Mixed is the word.
The device is decently designed, and the software — while lacking some polish — is still excellent compared to pretty much anything in this range (and that includes the Nook Color). It’s a well thought out tablet that can only get better as the company refines the software.
Topolsky likes it as an Amazon ecosystem content device, finds the hardware uninspired and, in some places, perplexing, and its choice of third-party applications disappointing.
David Pogue, with the best line of the Fire reviews:
You feel that $200 price tag with every swipe of your finger.
Wired’s Jon Phillips:
All of which leads us back to what the Fire can actually do as a day-in, day-out mobile workhorse. Is it tablet that people will grab again and again for web browsing, book and magazine reading, casual gaming, and more?
No. It’s not that kind of tablet.
Which makes me wonder: what kind of tablet is it?
The reviews tend toward liking the Fire for watching, reading or listening to Amazon-purchased media, being unimpressed or mildly satisfied with the browser, and annoyed by jerky animation and a too-small screen for reading magazines. In other words, it doesn’t compare at all to the iPad.
But at $199, that might be good enough for the masses who haven’t purchased an iPad because $499 is too much for them. We’ll see. Amazon’s strategy is to target people who just want to browse the web, watch video, check Facebook and play some games—people who the iPad is too feature-rich for. And that’s a smart strategy, because there’s plenty of those kinds of people, and at $199, the Fire is close to being an impulse purchase.
I’m curious what happens, though, if Apple drops the current iPad 2 to $399 or even $299 (along with a retina display-equipped iPad 3 at the current price-points). I can’t see any reason to purchase a Kindle Fire when there’s an iPad available for $100 more. Apple isn’t going to let Amazon carve up their customers into different segments and force Apple to sell to only the high end of the market.