There has been a lot of debate on whether the Amazon Kindle Fire has had a significant impact on Apple iPad sales. Some believe that the Fire has cost Apple billions of dollars. I've never believed that the Fire would have much of an effect on hardware sales; the larger and more important battle concerns digital media sales (music, movies, books, etc.). In yesterday's earnings call, Apple CEO Tim Cook confirmed my belief and claimed that the Kindle hasn't changed much as far as hardware sales go.
According to Mac Rumors:
Contrary to some reports, Apple CEO Tim Cook said today that the company hadn't seen any slowdown in iPad sales following the introduction of the much-hyped Kindle Fire tablet.
When asked by an analyst during today's quarterly earnings call about the impact on the iPad from lower priced tablets, Cook noted that the company sold a record 15.4 million iPads and that Apple doesn't consider "limited function tablets and e-readers to be in the same category as the iPad". A big reason for the iPads success, Cook believes, is that the ecosystem for the iPad is "in a class by itself".
Naturally, I expect some people to argue that iPad sales would have been even more ridiculous had the Kindle Fire not been released. Certainly there's some overlap, but I believe that the Fire and the iPad 2 are targeted towards difference consumers. There's always the possibility that Cook was putting up a strong front and that the company is truly concerned about the Fire (as well as other sub-$300 tablets). Personally, I think his words were mostly honest. The iPad and the fire are different products with different goals and different strategies.
What do you think? As successful as the Kindle Fire was, do you believe that had it had no effect on iPad sales? Or is Cook putting on a brave face until Apple serves up its own sub-$300 tablet?
[Via: Mac Rumors]
