With Amazon's forthcoming Kindle Fire tablet staking out a new position at the bargain end of the tablet market with its $199 price tag, some have wondered how significantly the device will eat into Apple's potential iPad sales.
A new survey from RBC Capital Markets and ChangeWave Research now puts some numbers to that impact, revealing that 26% of those surveyed customers who have either already pre-ordered a Kindle Fire or are "very likely" to purchase one have either delayed or put on indefinite hold previously-planned iPad purchases.
/article-new/2011/11/kindle_fire_impact_rbc.jpg?lossy)
The survey also reveals relatively strong overall interest in the Kindle Fire, with 5% of survey respondents registering as either having already pre-ordered or being very likely to purchase the device. That compares with 4% of respondents who had indicated similar intent for the original iPad back in February 2010. The tablet market is of course at very different level of maturity now, however, given that Apple's iPad has sparked consumer interest in the form factor.
For its part, Apple has reportedly indicated that it welcomes the arrival of the Kindle Fire, suggesting that yet another Android-based tablet entrant heavily customized to integrate with Amazon's services will further fragment that platform and drive more customers toward the stability of Apple's iOS.
Top Rated Comments
As I've maintained - while I love my iPad - many people don't want to shell out 499+ when all they really want is a media consumption device and some email/web surfing. Yes - UI is great on the iPad - but not everyone wants to spend the extra money when (now) there's a choice and one backed by an ecosystem of books, music, video and apps.
I see these stats as obvious. I think the Kindle Fire sells well to those who had no plans on buying an iPad but also those that had no viable choice before Amazon entered the game.
The Nook tablet has better specs - but I still think that they won't do as well as the Fire because B&N doesn't have the same ecosystem.
LMFAO. You must be joking.
I don't think you understand what an "ecosystem" is. Or you do, but you think only Apple has one. Hell, when some people say "Apple Ecosystem", I imagine their eyes glaze over, and they get one of those thousand yard stares that creep everyone out.This is the kind of nonsense you hear from someone who really can't/doesn't/won't understand the whole of the Apple ecosystem. Amazon has nothing to compare to. They have a website, where you can buy em pee threez. Big deal.
I'm already thinking about putting it on my list of overly used big words and phrases people throw around on the internet all the time so they look like they know what they're talking about. It'll be there alongside "innovative" and "relevant".
So you can no longer say stuff like "the Apple Ecosystem is innovative because it collaborates to the objectives of my principals, and is relevant to my chosen preliminary injunction of patent infringements you obviously don't understand. It Just Works. You mad, bro?".
Okay, just to clarify, Amazon and Apple are quite similar in alot of ways. They both host streaming movies, music, books, ect. The only real difference is that Apple uses standalone software, while Amazon hosts their services via a webpage. So no, it's not "just a webpage where you can buy em pee threez". Only an idiot would say something like that, let alone think it.
You're not an idiot...are you?