“Rather than a platform that invites innovation, the iPhone comes preprogrammed. You are not allowed to add programs to the all-in-one device” (The Future of The Internet And How To Stop It).
Similar to Apple’s “locked appliance” approach towards the iPhone, the Kindle Fire also steers away from being an open, generative system for users.
The Kindle operates in a closed universe, meaning “its functionality is locked in” from the public’s growing participatory culture, ultimately limiting user access. The tablet runs under Amazon’s proprietary format, whereby the company makes money through controlling the content user’s have access to (i.e eBooks) and the transactions they make. Similar to Apple’s “walled garden of apps”, where users are at the mercy of the controller, ultimately the information appliance (iPhone) remains tethered to the maker’s (Apple) desires (Mitew, 2017).
In a sense, this device is merely a consumption appliance, rather than a generative platform that encourages user participation and innovation (Mitew, 2017). Amazon follows what is known as a “permission culture”, meaning the company believes locking the device is benefitting the consumer – that is the message of this medium.
Divergently, the Nook, an alternative reading tablet, uses an open format, which means user’s can read eBooks from a variety of sources. This device does not control the storefronts to which user’s can gain their products from, instead, it offers apps that let people stream content to the tablet (Kindle Fire vs. Nook Tablet: Which Should You Buy?).
Kindle Fire >> Nook
Brittany
blogonwithbritt.wordpress.com 
Wow, interesting post Brittany, I would also like to commend the layout and aesthetic of your blog site it is different to others I have seen. I personally have never encountered a kindle but they seem interesting and I like the comparison you have made with the iPhone. I would like to hear more about the functionality being locked in.
LikeLike