2• 14 years ago

> Why ? to put it in the next model to double the sales?

Yes, apple has a long history of only releasing the stuff it needs to (arguably favouring stuff like battery life over these features-- iPhone without 3G, 4S with no LTE, etc), and then release an 'amazing' new version later. All the retina items (which doesn't include MBA, fyi), all had a non-retina alternative on launch, too.

> To make it cheaper? It is not.

It is. For apple. There was no way they were going to compete on price in the 7" space. I'm confident the margins on the mini are no better than those on the regular one, too.

moystard• 14 years ago

Apple are known to take much bigger margins than competitors on their hardware. The reason has actually been given by Jeff Bezos during the Kindle HD announcement: Amazon wants to sell their ecosystem, their ebooks, movies and music; the hardware is only a gateway to allow users to buy from their store. Apple makes money on hardware itself and needs a bigger cut (even if they have an ecosystem on their own, much bigger that is in some domains).

jws4• 14 years ago

Best two reasons for not being retina:

• panel availability at volume and price

• power availability. Retina means about four times the power draw for rendering.

Both of these will improve with time. Eventually retina will come.

DannyBee• 14 years ago

Do you have any actual data to back up the second point? Don't get me wrong, I understand the fill rates necessary, but i keep hearing this with no real data.

After spending the past 6-8 months working with all sorts of embedded GPU's (mainly as an HTPC hobby on embedded boards), I kinda have serious doubts that the power usage is the factor here, and would like to see real data, not assumptions.

You are assuming that higher resolution requires linear scaling of number of cores/shaders/etc, and thus, 4 times the power. If it's displaying using 3D, it's definitely not true (it requires linear scaling of some hardware, but not all hardware, and thus, power usage is not necessarily going to be 4x).

On the 2D side, 2D cores have been so fast for the past "whatever" that it's not clear it would require any more power than normal.

In fact, the only articles i can find that did any real testing show the power usage is only increased about 30% (overall, including both panel and GPU) on a full sized laptop. Their methodology seemed very suspect, so I don't want to quote them here, just point out that there is some alternative claims.

I'm not trying to pick on you in particular, it just seems the common refrain for why the ipad mini is not retina, and i haven't seen a single shred of evidence to back it up.

rahoulb• 14 years ago

Re: Retina display ...

I would guess it's battery. My iPad 3 is heavy yet the battery life is significantly lower than my iPad 1 (and it takes ages to charge).

robmcm2• 14 years ago

Mare sure you are using the supplied 2Amp charger, if you use an iPhone one or computer USB port it will take ages!!! Still takes longer though...

joubert• 14 years ago

* why isn't that thing Retina. I mean, they have putted it on everything, iPhone, iPad and Air, why not this?

Air does not have Retina.

danbee• 14 years ago

It's probably battery life. The Retina iPad has a battery that's nearly twice as big as the iPad 2 and iPad mini and it's mostly to drive that screen.

I believe that the power requirements are down to the number of pixels more than the size.

jklp• 14 years ago

> also, I still have no idea why isn't that thing Retina

I can't find the link, but I remember reading that if the Mini had the iPad's retina display shrunk down, it would have had an unbelievably high resolution display, which would have increased the price of the Mini significantly.

Not something Apple would want when targeting the 7" tablet market.

melling2• 14 years ago

Air's aren't Retina. Mac Books aren't Retina. iMacs aren't Retina. In short, what you have posted is completely wrong.

As for Amazon's ad, it doesn't really matter to me. Apple can deal with it. I'm not going to spend my morning debating it on HN.

The one good thing about it is that Amazon wants to compete strongly for the tablet market. As a consumer of any "faith", this is good because it will create a technology race where we all win.

esrauch• 14 years ago

You can get Macbook Pros with retina displays now, which is what I assume you meant by Macbook since the Macbook-non-Pro line is discontinued.

Pedantry aside, I agree with you.

TillE2• 14 years ago

Not a bad idea. The low dpi screen of the iPad mini really is a glaring flaw when you consider the price.

And because of that price, there's going to be a long future for Android tablets in the sub-$250 range, now that Google and Amazon have proven you can make and sell a worthy device for that kind of money.

zwily• 14 years ago

They've proven that you can sell at that price, but not that you can make money at that price. Time will tell.

SquareWheel• 14 years ago

Their profit isn't from the hardware sale, but from the media/apps thereafter.

TillE2• 14 years ago

As long as they're not losing money, I really don't see a problem with this. For Google, having a decent Android tablet available at that price clearly helps them in ways beyond immediate profit from hardware sales.

Jabbles• 14 years ago

Discussed previously: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4710114

bornhuetter5• 14 years ago

It's a shame that they have resorted to direct attacks, but given Apple's comments about "all 7" tablets" I can't really blame them.

I do wish they would all just shut up and concentrate on the value of their own products though.

vitobcn• 14 years ago

And that is exactly the reason why vendors like to control the distribution / means of access to their products. e.g. Apple retail stores selling Apple products, Chrome as a browser to access Google products from desktop or Android from mobile, etc.

The goal is not having other companies in a position in which they can significantly affect your business if they choose to do so (e.g. indie developers and the Apple app store).

ElliotH• 14 years ago

The Fire HD seems to have an easier to sell homescreen too. While the iPad has these small icons with flowers and such (even in their official marketing) the Kindle's homescreen presents a plethora of stuff to appeal to the mass market: feature films, popular books, popular magazines, angry birds (I'm not sure about the US, but Angry Birds seems to have quite a long lasting appeal especially among young teenagers), Facebook, Skype, TV.

While the iPad can do all of this, the Kindle immediately demonstrates this to the consumer. I can see it doing really well against the iPad mini with that sort of imagery being shown to customers.

eigenvector2• 14 years ago

The iPad Mini's far from impressive DPI is no doubt the result of Apple not wanting to introduce another resolution into the iOS ecosystem (the Mini's resolution previously appeared on iPad 1 and 2). I don't think they were cutting costs with this panel, rather, you are seeing the non-resolution-independent iOS chickens coming home to roost as software limitations begin to hold back hardware innovation.

Apple needs to bite the bullet and implement true resolution independence in iOS and OS X otherwise every new device form factor (or Retina display, in OS X's case) is going to make things more and more painful.

bornhuetter5• 14 years ago

I knew this was going to be an issue when they decided on a fixed resolution as well as a fixed DPI - they are very limited in what size devices they can now produce.

It has been of great short term benefit to them though, as it has been much easier for people to develop great looking apps for it.

I'm really curious to see if they do eventually go for resolution independence and lose the advantages that comes with it, in order to gain the flexibility of making a broader (or even just different) set of devices.

I wonder if even they have decided with certainty which way they are going to go.

uptown• 14 years ago

If that's the direction you go, how do they handle resolution independence of raster images? Sure, you can implement scaling, but you'll still need developers to provide a massive range of assets to satisfy every potential resolution, or suffer the consequences of blurry and/or jagged images as a result of their scaling artifacts.

dabeeeenster• 14 years ago

If I had to guess, I would say that the resolution dependence has been a major contributing factor to the high UI/UX quality in iOS applications. Yes, there are other aspects to consider, but this single design decision has a lot of benefits to developers.

eigenvector2• 14 years ago

It's definitely a major contributor to the simple fact that iOS apps, on average, look a whole lot better than Android apps. That being said, it's a burden on Apple hardware designers that will only increase with time.

It's a tough decision if there is an elegant solution out there, I can only hope that Apple is already working on it.

glesica• 14 years ago

This is a good point. I wonder if they could go half way on resolution independence, a hybrid solution of some sort. They don't really need true resolution independence since they control all the hardware. But if they had something that worked within certain parameters it would ease up the burden on the hardware designers and iOS developers without hurting the UX...

danmaz74• 14 years ago

True, but, as the DPI increases, manually making the UI pixel-perfect becomes less important.

Tyrannosaurs3• 14 years ago

There are two other major reasons they'll have gone for the lower resolution:

1) Power consumption - the retina display drains a lot of power (and handling the higher resolution requires a better processor which contributes further). This means a bigger battery, which means a larger and heavier device which kind of goes against the point of the iPad mini.

2) Price - It seems that one of Apple's key business goals with the iPad mini is to bring the lowest entry point of the iPad down. Retina displays a going add cost which means Apple would have to go in at a higher price point - kind of undermining the whole thing.

Apple have optimised for size and price and while I'm sure they'd have loved to have a retina display on the iPad mini, the trade offs they've made are consistent with the aims they have.

megablast• 14 years ago

It also has the same DPI as the iPhone 3gs, so they can use the same screens, just cut to a bigger shape.

philwelch2• 14 years ago

Apple doesn't need resolution independence. They just need to get everything on retina displays, then it won't even matter anymore.

smackfu6• 14 years ago

The problem for Apple is that they defined Retina as "you can't see the pixels" and there is no need to go higher PPI than that. But the pixel doubled iPad mini would have a resolution higher than that. So they would need to spend battery life and processing power on something they have themselves stated is worthless.

It's an odd situation.

Spearchucker• 14 years ago

When you're a Microsoft, an Apple or a Google you have the money to create something truly epic - and none of them have.

The Surface has great design, as do all of Apple's products. However the Surface, while having the potential for great software, comes with something not quite finished. So while it's eminently usable as it is, it falls short of greatness.

The iPad Mini, similarly, has the quality one expects from Apple, and yet the features, such as the display resolution and lack of GPS, give it a feel of mediocrity. And iOS itself feels a little long in the tooth these days. Not what you'd expect from Apple.

Google of course have an OS that outsells any other. And yet that's plagued by patent infringements, operators and manufacturers that aren't incentivised to update the OS, and the subsequent slew of (real or perceived) security holes. Android could be truly open, but isn't.

All three companies have the resources to create something earth-shatteringly innovative, usable and beautiful. And yet they don't. Nokia with the 920 is the only one that seems to get close. This really surprises me, given the importance we're placing on the mobile market.

bornhuetter5• 14 years ago

I think they are all epic in their own way.

Especially in the case of the Surface - it's the first version of the product! The original iOS and Android devices all had crappy or non-existant app stores when they were launched, and were plagued with problems and limitations.

Similarly, for the right use-cases iPad Mini and the Nexus tablets are epic, and many people adore them.

mtgx• 14 years ago

What's so great about Surface besides its design and build material? I don't mean to knock on those. I think they are great, but that doesn't equal that the product overall is great. Windows RT is performing very poorly on an high-end ARM chip (don't want to imagine how it would perform on an older dual core ARM chip, or god forbid a single core one) compared to the true mobile operating systems like Android and iOS, and its app store is virtually non-existent. Office on it is also an exercise in frustration.

The price is also too high for what it offers. Even if the build of materials is exactly the same as the iPad 4 (I think it's lower), that doesn't mean it should cost exactly the same as an iPad 4. Because it offers lower value than an iPad (think ecosystem, brand, etc). I also don't think it's acceptable for a $500+ product to have such a low resolution anymore. And don't tell me it has an "extra 16 GB". It doesn't. It only has 17 free GB of storage.

DanBC• 14 years ago

> However the Surface, while having the potential for great software, comes with something not quite finished. So while it's eminently usable as it is, it falls short of greatness.

It's like "kaizen" never happened. People really need to stop thinking about revolutionary change and remember what happens with good iterative design.

When I have a product that I'm supposed to interact with many times each day I really don't want change. I want something calming and familiar that gets better over time.

yohui2• 14 years ago

If we're comparing their latest tablet products, shouldn't Google's be the Nexus 7? (Or, probably within a week, the all-but-inevitable Nexus 10.)

The Nexus series represent the only devices that Google directly supports, after all. In which case I think we can strike out all the complaints you list, from the customer's perspective. The focus then turns to Android's perceived handicap in regards to tablet apps.

frogpelt• 14 years ago

Sure, they have the money to create something epic. But to build something epic and sell it for under $300 is taking a loss just for the epic-ness of it.

That is not how Apple, MS or Google got to where they are.

georgespencer3• 14 years ago

There's so much about this which is disingenuous. I'm not surprised by this, but it's worth pointing out some of the tricks Amazon are employing here:

1. Much More for Much Less. Much More is obviously the kindle fire HD, and Much Less is the iPad Mini. Heck, if you remove the 'f' of 'for' you get to the central point here which is to turn the choice into 'Much More or Much Less'.

2. Kindle Fire HD branding is used (sexy typeface, orange gradient), iPad mini has some weird typeface which a cynic might argue has been deliberately spaced to make it look antiquated and unprofessional.

3. The Kindle Fire is "stunning" and the iPad Mini is "standard".

4. Just because the iPad Mini display is high definition and has 30% more pixels than the iPad Mini, it doesn't mean that the iPad Mini is a "low resolution" display.

5. Because the iPad Mini has a bigger screen in the same overall form factor, they make the same point a different way ("30% more pixels than the Mini" => "216 pixels per inch"). If the Kindle had a bigger screen but lower PPI they'd put the screen size in here.

6. "Watch HD movies and TV" "No HD movies or TV". The phrasing here is very clever. To a technically competent individual it parses as "no HD content on iPad Mini, only standard definition". But the "and TV"/"or TV" phrasing means that an average consumer might assume that you can't get any TV shows on iPad Mini.

7. The screen of the Kindle Fire is odd looking. The iPad Mini behind it is on its default home screen. I'm guessing that the Kindle Fire has deliberately been shown all in black (with the bg the same colour as the bezel) because it makes it unclear where the bezel ends and the screen begins. (I don't know if this is the default setting of the Kindle Fire HD or not).

8. The iPad Mini has been photoshopped horribly. For a start I have no idea which iOS that is, but it's not the one which ships with the iPad Mini or the one which Apple are using in any of their promotional shots. If you overlay one of Apple's promotional shots on top and adjust the size and opacity, you'll see that the iPad Mini has been warped so that the icons seem slightly smaller and the positioning is off.

8. Ultra-fast MIMO Wi-Fi vs. A BLANK SPACE. Not even trashing the fact that there is Wifi in the iPad but it's not as fast. It looks like they just gave up at this point.

Again, I'm not blaming Amazon for any of this. It's just interesting to see how much thought has gone into basically attempting to deceive consumers.

axx6• 14 years ago

Don't tell us about "false marketing" on amazons side.

Did you notice how Phil Schiller showed the iMac on Stage? He always talked about how thin it is and how incredible but he never showed the thicker part of the iMac.

Also noticed that Apple ALWAYS showed every iMac from the side on there website? Since the new iMac, there is only a 20° angle to the iMac, so you can only see the thin border, but not the thicker part behind it.

Oh, btw: have fun with your iPad mini.

Shivetya• 14 years ago

Check out the iMac gallery on the Apple Store, the fifth and sixth pictures show a side view. I would expect the show they put on to only provide the best views of their products but at least you can find better pictures on their site.

phwd• 14 years ago

Agreed both sides have their fair share of false marketing but did you really have to add the last paragraph? Everything else about your counter is reasonable, no need to be snide.

thornofmight• 14 years ago

This apparently worked. I've only heard about the new iMac from apple.com and until reading this post I had no idea that it wasn't as thin as it appeared. I was so amazed when I saw it.

jws4• 14 years ago

but he never showed the thicker part of the iMac.

He did turn it full sideways to the camera and revealed its bulging back. You can't show off its full thickness any more than that.

It wasn't on screen that way for as long as the "ooo!" moment of the brightly lit knife edge, but it was there for all to see.

Unrelated random thoughts on iMac thickness:

It is really just an aesthetic. The foot print of the machine can't be thin because it would be too easy to knock it over backwards. You can't stick it to a wall because there would be no place for your legs. That leaves aesthetics.

Consider the angles from which you see an iMac. Generally you are mostly in front. As you move off axis beyond the screen perimeter, the edges become visible. These are indeed thin, and deliberately visible in their glorious thinness. If your desk is against a wall you will never see the bulge. If you are in an office with the desk facing the door (always my preference) the bulge is not readily apparent to people entering because of its gradual edges, it is only from about a 30 degree angle of view around the rear sides that you can really see it, and that is the region where you are walking around your desk to sit down, not one visitors inhabit.

You end up with a computer that looks thin. Does it really matter if it isn't?

georgespencer3• 14 years ago

Dude, be civil.

> Don't tell us about "false marketing" on amazons side.

Why not? I thought it was interesting.

> Did you notice how Phil Schiller showed the iMac on Stage?

Yep! I didn't think it was especially relevant in the discussion thread for a story about Amazon marketing the Kindle Fire, though...

> He always talked about how thin it is and how incredible but he never showed the thicker part of the iMac.

He did, but not for very long.

> Also noticed that Apple ALWAYS showed every iMac from the side on there website? Since the new iMac, there is only a 20° angle to the iMac, so you can only see the thin border, but not the thicker part behind it.

That is weird.

> Oh, btw: have fun with your iPad mini.

No plans to buy one.

pherk• 14 years ago

Why such a great support to Apple even when it is so evident that the mini iPad is a first generation product? I think it has become fashionable to praise Apple even when it falls short and bash others even when they exceed expectations. This is analogous to transforming from fanboyism to fanaticism.

I hail from a place where the worth of 200$ or 300$ for a tablet cannot be justified, where we demand true value for money. So I guess I can look at these without any bias.

I am quite confident that Apple's iPad mini will have better resolution (more pixels, to be clear) in its next version. And you will find yourself saying "yes, more pixels is better".

Perhaps, Amazon is not the greatest competitor that Apple will face. Perhaps, it would be Samsung or Google. Amazon's products will not match Apple's perceived quality. Yet, these things do not change the fact that Amazon's price point would drive down the profitability of Apple products. And that, Amazon's price point will look attractive to certain segment of people (at least those like me, who believe in value for money).

macspoofing2• 14 years ago

>Why such a great support to Apple even when it is so evident that the mini iPad is a first generation product?

It's not really a first gen product. It's an iPad with the same aspect ratio, but a smaller screen.

Tyrannosaurs3• 14 years ago

> I hail from a place where the worth of 200$ or 300$ for a tablet cannot be justified, where we demand true value for money. So I guess I can look at these without any bias.

No, you just have a different bias.

If a $100 difference in price is a lot to you but it's not a lot to me, then your definition of value and mine are likely to be very different.

Value for money is tied into a whole load of things including how hard I had to work to get that money, what else that money might be spent on, what the improvement you get for that money is worth and so on.

These things are all relative - when it comes to matters of opinion, it's best not to claim no bias, it's easier just to state your positions and assumptions and let others factor them in.

Kerrick• 14 years ago

> I'm guessing that the Kindle Fire has deliberately been shown all in black (with the bg the same colour as the bezel)

You need to calibrate your monitor. The screen shown on the Fire is dark grey, but not black. I can clearly see where the screen ends on the top, right, and left. The bottom is a subtle gradient to black, though.

goatforce52• 14 years ago

> Again, I'm not blaming Amazon for any of this. It's just interesting to see how much thought has gone into basically attempting to deceive consumers.

It says things that are strictly true and presents the Fire in the best possible light, while leaving off anything that might balance out the comparison.

There's probably some weird parallel to Hacker News called Copywriting News where they're praising the people who created this promo.

riffraff• 14 years ago

>There's probably some weird parallel to Hacker News called Copywriting News where they're praising the people who created this promo.

I want Copy News so much now :(

polshaw2• 14 years ago

I hope you are aware that apple does this too (and far better). I say this because I wouldn't see this type of post after an apple keynote. They are MASTERS of setting the conversation points.

Take the iPhone4 launch. A new phone with a slightly higher resolution screen, but significantly smaller than the existing competition. Their framing, with retina branding, switched the existing conversation from screen size, not to resolution even (where apple had a minor lead, that would be soon overtaken) to PPI! There was almost no discussion of PPI before this. Apple competitors were now framed as 'worse' if they included a screen with the same resolution but bigger! Insane!

Now fast-forward to 2012, and we have a new iPad marketed as 35% bigger screen (again they have found a metric that maximises the difference, which would normally be framed as the 7" vs 7.9"), no mention of resolution.

Apple would never even show a competitor on their site, because they are the market leader.. but see Mac vs PC for what happens when they are not.

axx6• 14 years ago

Good point on the Mac vs PC part.

jusben1369• 14 years ago

"Apple would never even show a competitor on their site, because they are the market leader.." - One thing that struck me from the iPad Mini announcement was just how much time they spent comparing it to the competition - a sure sign that they really do think there is competition now. Then they disappoint on the iPad numbers in their latest earnings - chalk that up to people waiting for iPad Mini's but that seems like only half the story - and I think we've got a real interesting battle on our hands.

I wonder if Google was brilliant or lucky pricing the Nexus 7 at $199. They created this dilemma for Apple. They can't have the Mini cannabalize the more profitable iPad (the % of which must increase measurably by every $20 price differential) so they can't get close to $199. Amazon and Google smell blood in the water. iOS and the ecosystem is clearly superior to its Android brethren right now. However, a 65% premium for a device many acknowledge is a web surfer/facebook/email checker feels too rich. These guys will get a solid toehold in the market and in 2 - 3 years from now there will be an S III equivalent to the larger iPad's.

kbeegle• 14 years ago

I've been a Mac user going back to a Lombard Macbook and I remember when Apple used to really go on the attack against PC's before they switched to Intel. Examples are: Toasting the Pentium II: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zE6aKeK61A4 and Pentium II Snail: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ExNQ3iFhXc

During the Keynotes when Steve Jobs would show off the computers they'd run their Photoshop or really large Excel file tests to show just powerful their chips were. If I remember right, all of those tests were highly selective. For most regular computing tasks, I felt like PC's were faster.

In marketing, if you're in second place it doesn't hurt many times to attack first place. In the consumers minds, you're putting yourself on similar footing to the first place contender and then getting to highlight specific differences that make whatever case you want.

It many not be elegant but Amazon's promotions and Samsung's recent phone ads do illustrate differences between the products. They may not be the most important differences to a lot of people but the burden is on Apple to show that, not on competitors to follow a vague sense of fairness.

gurkendoktor• 14 years ago

I agree that Apple is great at marketing, but I also don't think that there is any lack of criticism/analysis online. I actually felt that they even failed to set the conversation point with the iPad mini - I have not seen one excited person on the internet, yet many comments complaining about the lack of a Retina screen.

Speaking of aggressive runner-ups, it will be interesting to see how Samsung behaves in the future. Right now, they are still at the "Mac vs PC" stage.[1][2] And they're highly effective too - they've pushed the Note form factor from ridicule into the mainstream. Are they too big already to launch another comparative ad campaign?

[1] http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nf5-Prx19ZM, [2] http://www.droid-life.com/2012/09/17/this-full-page-galaxy-s...

neya4• 14 years ago

I recently read an article on HN wherein a user posted asking all of us to be 'civil'. This is the reason why HN isn't so civil. You like a product, you try to support as if you created it and as if the company cares for you, while in reality the company doesn't care about you and you're just doing free marketing for them.

Not to say that you can't defend what you like, but most of what you've written here is very very subjective. One could argue otherwise too, and which is what is happening right here - You're adding subjectivity to your claims and provoking a 'fanboy' war. This is unacceptable.

For example, if I were to counter you, I would then say the entire of Apple's presentations and Marketing is just plain BS. For example they frequently market saying "The world's best Operating System (referring to Mac OS)" or "The fastest phone ever" etc. while these are not true. The iPhone for instance, still runs on a dual core processor. How the fuck can it be the 'fastest' while high-performance quadcore chips were long released even before this phone came into existence?

Where were you during Apple's presentations? I never saw you arguing "Hey that's not true, this is disingenuous" while they marketed their products in a similar fashion.

So may I kindly request you to cut the crap and stop the bias and avoid provoking people into such techno-wars?

Thanks

rimantas• 14 years ago

  > How the fuck can it be the 'fastest' while
  > high-performance quadcore chips were long released
  > even before this phone came into existence?

Indeed how? How was scrolling on the first iPhone smoother than on current android devices running on said quad core chips? How about understanding that processor power is not all there is?

  > So may I kindly request you to cut the crap and stop the bias and avoid
  > provoking people into such techno-wars?

And how about you following your own advice?

chris_wot2• 14 years ago

You know, your whole post coud be rewritten as:

A lot of what you have written here is quite subjective, and in fact you could mount a case that Apple's marketing team do the same sort if things as has been demonstrated by Amazon.

There is no need to flame the original poster. Please reconsider whether the last three sentences were necessary to contribute to the conversation here at HN. In my opinion, they were needlessly inflammatory.

nsxwolf• 14 years ago

I thought the tone of georgespencer's post was perfectly reasonable. Your post represents a tonal shift into the negative.

Please people, let's not turn HN into MacRumors forums (shudder)

Raphael_Amiard• 14 years ago

> Where were you during Apple's presentations?

This has absolutely no relevance, i hope one is still allowed to be critical of something without simultaneously pointing out all similar flaws in the universe.

> For example, if I were to counter you, I would then say the entire of Apple's presentations and Marketing is just plain BS

Except it doesn't counter anything OP said, since he didn't talk a bit about Apple marketing. Also, OP is providing a constructive analysis, which is quite better than just "this is BS"

> So may I kindly request you to cut the crap and stop the bias and avoid provoking people into such techno-wars?

You are the one using abrasive language here. I did read OP as an interresting (and opinionnated) analysis of what amazon did to make their product seem better.

scott_s• 14 years ago

Please be civil.

gnaffle• 14 years ago

http://www.anandtech.com/show/6324/the-iphone-5-performance-... - or do you think benchmarks are irrelevant?

Also, Apple claims it's the fastest _iPhone_ ever. I haven't seen any claim from them that it's the fastest phone ever.

coolnow• 14 years ago

There will always be fanboys, but the sheer amount of Apple fanboys on HN is amazing. For a community with a supposedly higher intellect than others, to resort to petty comparisons and worshiping of a corporate giant is seriously pathetic.

pooriaazimi• 14 years ago

The parent's post was quite civil IMO. Your language and last couple paragraphs though....

And just FYI, they never said iPhone 4, 4S or 5 were the fastest "phones", they said they're the "fastest iPhones yet", which is 100% true!

podperson5• 14 years ago

So in the interest of civility you call someone -- in essence -- a dupe and unpaid shill and quote the word "fanboy" in criticizing his/her comments. If this is civility, let's go back to simply insulting each other instead of making a pretense of civil discussion.

You then go on to provide evidence in the form of asserting that everything Apple says is "just plain BS" and go on to quote things you assert Apple frequently says which are either (a) not things Apple says or (b) general purpose unassailable and unverifiable claims (best, most comfortable, happiest, etc.).

"Disingenuous" means "lying while pretending to be sincere" versus merely lying -- the key component is hypocrisy. The classic example is when almost anyone starts a sentence with "Well, to be honest..." Another example would be making references to a thread on civility while blatantly insulting someone.

Amazon quoting Gizmodo is disingenuous. The rest of the ad is simply Amazon highlighting the good bits of their product against the correspondingly inferior bits of the rival product.

The fact that Amazon has failed to update its "fastest WiFi of any tablet" graph (despite clearly having updated it since the iPad mini was launched) might also be construed negatively.

A similar ad from Apple would probably discuss size of app library, iOS vs ???, camera quality, size, weight, thinness, and quote professors, school teachers, and reputable reviewers.

Apple claiming their OS is the best in the world is at worst lying and most likely actually what they believe. (Most Mac users probably believe it, even if they recognize that no OS is perfect, right?)

pessimizer• 14 years ago

Personally can't stand Apple as a company, and find their products anti-consumer, anti-developer, difficult to use, fairly ugly, and overpriced.

I see none of the incivility that you saw in the parent comment.

>if I were to counter you, I would then say the entire of Apple's presentations and Marketing is just plain BS.

Countering somewhat negative observations about one company != attacking that company's rival. This isn't football.

Consumer chauvinism is weird.

revscat• 14 years ago

> For example, if I were to counter you, I would then say the entire of Apple's presentations and Marketing is just plain BS.

It's unfortunate you think this to be a counterargument.

chucknelson2• 14 years ago

Does anyone know where this "No HD movies or TV" thing is coming from? Can the iPad mini not play 720p content or something? A link to where this is stated would be helpful.

Tyrannosaurs3• 14 years ago

I'm sure it can play an HD movie if that's the file you have, just the screen resolution is such that it won't appear as HD to your eyes.

But this post is a wonderful example of the sort of doubt Amazon will be very happy to have spread as a result of the ads.

engtech• 14 years ago

They're probably using 1080P as the definition of HD.

The last time I looked at buying a movie in iTunes, the max resolution they sold was 720P.

chaz• 14 years ago

I wrote this comment on a prior discussion about this:

> SD vs HD, is dependent upon who you ask. The CEA, which represents the TV makers, says that anything with at least 720 lines is HDTV, thus enabling 1024x768 to be called HDTV. ATSC, which develops broadcast standards, says that HDTV should be 720 or 1080 lines at 16:9 aspect ratio, which implies 1280x720 or 1920x1080.

http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=4710875

TopTrix• 14 years ago

At first place, I thought you are Apple representative. Why are you so aggressive?

These are the marketing tactics and do you thing Apple have never done this before?

macspoofing2• 14 years ago

You're overthinking it. Amazon is basically saying the iPad Mini is underpowered and more expensive. Yeah, what else is new? If Apple competed on tech specs and price, they wouldn't have sold a single Mac in the last 15 years. Price and specs is not why people will be buying the mini.

jrockway4• 14 years ago

Why will people be buying the Mini?

Me1000• 14 years ago

It's nearly impossible to compare raw specs when Apple is making their own chips. Android devices have had more cores and more Hertz than the iPhone for years, but only recently have they been able to start matching the iPhone in performance… that's that was entirely because of faster software.

ssmoot2• 14 years ago

My wife's (3yo?) Kindle Keyboard burnt out a couple weeks ago. The Kindle Paperwhite had a 6 week wait on it, so we waited an extra week for the Mini announcement.

The iPad Mini has a bigger screen, and is lighter than the Nexus 7 or Fire HD by a fair margin.

The press seems to be all about resolution and techie specs, but I just sold my iPad2 (to upgrade to a 4th gen), and a shrunk down iPad2, at half the weight, lighter than the competition by a decent margin seems like a slam dunk to me.

I guess time will tell, but if the primary use is as a reader, then the device with the biggest screen and the lightest weight seems like the obvious winner unless there's something horribly wrong with it. And there's certainly nothing horribly wrong with an iPad2.

michaelmior2• 14 years ago

As far as the "Ultra-fast MIMO Wi-Fi", iPad Mini has that too. (I can only assuming they're referring to 802.11n)

smackfu6• 14 years ago

Here's the slide from the Kindle HD announcement: http://www.androidcentral.com/amazon-hails-improved-mimo-wif...

At the time it beat the iPad 3 but I don't know if the mini changes that.

bradwestness2• 14 years ago

I'm not really shocked by the slant to the advertisement.

However it's interesting because Amazon is the world's largest online retailer, and they're using their advantage in that area to push their products, now that they make products.

Seems like a poor path to go down if you want manufacturers to keep selling products through your store.

jrockway4• 14 years ago

You are reading way too deeply into this. Unless you have some research to back up your assertion that people frequently misread "for" as "or", it's hard to believe.

To be fair, Apple started the density wars. Nobody knew what the acronym PPI meant until Apple started calling it a "Retina" display. It's strange that they can't continue to compete in this category, especially given the high price of their device.

The bezel and the UI are different colors, the bezel is shiny while the UI is pure black at the top and has a silverish-black gradient behind the content. I have no trouble seeing where the (large!) bezel ends and the screen begins.

8. Ultra-fast MIMO Wi-Fi vs. A BLANK SPACE. Not even trashing the fact that there is Wifi in the iPad but it's not as fast. It looks like they just gave up at this point.

What kind of Wi-Fi does the iPad have? If not MIMO, this seems to be a valid comparison point. (I would have preferred something more meaningful, like "3x3" or "450Mbps 802.11n", but I have an idea about what they mean.)

eykanal• 14 years ago

> It's strange that they can't continue to compete in this category, especially given the high price of their device.

Given that Amazon posted a net loss this past quarter in part due to manufacturing expenses, I wouldn't call their strategy "effectively competing".

ricardobeat2• 14 years ago

The iPad 3 was able to download at >30mbps on wi-fi, much faster on LTE. They say speeds were improved for the 4th gen.

http://www.techradar.com/reviews/pc-mac/tablets/new-ipad-3-1...

smackfu6• 14 years ago

Some of this is valid but a lot of it seems like a reach, like you were trying to pad out your list.

gws• 14 years ago

> 1. Much More for Much Less. Much More is obviously the kindle fire HD, and Much Less is the iPad Mini

I guess they actually mean you can get much more benefits for much less money

taylonr• 14 years ago

Aren't points 1-8 commonly referred to as "advertising"?

Shorel• 14 years ago

> Much Less is the iPad Mini

Not even likely. "Much less" is only about money: $199 vs $329

cma• 14 years ago

In the Apple keynote the nexus 7 looked a lot crappier than in real life; the bezel was all washed out grey instead of black etc.

dman• 14 years ago

Because Apple showed great sensitivity in their Vista commercials ?

CamperBob2• 14 years ago

This your first ad?

digeridoo• 14 years ago

If only the kindle fire shipped to countries where most people live.

goatforce52• 14 years ago

The list of countries where Amazon has deals in place to distribute digital content (apart from eBooks) is pretty low:

http://www.macstories.net/stories/mapping-the-entertainment-...

chj2• 14 years ago

They forgot to mention app numbers..

taylorbuley• 14 years ago

So we're using the word "ballsy" now in promotional copy? Because it seems to me that the word could be construed by some to be sexist.

metatronscube• 14 years ago

Oh yeah, another pro Android/Amazon/Google anti-Apple comment/article/submission. This is not getting tired, not one little bit. This specific point has been covered recently as well. While this points out select bits where 'on paper' the Kindle HD is 'better' its not the entire story is it? Nothing there about build quality or durability for instance, or the ecosystem or UI/UX or that the user can most probably update the OS (compared to Android where updates are few and far between and tend to never come if you are talking about Samsung)

I loved my Nexus 7, right up until it broke (for the 4th time). This time round the screen split from corner to corner previous times the screen developed faults and once the screen actually came loose from the body. It cost 209 quid in the UK (including delivery) and I wished to hell I waited off to get the iPad mini because apart from the beautiful responsive UI/UX, applications, app store and iTunes store its probably like most Apple devices in that its built like a tank.

Sometimes its not just about figures.

snupples• 14 years ago

"Sometimes its not just about figures."

Neither is it about your anecdotes. This isn't an anti-Apple submission so much as the news of Amazon's first real direct marketing attack on Apple.

denzil_correa• 14 years ago

Somehow Amazon have upped the ante against Apple ever since Steve Jobs passed away. The keynote slides in which Bezos revealed the Kindle Paperwhite and the Kindle Fire HD were so Apple like.

f1nch3r• 14 years ago

Having owned both, I am sticking with the iPad. The Fire is good for the price but I constantly got the feeling that I was working to use the device. But that's just one man's opinion. I know others who swear by the Fire.

davidjgraph• 14 years ago

So companies use marketing to spin their products? Selecting language and images that favours their stuff over the competition?

Let me get a pen and paper and write this down.

scotty792• 14 years ago

Does anyone know why iPad has single speaker?

jasonlotito• 14 years ago

Just want to add that this is one of my biggest gripes with the iPad. I have to position things behind my iPad to hear things sometimes. It's by far the worst part of the iPad.

robmcm2• 14 years ago

I expect they will say it's because having two speakers so close together wouldn't give you a stereo experience (be distinguishable).

<cynical> That is until the next version where it becomes a feature...</cynical>

jjguy• 14 years ago

My experience shopping on Amazon - a bit like browsing in a vast, chaotic and disorganized third-world marketplace - is not one I'd like extended to my computing platform.

Amazon and others can tout narrow features as much as they want, but I still prefer the better-managed end-to-end experience Apple provides in their ecosystems.

hiddenstage• 14 years ago

Ever use the app store?

philwelch2• 14 years ago

They left out the bullet point about the remote wipe feature. I hear that's a Kindle specialty.

pm90• 14 years ago

Ha, that's a good point! I'm curious, though: is it possible to do that on a Kindle Fire? I had thought that was only possible on a regular (Black and White) Kindle

venus• 14 years ago

Here's their full comparison:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/feature.html/ref=amb_link_366177422...

Tell you one thing, apple.com's got them beat on URLs ..

prof_hobart2• 14 years ago

"Create custom profiles for each child".

This is actually something that I do wish iOS would introduce. My daughter is not getting her own iPad any time soon, but I'd love to be able to lock down the apps/features that she's able to use on mine.

tsieling• 14 years ago

If they talk about the competition, they're scared of the competition, and the more they talk, the more scared they are. That goes for Apple, Google, Amazon and all the rest.

marban• 14 years ago

And [Special Offers] aren't available on the iPad either...

jemeshsu• 14 years ago

My first impression is that Amazon is displaying the possible margin they could get with Kindle Fire HD. Maybe someone in AMZ is regretting pricing it that low.

MattRogish• 14 years ago

Amazon doth protest too much, methinks.

cageface• 14 years ago

In the long run I am in complete agreement with Bezos on this. Content is what matters. Devices come and go but my relationship with an album or a book means something to me.

mrcomment• 14 years ago

Sorry, only eink kindles are being sold to Canada, and if I bring one in, software portion of device de-activates after 30+ days of being outside of the US, So thus no comparison unfortunately.

ritratt• 14 years ago

ipad/iphone has never been the best device hardware-wise. but they deliver a good experience despite having inferior hardware with better OS, apps, content etc.

FilterJoe• 14 years ago

The first 2 lines (display, PPI) and the price line are why I did not buy an iPad mini, which would have been my first tablet had it been priced at $200 or maybe even $249. So marketing is dead on, in my view.

Instead I bought an Apple-refurbished iPad 3, for $379, which is $79 more than the soon-to-be-shipped Kindle HD 8.9".

For $50 more than the Mac Mini I get a bigger and better display. And for $79 more than the Kindle HD 8.9 I get better apps and user experience.

EDIT: clarified what first 2 lines were

minton• 14 years ago

Doesn't matter how much better the specs on this device are. I'm uncomfortable using it to purchase content that can be revoked without warning or appeal[1] and nothing short of a popular article on Hacker News can reverse their decision (and only then as a PR issue).

I realize you're also "renting" content from Apple but the company doesn't have a history of abusing this and Amazon does.

1 - http://digitaljournal.com/article/335484

chj2• 14 years ago

Perhaps Apple will release an iPad mini with Retina Display sooner because of the peer pressure:)

Mordor• 14 years ago

Are Apple competing on hardware or software?

bitsoda• 14 years ago

This bothered me at first, but then I thought to myself: anyone naive enough to believe the Kindle Fire HD is better than the iPad mini deserves to own a Kindle Fire HD.

IheartApplesDix• 14 years ago

I was just thinking the same about iOS device customers.

sharpneli• 14 years ago

They forgot one feature:

Your device can be locked at random and only by raising a major media storm you may regain access to your device and stuff you've bought.

I do not know if Apple has done this, can someone enlighten me?

gulbrandr• 14 years ago

The URL for the "Shop now" link should have been:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B008GGCAVM/

instead of:

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B008GGCAVM/ref=gw_c1_kf_ipa...

lnanek2• 14 years ago

Have you seen their commercials? They have one where a whole family has Kindles for and drive home how much less it costs compared to a loner guy with an iPad. So not surprisingly they compare direct like this...

goostavos• 14 years ago

I'm becoming "that guy," it seems, but how is this relevant to Hacker News? This is little more than something which will stir up "fanboys" -- which by the way seems to have worked judging from the current top, and needlessly long, comment.

Summed up, this 'news' story boils down to: "Amazon advertises product." Queue hundreds of comments arguing about why the add is accurate or not; why product X is the worst, and shameful, and product Y is the best and wholesome.

Has anyone opened a news paper, magazine, turned on the radio or TV, or been on the internet? One company saying that it's product is better than the competition is kind of, well, completely normal -- Advertising 101, if I may be so bold. Why aren't we arguing to death about car commercials slamming their competition? Hell, what about Oxy-Clean, huh? Billy Mayes' talked a bunch of crap about Tide. Where is that discussion? Are people not ready to defend Tide's name as they are Apple/Amazon's?

People get so emotionally invested in certain products. It's completely silly.

Can we stop this inanity and go back to endlessly arguing about how worthless PHP is now?

Amazon.com criticising new iPad on homepage

Related Stories