Amazon Kindle Fire review 0

he Amazon Kindle Fire, as mentioned in this review, promises a new dawn with an affordable-for-all Android tablet that just might end Apple's reign

The Amazon Kindle Fire tablet view, is powerful, sexy and, unlike Apple products, refreshingly cheap. This lethal combination means the tablet will be a notable challenger to Apple’s iPad 2.

It arrives after Motorola, HTC, with its HTC Flyer tablet, Samsung and Sony, with their Sony Tablet S tablet, fell short, and after HP and RIM failed miserably with their own operating systems. But the folly of those giants was their belief that they could beat Apple on a massively uneven playing field.

They charged the same price, and often more, for arguably inferior products with inferior tablet ecosystems. But while all this was unfolding, Amazon spent 2011 plotting its masterplan. A way to even the odds once and for all.

The $200 (£125) Kindle Fire tablet promises the biggest tech shake up since the first iPad launch, but beyond the hype of that miraculously inviting price-point can it really hang with the big dogs? Or is it just a two-hundred-buck chump? Let's find out

Amazon Kindle Fire: Design and Build

Upon lifting the Amazon Kindle Fire from the box our first thought was “PlayBook”. The 7-inch device is strikingly similar to RIM’s flailing offering, right down to the soft casting on the rear and edges.

The device feels exceptionally solid, but certainly comfortable enough to hold in one hand. In that respect, it remains true to its e-reader roots.

At 0.45-inches it’s slightly thicker than the BlackBerry tab and, at 431-grams, slightly heavier, but again not too cumbersome. This is an exceptionally well-built device that could probably handle a decent beating.

There’s only one button on the jet-black gadget - the screen/power switch -  and everything else is controlled via the touchscreen. The headphone jack, which feels like it's at the wrong end, and the MicroUSB charging port sit next to the switch at the foot of the Fire.

It’s very minimalist. Too minimalist in some respects. There are no cameras, front or rear, and while we can all live without another pathetic tablet camera, video chat would have been nice. Indeed, the Kindle Fire does have its limitations. There’s no GPS sensor on-board either.

Amazon Kindle Fire: Display

As we mentioned, the Fire opts for a 7-inch screen and it’s safe to say the jury is still out on the optimum screen size for a tablet.

However, we did miss the larger screen format when watching videos and playing games and sometimes when using apps. This was especially apparent when using the on-screen keyboard as it reduced screen real estate to an absolute minimum.

In saying that when we first switched on the device we were very surprised at the quality of the 1024x600, 169ppi IPS display.

Colours are brilliant, crisp and defined. It was the first indication that the Kindle Fire actually meant business, but let's not get carried away, it's not Galaxy Tab quality.

The Gorilla Glass touchscreen, although prone to fingerprints, is also surprisingly impressive. The typing experience supersedes most Android phones, and we found ourselves making few mistakes. It’s an area of the device which once again defies the price-point.

Amazon Kindle Fire: Software and UI

The Amazon Kindle Fire runs Android 2.3 Gingerbread, but you wouldn’t really know it. Save the back-end stuff, Amazon’s custom skin hides most traces of Google’s familiar OS and tellingly there’s no Android Market (more on that later).

The user interface certainly differs from the norm and it’s a refreshing change. The homescreen takes the form of a bookshelf a la the Kindle readers, with the top shelf featuring your most recently viewed content and those beneath housing your favourite apps.

Naturally these can be customised, swiping between them is a breeze and it looks great in portrait and landscape.

Tabs above the shelves take you straight to your Newsstand, Books, Music, Video, Docs, Apps and Web. It’s very intuitively designed and even smartphone and tablet novices will pick-up the nuances of this device in a heartbeat.

We really enjoyed navigating our way around the Kindle, largely thanks to the handy on-screen home button that takes you back to your favourites and all that recently used content, almost as if it combines a homescreen with a multi-tasking menu.

Amazon Kindle Fire: Performance

However, it isn’t all smooth sailing. The Kindle Fire does suffer a little in the engine room with the 512MB of RAM and a 1GHz dual-core processor meaning proceedings are often, by today’s standards, somewhat sluggish.

The accelerometer was slow and transitions between screens likewise. We often found video playback to be pixilated, there were also regular app crashes to contend with and the advertised battery life of 8-hours sounds ambitious to say the very least.

It was at times like this when we felt encouraged to return to the price point. This was never going to be a perfect device, but the warning signs are there.

Amazon Kindle Fire: Browser

One of the main talking points to arise from the official Kindle Fire unveiling was Amazon’s new Silk web browser.

The company boasts about faster loading times as its cloud servers does a lot of the heavy lifting in the background, storing the cache to regularly viewed content, meaning faster access to your favourite sites.

For a fledgling browser, we’re very impressed with Silk. Pages do indeed load and render very quickly and the tabbed browsing works well. It’s certainly a match for Safari and Firefox mobile.

Double-tapping on the screen instantly zooms and re-renders pages and the pinch-to-zoom functionality is spot-on. At no point did we feel bummed-out about the smaller screen in this department

Amazon Kindle Fire: Apps

No Android tablet can match up to the App Store ecosystem, not by a long shot, but when you take the Android Market out of the mix, as Amazon have done to push its own Appstore, then the catalogue diminishes drastically.

The company does have a host of top partners on board, meaning essentials like Angry Birds, Words With Friends, Fruit Ninja, IMDb, Netflix and Pandora are around, but the Facebook app, for example, is just a shortcut to the mobile site and Twitter is among the many big names currently MIA.

The lack of Google’s native app shop also means no YouTube, Gmail, Google+, Maps, Navigation, Translate and the rest. These are the bread-and-butter Android apps and they’re sorely missed here. Again, for better or worse, this really doesn’t feel like an Android device.

Amazon Kindle Fire: Multimedia

Amazon has only allowed 8GB of storage (no SD card slot either) into the Kindle Fire meaning you aren’t going to be able to pack the device with your own music, photos and videos. The company wants you to rely on its Amazon Cloud Drive storage locker to keep your files on tap.

There’s also free movie and TV show streaming to Amazon Prime members (there’s a free one month trial with the device), while, like iTunes, movies can be rented also.

The Amazon MP3 store offers DRM free music and a neat interface, but it’s no iTunes. Also, be sure you have a decent set of headphones handy because the built-in speakers are truly dreadful.

When it comes to books though. Kindle is the king and this device doesn’t let down those long-time Amazon loyalists who have been itching for a colour touchscreen device.

The interface is familiar, just a lot prettier. It’ll be interesting to see whether it can convert those currently keen on e-ink.

Prime members also get access to the Kindle Lending Library, completely free of charge, which allows you to borrow and read one book a month.

Amazon Kindle Fire: Price

While the Kindle Fire has serious limitations, at $199 it remains astonishingly good value for money; one of the best tech bargains of the modern era. The price alone gives users the first true dilemma of the tablet era. Forget the expensive Moto Xooms and HTC Flyers of the world, This is the true alternative to the iPad.

In a head-to-head battle the Apple still wipes the floor with Amazon’s tablet, but this isn’t a head-to-head battle anymore. Tablet fanciers have a legitimate choice. It’s not Apple vs Android; it’s premium and near perfect vs dirt cheap and pretty darn good.

Amazon Kindle Fire: Verdict

When reviewing the Amazon Kindle Fire we found ourselves constantly revisiting the price point and, with that firmly in mind, were probably willing to cut it more slack than we might have had it cost the same as the Motorola Xoom, orSamsung Galaxy Tab 10.1.

There's no Android Market, but it's only £125. There's no GPS, but it's only £125. The same can be said for the less-than-stellar innards and paltry storage.

The limitations we've mentioned are plentiful, but Amazon has just about struck the right balance to the point where the device still receives a solid overall thumbs-up.

The Kindle Fire is no miracle worker, but the compromises the company has made in order to keep the price low are a good trade-off. Afterall, despite what's missing, it's still a very well-crafted and enjoyable device to use, packed with functionality and brimming with easily accessible multimedia content.

Things like the display, touchscreen and user interface have no right being as good as they are at this price.

It's not close to being an iPad killer, but by knocking down boundaries and attracting those who've been edging towards their first tablet but have so far struggled to justify the cost while appealing to those Kindle reader graduates, it will become the first tablet to sell on anything like the same scale. To that end, it's the iPad's first true rival.

Apple iPhone 4S vs Samsung Galaxy S2 0

The smartphone market is a battleground at the moment, with Nokia, Google/Samsung and HTC all releasing powerful, headline grabbing phones. Apple is no exception, having recently launched the iPhone 4S, to pre-orders of 4 million. But since the original iPhone 4 was released in June 2010 a couple of new Android challengers have come onto the smartphone scene and leading the race is the Samsung Galaxy S2 selling 10 million units and actually overtaking the iPhone 4 as the UK's most popular smartphone in June. But which is the best - the Apple iPhone 4S or Samsung Galaxy S2? Or are they just too different to compare? We'll take a closer look.

Apple iPhone 4S vs Samsung Galaxy S2: Design and build

The Apple iPhone 4S and Samsung Galaxy S2 are as far removed from each other in terms of build. Both are slim. The iPhone 4S at 9.3mm and the Galaxy S2 at 8.49mm. In terms of weight the 4S is 140g and the S2 is noticeably lighter at 116g.

While the S2 is primarily made from plastic, the iPhone 4S follows the same glass and stainless steel construction as its predecessor. Aesthetically, we prefer the iPhone 4S, with it’s glass front and stainless steel trim that conceals the repositioned antenna, it’s a stunning piece of kit, in contrast to the square almost anonymous smartphone-by-numbers of the S2.

The iPhone 4S has a premium feel, which the S2 doesn't come close to. In fact, remove the battery cover from the S2 and it feels positively flimsy and cheap, not what you expect from a phone at this price.

However looks can be deceptive. Which of these phones is tough enough to survive knocks and jolts? In our experience the answer is the Galaxy S2. We've dropped an iPhone 4 and the result was a large chip on the front, a friend dropped hers and the entire screen cracked making it unusable. We’ve dropped our Galaxy S2 before and it survived crack and chip free.

Apple iPhone 4S vs Samsung Galaxy S2: Connectivity

The iPhone 4S comes in 16, 32 and 64GB versions, which can't be expanded. The Galaxy S2 includes 16GB internal memory, which can be expanded using a microSD card. The 4S includes AirPlay, which means you can stream movies or to a compatible dock or TV via Apple TV. We prefer the S2, which lets you stream with less dependence on Apple products with DLNA compatibility so you can stream to any compatible TV, along the bottom the MHL port can be used to transfer HD data to a TV.

Apple iPhone 4S vs Samsung Galaxy S2: User interface

The Samsung Galaxy S2 currently runs Android 2.3.3 Gingerbread, whereas the iPhone runs iOS 5.

There no getting away from the fact the interfaces are very similar; along the bottom are four icons and each has multiple homescreens you can customise with apps and folders. Folders are easier to create on the iPhone 4S simply by dragging one item on top of another.

The S2 is infinitely more customisable with a selection of widgets including weather, Google search and Facebook, which update automatically and shortcuts for individual contacts. In Android you can position every icon, app or shortcut anywhere (as long as there is space), however in iOS you are restricted to a positioning icons in rigid rows left to right.

Both offer swipe down notifications - something that appeared on Android first, but only recently on iPhone with the iOS 5 update.

On the Samsung Galaxy S2, as well as message notifications there’s also information on app updates and calendar information. But by far the most useful feature are icons for quickly toggling the Wi-Fi, Bluetooth and Sound on and off. The iPhone 4S also provides message notifications, including Twitter, calendar and the weather and we like the way you can read the first sentences of all messages.

In use the iPhone 4S feels deceptively simple: nothing is buried in menus, with everything a few swipes away, this makes it more user-friendly. We're not saying the Galaxy S2 is tricky to use, it isn't at all, it's just iOS has a simplicity to it. Android also loses points for the inconsistency of its updates, which vary depending on country, operator and network.

We can't mention Android without talking about jailbreaking. Although this is not something we'd recommend, for many people the ability to root is a key appeal of Android handsets, especially the more tech-savvy mobile phone user.

Apple iPhone 4S vs Samsung Galaxy S2: Email

The iPhone 4S lets you add multiple email accounts including Gmail, Yahoo, Hotmail and corporate email you can view these individually or in a synchronised inbox. You can’t actually add attachments within email you have to locate the document/picture first.

The native email app on the Galaxy S2 is of course Gmail, which is very easy to use. Unfortunately it only works for Google and Samsung accounts, so if you have a Hotmail, Yahoo or a corporate email account you need to use the native Email account as well, which isn’t very good. We like the way you can add attachments not just from a range of sources though.

Apple iPhone 4S Vs Samsung Galaxy S2: Camera

Previously we’ve included the Apple iPhone 4 and the Samsung Galaxy S2 in a cameraphone group test.Here the iPhone triumphed over the S2, but now the 4S has an improved sensor and lens. When taking photographs, using the screen as a viewfinder, the iPhone makes the scene brighter than reality.

Both cameras have resolutions of 8-megapixel. We've included a test shot below, the bottom shot is a segment of the picture enlarged to 100 per cent the iPhone 4S is on the left in both. The iPhone 4S just edges the Galaxy S2, with sharper pictures, punchier colours and better rendition of shadow detail (photos have been scaled to fit the page).

The Galaxy S2 and iPhone 4S both shoot HD movies at full resolution of 1920x1080, underneath you can see the same scene shot using both phones (both were shot using automatic settings).

Colours seem to be a little richer with the S2, there’s more colours in the trees and more shades of green, but the 4S is much sharper and better at retaining detail in high and low contrast situations. We also noticed that a couple of times the S2 refocuses for a split second.

Audio from the iPhone 4S is clearer, the Galaxy S2 exhibits what can only be described as a slight chugging noise, although we hope that’s just our sample.

Ultimately we prefer the iPhone 4S’s camera, primarily for the sharpness, although the S2 trounces the iPhone 4S for features, with adjustable ISO, white balance and metering, along with a selection of scene modes, you can use to tweak your photos.

Apple iPhone 4S vs Samsung Galaxy S2: Performance

Both phones have dual-core processors. Apple has never revealed the exact details of the iPhone 4S’s chip, but it’s suspected to have 512MB RAM. The Samsung Galaxy S2 includes a 1.2GHz dual-core Samsung Exynos 4210 chip with 1GB RAM.

We ran a series of (non-scientific) tests by loading the same web pages (some text heavy, some media heavy) on each device simultaneously, over Wi-Fi after clearing the cache and deleting our history. In each test the iPhone 4S was one to two seconds faster at fully loading pages, but neither phone was slow.

One advantage of a dual-core chip is superior performance. At the moment there aren't very many dual-core games available for the iPhone 4S. We fired N.O.V.A 2 up on both phones and both play smoothly with no juddering, in fact during gameplay there’s very little difference between the two phones. Graphically we prefer the iPhone 4S though, more pixels and a smaller screen means it's sharper.

If you're interested in some detailed testing, we'd suggest checking out Anandtech which has a series of benchmarks comparing the two phones and others here.

Although we found the iPhone 4S slighty faster, in day to day use there's very little difference between the two. We should point out that unless you are doing lots of video streaming and gaming you might not even need/use the full power of a dual-core phone.

The speaker on the iPhone 4S is superior, producing a warm, full sound, in contrast the Galaxy S2 is tinnier, with less bass.

Turning to battery life. Neither of these phones is particularly good. With push email on, moderate browsing, calls and texting and the odd off-line Spotify session, we had to charge both phones at the end of the day, sometimes earlier with the S2, thanks to the larger screen. But we had iCloud email turned off, activate this and the battery will need charging even more.

Apple iPhone 4S vs Samsung Galaxy S2: Social Networking

Samsung has its Social Hub which pulls together all messages from Facebook, Twitter and Linked In along with your email, into a stream. It works pretty well, although we prefer HTC’s FriendStream and for us, the Android Twitter and Facebook widgets were acceptable, unfortunately the iPhone 4S doesn’t have any widgets.

Twitter integration was touted as an amazing new feature of iOS, however it’s nothing revolutionary. You can Tweet your location, photo or web page but that’s about it. In contrast on the Galaxy S2 you can send pictures, documents, favourite web pages to a range of sources including Facebook, Dropbox, Twitter, Google+ and Gmail.

We should mention iMessage, which lets you send messages between iOS 5 devices, such as the iPad and iPhone 4S, using your data allowance, rather than as a text. It’s a great idea, but of at the moment it doesn’t quite work as it should and it only works across Apple devices, in contrast to a cross-platform application such as What’s App Messenger. Overall, if you’re a social networking fan, the Samsung Galaxy S2 is the better choice.

Apple iPhone 4S vs Samsung Galaxy S2: Contacts

Now, many people have multiple methods of contact: email, work phone, home phone, Facebook and Twitter. The Android-running Samsung Galaxy S2 does a fantastic job of integrating them. As well as a phone number and email, you can also view their Twitter feed, Facebook profile and IM details (including Skype) through Contacts. In contrast the iPhone 4S offers far less integration with social networking, focusing on more traditional media, with phone numbers and email.

Apple iPhone 4S vs Samsung Galaxy S2: Screen

The iPhone 4S has exactly the same screen as the iPhone 4, at 3.5-inches with a resolution of 326 PPI compared to the 4.3-inch Samsung Galaxy S2 and 218 PPI.

For contrast the Samsung Galaxy S2 is easily the best screen on the market, with deep rich blacks, but the iPhone 4S has an excellent screen too, with much bolder whites.

In the picture below, the brightness is at maximum on both screens, but the iPhone 4S is much brighter and text is sharper thanks to the combination of more pixels 960x640 to 800x480, but a smaller screen.

Off-angle viewing is good on both phones, although on the S2 the white has a slightly green tint, unlike the more pure white iPhone 4S.

For N.O.V.A 2 we prefer the bold colours of the Galaxy S2, although it’s not as sharp as the iPhone 4S, with the odd jaggie edge. In the You Tube clip above from Avatar, the iPhone 4S seems sharper, with more detail, but the S2 is more colourful. Overall we prefer the Apple iPhone 4S for browsing, but for movies the larger screen of the Samsung Galaxy S2 is the winner.

Apple iPhone 4S vs Samsung Galaxy S2: Apps

Much has been written comparing the Android Market and Apple App Store and in terms of choice and quantity Apple still trounces Android.

However the Android Market has been redesigned and is far easier to use, now offering Apps, Games, Books and Films from the same place. To get movies or music on to the iPhone 4S you need to go via the iTunes app.

S2 user can of course buy apps from the Samsung App store, which has some good deals with mobile games developers, although it’s frustrating having to buy apps from two places.

Apple iPhone 4S vs Samsung Galaxy S2: Verdict

Before summing up, we need to say that the Apple iPhone 4S and Samsung Galaxy S2 are both excellent phones, they are powerful and quick, with fantastic screens and great cameras. It really comes down to the type of user you are.

The iPhone has a superior camera and app selection, it's also marginally quicker and the screen is sharper and brighter, but it’s smaller and less colourful and the battery isn't great. Ultimately the iPhone 4S’s operating system is much more rigid, with less integration to third-parties. We also need to mention Apple's walled-garden approach which won't appeal to many people, yes iCloud and iMessage is a great idea, but it relies on owning multiple Apple products. The Samsung Galaxy S2 is the better choice for movies and games with superior social networking, the interface is far more flexible and customisable and although it lacks the almost paint by numbers simplicity of iOS, improvements should come with the Ice Cream Sandwich update.

We also need to consider cost. To get the iPhone 4S free on contract it costs around £43-£46 a month. By virtue of being a bit older, the S2 costs £30 a month, that equates to a huge saving over 24 months.