I'm working with a client to publish a magazine on the Kindle Fire. The magazine, a bimonthly, has been available on the iPad for more than a year now. All of the folios that we have produced for the iPad are PDF format. (Which turned out to be a good decision, since they will display nicely on the new iPad.)
We will produce a 1024x600 rendition for the Kindle going forward. However, all of the legacy folios show up in the Kindle viewer library and are not readable. The reader displays an error when you try to open one of the old folios. ("This folio contains one or more PDF stacks which are not yet supported ...")
I would like to prevent some frustration for our readers here, but we do not have the budget or time to rebuild all of the legacy folios as 1024x600 documents.
The Kindle will adequately display 1024x768 PNG-based folios by adding bars at the top and bottom of the screen. Not ideal, but adequate. If we were to shave a few pixels -- say, 4 or 6 -- from the width of the legacy folios and rebuild them as PNG-based folios, would the difference be enough for the Kindle to recognize those as renditions and load them instead of the full-size folios? And would the iPad ignore the slightly narrower folios? That would allow us to address the problem without having to redesign a years' worth of magazines.
Thanks to Adobe and Amazon for working out the issues with the Kindle viewer. Looking foward to seeing our publications on both platforms soon.
If you set up renditions (same Folio Name, different Size values) between folios, it should work. Try shaving off one pixel and creating a 1024x767 folio and source documents. It definitely won't show up on the iPad (iPads viewers display 4:3 aspect ratio folios only), and if you set up renditions properly, the 1024x768 folio won't show up on Android.
An update: I finally had a chance to test this. Took 1 pixel off the width of the original document, and it worked perfectly.