It seems to me, in terms of logical argumentation that (1) a commenter would have to be able to show that the Kindle Fire and Nook Tablet received equal or nearly equal media coverage. Or, (2)they could, if they've used both devices, refute my contention that the Kindle Fire wasn't as good as the Nook Tablet, although, thanks to the media blitz, the Fire is outselling the Nook.
When one comments on a proposition, one does not bring in extraneous information. In other words, one doesn't compare apples with oranges. Apparently that basic rule of reasoning is not so basic as I thought. Before proceeding, I have to lay out what my post was about.
First, I was specifically talking about 7" color Tablets with dedicated eReaders built in to them. These display 16,000,000 colors and a plethora of pixels, thus displaying awesome, brilliant pictures. They also have web browsers in them, emails, a variety of Apps including those that stream movies, music players, games, and, in the Nook Tablets, photos and movies downloaded from one's computer. Amazon allows you to email documents to the Fire rather than directly downloading them via a USB cable as the Nook does.. Apparently, either of these methods of transferring files is satisfactory.
These 7" color tablets range in price from $144-$249. The lowest price is the upgraded NOOKcolor bought with a Barnes and Noble membership. The $249 is the 16 gig Nook Tablet without the $25 members discount. The Fire and the Nook Tablet (8gig) are both $199, although Barnes and Noble has "deals" in which, if you buy a subscription to the NY Times, they lower their prices dramatically.
I was specifically not talking about Amazon's 3 Kindles or the first 3 Nook readers. None of these are tablets. None of those display pictures. They all use what is known as Ink technology. They are far lighter than the Tablets and can do nothing except display text and look up definitions. If you prefer one of these devices, and there are good reasons to, that is fine, but it has nothing to do with the media blitz that Amazon was given gratis for its Fire tablet. My husband prefers his Kindle Touch and Nook Touch, because they are simple and very light. But this is beside the point of my posting. Not everyone wants a Tablet . Some prefer the simpler eReaders. However, I was talking about Tablets and the people who are buying them and why they're buying the ones they are
One reader responded with the information that she bought a Nook, but not the "fancy" ones, then went on to say she wished she'd bought the Kindle because it had more books that she liked than Barnes and Noble did, that Amazon books are cheaper, and you don't have to pay sales tax on them. That's fine, but it had nothing to do with my post. First, she didn't buy a Tablet, so she wasn't addressing the relative merits of the Fire or the Nook Tablet. Second, no media reports have claimed that either vendor surpassed the other in book selection, nor did I mention that as it has no bearing on the issue of the media's role in sales.
Barnes and Noble claims over 2,500,000 eBooks for sale, plus 1,000.000 free eBooks. Amazon boasts of over 1,000,000 eBooks, and also has free ones. I don't doubt that a given book might not be available in one or the other format, but how often this occurs, no media outlet that I could find says. Moreover, none of the media reports hawking the Amazon Fire mentioned the numbers of books available, much less the genres of books or their prices. Personally, I buy both Kindle and Nook books. They're usually the same price. Both Amazon and Barnes and Noble have websites which list all the books and all the genres of books which each has for sale. Before investing in any eReader, it seems to me one should visit these web sites and search for the kinds of books one wants. That is a sensible reason to invest in one or the other.
However, book selection and prices are not germane to my post. That was about the media giving free publicity to Amazon and the concomitant fact that this publicity, in itself, sells. We think we are free agents when we buy things, but we aren't. People, in the main, buy what the media touts. The media makes certain brands familiar and, because they've been singled out for mention, the unconscious feeling is that they must be good. And they may be good, but my point is that whether or not they are, if they're hyped in the media, they will sell. After all, companies spend millions of dollars on advertising because if people hear about and see a product, they're more likely to buy it. Free media reports of a product have the same effect.
To me, how an eReader performs is of most importance in a tablet. I willingly pay the sales tax on Nook books for the joy of reading on Nook Tablets. In evaluating each tablet, I did consider its eReader. That is pertinent to my discussion of media mention and product success because the eReader in the Fire is greatly inferior to both Nook Tablets. That argued to the merit of each tablet.
The media emphasizes that the Fire is only $199, and they tout it as competition to the 10" iPad, which it is not. Neither are the Nook Tablets. They are 7" color tablets with no phones or cameras and can't get iPad's apps. Rather, they have Android apps. The 7" tablets can't access iTunes, but they can get music. With an iPad, you can have both a Kindle App and a Nook app. Also, there are far more apps for the iPad than for the Fire or the Nook. An iPad costs between $500 and $800. The tablets under discussion range from $144 to $249. Obviously, the iPad has more than either the Fire or the Nooks. To imply that the Fire is an alternative to the iPad, as many articles have, is, to me, deceptive.
Finally, Barnes and Noble publishes over 1000 Vooks, Enhanced Edition books with embedded audio, video, and animation in them. They play on both the NOOKcolor Tablet and the Nook Tablet, but not on the Fire.These Vooks the greatest change in the book since Gutenberg. Just think, if I were writing a book on linguistics, I could have audio clips for people to hear dialect differences, and videos of body motion and in interactions, but only on Nook Tablets. They're not available on the Fire.
My reader clearly missed the point of my post. She did what so often people do with a point of contention. She cited matters that were not germane to the post she was ostensibly commenting on. She compared apples with oranges. I do not quarrel with her choice of eReader. I sympathize with her reasons for wishing she'd bought a Kindle. I think she should buy one, especially since she finds more books on Amazon that she wants to read. If she were to buy a 7" tablet, clearly the Fire should be her choice. The same is true of Sextant, who usually has witty and trenchant comments. I'm glad you like your Kindle. I wasn't invalidating anybody's experiences with their eReaders. I wasn't even talking about the Ink based eReaders like the black and white Kindles or Nooks. What pertinence do those personal experiences have to my article on 7" Tablets and the media?
I know I'm blunt. I'm open. I love getting comments on what I've written about. I don't mind negative comments. I thrive on them. However, the comments should be relevant to the posts.