Three new Kindles from Amazon!

Kindle. $79. More or less the current model, but 30 per cent lighter and minus a keyboard. This thing is going to fly off the shelves. It has an astonishing price-point that puts ebooks firmly within reach of far, far more people. It ditches the keyboard, which is fair enough, and it looks fab.

Kindle touch. $99 or $149 for 3G. Retains e-ink and nukes buttons; adds touch interface. An interesting move, given the price. I’m unsure if it’ll lead to purchase issues because of doubt over which model to pick (standard or touch), or whether it’ll be a straight upsell from the standard Kindle. I’m not sold on the touch interface for this kind of device: I like the Kindle buttons, and getting fingerprints all over the screen doesn’t seem like a great prospect. I’m just not sure this model is necessary in the line-up.

Kindle Fire. $199 7-inch Android-based tablet. This is initially going to sell like hot cakes. There’s no camera, mic or 3G, but you get Wi-Fi and 30 days of Amazon Prime (which in the UK seemingly means items being dispatched and lost by Royal Mail half the time anyway…) The question mark will be over usage. I do read on my iPad, which has a similar kind of display, but a standard Kindle’s e-ink is much better for long-form reading. But the Kindle Fire also has access to apps, games, movies and music. It’ll be interesting to see just how many buyers go for this (or if they go for this and a standard Kindle) and how it affects (if at all) the iPad, not least considering Amazon’s pretty dev-hostile app store.

Regarding Apple, I disagree with some tech pundits—there is a minor threat here. Amazon’s providing people with a much cheaper and potentially more than ‘good enough’ tablet option, for general media consumption. The iPad has brand awareness, a larger screen and a massive range of apps, but the Kindle Fire will eat up a lower end of the market, potentially snaring people who might later have bought an iPad, and who don’t care for or need advanced apps on a large screen. The real losers today, though, are every other manufacturer of 7-inch Android-based tablets. As of the Kindle Fire’s released, they are royally screwed.

Tsk, eh? Those pesky, uncooperative (if you’re a tech pundit) markets are really screwing things up. Last week, we got the news that in the face of myriad iPad killers, the iPad’s share had PLUMMETED. No, wait. Electronista reported IDC’s data as stating that

the iPad had gained share, moving up from 65.7 percent at the start of the year to 68.3 percent.

But surely all those wonderful Android tablets with loads of ports and Flash and not-at-all-iPad-like shells are selling fast, right?

Multiple Android tablets’ arrivals only led to Google’s share shrinking, dropping from 34 percent in early 2011 to 26.8 percent mid-year.

Oh.

Still, I’m sure that won’t stop plenty of people banging on about how the iPad is doomed at some point in 2011, or 2012, or definitely by 2013. 2014 at the latest. Or maybe 2015. Just like Apple itself, really. Now Steve Jobs is no longer CEO,  the company’s pretty much screwed, as evidenced by the hard-hitting article in the New York Times, Without Jobs, Apple Shares Hit All-Time High:

At the end of regular trading Monday, Apple shares closed at $411.63, up 2.78 percent, with a new record-high market valuation of $381.62 billion. It is now clearly the most valuable company on the stock market, displacing Exxon Mobil, with a market capitalization of $358.34 billion.

Ah. Still, give it a week or two and I’m sure we’ll have analysts and pundits falling over themselves to argue that this time, the new iPhone won’t sell, because of all the great alternatives out there. Just wait and see!

AllThingsD:

Apple scored another victory in its patent battle against Samsung today when a German court upheld the preliminary injunction banning sales of the company’s Galaxy 10.1 tablet computer in the country.

“The court is of the opinion that Apple’s minimalistic design isn’t the only technical solution to make a tablet computer, other designs are possible,” Presiding Judge Johanna Brueckner-Hofmann said in her verdict. “For the informed customer there remains the predominant overall impression that the device looks [like the iPad].”

Among my chums on Twitter, opinion is split on the Apple/Samsung spat. Some argue that Samsung is being bullied and that Apple’s design is ‘obvious’ and therefore suing Samsung isn’t fair. I agree with the German court: tablets didn’t look like the iPad before Apple’s device appeared, and now they all do. In the case of Samsung, a bunch of other stuff, such as icons, is almost identical too. I’m not sure Samsung has been trying to ‘trick’ people, but if I had any respect for Samsung I’d have lost it on hearing the company’s statement:

[We] believe that by imposing an injunction based on this very generic design right, this ruling restricts design innovation and progress in the industry.

Copying a successful competitor is not innovation; and if the design is ‘very generic’ why didn’t other companies do it first or simultaneously, rather than many months after Apple?

Mark Bernstein writes that there are always problems. He thinks the Mac and tech press is trying to drum up traffic by running articles critical of Lion. But he thinks the operating system isn’t to blame, and other factors cloud people’s judgment.

Whenever an operating system ships, everybody always runs around in circles to complain about it. Operating systems are big. They interact with everything. And they’re new, so they are a blame magnet. If you have an application bug, people will blame the operating system. If their disk is wearing out, odds are the operating system installation will push it over the edge and they’ll blame the operating system. If their network is wonky, what sort-of worked before might not work how – or might still sort-of work – and either way, some of them will blame the operating system.

And he also blames the press:

I blame a corrupt trade press. The way you get attention and make money – not much money – in this game is to start flame wars, and so “Apple ships lousy operating system! Scroll bars backwards! Apple doomed!” gets links and traffic and sells ads for off-brand iPad cases. And of course some of the financial press try to launch memes to manipulate stock prices – either because they play the market or simply to show what big lever-pullers they are.

I have some sympathy with that viewpoint; too many tech blogs are clamouring for hits rather than offering quality writing, and much of this comes from Apple rumours and anti-Apple sentiment. But there’s a nugget of truth in the Lion blame game. I cannot remember an Apple OS so buggy since the very early days of Mac OS X. I’ve certainly had way more problems in OS X Lion than in Snow Leopard, Leopard and Tiger. Apps crash far more regularly (mostly those that utilise the new auto-save feature), my Wi-Fi network that was fine under Snow Leopard absolutely refused to work using the same settings under Lion, and I’ve seen a ton of interface glitches, most notably with Save dialogs randomly getting really messed up and printing buttons and menus in the wrong place.

Of course, as Bernstein states, other factors could be at play here. For the first time, I installed a new OS over an old one, so perhaps there are clashes; although in my defence, this is how Apple wants people to install Lion by default. Perhaps my Wi-Fi network was screwy anyway, and Lion merely finally broke it. But I’m seeing too many issues, too many bugs, to suggest this is anything more than an OS that doesn’t have quite the same level of care that Apple usually enforces. None of the bugs have stopped me from using Lion and I certainly don’t plan to revert. But when TextEdit and Numbers crash for the nth time—despite neither app having crashed even once during my using them with Snow Leopard—that sets off alarm bells about the state of the system itself, rather than the state of tech journalism.

Hat tip: Daring Fireball.

Back in May, I wrote a quickfire review of sorts of the iCADE, a little arcade cabinet for the iPad. Around the same time, I also turned down two commissions to review the hardware for British magazines, primarily because I believed at the time that the hardware wasn’t reviewable in the traditional sense—the lack of support by third parties meant it was impossible to rate. The hardware was solid, but the only game at the time you could use with it was the mediocre Atari’s Greatest Hits; making that car crash about 20 per cent better certainly wasn’t worth a 75 quid investment, and yet it seemed wrong to massively downrate great new hardware due to poor support.

iCADE support has since grown, albeit slowly. But it was interesting that when I recently interviewed a bunch of major publishers involved in retro-gaming, they remained utterly tight-lipped about iCADE plans. To my mind, it would make perfect sense for Taito, Namco, Capcom and others to support the hardware, but what we’ve instead seen is a handful of indie developers quietly adding iCADE support to their apps. I no longer have an iCADE to hand, but I imagine that mini cabinet with Mos Speedrun or Minotron is probably a great pairing.

What’s most curious, however, is the lack of support from majors might be down to them working on their own systems. TouchArcade last week reported on Atari’s own stick, which strikes me as an odd idea—it’s portrait only (many of Atari’s games aren’t, nor are many of the apps that support iCADE), and a good chunk of the games in Atari’s compilation weren’t originally designed for joystick control, which is part of the reason they never really clicked for me with the iCADE. And earlier today, developer Stuart Carnie linked through to the iNVADERCADE, which looks like a tiny arcade cabinet for playing Taito’s rather poor iPad version of Space Invaders (which scales up the iPhone release in a lazy manner). It’s unclear from the video on the site whether other games will be supported, but even so, as developer Paul Pridham asked:

Is the iPad controller market that lucrative?

I doubt it is, and I very much agree with Carnie’s reply:

I would think one general purpose controller would be ideal. There is no standard SDK by Apple = fragmentation

I’m not really convinced at all by the need for physical controls for iOS games, because the best developers have gotten past that limitation, but I can see there’s a certain niche appeal regarding a ‘traditional’ controller, especially one as cute as the iCADE. What I don’t understand is individual developers releasing ones for their own games, fragmenting an already tiny market, rather than seeking to support a product that already exists and is already generally liked by those who’ve used it. I’d quite like an iCADE, especially if more games supported it; but the last thing I need on my desk is a little row of iPad games controllers, each one only working with a tiny number of titles.