????在亞馬遜公司（Amazon）正式推出Fire手機(jī)兩個(gè)月后，我們有理由把它稱為一款讓人失望的產(chǎn)品。

????在滿分為五星的評(píng)價(jià)表上，亞馬遜的客戶只給這款智能手機(jī)打出了2.6顆星的黯淡評(píng)價(jià)。評(píng)測(cè)者則稱其“過目即忘”、“平庸無奇”。當(dāng)時(shí)為隆重推出這款手機(jī)，亞馬遜在西雅圖舉辦了盛大的新聞發(fā)布會(huì)。但僅過了一個(gè)月，該公司就將Fire手機(jī)的定價(jià)從200美元大幅削減至99美分，足以表明亞馬遜默認(rèn)了慘淡的銷售現(xiàn)狀。

????對(duì)這家電商巨頭來說，在Fire手機(jī)上栽的這個(gè)跟頭是一個(gè)重大挫折。該公司起初的如意算盤是，通過投入巨資和豐富資源打造一款智能手機(jī)，以期在這個(gè)長(zhǎng)期被蘋果（Apple）、谷歌（Google）和三星（Samsung）等對(duì)手統(tǒng)治的巨大市場(chǎng)上分一杯羹。此外，亞馬遜還希望Fire幫助用戶更便捷地尋找和購買商品，從而將手機(jī)購物人群引入該公司自家的購物平臺(tái)上。但現(xiàn)在亞馬遜顯然陣腳大亂，它是否能從這次失敗中東山再起也不得而知。

????加拿大皇家銀行資本市場(chǎng)公司（RBC Capital Markets）總經(jīng)理兼分析師馬克?馬哈尼認(rèn)為，這種大幅降價(jià)純屬孤注一擲。他說：“亞馬遜成功的機(jī)會(huì)十分渺茫。這種做法為時(shí)已晚?！?/p>

????Fire手機(jī)的缺點(diǎn)多多。乍一看，它似乎是款功能足夠多的手機(jī)，在屏幕、攝像頭和內(nèi)存等方面與市面上的同類產(chǎn)品相差無幾。與眾不同之處在于，某些應(yīng)用的圖像具有三維顯示效果，還有一款名為Firefly的應(yīng)用可以讓實(shí)體店的購物者在網(wǎng)上輕松找到超過一億種商品并下單（當(dāng)然最好是在亞馬遜官網(wǎng)上購買）。

????可是，在這個(gè)早已被蘋果和安卓手機(jī)擠得滿滿當(dāng)當(dāng)?shù)氖袌?chǎng)里，僅僅推出一款“功能足夠”的手機(jī)是遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)不夠的。要想脫穎而出，對(duì)Fire這樣一款比首款iPhone晚了7年、比首款安卓手機(jī)晚了6年才推出的智能手機(jī)來說，必須要有突破性的硬件和軟件才行。

????弗雷斯特研究公司（Forrester）分析師弗蘭克?吉列特表示：“如果這款產(chǎn)品是很早以前推出的，那肯定能吸引很多人的眼球。但現(xiàn)在這個(gè)市場(chǎng)早已人滿為患、眾聲喧嘩了。這時(shí)候你再出現(xiàn)，根本沒人會(huì)在意你?！?/p>

????亞馬遜的一位發(fā)言人拒絕發(fā)表評(píng)論。但在Fire手機(jī)的發(fā)布會(huì)上，杰夫?貝索斯卻把自家這款產(chǎn)品吹捧為超級(jí)智能手機(jī)。

????當(dāng)時(shí)他在舞臺(tái)上是這么說的：“我們能為亞馬遜的尊享客戶打造一款更好的手機(jī)嗎？沒錯(cuò)的，我們可以?！?/p>

????羅伯特?布倫納曾在1989年到1997年間擔(dān)任蘋果公司工業(yè)設(shè)計(jì)總監(jiān)，后來也為亞馬遜首款電子閱讀器Kindle的設(shè)計(jì)出過一份力。他對(duì)Fire手機(jī)的前景卻要悲觀得多。

????Two months after Amazon released the Fire phone, it’s fair to call the device a disappointment.

????Amazon’s customers gave the smartphone a lackluster rating of 2.6 out of 5 stars. Reviewers called the device “forgettable” and “mediocre.” And Amazon AMZN -0.43% all but admitted to underwhelming sales by drastically cutting the Fire’s price from $200 to 99 cents just one month after unveiling the device at a splashy press conference in Seattle.

????Amazon’s stumble with the Fire is a major setback for the online retailing giant. By sinking money and resources into a smartphone, the company had hoped to gain a significant piece of the huge smartphone market long dominated by rivals like Apple AAPL -0.64% , Google GOOG -0.13% and Samsung. Moreover, the Fire was supposed to funnel mobile shoppers to Amazon’s online store by making it easier to find and buy products. But Amazon is now left scrambling, and it’s unclear whether it can recover from its flop.

????“The odds of Amazon succeeding were always very small,” says Mark Mahaney, Managing Director and analyst for RBC Capital Markets, who argues the price cut is a veritable Hail Mary pass. “My guess is it’s too late.”

????The Fire phone’s shortcomings are plenty. On first blush, it’s an adequate device with features comparable to others in the market in terms of screen, camera and memory. What sets it apart is a three-dimensional effect for graphics on certain apps and an application called Firefly that lets shoppers in bricks and mortar stores easily identify over 100 million different products and then buy them online (preferably at Amazon).

????But in a crowded space dominated by Apple and Android devices, simply releasing something “adequate” isn’t enough. To stand out, a smartphone like the Fire, which arrived seven years after the first iPhone and six years after the first Android device, requires breaththrough hardware and software.

????“If they had shown up with this phone a long time ago, they could have gotten a lot more attention,” says Frank Gillett, a Forrester analyst. “But it’s a very noisy crowd in an established market. Once you show up at the party now, nobody pays attention.”

????An Amazon spokesperson declined to comment. But at the Fire phone’s unveiling, Jeff Bezos trumpeted the device as a superior smartphone.

????“Can we make a better phone for Amazon Prime customers?” he said onstage. “Yes. Yes, we can.”

????Robert Brunner, who served as Apple’s director of industrial design from 1989 to 1997 and later collaborated on the design of Amazon’s first Kindle e-reader, gave a much more pessimistic assessment.