"Amazon Kindle Fire Has Dulled eReader Market In Q1 2012"

[scrapking]

http://www.inquisitr.com/202733/amaz...et-in-q1-2012/

"The popularity of the Amazon Kindle Fire tablet hasn’t done any favors for the eReader industry, according to a recent report eReader shipments fell drastically in the first quarter of 2012 on the heels of Kindle Fires success."

OK... while clearly the Kindle Fire (and the Kobo Vox, and the Nook tablets) can do more than your average e-reader, aren't they all still considered e-readers? To me an e-reader is any device where e-reading is the main purpose, and the primary way it's marketed. Presumably if people are buying the Fire instead of traditional e-readers, they are doing so because they want it for e-reading!

To me what this article is trying to say is that the Kindle Fire has affected e-ink e-reader sales, which is likely true. I know my girlfriend and I both got Kobo Vox e-readers over traditional e-ink e-readers, and while we can do all sorts of other things with them (and occasionally do), 90%+ of our time on them is spent reading.

So I don't see how the Fire has hurt the e-reading industry.

[Synamon]

I agree that the article is confusing. And light on details. The numbers they do give seem to compare apples and oranges; for instance, the Kindle Fire is only available in the US, yet they quote the percentage of the global tablet market.

A recent survey of Fire users showed that you are typical, most are using them predominantly as an eReader. I doubt that's the case for other tablets, more apples and oranges.

It would be interesting to see numbers comparing the quarters excluding the US for eReader sales. I expect international sales will be strong this year as prices drop for eReaders, availability improves, and the ebook phenomenon catches on worldwide.

[cHex]

Before the Kindle Fire came along, Kindles were e-ink devices designed to be one thing: eReaders.

The Kindle Fire (and Nook Color, etc.) add color but reduce resolution. For reading texts, this means they are less capable for eReading. However, the Kindle Fire et al. were marketed for listening to music, watching movies, and running apps--things earlier eReaders did not do (or if they did do them, e.g. games or MP3's, they were not featured).

I'm one who tends to think of the Kindle Fire and Nook Color not as eReaders but as media consumption devices or small tablet PCs.

[wvcherrybomb]

I've never read a book on my Kindle Fire. However, I would if it was my only ereader. I am more comfortable reading on my K3.

I use my KF for games, apps, and internet. It's nice that I can sync it with my K3 and use it to read on in a pinch. For a person who reads as much as myself, the eye strain and battery life of KF make it impracticable as a primary reader.

Of the other KF owners that I personally know, only one bought it to use only as a tablet. All the others bought it as their main ereader.

[wizwor]

I bought my first e-reader last fall. It was the k79. I traveled with it extensively in the fourth quarter. When the Fire came out, I bought a couple. I liked it so much, I ended up getting four -- one for me. My first trip this year, the Fire replaced the k79. It's a fine reader and I watched movies on my flights, checked my email, and did some web browsing. My k79 will join me by the pool, but the Fire is better for just about everything else.

[The Terminator]

Originally Posted by scrapking

http://www.inquisitr.com/202733/amaz...et-in-q1-2012/



OK... while clearly the Kindle Fire (and the Kobo Vox, and the Nook tablets) can do more than your average e-reader, aren't they all still considered e-readers? To me an e-reader is any device where e-reading is the main purpose, and the primary way it's marketed. Presumably if people are buying the Fire instead of traditional e-readers, they are doing so because they want it for e-reading!

To me what this article is trying to say is that the Kindle Fire has affected e-ink e-reader sales, which is likely true. I know my girlfriend and I both got Kobo Vox e-readers over traditional e-ink e-readers, and while we can do all sorts of other things with them (and occasionally do), 90%+ of our time on them is spent reading.

So I don't see how the Fire has hurt the e-reading industry.

I think they mean dedicated eReaders, the Vox and Fire can do a lot more things than a dedicated eReader, but they do sacrifice battery life and glare on the screen. The Ipad can read books but that doesn't make it an eReader.

Someone could buy a Vox or Fire and never use it for reading and still enjoy it, not so much for a dedicated eReader.

Who knows what the long term prospects for eInk based ereaders are? I'm pretty sure that a lot of the people who bought the Fire did so because it is a frighteningly cheap tablet, at least compared to the competitors.

Long term prospects though? That can go either way.

Yet I think that there are two things that we can be certain of: the Fire (and similar devices) has and will continue to push down the price of tablets, and that eInk will continue to be a strong contender for heavy readers until better technologies are developed.

[soulfuldog]

The popular desire seems to be for a do-it-all device, but the battery life in my individual gadgets is important to me, and I'm sure I'm not the only person who is like that?

I get told I'm in the 'boring minority' when it comes to mobile phones, but although smart-phones are huge and there's a lot less choice of 'basic' mobiles, they aren't going to disappear entirely, so why should e-readers?

Edited to add: but then again, what do I know, I don't see the point in having my Kindle play MP3s

[SteveEisenberg]

Originally Posted by l_macd

I get told I'm in the 'boring minority' when it comes to mobile phones, but although smart-phones are huge and there's a lot less choice of 'basic' mobiles, they aren't going to disappear entirely, so why should e-readers?

Color tends to push out black and white. I think that mobile phones with black and white screens did disappear. And monochrome black and white computer monitors have come close to disappearing.

I realize that many would find a mirasol color display device to be a better eReader rather than a tablet. Whether I would, I don't know for sure. Not being a particularly visually-oriented person, I doubt it.

I consider the outstanding feature of my Kindle Keyboard 3G to be the ability to take it anywhere in the world (of the places I can imagine going) and have seamless access to key mobile web sites for email, news and weather without making special arrangements or paying a monthly fee. I can't see this happening with a color device having a higher refresh rate.

It won't be the end of the world when Amazon pulls the plug on free worldwide cell-phone based internet and/or stops making monochrome devices. Until then, these are the good old days.

[hidari]

eink will stay around in some form I reckon.... fact is for the last 500 years people have read mostly in black and white on pbooks....so reading black and white on an ebook seems like a natural step to me.... dedicated device have their pluses....my mp3 player goes 2 weeks on one charge.... pb360 two to three weeks. my dumb phone up to 5 days..... give me battery life....any day over superfluous features...

Originally Posted by SteveEisenberg

Color tends to push out black and white. I think that mobile phones with black and white screens did disappear. And monochrome black and white computer monitors have come close to disappearing.

We have seen that happen time and time again with devices like televisions, desktop computers, portable computers, PDAs, phones, and calculators -- so it will happen to ereaders. But I doubt that it is going to happen to ereaders until a suitable replacement technology is found and becomes inexpensive. LCD doesn't fit the bill because of power consumption and other ills.

[dadioflex]

Originally Posted by Synamon

A recent survey of Fire users showed that you are typical, most are using them predominantly as an eReader. I doubt that's the case for other tablets, more apples and oranges.

Sure, they SAY they're using them primarily to read ebooks, but how many are really cursing at Angry Birds for hours on end?

[CommonReader]

Originally Posted by SteveEisenberg

Color tends to push out black and white. I think that mobile phones with black and white screens did disappear. And monochrome black and white computer monitors have come close to disappearing.

I don't believe that anyone will object if some manufacturer comes up with a device that has a glare free colour screen that can be read in sunlight and can be used for - let's say - at least two days until it has to be recharged. I haven't seen such a device yet.

[Andrew H.]

Originally Posted by SteveEisenberg

Color tends to push out black and white. I think that mobile phones with black and white screens did disappear. And monochrome black and white computer monitors have come close to disappearing.

This is true, but pretty much only when color has feature parity with monochrome. When I bought my first computer, for example (1987), monochrome monitors were still more popular for academic or business purposes than color because the monochrome monitors could display 80 characters on a line (about the right width for typewriting on a normal sheet of paper); color monitors could only display 40 characters. It wasn't until color monitors became otherwise as good as monochrome monitors *and* could display color that they pushed the monochrome monitors out of the market.

I realize that many would find a mirasol color display device to be a better eReader rather than a tablet. Whether I would, I don't know for sure. Not being a particularly visually-oriented person, I doubt it.

If it were otherwise as good as an e-ink screen and the color was good (and the cost was similar), I'd probably get one. But I wouldn't pay too much extra for one.