Amazon's New Kindle Fire Claims a Clear Niche

“Why should somebody buy this instead of an iPad?”


Up to this point, even the answer "it's cheaper" hasn't been possible, since most other devices actually cost as much, or more, than an iPad.


Amazon's Kindle is the first device that answers the question, and it is not about "speeds and feeds."


 Both the iPad and the new Kindle Fire are gateways to a rich content ecosystem.

That’s the difference that other tablet makers missed. Motorola, Samsung and Research in Motion have essentially been chasing the iPad on specs, building the best tablet they can manage at the same starting price of around $500. Watch Jeff Bezos introduce the Kindle Fire

The Kindle Fire is the first device with a good answer. It is much cheaper than an iPad and offers a digital content ecosystem that rivals Apple’s (fewer apps, but more books).

Also, Amazon built an alternative to the iPad, rather than a direct competitor. That's why some might say the Kindle Fire is something different. It is sort of an iPod "touch" content consumption device with a more-usable screen, that is optimized for multiple content types, including reading books and magazines, video and audio, plus web browsing.

Amazon's Kindle does not compete with iPad

"Helicopter" View of Google Maps

Getting directions is one of the most popular features on Google Maps, whether it be for driving, walking, biking or transit. Today, is launching a new feature that allows users to preview routes in 3D.

"Let’s say you’re planning a road trip down the beautiful coast of California’s Highway 1 and want to be able to see what the route really looks like. California’s rugged coastline is not to be missed, but the top-down view really doesn’t give you a good sense of what this majestic terrain is like. Using the 3D preview; however, you can get aerial view of the route, as if you were in a helicopter flying above the road."

It's just fun.

Google adds "helicopter view" of maps

Cable’s Packaging Dilemma

Video service providers are caught in a vice, and so are many of their customers. The problem is escalating costs for content access, and contact clauses that it make it difficult for distributors to restructure their service packages in ways that would allow customers to opt out of some pricey offerings.

ESPN charges cable operators an average $4.69 a month for each subscriber. And ESPN contracts mandate that ESPN be carried on the most-popular tier of service. Cable networks such as CNN or TBS charge less than a dollar, says SNL Kagan analyst Derek Baine. 


So if a distributor created a new tier of service without ESPN and other pricey sports programming, and consumers responded, distributors would have to put ESPN back into those lower-priced tiers, which would destroy the retail pricing advantage again.

And even in a hypothetical full a la carte environment, when all subscribers would have the option to buy each channel one by one, ESPN parent Disney Co would likely have to charge about $30 just for ESPN to make up for lost advertising and affiliate revenue it gets from distributors.


In part, the lost revenue would come from advertising revenue on ESPN, and in part the lower revenue would represent the value of the fees Disney gets from contracts that say distributors must carry a number of other networks, to get ESPN, argues Sanford C. Bernstein analyst Craig Moffett.

The end result would likely be that consumers wound up paying more money for just a relative handful of channels than they pay for hundreds of channels today. 


Unless distributors can force major programmers to sign different contracts, it is going to be very difficult to create the lower-cost packages many consumers actually may want, or even tiers that are cheaper because they do not include the pricey sports channels. 

Cable’s ESPN Dilemma

Social Gamers Open to In-App Ads, Commerce, Virtual Currencies

About seven percent of social gamers surveyed by Interpret, on behalf of RockYou, would use real money to purchase a virtual item not used inside the game, 14 percent have used real money to purchase virtual currency, 13 percent use a branded virtual good, and 18 percent paid to play a game or get items in a game.

On average, gamers spend $42.70 on in-game items or virtual currency. A quarter of the survey participants report buying virtual currency at least once weekly, and 55 percent would rather earn virtual currency than purchase items with real money.

When it comes to ads in games, 45 percent are open to viewing in-game ads to earn virtual currency, 42 percent are more motivated to play a social game that offers real-world rewards, like a coupon or gift card, and 41 percent will review the game or spread the word through their social network page to earn virtual currency.

All of those sentiments illustrate growing interest on the part of game developers in in-application commerce, in-app advertising and in-app "currencies" of various types.

Social gamers receptive to ads, in-app commerce, virtual currency

How Much Sharing Will Facebook Users Really Want?

Privacy and sharing always are in tension with any application a user wants to experience in a personalized and custom way. It' hard for an application to provide a personalized experience without knowing a fair amount about a user's preferences.

We are about to find out whether 800 million Facebook users prefer the "Open Graph apps" to share widely, or will ratchet up their privacy settings. How many people will give services permission to share everything on Facebook, and then rue it months or years later when something they don't want the world to know about is instantly distributed to all?

Will users want to give Facebook the right to log all actions?

Facebook Privacy and Sharing Issues

Devices are Gateways to Services, Content and Software

“In the modern era of consumer electronics devices, if you are just building a device you are unlikely to succeed,” says Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos. “Today it is about the software, the software on the device and the software in the cloud. It is a seamless service."

Some would say that is a reason no Android tablet has yet taken off to rival the iPad: tablets are a window into the cloud.

The companies that get this are best positioned in the post-PC world. It is not just about the device, but about the services on the Internet tied to that device.

If You Are Just Building A Device You Are Unlikely To Succeed

RIM Halts BlackBerry Playbook Production, Some Say

 Has Research in Motion stopped making its BlackBerry Playbook tablet computer? Portfolio.com reports that Research in Motion has stopped manufacturing the tablets and is considering exiting the tablet market altogether.


"We believe RIM has stopped production of its PlayBook and is actively considering exiting the tablet market," Collins Stewart tech analyst John Vinh said in a report. The chip analyst said manufacturer Quanta had laid off a "significant number" of workers from a factory that produces RIM's PlayBook. RIM denies report


RIM dismissed reports that its PlayBook was in danger of extinction as "pure fiction." RIM spokeswoman Jamie Ernst said, "RIM remains highly committed to the tablet market."

RIM may have halted BlackBerry Playbook production