[HN Gopher] My coffee maker just makes coffee
___________________________________________________________________
My coffee maker just makes coffee
Author : bradley_taunt
Score : 88 points
Date : 2023-01-09 16:34 UTC (6 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (bt.ht)
(TXT) w3m dump (bt.ht)
| sidfthec wrote:
| The model that I think the OP is talking about has 3.4/5 stars on
| Keurig's own website. That's a horrible rating.
|
| Maybe there's a different lesson to be learned here?
| fwungy wrote:
| My coffee maker can communicate with my stove and refrigerator
| over wifi. He seems less lonely now.
| deafpolygon wrote:
| My $20 coffee maker lasts me years.
| jamesgreenleaf wrote:
| It's funny how the engineers are rarely the ones over-
| engineering.
| paxys wrote:
| Simplicity isn't a measure of quality. I have a "pro" $800
| espresso machine with lots of fancy functions that is used many
| times a day and has been working perfectly with near zero
| maintenance for >10 years now. I can guarantee that the author's
| simple $12 drip coffee maker from Amazon is going to the landfill
| well before that.
|
| The problem really is that brands like Keurig are packaging these
| same $12 machines for $100-150, and add useless half-baked
| features to justify the price. Same can be said for plenty of
| other companies that built a reputation for quality 20+ years ago
| and are now trading that for a quick buck by cutting costs and
| sacrificing product quality. It's ultimately up to the consumer
| to be diligent and do their research before buying. Plenty of
| companies are making solid coffee machines today - Breville,
| Bonavita, Baratza, Gaggia, La Marzocco, Ninja, Bialetti, OXO.
| munificent wrote:
| _> I can guarantee that the author 's simple $12 drip coffee
| maker from Amazon is going to the landfill well before that._
|
| I'm nearing a decade into my $15 Mr. Coffee and the little guy
| is still trucking along just fine.
|
| Simplicity isn't a _measure_ of quality, but the more complex a
| thing is, the greater the number of parts that can fail, so it
| 's easier to make a robust simple thing than a robust complex
| thing.
| r00fus wrote:
| I used to have one of those (notably probably cheaper than
| yours) but the cleaning/maintenance was cumbersome and I never
| got around to spending the 2h/mo it would require.
| JimtheCoder wrote:
| "I have a "pro" $800 espresso machine "
|
| Sorry, but just had to chuckle to myself a little...
| xenadu02 wrote:
| In written US English (especially online) the double quotes
| around "pro" imply sarcasm or that the word is not meant to
| be taken literally. In context it means the author knows it
| isn't actually a professional machine despite the
| manufacturer marketing it as such.
| lapetitejort wrote:
| Not sure if you're laughing at how cheap or expensive it is.
| Your local independent coffee shop might be sporting a five
| figure espresso machine. Equipment gets expensive when it
| needs to run >8 hours straight
| 0x457 wrote:
| $800 is far from "pro". It's not "cheap", but it also not
| expensive. That's just about entry level if we're taking
| decent machines that will last.
|
| Pro would probably start at 5k (Ascaso Baby T Plus).
| Commercial, that's 10k (La Marzocco Linea 2 Group EE ). Buf
| if we are talking about actually coffee shop, that's 20k at
| least.
| 10u152 wrote:
| Apple changed the meaning of "pro" to mean "slightly
| higher than basic spec"
| JimtheCoder wrote:
| Cheap...
| OJFord wrote:
| The quotes around 'pro' were as written though right, I
| read OP as saying 'this thing was sold to the home user
| as 'pro', it's expensive for the market'. I don't think
| someone quoting their own 'pro' is under any disillusions
| about how much it's used in a commercial setting...
|
| I have a Rancilio Silvia that was I think PS400 (so, uh,
| about $400..) and it's a good thing I don't run an
| espresso bar. The queue out of the door would only ever
| shrink by people giving up and leaving.
|
| For me, it's great, but a machine that needs to make
| however many shots an hour all day, and peak at say 10x
| that, is just in a different class. Not even
| _necessarily_ 'better', it just has different/extra
| problems to solve which would be engineering gone to
| waste at home; tank capacity never used, reliability
| never called upon.
| pessimizer wrote:
| > I can guarantee that the author's simple $12 drip coffee
| maker from Amazon is going to the landfill well before that.
|
| What makes you think you know this?
| paxys wrote:
| To start, the kind of plastic likely used in a machine at
| that price point will start to degrade well before 10-15
| years of use. The plug/adapter/circuit board won't have
| adequate protection against voltage fluctuations or surges.
| The heating element they use will be rated for fewer cycles
| than their pricier counterparts. "You get what you pay for"
| applies for any product, especially a reasonably complex
| electronic one.
| zemvpferreira wrote:
| While I have no doubt your machine can make much better coffee
| than a $12 plastic gizmo, the gizmo will probably outlast it.
| There's just less of it to fail.
|
| Durability and excellence can often be orthogonal.
|
| (Fellow coffe enthusiast and mechanical/product engineer here)
| netfortius wrote:
| Absolutely this, but I cannot blame the OP, as you can tell
| this is another US biased coffee making & consuming experience.
| The best these people may have tried, and failed to ever reach
| and enjoy the true quality, having - indeed - some complexity
| behind it, is in visiting Starbucks.
|
| On the other hand - if you visit a serious place in Europe
| (recommend Italy, or France), for example, try a true expresso,
| made with a true machine, with proper grains ground to the
| proper size and all other necessary conditions (water,
| temperature, etc.), then you'd ask yourself how you could have
| ever considered coffee anything else than a worthy experience,
| like the French cuisine. Then you save and invest into a proper
| machine and grinder, and forget the Mr. Coffee monstrosity
| having ever inflicted your senses.
|
| Even without the investment in a high end machine, an expresso
| setup in the price ranges above, with Yirgacheffe grains
| freshly ground, brings the joy of a coffee to a "place" that a
| morning with such gives the rest of the day another level of
| "joie de vivre"
|
| Same with "complex" software ...
| ativzzz wrote:
| unfortunately espresso lasts all of 30 seconds and while it
| tastes great, i make coffee while working to last longer and
| "keep me company" for some amount of time - espresso simply
| doesn't do that
| bigwheeler wrote:
| I have a 4-cup Mr Coffee maker (definitely purchased for less
| than $25) that has been chugging along for about 15 years now. I
| just bought a Breville Nespresso Creatista Plus over the holidays
| because I got spoiled in Italy a few months ago. Which one will
| die first? I know what my money is on...
| tiborsaas wrote:
| So far I love my Delonghi magnifica, no display or programming so
| it also doesn't do much and it was around $230 a few years ago.
| It grinds coffee beans and has sufficient water pressure and
| that's it. A bit loud, a bit bulky, but for the money it was a
| great value :)
| jiri wrote:
| Yes! I have few of them and they are repairable as well (for ok
| price). They last for many years.
| aaronbrethorst wrote:
| My coffee maker is a ceramic cone with a tiny hole in the bottom
| and a handle on one side. Best one I've ever had, and I can't
| imagine using anything else to make coffee. It'll never become
| obsolete, never need descaling, and has been 'running' perfectly
| for over 10 years now.
| r3trohack3r wrote:
| Recently did something similar, and switch to a Bunn. They aren't
| cheap, but my grandparent's had one last for 20 years. It's an
| always-on heated reservoir that uses gravity to dispense the
| water over the beans. You pour the water into the top, close the
| lid, and the room temperature water flows down into the reservoir
| pushing the hot water out over the beans.
|
| They are simple, easy to repair, machines. While I spent ~$100 on
| mine, the longevity of it will likely make it cheaper than lower
| priced units that need to be replaced more frequently. It brews
| faster than a Keurig since the reservoir is always on. It's also
| about as good of a pour over as you can make given the constant
| stream of perfect temp water.
|
| 10/10 would recommend.
| dave78 wrote:
| I was gifted a Bunn VPR a few years ago as well and love it.
| Nearly everything on it is made out of metal, very little
| plastic. Easily serviceable. Makes what I at least consider to
| be good coffee (I like a few cups each morning but I'm not
| really a connoisseur - but it's better than any drip machine
| I've had previously).
|
| My only complaints:
|
| 1) No auto-shutoff on the hotplate, so if you forget you get a
| nice burned coffee smell to remind you.
|
| 2) Keeps a reservoir of hot water all the time which isn't very
| efficient. I plan to add a timer to only have it be hot in the
| mornings when I need it.
|
| 3) I miss the interrupting feature that my old coffee maker had
| where you could take the pot out from underneath while it was
| brewing and it would not drip all over. The Bunn brews fast so
| this isn't a huge problem, but sometimes as it's finishing and
| there's a few drips coming out you want to fill your cup and
| not have it drip on the hotplate.
|
| It's not for everyone, but I'm happy with it and I'm confident
| this machine will last as long as I want it to.
| TheCapn wrote:
| Also 10/10 recommendation. I am assuming we have the same
| machine. It's been a stellar coffee machine for about 8 years
| now. My sister took our father's when he passed (same model)
| and it has been strong for 10+ years.
| Reason077 wrote:
| My Delonghi coffee machine (ECAM 350.35.W) developed a fault
| after a couple of years of use. It would often give an "INSERT
| INFUSER ASSEMBLY" error when trying to turn it on, especially if
| it was already warmed up (cold starts on cold mornings tended to
| work fine!). Perhaps this was due to a faulty microswitch or
| similar so it was failing to properly detect the position of the
| infuser within the machine.
|
| Delonghi charged PS120 for the repair, including shipping both
| ways, which is about 1/4 of the new price. Came back fully
| cleaned, descaled, and serviced and has worked perfectly again
| ever since.
|
| So hats off to Delonghi for designing repairable machines!
| landswipe wrote:
| One of the best high quality purchases I have made is an Italian
| coffee grinder, built like a tank. It doesn't even have soft
| power, but it does have a small touch LCD (non dot matrix) to set
| the timer. Perfecto!
| getToTheChopin wrote:
| I've been using my $30 aeropress for years, and heartily agree.
| roflyear wrote:
| The aeropress is a great way to make coffee, my only issue with
| it is it doesn't make quite enough! My hario switch (large)
| gives me just about 2 cups of coffee so I can share a brew with
| someone.
| valarauko wrote:
| You can also use the aeropress chamber as a zero bypass
| pourover - grind finer than usual and/or double up on filters
| to slow it down.
| ar_lan wrote:
| It functions similarly (and was inspired by) as espresso, in
| my experience - so typically you'd add water to fill it as a
| full cup (e.g. an Americano). Still, with two people, you'd
| brew it twice.
|
| Edit: designed as an espresso alternative -> functions
| similarly to espresso
| nicolaslem wrote:
| The aeropress was really not designed as an espresso
| alternative. In interviews, the inventor said he was
| designing a better way to do drip coffee for a single cup.
| He recommends pressing as slowly as possible to not create
| pressure.
| ar_lan wrote:
| Perhaps semantically I am wrong, and can admit that, but
| your comment acts a bit as if it's so ridiculous to think
| of (and make) Aeropress coffee that way. I gladly make
| Americano's and lattes with it regularly.
|
| > he was designing a better way to do drip coffee for a
| single cup
|
| Can you point to this interview? In https://archive.nytim
| es.com/tmagazine.blogs.nytimes.com/2010..., it mentions
| he actually started with an espresso machine before
| trying drip and French press. So, it'd be more accurate
| to say he was designing a better way to all 3 of those -
| not just drip, as you claim.
|
| Some other references to espresso --
|
| https://www.aeropress.co.uk/blogs/news/evolution-
| aeropress-h...
|
| > AeroPress is inspired by technology found in espresso
| machines
|
| https://aeropress.com/pages/how-it-works
|
| In this page, each recommended option is an offshoot from
| espresso-based drinks.
|
| https://aeropress.com/pages/faq
|
| > Many people say that espresso must be made with 9 bars
| of pressure. If you use this definition then no,
| AeroPress coffee makers do not make espresso. But if you
| define espresso by the taste of the drink in the cup,
| certainly many people think AeroPress coffee makers can
| brew espresso. Since coffee brewed by AeroPress coffee
| makers can be made into lattes, cappuccinos, and other
| espresso based drinks, we feel it is important to use the
| term "espresso" when describing what AeroPress coffee
| makers brew so potential customers will understand how
| coffee brewed by AeroPress coffee makers can be enjoyed.
|
| --
|
| tldr; I've amended my previous comment but to act as if
| espresso is not a clear design/inspiration choice is
| wrong.
| nicolaslem wrote:
| I just don't understand why every coffee method needs to
| be compared to espresso. Espresso is not a gold standard
| to achieve, it's just one tasty way to make coffee among
| other.
|
| With that in mind, the aeropress marketing material uses
| espresso as a gold standard and because of that it is
| plain nonsense to me.
|
| > But if you define espresso by the taste of the drink in
| the cup, certainly many people think AeroPress coffee
| makers can brew espresso.
|
| That is just fantasy.
|
| > Since coffee brewed by AeroPress coffee makers can be
| made into lattes, cappuccinos, and other espresso based
| drinks, we feel it is important to use the term
| "espresso" when describing what AeroPress coffee makers
| brew.
|
| Ah yes, just like since lemonade can be used instead of
| rum to make a Mojito I feel it is important to use the
| term "alcohol" when describing lemonade.
|
| Espresso is widely understood to be a percolation brew,
| about 2:1 coffee to water ratio, brewed at around 9 bars,
| in about 30 seconds.
|
| The aeropress is almost the exact opposite, it's an
| immersion brew, usually at much higher ratio, with almost
| no pressure and much longer brew time.
|
| Both are awesome and none is superior to the other. It's
| fine to enjoy aeropress-lattes or aeropress-americanos.
| nicolaslem wrote:
| The trick for a two cups aeropress is brewing at a stronger
| ratio (for instance 25g in with 220g of water) and diluting
| it with water once it's done brewing.
| latchkey wrote:
| I do another trick that works well enough for me, I put
| more coffee in than I normally do for one cup, plunge, then
| pull the plunge out, add more water and plunge again. Just
| make sure you are going into a big enough cup or use two
| cups.
| llbeansandrice wrote:
| I've never had success with brewing a concentrate using an
| Aeropress really. I prefer using a different method like a
| larger french press for multiple cups.
| incanus77 wrote:
| Same here. Plus, it travels effortlessly if I'm going to be
| someplace with terrible coffee. You can almost always get an
| electric tea kettle or hot water at any hotel.
| indymike wrote:
| Aeropress coffee is fantastic and the machine lasts a very long
| time. Highly recommended!
| Empact wrote:
| Likewise, the french press and moka pot are extremely simple,
| easy to use and require no electricity to operate.
| dkdbejwi383 wrote:
| Except to boil the kettle!
| yamtaddle wrote:
| ... unless you have a normal stovetop kettle, and a gas
| cooktop. Technically no electricity required then, though
| it does consume fuel.
| cf100clunk wrote:
| That's a good justification for buyers of outdoor grilles
| to purchase one with a side burner that has enough output
| to bring a kettle or pot of water to a boil. No
| electricity needed.
| Scoundreller wrote:
| I have a $20 "camp stove" and cheap butane cylinders that
| are in aerosol cans.
|
| If things get real bad, the Wood stick camp stove that's
| just folding metal plates.
|
| Propane burners are just an annoying in between, but our
| outages are rarely long.
| KptMarchewa wrote:
| Stovetop kettle would be considered normal maybe in a
| nursing home.
| dkdbejwi383 wrote:
| A stovetop kettle would not be considered normal in the
| UK in the 21st century
| timeon wrote:
| Not in case of moka pot.
| jmkr wrote:
| I haven't owned a drip machine in over a decade. Moka pots
| are probably my favorite quick coffee, and french press is
| easy. Both are easier to clean.
|
| However last year I got a Gaggia espresso machine, and
| espresso is a whole other world of complexity. My Gaggia only
| has the pressure mod, but I did plan to add a PID to it. It's
| still simple, turn on and let it get hot, then I usually do
| long pulls for like 40-50 seconds on a double shot
| portafilter. But there are other espresso machines with more
| electronics that feel desirable.
|
| Of course I chose getting a Gaggia by going to Github and
| seeing which espresso machines are developer friendly. :)
|
| https://github.com/Zer0-bit/gaggiuino
|
| However I just make coffee for myself. Maybe a Keurig is
| easier if you have guests. It seems most of the people I know
| who have it, have it for that reason.
| roflyear wrote:
| Fun project! And espresso is fun too. I have a la pavoni,
| but was interested in the Gagguinio after my bad experience
| with the Decent (can't really hack on it at all).
| cjrp wrote:
| The beauty of machines like the Gaggia (I have a Classic)
| is their simplicity. I can get spare parts to replace
| everything in the machine, and work on it myself (I'm not
| mechanically-minded, but it's very straight forward). The
| biggest repair I've had to make is to replace a thermostat
| and themal-fuse, and it cost me about PS10 in parts and 30
| mins of work.
| cf100clunk wrote:
| I use a Stanley full-metal-jacket french press on camping
| trips and for just-in-case situations like power failures.
| Unlike most moka pots that can eventually have seal failures,
| only the wire mesh of a french press plunger ever needs
| tweaking back into shape.
| bravoetch wrote:
| V60 or French Press is enough. You can use it for decades without
| anything but basic cleaning. Machines like Keurig are a disease.
| sgt wrote:
| French press I would not recommend. You get a lot of unhealthy
| oils normally removed by a paper filter. After my coffee maker
| broke, I ran with french press (about 6 cups a day) for 2
| months and it made me feel unhealthy after a while.
|
| Then I switched back to a drip coffee maker (Moccamaster in
| fact) - coffee is excellent. Same issue might apply to espresso
| machines.. not sure.
| onewheeltom wrote:
| The Keurig that worked well for me was a institutional model from
| Staples with simpler controls. The model with manual water fill
| works fine also. When my partner was buying a countertop oven, I
| suggested the version that was $5 more expensive that had a temp
| knob rather than a digital display, because once the display
| fails, you have an expensive brick.
| 0xbadcafebee wrote:
| > The product tries to do too much.
|
| Not necessarily. It could be the product was designed around many
| different facets - user stories, bug reports, marketing requests,
| safety standards. Then there's the stuff you don't necessarily
| control, like cost controls and deadlines.
|
| At the end of it there's quality control, and that's where these
| things usually fall down. You can make a super duper fancy coffee
| maker that won't die after 3 months. But you need the QC to
| ensure quality at scale. 90% of the defects might be easy to
| solve, but the last 10% might be too costly/time-consuming. If
| only 1 in 1000 will have a defect, it might be simpler/cheaper to
| replace the defective ones than do the QC to prevent it.
|
| You don't _have_ to have a simple design for reliability. But the
| more complex it is, the more quality control is necessary to make
| it reliable.
|
| (I use an Aeropress, but that's because I only drink 1 cup... for
| more than 1, I'd probably go french press)
| fwungy wrote:
| The Simpson's Poochie episode is an insightful and classic satire
| on product design.
| roflyear wrote:
| The most simple, and best (from quality and value) is something
| like a v60 or hario switch (my preference) + kettle.
|
| You can very easily get under <$50, it will last you a lifetime
| (longer than a drip coffee maker, I'd bet), and the quality of
| coffee is way better than a drip machine (and depending on your
| kettle, you don't need electricity).
|
| Not quite as convenient, but great high-end kit for a low cost.
| Then later, if you want to upgrade, buy a good hand grinder
| ($100-$150).
| undersuit wrote:
| I make multiple cups of day with my Aeropress and a kettle. I
| am looking to upgrade to a water heater with temperature
| control. I'm not really looking to replace the Aeropress. I
| clean it after every use and I've even invested into the
| ecosystem with a reusable filter and an adapter to brew cold
| coffee.
| barbazoo wrote:
| You're right. However as life gets busier, especially in the
| morning I found that I just don't have the time for the
| "procedure". I love the "procedure" but it's synchronous so it
| had to go. Also I was having a very hard time getting the size
| 03 filters in white.
| funks_ wrote:
| This is exactly why I would recommend a Hario Switch over a
| V60 or Aeropress. It makes my mornings much less complicated.
| However, you will still have to look for filters.
| incanus77 wrote:
| Some years back I bought a stainless steel filter from Able
| Brewing. It's great. I no longer have to buy consumables or
| throw anything away but wet coffee grounds -- which are great
| for the garden anyway.
| rsynnott wrote:
| > What an interesting idea to combine both a standard 12-cup
| percolator with the "pod-based" single serve option.
|
| Oh, no, it's the coffee equivalent of the combo DVD-VCR.
| grishka wrote:
| I have a vague memory of some of the high-end ones being
| capable of recording DVDs and so you could use them to digitize
| your tapes. So those were not cobmo just for the sake of it.
| OJFord wrote:
| There were also briefly D-VHSs and VCRs, so actually you
| don't even technically need DVDs to digitise your tapes...
|
| ...though if your D-VCR broke you would probably have had a
| harder time saving the D-VHS material than if it was still on
| VHS!
| mrguyorama wrote:
| Some of them also allowed you to record live television, and
| some of THOSE supported DVD-RAM for essentially cheap DVR
| functionality.
| btilly wrote:
| My wife and I got a Keurig and found metal coffee capsules that
| let us brew the coffee we liked in it, for a price we liked.
|
| This worked great until it stopped working. We got a replacement.
|
| We learned the hard way that Keurig has upgraded their "security"
| so those third party replacements no longer worked.
|
| We've thrown out the Keurig and gone back to using a purely
| mechanical French Press. I happen to like
| https://www.amazon.com/Half-Dozen-Coffee-Du-Monde/dp/B000FV5....
| And I don't need a fancy coffee maker with an electronic nanny
| built in telling me I can't have it because nobody paid a premium
| for the approved packaging.
| s-xyz wrote:
| This is very recognizable. Every time I arrive at the coffee
| machine, I have to perform 30 tasks (cleaning, rinsing, ...) and
| press on 20 settings just to get a simple espresso.
| CmdrLoskene wrote:
| https://us.moccamaster.com/collections/cafe-office-brewers/p...
|
| It ain't cheap, but it's sturdy and dependable, and it makes a
| very good cup of coffee. It's already outlasted every other
| coffee machine I've ever had.
| devindotcom wrote:
| This is the latest classic home version of that, I have one:
|
| https://us.moccamaster.com/products/kbgv-select
|
| Good coffee, compact, looks good, easily fixable if a piece
| breaks since the movable parts are all individually purchasable
| (e.g. carafe top). Definitely expensive though. The 8-cup OXO
| is another good option.
| brailsafe wrote:
| Ironically, the latest addition to my coffee system is going to
| be the Fellow Ode v2 grinder. A lot of people had specific
| problems with the first version, and then instead of adding
| features, they just went in and improved all of their existing
| ones to solve all the issues. With the exception of an ionizer to
| reduce static and create a cleaner experience. But it didn't
| grind for espresso and still doesn't.
| wgjordan wrote:
| Fellow Opus ($195) is coming Feb 21 and grinds espresso:
|
| https://www.gearpatrol.com/food/a42409254/fellow-opus-grinde...
|
| https://fellowproducts.com/pages/opus-is-coming
| sonofhans wrote:
| > People tend to place all of that blame on top-level management
| or developers within a company. They do deserve the blame - but
| not all of it. Designers cause a lot of these issues all on their
| own and it's easy to understand why.
|
| Not to get defensive -- I am a designer -- but there are two
| things missing from the conversation when you lay blame at the
| feet of designers.
|
| First, you bought that over-complicated appliance for the same
| reason everyone else does: it has more features, and you like
| features. Everyone wants features. If you want to sell an
| appliance today, you have to cram in more features, and do it
| more cheaply than the competition.
|
| If you want companies to produce simpler, higher-quality
| products, then search out and buy those products. Vote with your
| feet, and your wallet. Companies build what sells.
|
| Second, that designer likely has as much real agency as the
| engineers building the firmware for the control board. Corporate
| mandated 12 months ago, "A coffee maker with features A, B, and C
| and price point P and trim level T." The designer likely has no
| place to argue with any of that. A product marketing executive
| made these decisions, and for one reason -- to build what sells.
|
| The author is totally right that companies often ship software
| that's too complex, or solves too many problems and does so
| poorly. This is mostly because the design/engineering team (a)
| takes directions from Corporate rather than from users, (b)
| Corporate wants more features so the product stacks up vs. the
| competition.
| onlyrealcuzzo wrote:
| > First, you bought that over-complicated appliance for the
| same reason everyone else does: it has more features, and you
| like features. Everyone wants features. If you want to sell an
| appliance today, you have to cram in more features, and do it
| more cheaply than the competition.
|
| Is this true for all appliances?
|
| The toaster and the refrigerator seem functionally complete to
| me.
|
| More features = more problems = I don't want them for my
| toaster.
| mrmattyboy wrote:
| > ... the refrigerator seem functionally complete to me.
|
| And yet fridges are the first product in the kitchen to
| receive a 24-inch monitor from Samsung :P :P
| jrochkind1 wrote:
| Makes sense. I think the OP is not unsympathetic, although not
| as familiar with what it's like to be a designer.
|
| > The only advice I can give to designers is this: try not to
| add to the problem. I'm not asking you to move mountains, but
| maybe consider working somewhere else if your career exists
| solely to add more bloat to the world. (Easier said than done,
| I know). Or keep doing what you're doing. What do I know - I'm
| just some guy who rambles on the web.
|
| Designers in graphic and physical design, with regard to over-
| complexity and physical waste, which the OP was talking about
| with the coffee maker -- have been talking about this, and
| about what the designer's ethical responsibility is in an
| environment where the business constraints/pressures may be to
| create things that don't make things better for people... for
| 50 years now.
|
| https://eyeondesign.aiga.org/why-ken-garlands-first-things-f...
| csydas wrote:
| I'm very sympathetic to designs at the beck and call of someone
| else making the decision on features, but I'm not sure that
| some of the points above are the right way to frame it.
|
| > you bought that over-complicated appliance for the same
| reason everyone else does: it has more features, and you like
| features. Everyone wants features.
|
| I don't think this is accurate for a substantial part of the
| population. A novel-length feature list is a guaranteed way to
| ensure that no one really understands what your product does. A
| product I worked on had the usual hundreds of features and
| novel-length user guide, and probably one of the most common
| questions our support team would ingest was "can product X do
| thing Y?" which was even just a quick online search away.
|
| Featureful updates I think look better for the people investing
| in the product, not the ones selling/buying it. It justifies
| expenditures, can be correlated to growth/progress, etc. For
| specialized products, e.g., coffee makers, I have personal
| doubts that a substantial amount of buyers care much more than
| reading a few reviews to confirm that the product "makes good
| coffee" or " is easy to clean".
|
| > Second, that designer likely has as much real agency as the
| engineers building the firmware for the control board.
| Corporate mandated 12 months ago, "A coffee maker with features
| A, B, and C and price point P and trim level T." The designer
| likely has no place to argue with any of that. A product
| marketing executive made these decisions, and for one reason --
| to build what sells.
|
| This one I agree with mostly, except for the "build what sells"
| part. What sells is what the company effectively SEO spams and
| price-points well within the market. Let's not forget Juicero's
| history and how well it sold until someone did the
| groundbreaking journalism of actually using the device and
| showing how ridiculous it was. I think it helps support the
| idea that enough moxy/aggressive marketing, you can get just
| about anything to fly for awhile to turn a profit. And Juicero
| is just one example of many such things; I doubt that the
| executive guidance on Juicero was anything more than "Make it
| squish these bags, read our juice DRM, and set up a
| subscription service to buy more juice bags."
|
| The answer to this is pretty complex I guess, as voting with
| our wallets is historically pretty ineffective at enacting
| change. There are a lot of tricks that can be used to make hot
| garbage a top seller; Amazon is raking in billions doing just
| this and has been for years, despite constant outrage articles
| and proof of the garbage-ness of the services.
|
| At a certain point, change does need to come from within the
| company rather than external pressures; the market gets fooled
| really easily by fancy enough presentations and rich enough
| people talking about a failed product for 30 seconds.
|
| I think that's why the author made the call-out; I read it as
| fairly tongue in cheek, but it has an element of truth that the
| pushback likely needs to come internally; I think the author
| though, and many people, realize this is not as simple of a
| situation as that though for the points you mentioned about
| executive decisions. I don't think designers should completely
| abandon their agency though on products; saving money is pretty
| persuasive to the decision makers, and probably _that_ is the
| best way to influence products via a wallet. Just it's the
| company's wallet, not the consumers.
| taffer wrote:
| > probably one of the most common questions our support team
| would ingest was "can product X do thing Y?" which was even
| just a quick online search away.
|
| That's a very biased way of looking at it. Just because
| _some_ customers were confused by the feature list doesn 't
| mean _most_ customers were. You just never hear from people
| who don 't have questions.
|
| > It justifies expenditures, can be correlated to
| growth/progress, etc. For specialized products, e.g., coffee
| makers, I have personal doubts that a substantial amount of
| buyers care much more than reading a few reviews to confirm
| that the product "makes good coffee" or " is easy to clean".
|
| The claim that feature lists can correlate with growth, but
| also that customers are not interested in feature lists,
| sounds like a contradiction to me. If customers are not
| interested in feature lists, then there should be no
| correlation.
|
| > What sells is what the company effectively SEO spams and
| price-points well within the market. Let's not forget
| Juicero's history and how well it sold until someone did the
| groundbreaking journalism of actually using the device and
| showing how ridiculous it was.
|
| Doesn't Juicero actually show the exact opposite? _Despite_
| all the advertising and multiple price reductions, Juicero
| was an absolute slow seller.
|
| > There are a lot of tricks that can be used to make hot
| garbage a top seller; Amazon is raking in billions doing just
| this and has been for years, despite constant outrage
| articles and proof of the garbage-ness of the services.
|
| There are few online stores with such a wide range of
| products and such fast delivery as Amazon. Garbage-ness is
| relative when everyone else is garbage-er.
|
| To me the "build what sells" theory sounds much more
| convincing than the "it's all about advertising" theory.
| sonofhans wrote:
| > The answer to this is pretty complex I guess, as voting
| with our wallets is historically pretty ineffective at
| enacting change. There are a lot of tricks that can be used
| to make hot garbage a top seller; Amazon is raking in
| billions doing just this and has been for years, despite
| constant outrage articles and proof of the garbage-ness of
| the services.
|
| Yes, I agree, and I think this is a large part of the
| problem. If I get my neighbor John the blacksmith to make me
| a plow and it doesn't work quite right, I'm sure he'll fix it
| for me. That's a very short and direct economic chain, and
| it's based on personal relationships and geography, two
| things that humans do very well.
|
| If I buy an over-featured electronic piece of crap from
| Alibaba, from the merchant who'll sell it for $1 less than
| the competition -- I don't think I can model or count the
| economy of that purchase.
|
| And I think that the lack of personal relationships does more
| of a zap on our heads than we realize. We've not evolved to
| exist in a pathological environment, where a huge amount of
| the communication we receive is designed to manipulate us,
| and to our detriment. We yearn for real relationships we can
| trust, and over-index on signs of trust in vendors, like star
| ratings on Amazon. Amazon, who literally employs an army of
| people to game this as much as possible. It's an awfully
| asymmetric relationship.
| trgn wrote:
| > Vote with your feet, and your wallet. Companies build what
| sells.
|
| This is the defeatist attitude that largely explains why we're
| stuck in this race to the bottom.
|
| A lot of the mass produced stuff we surround and find ourselves
| surrounded with has gotten worse. This is not because people
| want worse things. It is because of hidden and opaque incentive
| structures that are completely misdirected. By leaving it to
| the market with such a pithy attitude, we divest collective
| responsibility and instead assign it to some mystical process.
|
| Coffee makers are the least of it. Our material surroundings
| absolutely suck. Like, in america, it's absolutely degrading
| how the wealthiest society ever on this planet is basically
| made real in plastic, disposable, malfunctioning shit. For my
| own sanity, I have to reject that this state of affairs is the
| expression of our collective wishes through the workings of the
| market.
| [deleted]
| sonofhans wrote:
| Oh, I'm not being defeatist about it, just trying to offer
| the best practical advice I have.
|
| > Like, in america, it's absolutely degrading how the
| wealthiest society ever on this planet is basically made real
| in plastic, disposable, malfunctioning shit. For my own
| sanity, I have to reject that this state of affairs is the
| expression of our collective wishes through the workings of
| the market.
|
| I agree with you. People in this society are making the best
| choices they can from a selection of poor or harmful options.
| We're programmed from birth to place value on things that
| have no inherent value. Our society in the USA is rich but
| ungenerous, which is awfully strange. The country as a whole
| generates vastly more resources than necessary to keep
| everyone in it safe, healthy, and fed, and yet we allocate
| those resources towards other things (e.g., entertainment,
| over-consumption, concentration of resources in the hands of
| a few).
|
| That's all a much bigger problem than coffee makers, but
| they're inextricably tied. Personally I don't think we can
| solve the coffee maker problem without solving the legalized
| political bribery / "campaign finance" problem first; that
| blocks progress on many obviously humane ideas.
| trgn wrote:
| > just trying to offer the best practical advice I have
|
| It's good advice. But imho it doesn't scale in the way it
| should, in the way the "invisible hand" should work.
|
| The main thing is that imho consumers have too little
| leverage to really make meaningful impact.
|
| e.g. I have a microwave form '82 that still works
| flawlessly. That was a bargain model at the time. More
| recent "luxury" appliances have broken within 10 years of
| ownership on me. How can a consumer, today, possibly be
| certain they're getting the high quality thing that will
| last decades? It's absolutely impossible, standing in a
| store, choosing a thing based on price/feature-set to get
| the durable vs disposable. That trade-off just cannot be
| made for the majority of material things in stores.
|
| The same with feature-less vs feature-full. Once you go
| feature-less, options completely dwindle. That's the curse.
| If the market does work, it flattens everything not to
| best-of-breed or bang-for-buck but instead to lowest-
| common-denominator, sub-optimal.
|
| > Our society in the USA is rich but ungenerous, which is
| awfully strange.
|
| 100%
|
| > I don't think we can solve the coffee maker problem
| without solving the legalized political bribery
|
| also, 100%
| jacobr1 wrote:
| Lots of people genuinely do prefer the cheaper (and thus
| lower quality) product. There isn't always such a trade off,
| and there are other reasons to buys things. But low price is
| commonly a dominant factor.
| mrguyorama wrote:
| No, Americans have seen their real take home pay stagnate
| for fifty years while the major costs of being alive have
| significantly increased, and thus are stuck using the same
| pile of money to attempt to pay for and obtain necessary
| and desirable things for less than they would have
| previously.
|
| They don't _prefer_ cheaper, they can 't afford _not
| cheaper_
|
| "They don't make it like they used to" is like a society
| wide exclamation that you can't buy high quality stuff
| anymore because nobody can afford to buy high quality stuff
| so nobody can afford to make high quality stuff.
|
| This lower basket of income also means americans can't
| afford to pay the going rates for labor to fix their stuff,
| meaning something being repairable isn't useful or
| beneficial in any way, so everything becomes disposable.
|
| Small towns used to have niche repair businesses, but who
| can afford to spend $100 on getting a boot repaired,
| especially when a new boot is $80 at walmart. So now the
| cobbler has to shutter his business and he can't afford
| good stuff anymore either, so now if you DO buy the
| expensive boots and need them repaired to make them worth
| their price, you have to seek out a much more expensive
| specialist or do it yourself which most people cannot do.
| Money was basically shipped out of local economies into
| giant megacorps.
|
| A lot of stuff isn't even significantly less repairable
| then it used to be. Flatscreen TVs are super reliable now
| that they are solid state, with the one exception of the AC
| power circuitry. Anyone with $20 and a multimeter and
| youtube and a little confidence can watch tutorials to
| debug and fix a blown cap on the power supply, but nobody
| could really run a business on charging $100 to repair $200
| flat panel TVs because people can't afford that.
|
| Meanwhile "Electronics repair" used to be a common small
| town business.
| dkonofalski wrote:
| >It is because of hidden and opaque incentive structures that
| are completely misdirected.
|
| While this is true, the parent is still true too. The issue
| is that companies make these cheap, easily broken devices and
| consumers keep buying them because the alternative is living
| with the inconvenience of not having that class of product.
| It's not a defeatist attitude, it's the truth. Unless people
| stop buying Keurig coffee-makers with dual functions, the
| data these companies are using for marketing and development
| show that that's what people buy.
|
| The choice here is: If I don't want to support these cheap
| Keurig junk machines, do I just buy another cheap junk
| machine from someone else or do I buy a French Press and make
| my coffee the old-fashioned way in the morning? I'm trading
| convenience for quality. Despite what you think, that's still
| a choice that consumers make that fuels the race to the
| bottom.
| satvikpendem wrote:
| > _The issue is that companies make these cheap, easily
| broken devices and consumers keep buying them because the
| alternative is living with the inconvenience of not having
| that class of product._
|
| "The reason that the rich were so rich, Vimes reasoned, was
| because they managed to spend less money. Take boots, for
| example. He earned thirty-eight dollars a month plus
| allowances. A really good pair of leather boots cost fifty
| dollars. But an affordable pair of boots, which were sort
| of OK for a season or two and then leaked like hell when
| the cardboard gave out, cost about ten dollars. Those were
| the kind of boots Vimes always bought, and wore until the
| soles were so thin that he could tell where he was in Ankh-
| Morpork on a foggy night by the feel of the cobbles. But
| the thing was that good boots lasted for years and years. A
| man who could afford fifty dollars had a pair of boots
| that'd still be keeping his feet dry in ten years' time,
| while a poor man who could only afford cheap boots would
| have spent a hundred dollars on boots in the same time and
| would still have wet feet. This was the Captain Samuel
| Vimes "Boots" theory of socioeconomic unfairness."
|
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boots_theory
| dkonofalski wrote:
| I'm familiar with the Boots theory but that's not really
| what I meant. Boots are a necessity. Coffee makers are a
| luxury.
| Adverblessly wrote:
| > Vote with your feet, and your wallet.
|
| Sure, how do I cast my vote for a non-smart TV? Where do I go
| to watch my shows via DRM free downloads? How can I find a
| washing machine that will last for 20 years?
|
| Beyond that, how do I even compare products and find what I
| want to "vote" for when everything is named something like Sony
| XP-3000-ZXS Pro that is exactly like the XP-300ZXS Pro+ except
| one has a water-proof coating and the other comes with patented
| GB-Free technology (you guess which is which). And to make it
| harder to compare, the models are subtly different between
| countries (Oh, you are in Israel? You only get the XP-300ZXS-B
| Pro+ which is different from the regular Pro+ but we won't tell
| you how, better look for some local reviews to be sure).
|
| It is obvious that most companies go out of their way to
| frustrate the customer's attempts to "vote with their wallet".
| It must be cheaper to just drill a brand name into their heads
| via ad spending then to actually produce a good product
| (definitely more scalable if you already have the money to
| spend on ads...).
|
| ...
|
| Apologies, rant over.
| zelos wrote:
| > everything is named something like Sony XP-3000-ZXS Pro
| that is exactly like the XP-300ZXS Pro+ except...
|
| This drives me crazy. I don't get how companies get this so
| wrong. I just spent hours looking for a tumble dryer and
| they're all like that.
|
| Who are the people at these companies who think it's a good
| idea to name your product a completely opaque alphanumeric
| jumble?
| otikik wrote:
| Oh I know that one.
|
| It's because they have slightly different models names for
| differ markets, and they figured out that using their
| internal code names was easier than paying someone to come
| up with easy, memorable names. So the model sold in
| Delaware is the UX-7200-D, and the one sold in The
| Netherlands is exactly the same item with a different power
| cord and instruction booklet. But it's called NT-376xd
| because the Netherlands branch is actually a different
| company that was bought 2 years ago and they are still
| using their old system which has different codes for
| products.
| thangalin wrote:
| > How can I find a washing machine that will last for 20
| years?
|
| Try: site:reddit.com inurl:BuyItForLife
| "washing machine"
|
| > Sure, how do I cast my vote for a non-smart TV
|
| Don't buy one. There are plenty of other options. Computer
| monitors, for example, can double for a display and TV. This
| one is excellent (had mine for about a year without any
| problems):
|
| https://www.amazon.com/dp/B099PJ8SPT
| agentdrtran wrote:
| reddit is chock-full of astroturfing and someone's washer
| brand lasting 20 years doesn't mean their modern model will
| last 20 years.
| taffer wrote:
| Sceptre[1] makes non-smart-TVs, Miele[2] washing machines are
| made to last 20 years.
|
| [1] https://www.sceptre.com/TV/4K-UHD-TV/U557CV-
| UMRB-55-4K-UHD-T... [2] https://www.mieleusa.com/e/washing-
| machines-1015696-c
| mhuffman wrote:
| Sceptre certainly keeps that hidden! They need better
| marketers! For that price point and non-smart, I would have
| absolutely bought recently. But I have never heard of this
| brand until today.
| wrs wrote:
| There are plenty of non-smart TVs, at least, and plenty of HN
| threads telling you where to look (they are sold as
| commercial displays and digital signage). You will really
| have to vote with your wallet, though, because the smart TVs
| come with hundreds of dollars of price discount based on
| bundling of streaming service clients and their ability to
| send consumer tracking data.
| sophacles wrote:
| > First, you bought that over-complicated appliance for the
| same reason everyone else does: it has more features, and you
| like features
|
| Well no. I bought it because I didn't have a choice. (Literal
| coffee makers are actually an exception here). I bought the
| featurefull version because i wanted a specific feature and my
| options were basic with 7 features I don't need, pro with 19
| features I don't need and ultra with 200 features i don't need
| and the 1 i do need.
|
| Or maybe some obscure other brand has exactly what i need but
| discovering it is impossible because all 10^9 drop shippers
| sell only the basic and pro model above, and the rest of the
| brands are just white label rebrands of the above with slightly
| different plastic molding and some of the features disabled.
| blfr wrote:
| Yes, basically the only way to sell the one-purpose, well-made
| solution is to target customers/clients who already got burned
| with the more popular option. Which means that you confine your
| product to a small or professional niche.
| taylodl wrote:
| That's where the product lines Professional, Commercial and
| Industrial come from! Oftentimes you'll notice these items
| have _fewer_ features but a higher build quality.
| sonofhans wrote:
| Yes, exactly, that's what I do as much as possible. I have
| a commercial microwave with literally one control, and a
| handle; it doesn't even have buttons. I expect it to
| outlive me, given that I put it through 1/1000 the duty
| cycle of the commercial kitchen for which it's designed.
| safety1st wrote:
| More often than not in my experience feature creep originates
| from marketing/sales. It's their job to sell more units, if
| that doesn't happen they get a bad review.
|
| Frankly, "Make product X do more stuff" is a legitimate way for
| them to accomplish their goals. But I tend to think if your
| primary market is sufficiently large, it's better to go deep on
| solving a specific problem better than anyone else. That said
| it sure seems like a lot (most?) of the biggest successes in
| software, from Windows and Office to WeChat, bundle in
| everything but the kitchen sink.
| gretch wrote:
| A big part of product and marketing is "differentiation". You
| have to give the customer a reason to select your product
| over N other possibilities in the market.
|
| If your functions are a subset of everyone else, and your
| only benefit is "it works better", it's a tough sell. And in
| a lot of cases people don't care - eg if your appliance
| product lasts 5 years compared to 3 years, but studies show
| on average consumers will upgrade every 2 years (maybe they
| receive one as a gift), then you don't stand out at all.
|
| It's just basic product/marketing that if you can say "hey
| ours has a timer and no one else does" you can draw a lot of
| customers. It's your foot in the door, but you should also
| strive to compete in the fundamentals
| [deleted]
| jrwoodruff wrote:
| I actually laughed out loud when I clicked the link and it was
| Keurig. K-cups rank right up there with Dyson imho. Yea, it
| kind of solves a problem, but mostly it's great marketing.
|
| They created a problem people didn't realize they had, drove
| demand for a solution no one asked for, and charge a premium so
| you can create more waste per cup.
|
| But, it's cheaper then stopping at Starbucks...
| selectodude wrote:
| My Dyson vacuum cleaner has been exceptionally good for like
| a decade now.
|
| Keurigs make horrendous coffee and create orders of magnitude
| more waste. I'm not sure how they're the same.
| kuschku wrote:
| Dyson takes the cheapest panasonic parts that exists, puts
| a fancy case around it, and sells it for massive margins.
| Here's a detailed teardown of a dyson vacuum:
| https://youtu.be/NPTzNJMd19A
|
| Try a Miele next time, that's a genuine high quality vacuum
| cleaner that will last you a lifetime.
| criddell wrote:
| I have a Miele C4 and there's no way it's going to last a
| lifetime. The mechanicals may be metal but everything
| else is made of plastic that seems to be getting more
| brittle as time passes. Mine has cracks and has broken in
| a couple of places and so far I've been able to glue it,
| but I should probably replace the case. Miele doesn't
| seem to carry these parts for mine anymore so looking for
| used parts on eBay is probably my only solution.
|
| Rather than take a chance buying somebody else's cracked
| case, I'm probably going to replace it. When I do, I'm
| going to spend less money next time understanding that
| I'll have to replace it after 5-10 years.
| gffrd wrote:
| It does take two to tango, but this response is frustrating to
| me because it illustrates the lack of ethics/expectations in
| the design profession/community. (I am also a designer)
|
| Companies create the problems the features purport to solve,
| not the market. Yadda yadda faster horse quote, but it's true:
| people don't ask for (or need) much ... so where does the
| divergence come from?
|
| To designers: Why do we allow such rubbish to be created? We
| know we can't put up too much fuss or we'll be worked around or
| replaced ... by another designer who will willingly turn the
| crank for the biscuit. How do we not have more to push back
| with?
| andix wrote:
| In my kitchen I always try to go as low tech as possible. Usually
| that's not worse then high tech, way more reliable and often less
| work.
|
| For coffee: just get a French press. The taste is somewhere
| between Filter coffee and espresso. You can't run out of filters,
| because you don't need any. The only waste you produce is the
| coffee. And you can get them for as little as 10$. And you can
| let the dishwasher clean it.
| toddmorey wrote:
| I hear you. My entire stove had to be replaced because the
| control board for the digital display overheated (hello, it's
| an oven!) and stopped working. Everything else was fine, except
| you couldn't operate the thing without that control panel. So I
| looked a long time to find something completely manual with
| real metal knobs and actual switches.
|
| For coffee, I love my Aeropress... it's a manual plastic coffee
| press that you can easily travel with.
| Kon-Peki wrote:
| > My entire stove had to be replaced because the control
| board for the digital display overheated
|
| There is a place in the suburbs of Chicago that rebuilds them
| for ~$500 with a turnaround time of a week or less. A lot of
| people aren't willing to spend that much to repair an "old"
| stove but in our case it saved us $10k because our stupid
| stove is a non-standard size that nobody but a few niche
| European manufacturers build any more.
| disparate_dan wrote:
| Do you tolerate a lot of grounds in your coffee, or use a
| really course grind? I like the result of a French press except
| for all the grounds.
| toddmorey wrote:
| I mentioned this above, but the Aeropress is a great solution
| for French press simplicity and taste without the grounds
| ending up in your cup. It has tiny round paper filters and
| it's pretty much self-cleaning. After using it (all manual),
| you just unscrew the filter and eject the coffee grounds.
| andix wrote:
| I need to try one of those once. But if you need filters
| that's really bad for me. I always forget to restock on
| those little things. I'm already happy if I managed to buy
| coffee on time ;)
| falcolas wrote:
| FWIW, a filter pack has around 300 filters last time I
| checked. You'll have a bit of headroom.
| andix wrote:
| Okay, that's good. I can keep the French press as a
| fallback.
|
| But usually I run on green tea, which you can always do
| Chinese style, by just putting the leaves into a glass
| with hot water and wait until they reach the bottom of
| the glass.
| andix wrote:
| You need to grind your coffee into bigger pieces. With a good
| coffee grinder there should be no dust created. The coffee
| grinders with a rotating knife are just awful, throw it away
| and get one that works like a pepper grinder.
|
| If you buy already ground coffee you need to tell the shop to
| make it coarser, tell them you need it for the French press
| they will know. If you buy the coffee online, you can usually
| chose the grade of grinding in the online shop.
|
| It's the opposite for an espresso machine, there you need it
| extra-fine.
|
| Pre-packaged powder from the supermarket usually tastes like
| mud, because it's not freshly grinded.
| bravoetch wrote:
| Someone linked the espro, which has a double filter system
| for fewer grounds.
| rpmisms wrote:
| I have a Mr. Coffee machine with a timer. I got it new for $20 at
| Target. It makes coffee for me in the mornings.
|
| There's an appropriate level of complexity, and it's not a hard
| line. It's a balance between convenience and absurd complexity.
| Can I both achieve a simple task and a more complex task, with
| _appropriate_ levels of effort for both tasks?
| SoftTalker wrote:
| Yeah I got a countertop oven/air fryer for Christmas. It's nice
| and all, but very complicated. It has over 100 preset modes,
| and you can program your own. But 99% of the time all I want to
| do is set a temperature and a time. That's easy enough, but it
| would be a much more elegant machine without all the other
| options and controls.
| ilyt wrote:
| That was our hack for the coffee in the previous job. Company
| mandated timers coz people forgot to turn it off when leaving
| so what we did ? Obviously prepared it before leaving then
| timer started it around 8:50 and we got a bunch of fresh coffee
| in the morning and smell of coffee right from the door
| Someone1234 wrote:
| Simple drip-coffee makers still exist. A lot of other products
| that try to fill different needs also exist in the coffee
| segment.
|
| For example, I have a coffee machine that uses ground coffee to
| make just a single cup instead of a whole pot, like a Keurig,
| but without the wasteful pods. Is this over-engineered? Maybe
| compared to a Mr. Coffree, but I it fills my needs without
| added pods.
| squidsoup wrote:
| If you want a simple drip machine that makes really good coffee,
| I can highly recommend a Moccamaster. It's probably the closest
| you're going to get to a pour over with a machine, and it has
| only two buttons - one to turn the machine on, and another to to
| adjust how long the plate stays hot.
| debunn wrote:
| I came here to recommend the same! Mine's the thermal carafe
| version (so it doesn't have a hot plate) - so it's even more
| straightforward. Some selling points you didn't mention though:
|
| - It has a 5 year warranty
|
| - It's handmade in the Netherlands
|
| - Replacement parts are available without too much effort
| conor- wrote:
| I have a Bonavita one-touch machine that makes excellent coffee
| for a drip brewer - it simply has an on switch and a thermal
| carafe to avoid scorching your coffee with a hot plate and I've
| been using it daily for going on 3 years now with 0 issues.
|
| Iirc it was one of the top recommendations from America's Test
| Kitchen for a while.
| sgt wrote:
| Agreed! I just bought one. Super happy.
|
| On the slim chance that someone else here from South Africa
| wants one, I bought mine from here:
| https://capecoffeebeans.co.za/products/technivorm-moccamaste...
|
| (I am not affiliated)
| thom wrote:
| We had a Nespresso for years and it was great. We felt guilty,
| but the pods were tactile and beautiful and the coffee was fine.
| Eventually we moved on to a bean to cup machine with all sorts of
| complicated settings. That was great too, and has never stopped
| working. I've had an Aeropress for years but eventually I
| realised I'd just skip having coffee because I couldn't be arsed
| grinding beans and faffing and then washing it up every time. I
| do think having little physical rituals in life is important,
| especially when they break you out of the monotony of work etc.
| But also life is short and I like things that work well. My
| response to a broken coffee machine will always be to get a
| better coffee machine, not a worse one.
| Reason077 wrote:
| Yep. As much as I used to love my Aeropress, it's been sitting
| and gathering dust in a drawer for a few years now. +1 for
| bean-to-cup coffee machines!
| Axien wrote:
| Apple had a design philosophy that a device should do one thing
| only. That is why the iPod was so amazingly successful. It was
| just a music player. No meeting planner or contacts list. Just
| played music.
|
| This design simplified things and allowed each button to serve a
| distinct purpose.
|
| With the iPhone, the design philosophy carried. The iPhone could
| change itself via running different apps. To switch between
| features you had a single giant button at the bottom. But each
| app should do one thing. So it was either a phone, calculator,
| GPS, or Rolodex. But never all at the same time. And never more
| than one thing on screen at the same time.
|
| They started to get away from this, such as using a volume button
| to take a picture. Or displaying a video inside a window. I would
| argue overall it makes things more complicated.
| SllX wrote:
| Apple added contacts, notes, calendars, photos, videos,
| podcasts, and games over subsequent revisions. From day 1 you
| could use it as a FireWire drive in addition to a music player
| (5GB when USB flash drives were still measured in megabytes and
| likely going over a 1.1 bus instead of a 2.0 bus). It might
| have had a game or two at launch but I can't honestly remember
| at this point, but either way games for iPods were also sold
| through iTunes in a later revision.
|
| iPods were _best_ used as music players but they were pretty
| much always multi-function devices. In a world where Apple
| didn't follow it up with iPhones: music phones and camera
| phones were finally starting to converge in a way that would
| have eventually eaten the iPod's and point-and-shoot camera
| market's lunches.
| Reason077 wrote:
| > _" To switch between features you had a single giant button
| at the bottom. But each app should do one thing. So it was
| either a phone, calculator, GPS, or Rolodex. But never all at
| the same time."_
|
| On the Apple Watch they've taken this philosophy a little bit
| too far, in my opinion. In several cases you have apps that are
| conceptually very similar (such as the "Find Items" app and the
| "Find Devices" app) ... really these are so similar that they
| should be the same app, yet they are separate, which clutters
| up the app launcher with huge numbers of apps. And an over-
| cluttered app launcher is, by nature, more difficult and slower
| to use.
| strict9 wrote:
| > _The only advice I can give to designers is this: try not to
| add to the problem._
|
| I agree with this a lot. But one difficulty in adhering to this
| lies in our ability to process the additional cost beyond initial
| implementation.
|
| It seems easy, even to engineers and builders, to add something
| small. But as the author points out increased complexity leads to
| fragility.
|
| It may be easier to convince product managers and designers of
| product minimalism when approaching from UX angle: keeping
| features as bare bones as possible makes it easier for people to
| figure out how to use the thing.
| synlatexc wrote:
| Reminded of this from an NYT article [1] about Tumblr:
|
| The features Tumblr eliminates are as important to the way it
| feels as those it adopts. Bijan Sabet of Spark Capital, an
| early Tumblr investor who sits on its board, says that it is
| "normal behavior" for a founder to be excited about adding new
| bells and whistles, but Karp seems excited about doing the
| opposite: "He'll tell us, 'Hey, got a new version coming up --
| and I took four features out!'"
|
| [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/15/magazine/can-tumblrs-
| davi...
| seanhunter wrote:
| Keurig coffee machines are garbage. They are expensive and make
| terrible coffee and they are designed to do one thing only: to
| lock you into the pods which are very high markup and have
| negative externalities because they go straight to landfill etc.
|
| If you want a coffee machine and don't want to spend a lot, I
| implore you buy something made for making great coffee like an
| Aeropress[1]. You can also do worse than say a chemex[2] or a
| French press/cafetiere[3]. Then when you can afford it buy a nice
| grinder[4]. Aeropress in particular is really cheap to buy,
| really easy to make coffee and clean afterwards and makes
| fantastic coffee.
|
| [1] https://aeropress.com/
|
| [2] or other drip maker but chemex is a classic.
| https://www.chemexcoffeemaker.com/
|
| [3] I don't know what brand mine is because it was a gift but
| it's weirdly blue with white spots. Basically everyone in France
| is issued a Bodum by (I think) the government or something to the
| extent that they don't call them a cafetiere even though that's
| the French word, they call them a Bodum. https://www.bodum.com
|
| [4] Mine is a mahlkoenig which is expensive but it was a gift
| from my wife (similar to when Homer buys Marge a bowling ball
| with his name on it) so I would make her nice coffee
| https://www.mahlkoenig.com/
| manimino wrote:
| There's a far better Keurig alternative with ZERO cleanup. Not
| easy cleanup, ZERO. (Edit: To clarify - zero extra, relative to
| a Keurig.)
|
| They are called "hanging ear coffee filters" - it's just a
| disposable paper filter with two arms on it. You can get a box
| of 100 for about 10 cents each.
|
| Filter attaches to your mug, coffee goes in filter, pour
| boiling water into the top. The process is almost exactly what
| a Keurig would do. Makes a single-serve coffee in your mug with
| no cleanup.
|
| It's cheaper and better and more environmental, and you can use
| whatever coffee you want.
| gretch wrote:
| Normally I wouldn't be a pedant and nitpick this but you went
| out of your way to be confidently incorrect about there being
| exact ZERO cleanup.
|
| The only way this is true is if the filter dissolves into the
| coffee and you consume it.
|
| But it's not, there's still a thing you have to throw away.
| You can mishandle that waste and accidentally spill the
| grounds everywhere. If you drink enough cups you have to take
| out the trash.
|
| Given your familiarity with the product, I consider your
| statement as pretty much lying, and it's driving me (and
| probably others) to distrust your more. In the best case
| someone is gonna try it and realize, oh, there is non-zero
| cleanup
| manimino wrote:
| Thanks for that perspective. I wanted to emphasize the
| difference between this solution and the Aeropress. I went
| into hyperbole in doing so, and will be more careful about
| that in future.
|
| Hopefully the clarifying edit resolves your concerns.
| bluedino wrote:
| I only drink 1-2 cups each morning, and I bargain-shop for
| k-cups that are 20-30 cents each.
|
| I enjoy a nice cup of coffee, but I'll drink trash to get me
| going in the morning.
| antisthenes wrote:
| I would normally judge you, but I've definitely gone a
| similar route - our office had a Keurig machine (as a gift
| from some vendor) and a supply of crappy K-cups that no one
| else wanted.
|
| And all I needed was a caffeine boost before going to the
| gym. So all the things just aligned for me to use both the
| machine and the (frankly terrible) coffee it made.
|
| Can't beat free. Even if it is terrible quality. But in the
| future, I would probably just go with a 150mg caffeine pill,
| simply because it produces less plastic waste (I hope?)
| acdha wrote:
| You can buy chocolate-covered espresso beans from Trader
| Joe's for a good bit less than a Keurig will cost.
| Stranger43 wrote:
| I think the popularity of the Keurig's(and clones) have a lot
| to do with the legends about how difficult pour over coffee is
| along with the fact that American's don't really have electric
| kettle's nor coffee grinders.
|
| So for the cost of one overpriced toy the Keurigs lets you play
| at being an coffee snob without really having to learn anything
| about coffee or how to use an grinder or buy an electric kettle
| and that speaks to a lot of people.
|
| And we should not forget that if your only experience with
| manual coffee makers and grinders is watching some internet
| coffee snob use massively overprized equipment and obsess over
| every little detail the process of making coffee the old
| fashined way might seem overwhelming.
| pwinnski wrote:
| I've been using the cheapest Keurig machine for I think four
| years now without issue. Roughly five cups a week go through
| that thing, and it never fails to work. I use unlicensed
| biodegradable k-cups.
|
| I initially bought it as backup for my Aeropress, but
| eventually switched to using it full time and keeping the
| Aeropress as backup instead. I use a French press while
| camping.
|
| They don't seem to sell the model I have anymore, so perhaps
| all the models available today are garbage, but the one I have
| is notably not.
| lovehashbrowns wrote:
| Can I recommend some of the ninja machines? I have the dual
| brew one which supports kcups but the machine itself doesn't
| give a hoot if you use branded kcups or reusable cups. And it
| can brew regular coffee as well.
|
| The one thing I like about kcups is how stupid simple the
| whole thing is while I'm in the middle of something like
| work. So this machine lets me be a caffeinated monkey during
| work things and I can also brew regular coffee when I'm okay
| with a slight distraction.
|
| It's been working a whole lot better than the cheap-o keurig
| I initially bought which comes with a tiny water reservoir
| enough for one cup of coffee only. Most stupid thing I've
| ever seen. Why am I going for convenience but I also have to
| refill the water reservoir every time I want coffee?!
| rr888 wrote:
| aeropress is just a low tech device built to sell filters. A
| regular french press doesn't need to buy disposable filters so
| is better.
| anaccountforme wrote:
| $4.99 for enough filters from Target to last me a year (350).
| Quite the money making scheme they have!
| squidsoup wrote:
| Except you can't produce a clean cup of coffee with a french
| press.
| brewdad wrote:
| True, a french press tends to leave sediment at the bottom
| of your mug. Easily solved by leaving the last tiny sip
| behind.
| jacobr1 wrote:
| What do you mean by clean in this context?
| squidsoup wrote:
| Filters remove sediment and oils, which gives the coffee
| a 'clean' mouth feel. A little hard to describe, but easy
| to observe if you make a french press and a v60/aeropress
| using the same beans and grind and compare.
| cianmm wrote:
| Maybe! But the filters are currently under EUR0.02 per unit
| on Amazon in a pack of 700 and it makes incredible coffee
| when paired with pretty much any (non spinny-blade) grinder,
| and pretty decent coffee when paired with preground. And the
| inventor says he washes the filters off and uses them two or
| three times each.
| JshWright wrote:
| Aeropress and French Press make fundamentally different
| coffees. The paper filter in the Aeropress changes the taste
| and "feel" of the coffee in ways that many people prefer.
| Additionally, the pressure created during the "pressing"
| process changes the extraction a bit (nowhere near as much as
| espresso type pressures, but more than nothing).
| mikestew wrote:
| Yeah, I'm sure Aeropress is making bank selling you $15 worth
| of filters once or twice a year[0]. Or you could spend that
| same $15 on Aeropress' stainless mesh filter[1], and they'll
| never see another dime from you again.
|
| Downside to metal mesh filter: it doesn't pull out all of the
| oily residue that a paper filter would. It doesn't bother us,
| but you might be more picky.
|
| [0] https://aeropress.com/products/micro-filters
|
| [1] https://aeropress.com/products/aeropress-stainless-steel-
| reu...
| trynewideas wrote:
| I used a metal filter with my Aeropress for six years. It's
| fine. The paper filters are an option, not a requirement.
| seanhunter wrote:
| Yeah me too. I literally haven't even used the filters that
| came with the aeropress when I got it and I use mine every
| day.
| SoftTalker wrote:
| I rinse and re-use the aeropress filters. If I'm somewhat
| careful handling them I get 10 uses or more per filter.
| _Algernon_ wrote:
| I've had a lot of success with James Hoffman's method[1] for
| making coffee with a french press. Good coffee and with a
| larger french press you can make enough coffee at once for at
| least two people. You only need a french press and optionally a
| coffee grinder if you want to grind your own beans to get
| started.
|
| It is a bit time consuming (10-15minutes) so it may not be
| great for making a quick cup before leaving the house in the
| morning though.
|
| [1]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=st571DYYTR8
| mvanbaak wrote:
| "But drip is for people who hate themselves and know their
| lives have no real purpose or meaning." -- Wednesday Addams
| jollyllama wrote:
| Yes, instant is the choice of the patrician.
| foobarian wrote:
| I don't get the drip hate. It makes perfectly good coffee.
| The main step functions in coffee quality for me were 1) A
| burr grinder and 2) get fresh roasted light to medium roast
| beans
|
| Everything else had negligible benefit for me. I tried the
| French press and Aeropress thing a while but it's way too
| labor intensive for how much I drink (one "10" cup drip pot
| per day).
| seanhunter wrote:
| Agree. I was a died-in-the-wool drip-hating espresso snob
| until we were getting some work done on the house and our
| espresso machine had to go into storage. Then I was forced
| to learn to make nice drip coffee and aeropress and now I
| can make basically all the types of good coffee. It's a
| valuable life skill for sure.
|
| The real crime is most people make drip coffee too weak or
| with bad beans (or badly-ground beans).
| acdha wrote:
| It works well in the context of that quote: the Wednesday
| character is smart and competent, but not nearly as much as
| she thinks. There's nothing wrong with drip coffee but some
| people think it does because they skimped on the two things
| you mentioned or are getting diner coffee which has been on
| the burner for a couple of hours. At least in this case,
| that mistaken attribution doesn't have a body count.
| mrguyorama wrote:
| Good drip is stupidly close to pour over in function
| anyway.
|
| There are things you can do to improve it massively, even
| with a $20 brand-less drip machine from walmart: 1) Make
| sure your coffee maker is free of old, dry, rancid coffee
| or coffee oils, and not clogged with scale 2) Use really
| good water. 3) Grind your own coffee 4) Buy coffee you
| enjoy, which might be a national, name brand, cheap bag of
| beans, but there's significant flavor and style differences
| in these different brands! Try several different ones. Some
| lean acidic, some lean earthy and bitter, find your
| personal preference
|
| Now we get to the "over fussy" stuff depending on how lucky
| you are 4) Use a concical bur grinder instead of a blade
| grinder for more consistent grind and extraction 5) Play
| with your coffee to water ratio. Everyone has different
| preferences here 6) Rinse the paper filter for your machine
| before use, or replace with a reusable mesh of some sort if
| you like your coffee more "sludgy" like cold brew or french
| press 7) "Pre heat" the water. Lots of drip machines don't
| heat the water very well in the beginning. My machine has a
| feature where if I keep the top open, the water recycles
| back into the tank so I can let it run and heat itself up.
| Alternatively heat up your water before brewing. 8) Let the
| grounds degass: remove the carafe or otherwise block the
| basket output, let hot water drip into the grounds until
| they are mostly submerged, and stop water from going into
| the basket. Let the grounds steep in the hot water for like
| a minute, then continue the brew as normal. I find this
| helps reduce acidity personally 9) Put a pinch of salt into
| the pot of coffee. Salt has a bitterness blocking effect
| that you might enjoy 10) check the output spout of your
| brewer into the basket. It can help to add some sort of
| "diffuse" so all the water doesn't just dig itself a hole
| into the grounds. When you go to empty the basket, it
| should look like a very even bed of grounds that got even
| water mostly all over
|
| Check out James Hoffman on youtube for more information.
| 0x457 wrote:
| Keurig are...coffee machines for places that want to serve
| coffee without going through the trouble of making that coffee.
| Waiting rooms - just go and make yourself a cup. Cheapo office
| kitchen machine.
|
| It does make pretty bad coffee, but hey, it's better than not
| having coffee an all...sometimes. Buying it for home is another
| story.
|
| Aeropress is a great travel coffee maker. Still need to clean
| it, grind beans, but managable.
|
| Chemex... Have to buy filters (aeropress you can buy reusable
| metal filter that is better than paper ones), takes a while to
| make. We actually had an issue with new company management
| because of how much time people spent making coffee with chemex
| (fuck em, but still)
|
| Frenchpress are great. A bit annoying to clean, but nice
| coffee.
|
| All of them require you to grind your own coffee. That means
| easier cheap manual grinder or somewhat expensive electronic
| grinder (because cheap electronic grinders are trash).
|
| None of them work well in places that any pod-based coffee
| maker works well: self-serving waiting rooms.
| KptMarchewa wrote:
| Aeropress is really peak coffee simplicity, especially if you
| use metal filter. Couple simple parts, stupidly easy to
| disassemble, stupidly easy to clean, stupidly easy to make at
| least decent coffee - beans dependent of course.
| teachrdan wrote:
| I've used my SnowPeak titanium French press for years. It fixes
| the weak point of 99% of French presses -- the glass carafe
| that inevitably breaks when you're most vulnerable. (before
| you've had coffee!) It also makes great coffee every time. And
| you can take it camping with you!
|
| https://www.snowpeak.com/collections/coffee-tea/products/tit...
|
| And this is the upgrade pick. Expensive until you consider how
| much you save by making coffee at home.
|
| https://www.espro.com/collections/french-press/products/coff...
| brewdad wrote:
| I stuck with the Bodum brand mentioned above. This stainless,
| huge-ass, french press has served me well for about a decade
| now after I broke my second glass model.
| https://www.bodum.com/us/en/1312-16-bodum-columbia
| noefingway wrote:
| I highly recommend cold brew coffee. We make it once a week or
| so. My wife grinds her mix of beans, into the toddy, add cold
| water, let steep over night and drip the next day. Add some brew
| to a cup and top off with hot water. Cold brew will keep for
| quite a while in the refrigerator. No fuss, bother and filling
| the landfill with little plastic cups. IMHO too many simple tasks
| are over-engineered into ready to fail products.
| andix wrote:
| I totally agree. Go low tech or get a real Italian (style)
| espresso machine for a few thousand dollars. But only if making
| coffee is your hobby. Otherwise low tech is good enough, there
| are so many ways to make good coffee without a machine (cold
| brew, french press, manual filters, Turkish coffee, ...)
| sgtnoodle wrote:
| The $12 one works great until the thermal fuse blows for no
| reason. Luckily it's easy to fix with a soldering iron.
|
| I've been doing pour-overs for a couple years now. I am always
| amused when I get LinkedIn messages from coffee brewing startups
| looking for embedded firmware engineers!
| barbazoo wrote:
| > Instead, I snagged the cheapest and most basic coffee maker I
| could find. It cost me $12. It has no clock, no programming
| options, no base settings or cleaning functions. Hell, there
| aren't even level numbers on the water reservoir tank. You simply
| add your scoops of coffee grounds along with desired amount of
| water. Then you switch on the (only) button at the side of the
| machine. After a handful of minutes, you have coffee.
|
| Until recently that's what I had too and I connected it to a
| Sonoff S31 (Tasmota) connected to Home Assistant which let me
| turn on the coffee maker with an automation and also measure when
| it's done brewing. One of the temp fuses blew recently and I
| haven't been able to get the parts I need to fix it. None of the
| thrift stores in the area have had a simple model like that for a
| while now. They're all "smart" with their timers and "brew
| strengths" and whatnot, very frustrating.
| relwin wrote:
| Try NTE Electronics for thermal fuses -- used to get these at
| Fry's (in the US) for $2. Today's inexpensive coffee makers
| usually use specialty plastic screws making disassembly
| difficult.
| Night_Thastus wrote:
| Customers are ultimately the problem here - not designers.
|
| Customers want lots of features, and they want it at a cheap
| price. This has resulted in an arms race of every-more-poorly
| made devices that try to do more and more with less and less.
|
| This is the problem. Demand. Not the designers. They're just
| working within the market that exists.
|
| There is of course demand on the higher end price brackets as
| well, but that's a separate discussion. That makes up a minority
| of all sales in terms of volume.
| [deleted]
| remremz wrote:
| I use a Moccamaster cup one. It is pretty consistent drip, design
| is simple, sturdy, easy to clean and has a 5 year warranty.
| Granted it does come at a more premium price.
| kubectl_h wrote:
| Came here to say Moccamaster, but I have the full one. Have
| done most every manual prep (Chemex, French Press, Aeropress,
| pour-over, etc) over the years but switched to the Moccamaster
| a few years ago and never looked back. Someone hit the
| motherload of coffee prep gear at my local Goodwill a couple of
| years into my Moccamaster purchase.
|
| I have the ten cup and put 67g of ground coffee into it every
| morning. Once fully brewed I reserve half of it into a Stanley
| thermos to have over the course of the day and then have my
| morning coffee. Always excellent and above all, consistent.
| Thlom wrote:
| The regular Moccamaster is nearly indestructible. Just remember
| to run through a clean cycle once in a while.
| lsaferite wrote:
| As a preface, I'm a massive tech lover and have tons of
| complicated devices in my house.
|
| We have 3 ways to make coffee in our house. The first is a ~$7
| 5-cup coffee maker with no bells or whistles (like in the
| article) that I've used for 5+ years now. I'm fairly certain I've
| gotten my money's worth in that deal. I recently added a Zigbee
| on/off switch so I stop forgetting to turn it off. Second is a
| dead-simple ~$25 Kurig machine that you pour water in, pop in a
| pod, and punch the only button on the device to activate. It
| pumps out hot water and turns off. We've also had this for years
| with no issues. The third is a recent addition. It's a double
| walled glass vessel with a basket on top that holds grounds and
| you pour in boiling water. No electronics at all. I couple it
| with a simple electric kettle that's equally dead-simple (one
| button), but could be replaced with water boiled on the stove or
| a fire if need be. I fully expect these devices to last for many
| more years at this point.
|
| All of the above is my anecdotal contribution to the value of a
| machine or device that just does the core thing it was designed
| for in the simplest way possible.
| don-code wrote:
| In the past seven years, the only consumable I've bought for my
| moka pot is a new seal - $5 on eBay.
|
| The pot was made in 1947. It was my father's. Before that, it was
| my great aunt's.
|
| These are not statements you could make of really any product
| made today.
| low_common wrote:
| I'm not a huge fan of moka pots.
| xeromal wrote:
| I ruined my moka pot on accident by absent mindedly putting it
| on my drying rack and it melting through the rack and being
| covered everywhere in plastic. I was afraid of the BPAs getting
| into my coffee.
| 0xbadcafebee wrote:
| There are quite a few things made today you could make that
| statement of... french press, steel cooking utensils/pans,
| ceramic dishware, gas range/oven, gym weights, woodworking hand
| tools, leather and wool clothes, solid wood furniture, flower
| pots... There's still a lot of things made today that last. You
| just won't find them at Wal-Mart or Amazon.
| mrguyorama wrote:
| I once bought a knife set at walmart with 20ish pieces for
| less than $20. Sure, they won't be crazy tough, and sure they
| probably won't hold an edge very well, but it had a huge
| variety of knives and with a $5 sharpener they could last a
| decade in service. I have a smaller collection of Henkels for
| day to day use but I never got rid of the cheap ones because
| they are fantastic when I don't have the right Henkels knife
| and don't want to spend $80 on one knife that I will use
| twice a year.
| dctoedt wrote:
| Chemex pour-over turned out to be the sweet spot: Last summer we
| rented a house in England for a month but the French-press coffee
| maker in the house was too small for our family and a pain to
| clean. So we picked up a Chemex, used it happily, and brought it
| home.
|
| Supposedly important: We use an electric kettle that allows us to
| specify the temperature, in this case 200degF / 93degC, _not_
| boiling.
|
| Making coffee takes a few minutes of attention but it's a nice
| way to wake up in the morning -- as the coffee is pouring
| through, I'll get the paper and start reading it, check emails,
| empty the dishwasher, etc.
|
| Washing out the glassware each time with dish soap and a sponge
| wand, vice just rinsing: A habit ingrained from college-freshman
| chemistry class.
|
| Chemex: https://a.co/d/8YfriZF (Amazon.com)
|
| Bamboo stand: https://a.co/d/1n2zOet
|
| Chemex filters (coffee people claim they're better):
| https://a.co/d/6vrexRH
| dieselgate wrote:
| i've received the most compliments for coffee when using pour
| over, also feel it's the easiest way to make a cup/2 and it's
| portable for camping, travel etc. Plus everything is compostable
| keurig always leaves me disappointed just from a coffee drinking
| perspective
| poulsbohemian wrote:
| I'll do you one better: an electric kettle and a French press.
| Kettle does one thing: boils water. French press has no moving
| parts and is interchangeable with water and coffee from any
| source. Lasts forever or until you knock it off the counter.
| Makes good coffee.
| ramesh31 wrote:
| After running the gamut of bullshit fancy coffee makers, this
| is where I've landed as well. Dead simple, easy to clean, and
| fast.
| wintogreen74 wrote:
| How do you prep your coffee? And a french press is a pain to
| clean.
| Scoundreller wrote:
| I'll let you in on a secret: I use my French press pretty
| much daily and throw it in a dishwasher every long weekend.
|
| I suspect regular hits of mildly acidic boiling water keeps
| the microbes at bay better than most other sanitation
| methods.
| fleekonpoint wrote:
| Not OP but I have a electric burr grinder. You can also ask
| coffee shops to grind the beans for you (mention that it is
| for a French press so they get the grind right). It takes me
| about a minute 90 seconds to clean mine, I turn it upside
| down to get most of the grinds in the trash and then I rinse
| out the rest and dry. I clean it with soap maybe once a week.
| poulsbohemian wrote:
| I know this is sacrilegious, but we drink so much coffee
| around here that I've kinda come to the conclusion that
| buying pre-ground isn't the end of the world. I've always
| been a buy beans and grind fresh guy (and we typically buy
| beans from the local roaster). That said - if you buy a bag
| of ground and use it within a few days / one week, I'm not
| sure the quality is degraded to the point that it's
| noticeable in terms of everyday brew - again, especially if
| you are going through multiple pots per day.
| poulsbohemian wrote:
| I grind it in a basic cheap grinder. Studies in this stuff
| have shown that consistency in grind matters more than the
| amount of money spent on the grinder. I'm not sure what you
| mean by French presses being a pain to clean - you rinse out
| the pot, run the filter under hot water and you are good to
| go. Worried about coffee sludge build up on the filter? I
| guess you could soak it in some kind of cleaning product. I
| find the coffee residue comes right off with hot water.
| OJFord wrote:
| > Studies in this stuff have shown that consistency in
| grind matters more than the amount of money spent on the
| grinder.
|
| But what's this super consistent 'basic cheap grinder' you
| have? The people buying expensive grinders know this too -
| that's why they're buying them, for their 'conical burrs'
| or 'ceramic' or some other promise of a great (consistent)
| grind.
| poulsbohemian wrote:
| Studies have shown (I guess I could go google - last time
| coffee came up on HN there was info shared too) that you
| can use a very simple heuristic - you give it a little
| shake. That is to say - expensive grinders have various
| ways they create a consistent grind size, and they may
| even have ways to create different grinds (espresso, for
| Turkish coffee, etc). You can approximate this
| successfully with a cheap grinder by doing a grind-shake-
| grind-shake, as the primary problem with these cheap
| grinders is that they don't rotate the beans through the
| grinder as smoothly as the expensive guys.
|
| I am but a poor man and an amateur coffee drinker, but
| for my money (and again - according to the sources who
| blind studied this stuff...) you can get a perfectly good
| cup of coffee from a $10 no-name grinder. Now, whether
| the expensive grinder will make you more attractive to
| your desired mate or make your enemies jealous compared
| to the cheap grinder - that's a whole other conversation.
| Kon-Peki wrote:
| Ikea used to have a cheap (~$20?) hand-crank ceramic burr
| grinder. It was excellent for the money, but coffee snobs
| turned up their noses because it wasn't as good as ones
| costing 5x.
|
| There just isn't a market for such things, or at least
| there isn't if it is only being compared to very
| expensive stuff. Ikea might still sell it in some
| markets, but definitely not in the USA.
| KptMarchewa wrote:
| >It was excellent for the money, but coffee snobs turned
| up their noses because it wasn't as good as ones costing
| 5x.
|
| Problem with very cheap burr grinders is that burrs
| aren't very well supported and can move during grinding.
| This causes inconsistency in grinding.
| llbeansandrice wrote:
| Immersion brewing (french press) is really forgiving. Just
| don't grind the coffee too fine and you're pretty much good.
|
| I cleaned my french press by knocking out the grounds into
| the trash, quick rinse with water, then more water with a bit
| of dish soap and pump the plunger a bunch to froth the soap
| and clean the screen. Pour out, rinse until soap is gone, air
| dry. Every couple of weeks I'd do a deep clean by soaking the
| various parts in Cafiza and hot water. Not that bad imo.
| Semaphor wrote:
| > And a french press is a pain to clean.
|
| What? It's probably the 2nd easiest to clean right after a
| chemex.
| r00fus wrote:
| Indian filter coffee is even easier - all metal, no glass.
| But are far simpler than the once-in-a-while cleaning of
| that complicated coffee machine.
| timeon wrote:
| Also Moka pot or Aeropress. Not sure what is low-tech
| alternative for espresso.
| NoboruWataya wrote:
| > Not sure what is low-tech alternative for espresso.
|
| There are manual espresso machines like the Flair or the
| Cafelat Robot. But for many people, the moka pot is a no-
| fuss, close-enough alternative.
| Semaphor wrote:
| > Lasts forever or until you knock it off the counter.
|
| Mine is stainless steel. I think it might have glass inside the
| walls, but that would only affect the insulation properties and
| the noise ;)
| poulsbohemian wrote:
| This is true - I own three or four and at least one is
| stainless steel as well. The Bodum is the best all-around of
| mine, but the $9 ikea has been pretty good for many years up
| until the plastic push knob started to break. The stainless
| steel is a Starbucks, which in some ways I don't like because
| I can't see the color of the coffee as it is brewing and the
| knob is wooden - pretty, but not wise for a product that gets
| wet.
| mantas wrote:
| > $9 ikea has been pretty good for many years up until the
| plastic push knob started to break
|
| I had this happen to me... Sugru ball works great as a
| replacement knob.
| Semaphor wrote:
| My SS one is from Bodum and sadly not sold anymore, IMO
| it's by far the best looking SS one: [0]. I've had it for
| over 10 years by now, and it's seeing use every day as it's
| also my only one ;)
|
| [0]: https://i.imgur.com/rlZwdww.png
| l8again wrote:
| In the same vein, I think the industry is ripe for "smart-less"
| TVs. Reduce the cost, and take all the smarts out of it. Don't
| even need wifi. Apple TV, roku, chromecast - enough good options
| out there that there's really no need for your TV to come built
| in with any apps or smart features.
| AdamJacobMuller wrote:
| I hope that you're right but I don't think you are.
|
| While we (you, me, most of HN) see smart TVs as an anti-
| feature, most of the public sees them as a huge feature.
|
| "I can't buy a TV that doesn't support Netflix, I want to watch
| Netflix!"
|
| "yes but you can just get a AppleTV and watch Netflix with
| that"
|
| "I don't like the Apple TV service, it doesn't have as many
| good shows as Netflix!"
|
| Even if you can convince them that AppleTV can show them
| netflix you need to get past such insurmountable obstacles as
| "needing an HDMI cable" and "having two remotes" and "which
| input does the TV need to be on?" and "which remote do I use
| for the volume?"
|
| And, yes, CEC fixes some of this and 80% of the time when it
| works it's fantastic.
|
| I think we'll see TVs which have "swappable" OSes before we see
| smart-free TVs but I don't think either one is gonna happen in
| my lifetime.
|
| I'm just resigned to buy the least-shitty smart TV experience I
| can and to neuter it as much as I can. Currently I have a nice
| LG C9 OLED which doesn't bother me at all. If this dies before
| me, or, I feel compelled for an 8K/UltraHDR upgrade, I think LG
| will continue to offer reasonably non-shitty experiences on
| their top of the line TVs which I can block from the internet
| still.
|
| When they stop doing that I'll just buy a projector.
|
| When projectors become infested with this nonsense I'll just
| move to the woods and become a hermit.
| acdha wrote:
| > While we (you, me, most of HN) see smart TVs as an anti-
| feature, most of the public sees them as a huge feature.
|
| There's a lot of truth here but the manufacturers skimp so
| much on hardware that they're making that easier to
| understand. When you buy a brand new Samsung 4K TV and it
| can't play >1080p without stuttering the value of an Apple TV
| is a lot easier to understand.
|
| > Even if you can convince them that AppleTV can show them
| netflix you need to get past such insurmountable obstacles as
| "needing an HDMI cable" and "having two remotes" and "which
| input does the TV need to be on?" and "which remote do I use
| for the volume?"
|
| This is incorrect for the last 3 (you need something like
| 2000s-era hardware not to auto-detect inputs or allow the
| player's remote to control the volume) and the first one is
| true but also quite familiar to most people and it's hard to
| buy one without some kind of "do you already have a cable?"
| prompt since the vendors all want to sell you one.
| ilyt wrote:
| > I think we'll see TVs which have "swappable" OSes before we
| see smart-free TVs but I don't think either one is gonna
| happen in my lifetime.
|
| There was already a thing doing it, didn't get popular.
|
| But I'd definitely see the market for "just few HDMI inputs
| and a screen", especially for people that say already use
| Netflix from their PS5 or xbox
| Night_Thastus wrote:
| Such TVs will never exist, and people need to get used to that.
|
| Customers care about price and features. A TV with "less"
| features has no market appeal, except to a _very_ , _very_
| niche audience.
|
| It also has far less power to collect user data, which means
| less profit as well.
| ellieh wrote:
| I've had my chemex for 7 years now, and it's still going strong!
| I can't see it going wrong any time soon :P
| cf100clunk wrote:
| My sister bought a Bunn VP17-1 with the additional 20216.0000
| stainless steel funnel basket after she had ditched her Keurig
| and older coffee machines. I am not a fan of terms like "military
| grade" but I think her machine fits that sort of concept, and it
| is easy to keep in an almost sterile state between uses. My only
| tweak would be immediately pouring the output of her machine into
| my Pykel stainless steel carafe. Bear in mind that the Bunn
| machine is ridiculously expensive for most consumers.
| femto113 wrote:
| Simple drip machines are a marvel--I spend more on a month's
| supply of beans than I do on the maker, and have been getting
| about 5 years daily service out of each one. Technology
| Connections made a great video explaining how stupid/brilliant
| they are https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sp9H0MO-qS8
| r00fus wrote:
| I despise Keurig and all the waste. I have a very simple coffee
| routine now and it works fantastically.
|
| I buy coffee grinds (I no longer have a working grinder or I'd
| buy beans) - I buy several blends (decaf/light/dark) and freeze
| them in a ziploc.
|
| I tend to just make it for myself in which case this simple
| filter coffee setup works great [1]. Alternatively a french press
| or pour-over style filter setup is just as convenient and may
| yield more coffee (if you're preparing for spouse/etc).
|
| Taste is quite good, and the cleanup is very simple. No
| maintenance. Coffee tastes great and takes very little
| time/materials - just need a kettle or stove + kit +
| grinds/beans.
|
| [1 ]https://www.amazon.com/Stainless-Steel-Coffee-Filter-
| Indian/...
| rixrax wrote:
| In last 10 or so years I've gone a full circle with coffee makers
| (manufacturers rejoice!) in a quest for better coffee. From
| Moccamaster, to Keurig, Nespresso, french press, fancy capucino
| machine or two, and now back to filtered coffee /w Wilfa Classic.
|
| At the end of the day, it turns out I am drinking it for the
| effect, and quantity (as in volume of liquid, more is better).
| Although lately I've found some decafs that produce a rather
| pleasant brew. Filtered coffee from the 'right' (for me) ground
| coffees seem to hit right balance between ease of use, speed, and
| taste.
|
| And then there are some studies indicating that filtered coffee
| might be a bit healthier[0] than other forms.
|
| [0] https://www.health.harvard.edu/staying-healthy/whats-the-
| hea...
| wgjordan wrote:
| I'd actually consider something like the Wilfa Classic
| (PS189.00) to be on the opposite end of the product-design
| spectrum compared to the $12 no-name coffee maker mentioned in
| the article. You see a similar 'do one thing really well' focus
| in high-end and low-end appliances, the difference being less-
| significant details that most consumers don't care about and
| wouldn't spend a premium to enjoy (in this case, probably more
| precise brewing temperatures and extraction times).
|
| In-between is where all the bloated trash gets dumped.
| NoboruWataya wrote:
| I have a Stagg EKG Electric Kettle. It is quite featureful for a
| kettle, with variable temperature control and the ability to
| continuously hold at the desired temperature. Some might even
| consider it too featureful (particularly if you count the snake
| minigame easter egg), but in general its main features are things
| that coffee lovers appreciate and it's a popular product.
|
| Of course, now they have released the "Pro Studio Edition", which
| in addition to the above also sends you updates over WiFi. What
| could go wrong?
|
| I agree with some other commenters, though, that this is
| ultimately driven by consumers. I'm sure "Corporate" would love
| to be able to sell us all on minimalism so they could charge more
| for less. But consumers love features and frankly most don't care
| about waste. I agree with the sentiments in the article but it is
| very much a minority view.
| jdlyga wrote:
| I'm more of a cappuccino fan, and I have two coffee makers
|
| 1: A Nespresso that uses the classic pods
|
| 2: A Breville Barista Express
|
| I highly recommend the Breville if you can find it used or on
| discount. We got ours from a man who got extremely into espresso
| and upgraded 6 months later to a very high end machine. I've had
| it for 2 years and it's very nice. I use it to make cappuccinos,
| espressos, or just regular coffee with milk by adding hot water
| to espresso shots (Americano).
|
| The Nespresso is the quick solution if you just want espresso or
| cappuccino fast. The pods are ubiquitous, and you can usually
| find them for cheap. I definitely do not recommend the Nespresso
| Vertuo machines since the pods are very expensive and hard to
| find. Vertuo machines make coffee sized drinks, but in reality
| it's just a massive amount of pure espresso and not traditional
| American coffee like Keurig does. If you're leaning towards
| coffee, then just do old school pour over with a filter. You'll
| get better quality coffee, more options in what flavors you like,
| and it's generally faster. Just make sure you have a fast kettle
| or hot water machine.
| bluedino wrote:
| We have one of those Nespressos at work, they are not bad at
| all. Wouldn't buy one for myself, but I'll drink the free
| stuff.
| kylehotchkiss wrote:
| I'm a Vertuo fan and it got me out of going to the coffeeshop
| almost every day in a way my Chemex doesn't (so it ended up
| being net savings despite the relatively higher pod cost).
| Being around multiple Nspresso stores helps. There's enough
| variety in coffee-sized pods to be interesting and occasionally
| I like to try to make an actual latte. The recycling program is
| decent and so far I haven't generated any pod generated waste.
| Agreed it's not right for everybody though.
| zwieback wrote:
| To me Nespresso tastes like actual espresso, Keurig is pretty
| trashy unless you get really high-end pods. Maybe that's not
| saying much since I've only had Nespresso branded pods that are
| expensive so it's an occasional luxury for me.
| xeromal wrote:
| Anyone interested in how the traditional american coffee maker
| works should watch this.
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sp9H0MO-qS8
|
| Very fun video and I love the concept of using a piece of metal
| as a temperature-sensitive valve.
| JshWright wrote:
| Alec calls this out in both the description and in the video
| itself, but be sure to check out The Engineer Guy's video on
| the topic as well:
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4j4Q_YBRJEI
| josefresco wrote:
| My simple Keurig has no clock, size options, cleaning
| requirements or any fancy features and it's been rock solid for
| years ( _knocks on wood_ ). Maybe this guy/gal just needed a more
| simple... Keurig?
| wintogreen74 wrote:
| I'm on my second Hamilton Beach unit like this. I really liked
| the simplicity and cost but now it can't even make a simple pod
| correctly; I'm (once more) getting weak, tepid "coffee-like
| water". I do clean it regularly but it also seems to be brewing
| very fast.
|
| So it's not just over-complexity, it's also terrible quality in
| a race for the bottom.
| Kaibeezy wrote:
| Aeropress ftw. There is a somewhat intricate mostly sequential
| workflow (inverted method): - fill and start
| kettle - measure and grind beans - clear and rinse
| coffee maker - assemble coffee maker and invert -
| collect grounds, funnel into coffee maker - remove funnel,
| replace as stand for coffee maker - check water
| temperature, heat or cool as necessary - pour water into
| top of coffee maker, 2/3 full - stir for 10 seconds -
| allow to rest - pour hot water into cup to warm it -
| insert filter into holder and rinse it - add remaining
| water to fill coffee maker - attach filter cap - dump
| water from cup - invert coffee maker over cup - press
| slowly to fill cup
|
| Doubles as a dementia detector. Forgot the filter? Hot muddy mess
| on your counter. Forgot to dump the cup warming water? Too weak
| to drink. Forgot to set the grind properly? Too weak or un-
| pressable. Forgot to finish making the coffee? It's cold.
|
| Get it all right and it's probably the most satisfying non-
| espresso cup.
| xeromal wrote:
| I always felt the inverted method was invented just for the
| sake of being difficult.
| Kaibeezy wrote:
| So did I until I used it for a while. Going back the other
| way a couple of things bothered me. First, it's dripping a
| bit while you give it a chance to brew. But also, inverted
| it's clearer how much hot water to add, right up to the top,
| whereas right-side-up, you're pushing the plunger into the
| cylinder filled with hot water, which conflicts with wanting
| to get a maximum cup from an already minimum process. Somehow
| inverted is just feels overall more consistent and precise.
|
| Also, I lost my t-handled stirrer and when inverted you can't
| accidentally lift the filter with a spoon. By complete
| coincidence, I found that dang stirrer _yesterday_ so I may
| give right-side-up another go.
|
| Also, I like imagining the coffee maker is the Rocinante
| doing a flip 'n' burn ;)
| squidsoup wrote:
| If you 'pull' the aeropress slightly at the beginning, you can
| create a vacuum which stops the initial drip, making the normal
| method potentially preferable.
| Kaibeezy wrote:
| But there's still the drip from placing the plunger
| initially.
| LesZedCB wrote:
| Technology Connections on youtube has an awesome video about
| coffee makers! its 35 minutes, but i highly recommend it!
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sp9H0MO-qS8
|
| i think it's actually amazing how much design went into these
| "dead simple" coffee machines!
| craig_s_bell wrote:
| He also made a video about water kettles, which I found just as
| interesting.
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_yMMTVVJI4c
| sdeframond wrote:
| So the manufacturer gets revenue from the sale but externalizes
| the cost of trashing the device.
|
| The buyer personally benefits from many features for cheap, and
| externalizes the environmental cost to society.
|
| I say it is good design, from a business perspective.
|
| Also, yet another instance of the Tragedy Of The Commons
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tragedy_of_the_commons
| mjmsmith wrote:
| I use a cheap Bodum pour over, but if I was going to spend too
| much money on a coffee maker:
| https://ammunitiongroup.com/projects_pt/terra-kaffe/
| undersuit wrote:
| That Terra Kaffe looks wonderful but it's probably the exact
| opposite of what the article writee wants.
|
| >The machine houses numerous proprietary systems
|
| Yuck.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-01-09 23:02 UTC)