Single page view ?
These multi-multi-page articles used to have a single page view button.
Where's it gone ?
Before you all take to the comments page and start asking why in the name of hell it has taken us more than six months to review the Fire 8.9 HDX, let me clarify one thing. This is the new, refreshed winter 2014 model. Yes, I know it looks very similar, OK, make that identical, to the previous (3rd) generation 8.9 HDX but trust …
you could always use the top-right-hand-side URL-bar blue coloured "READER" function in Safari browser, or El'reg could go out to press with a bit less make-up on.
(other site-hacks are available, maybe iReader for Chrome & Readability for FF-ozilla are still around?)
> After the first massive picture, I read the first paragraph and realised I had completely forgotten what this tablet looked like. Thankfully, you then included an identical massive picture again.
It's apparently for the benefit of mobile bods who don't have as much screen real estate as desktop users. It seems a bit counter-intuitive to seemingly waste all that space but I only build websites professionally, so what would I know?
I have bought my GF Kindles various since they first came out. I think she's on her 4th now (a Fire HD)and it seems to be surviving its nightly drop on the floor when she falls asleep whilst reading it. The rest all ended up as piles of bits in the bin (in one case, a soggy pile of bits). At those prices, she's not getting number 5...Blimey I'm shocked!
When someone produces a decent/sensibly priced 12" tablet with a 4:3 viewing ratio, so I can read magazines and web-browse at a sensible viewing scale - I'm getting tired of poking and prodding the screen to try and hit the tiny links on my company's mobile-unfriendly Outlook web client, even on my LG G3's 5.5 inch screen!
All these variations on a 16:9 7"/9" tablet are missing the point - not only is the market glutted with the beasties, but they're not really big enough to offer a significant advantage over the many 5"+ phones which are now available...
I have exactly the same problem and am bemused that the Outlook OWA doesn't have a default mobile-friendly format.
Try appending '/?layout=twide' (or '/?layout=tnarrow' if you're on a phone) to the end of your OWA URL. I've got it as a bookmark.*
PITA, but it works.
*May be dependent on running Exchange 2013
Try paying for a mail client.
I agree that you shouldn't need to but, yeah, Microsoft... Woo.
I use "Mobile Access For Outlook OWA" on android. It only cost a few quid and has been regularly updated and gone from strength to strength. Would recommend. Devs were quick to respond to my emails identifying issues.
Def works with exchange 2007+2010, not sure what else.
Like it so much I'd happily pay the 3 or 4 quid all over again.
"I agree that you shouldn't need to but, yeah, Microsoft... Woo"
So you're blaming Microsoft because your Android tablet doesn't come with a good mail client? All of the other tablet OS's come with a perfectly serviceable mail client out of the box, and Exchange 2013 has full mobile support on OWA which works perfectly. From what I can tell MS are doing quite well.
I agree with you for web browsing and magazine/book reading and the like but I use my tablet very frequently for viewing movies, and there a 16:9 makes MUCH more sense as you will get less of the black-bordery badness happening. Given Amazon are very much touting this as a movie/video content consumption toy, I think the 16:9 makes more sense to be honest.
But it's swings and roundabouts, and YMMV. :)
That is why Amazon Fire is struggling, in a nutshell. You can't strip useful stuff out of Android then expect people to pay more for it.
The Fire tablets either need to have some new, killer, must-have functionality or a rock-bottom price. The combination of missing features and high price-point is not attractive.
I don't really care how whazzy the technology inside it is, because all I would seem to get for the rather high purchase price is the opportunity to send an ongoing stream of yet more money into Amazon's coffers. I'd only consider something like this if it was readily rootable to allow stock Android as a replacement for the proprietary Amazon OS. On second thoughts, perhaps I'll get a Nexus 9.
"based on 4.4.3..."
So.. given 4.4.4 was release mid-june, why haven't Amazon incorporated it (at least!) into their new product? 4.4.4 was supposed to include security fixes - so does that mean this new shiny is missing them?
Not even mentioning Lollipop which has been out in developer preview form since the end of June....
My summary of the product would be "somewhat dated software - possibly even having security vulnerabilities"
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019