I love technology. But I'm not the kind of person to rush out and just buy things. Land sakes, no. I think about it, analyze it, do price comparisons, read reviews, the whole nine yards. My husband and I keep up with what's new in gizmo-land, but we don't replace our technology unless it doesn't work anymore or is truly, sorely out of date. Average life expectancy on a cell phone/smart phone in my hands? 2-3 years, depending. For a laptop? 3 years. A TV? 5 years. We replace things, but not after carefully researching and making sure it's needed or warranted.
Enter the oh-so-flashy iPad.

Pertinent information: I am a former Mac user who converted mainly to PC circa 2004 (largely because of my workplace) and have only purchased iPods since - until this year, when I purchased an iPhone and then was issued a MacBook Pro and a second iPhone for my new job. So I guess I'm a born-again Apple person. I'll save my thoughts about the Apple corporation for another day, because they are lengthy and highly polarizing, and for now I'll be brief: Apple is very cool; Apple is very expensive; Apple gets away with charging you a premium because their shit is cool.
Now, back to the iPad.
There were tablets long before the iPad, but no one bought them. And it wasn't because they didn't do nifty things like stream content and let you play games. It was because they're unnecessary. You don't NEED a tablet. Especially now that most people have smartphones. But through the genius of Apple, the world suddenly liked tablets. Because the iPad is cool. The iPad is also very, very expensive, so of course not everyone can afford one...so all the other techno peeps set about creating their tablets to compete. And the tablet craze was begun. The people cried out, "Our laptops and smartphones are not enough! We want tablets! We want to stream our Netflix without having to carry our laptops to the living room!" Oh, we privileged first-world citizens do love our techno gizmos, do we not?! Life is so hard! But this whole thing is actually good because now there are lots of options and price points and there's something for everyone - from the low-budget to the "sky's the limit" crowd. Yay! Toys for all!
At first I was supremely anti-tablet. But after 18 months of watching everyone and their mom buy a tablet, I started thinking, you know, this might actually be handy for me. I'm over the in-home laptop, certainly now that work provides me a laptop. And I travel a lot. It might be nice to have another option. So I started to research, for a long time determined NOT to buy an iPad because, well, the principle of the thing. But now that I have all this Apple shit, I eventually realized that it would be more efficient if I could use the same cloud, share all the same stuff, etc. So I did it. I bought myself a very first-worldy iPad 2. And a little part of me died inside.
Meanwhile...Amazon released the Kindle Fire.

And I bought one for my husband, because why not? We both love Amazon in the way many people love Apple, and it's only $200! As someone who still can't believe that a regular Kindle is so cheap, I thought if nothing else, you can read on this thing, so it can't be a total bust. And you know, they hype on the Fire was big, but when it came out I read a lot of articles saying "Meh, it's not an iPad." Well, folks, no. It's not an iPad. But after a few weeks of having both around the house, I have come to the conclusion that most tablet users would do just fine with a Fire.
POINT-BY-POINT IPAD/FIRE COMPARISON:
Streaming content
This is the main reason most people buy a tablet - to listen to music, read books, watch movies. The Fire and the iPad do this about equally well from what I can tell. Though you have the option of 3G on an iPad, road tests with both gizmos didn't show a significant difference in service despite 3G enabling on the iPad. The Fire seemed to work just about everywhere the iPad worked. What's more, the Fire actually downloaded movie rentals from the Amazon Prime store much faster than the iPad downloaded them from the iTunes store - and also faster than my home computer downloaded movies from iTunes. I think the details here are important. It took 5+ hours each time I downloaded a movie from iTunes, whether it was to my iPad OR my laptop. The Fire downloaded movies in 90 minutes. That's a BIG difference.
The Silk browser on the Fire works at about the same speed as the Safari browser for iPad, and you can download new browsers like Opera to either one. Very important: you do NOT have to use Amazon Prime to enjoy your Fire. You can access Netflix and Hulu and such from the Fire. The only site Jay has had trouble with is HBO Go. Hopefully that will work better if he tries another browser. The screen on the iPad is obviously bigger and better, but the Fire is really light and comfortable to hold, so hey, they're both pretty neat. Both devices can handle your email just fine.
Storage
The iPad offers more storage, but thanks to the cloud on either device, it really doesn't matter UNLESS you are someone who wants to physically store more than 3 or 4 movies on your device, which I would argue is not most people. I purchased the 16gig 3G iPad and I cannot imagine filling it. Why would I put my music on it? It's all on my iPhone, and when do I not have my phone with me? And you're not gonna take your iPad to the gym to listen to tunes, or on a run. So really...is space REALLY that important? Also, Amazon's had a cloud longer than Apple has, and both gizmos come with the same amount of cloud storage.
iTunes vs. Amazon Store/Amazon Prime
You have to pay a membership fee for Prime after your trial period, but it's not that much money, and afterwards you get discounts. For instance, if you rent a movie through Prime, it costs 99 cents and you get 48 hours for viewing, whereas rentals at iTunes are more in the neighborhood of 4-5 bucks and you only have 24 hours to watch. I keep waiting for iTunes to give us a membership option, that would be so great! Hint, hint, Apple! And let's not forget about that whole download time thing. I don't know what's going on with iTunes, but Amazon Prime downloads are faster. Plus, if you buy music from Amazon, it doesn't come with usage restrictions. Remember that annoying iTunes rule about only putting the music on 5 devices? That is SO uncool. No worries with that on Amazon. Sorry, iTunes. Your store is prettier, but I usually browse for ideas there and then go shop on Amazon.
Reading
Both the Kindle Fire and the iPad suck for reading. Period. It's bad for your eyes to read on lit screens. That's what they are. Suck. Magazines look great, as do graphic novels, but if you want to read books for long periods of time, read a real book or get an e-reader like a regular Kindle or Nook or whatever.
Camera/lack thereof
The Fire has no camera and that is a bummer if you are a person who uses Skype or other video chatting programs. It's pretty much the only major downside of the Fire as of right now. But some people don't use those programs OR they will be okay with using them on their laptops or smartphones, like my husband. He doesn't care that his Fire has no camera. I will be interested to see if Amazon releases a more expensive Fire with maybe 16g and a camera. Who knows.
Extras and apps
So as we all know, Apple currently boasts the most robust selection of apps. So far, Jay has been able to find most of the apps he wants in the Android selection for the Fire, or a very close approximation. You can play Angry Birds on the Fire, which should be enough to sate your average American. But if you're really into apps, you will find more on the iPad for sure. Also, it's true that you can't do all the cool music and video editing on a Kindle Fire that you can do on an iPad - and this touches on the reviewers who talk about the Fire not qualifying as a tablet, or offering any of the cool stuff that the iPad offers. This is my thought: Most users don't use that stuff. How many people are actually editing video or music on their iPad? I mean, really? Some are, but not very many. This is the same argument I make about laptops/computers, actually - most people only use about 1/5 of the power of their device, so I would argue, why are you paying for that other 4/5?
In summary...
The iPad is really cool. It syncs up with my laptop and phone. It has all the exact same features as my phone...which is cool, but it also MAY make you wonder why you just ran out and paid $700 for a larger version of the phone in your pocket. Ask yourself which of the features on the iPad you are actually going to USE...and how much of your desire to have an iPad is because "it's cool." If you've got the cash and you don't care, then tenfore, good buddy. That was me. I knew I didn't NEED it, but I wanted it, and that's basically all. But you won't hear me talk about how I needed it, that's for sure.
If you aren't flush with cash to spring for the iPad or any other $600+ tablet (and by the way, even wifi-only, 16gb iPad is going to cost $600 by the time you pay tax and get a cover for it), seriously, the Kindle Fire is a very, very cool option. Or if, like us, you want two unnecessary tablets for your first-world home. Or if you have KIDS who want to watch movies and play Angry Birds. It's a cool mini-tablet, and I would bet you that they'll release several other versions of it in the coming months/years because Amazon is awesome. And they'll all be cheap, because Amazon is so savvy, they don't have to make cash on these things.
The point of this diatribe is not to say the iPad sucks. Nope, it's very cool. I love my iPad. But the Kindle Fire is very, very cool too, and if money is tight or you just aren't that into the Apple thing, I think the Fire will serve as a great, inexepensive alternative for lots of people.
If anyone has tried the new Nook tablet, which is only $50 more than the Fire, I'd love to hear about it, as that looks to be another strong option for people in the under $300 price range.