RE:"You get what you pay for"
Indeed and as to your point concerning who Apple are marketing to a survey I read recently concerning the iPad in the US showed clearly that their main demographic is 20 - 30 something males in households with a joint income of over $100.00 per annum.
As far as this comment from the article goes
"but in my experience it hasn't gone nearly far enough to rival the iPad for elegance and polish."
However much he hedges that comment it is IMHO meaningless. The question is not whether the people who are Apple's marketing goal are going to stop buying iPads and buy the Fire instead (they most certainly *won't*) the question is what proportion of people *in general* coming into the market are going to regard the Fire at the price concerned as attractive. The Fire is only competing with the iPad in the sense of it being a content provider. I simply do not see the point in comparing the iPad (which is high end kit) as *hardware* with the Fire. The question is will enough customers find the experience attractive enough to make the KF a success. The author pays lip service to much of this but then hedges it about with caveats and comparisons that I feel simply are not relevant to the outcome. Comparing a high end tablet like the iPad with something like the Fire in hardware terms and the sophistication of the os ( iOS does not float my personal boat but I recognise that it is a mature os developed for a high-end device and cannot be compared to what Amazon have done in any meaningful sense.)
The only relevant judgement in this instance will be the Fire's first quarter sales figures.