Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Cookware Got Worse on Purpose: Who Owns Pyrex and All-Clad Now

worseonpurpose.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–46 of 46 posts

Re: Cookware Got Worse on Purpose: Who Owns Pyrex and All-Clad Now

#41

Post by bob1029 »

al_borland wrote: post #31
bob1029 wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Stainless steel is your best bet if you want something you can put in the dishwasher consistently and not have it do anything weird.

All-Clad is stainless steel and there was a lawsuit over the issues related to it going in the dishwasher. I got some stainless steel pans about 6 months ago. They were advertised as dishwasher safe, but the fine print recommended against it.

All-Clad has issues because it is a composite of stainless and aluminum. Pure 18/10 stainless cookware is basically inert.

Re: Cookware Got Worse on Purpose: Who Owns Pyrex and All-Clad Now

#42

Post by Hikikomori »

girvo wrote: post #38
Hikikomori wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hard to get a seasoning that isn't stripped by acids, most vendors don't seem to provide the correct method either, leaving people with a blotchy seasoning.

Vinegar etching helps heaps with that I’ve found :)

Yeah that's the way, creates magnetite. Many manufacturers recommend the normal cast iron way that creates a brown seasoning that is stripped if it sees a lemon and doesn't get better over time.

Re: Cookware Got Worse on Purpose: Who Owns Pyrex and All-Clad Now

#43

Post by al_borland »

bob1029 wrote: post #41
al_borland wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All-Clad is stainless steel and there was a lawsuit over the issues related to it going in the dishwasher. I got some stainless steel pans about 6 months ago. They were advertised as dishwasher safe, but the fine print recommended against it.

All-Clad has issues because it is a composite of stainless and aluminum. Pure 18/10 stainless cookware is basically inert.

When I was researching pans, almost every recommendation was for fully cladded cookware. Stainless steel on its own is a poor conductor of heat.

Re: Cookware Got Worse on Purpose: Who Owns Pyrex and All-Clad Now

#44

Post by ungreased0675 »

slowmovintarget wrote: post #34
ungreased0675 wrote: post #27

I’d love to see legislation prohibiting private equity from strip-mining established brands.

How? It seems like any legal framework for attempting to prevent something like this would only have worse unintended effects. For example: every sale of a brand or a company has to go through a government committee (bribes, kickbacks, friction...). Restrictions on product changes: the new owner isn't allowed to improve the products, or stop producing older products when newer ones sell better, even if the newer ones…

I don’t actually know what a good government policy would be. I don’t want to add friction to normal business practices.

But I’d also like to make it unprofitable to plunder well-established brands. It seems like a form of dishonesty, to sell an intentionally inferior product under a brand that was previously quality. Consumers eventually figure it out and move elsewhere, but the pirates have already cashed out by then.

Re: Cookware Got Worse on Purpose: Who Owns Pyrex and All-Clad Now

#45

Post by nchmy »

qwerpy wrote: post #33
nchmy wrote: post #5

Just get cast iron

Not sure if you have a wife or not, but "just get cast iron" is something I would have said when I was single. Now, it's buy a new nonstick pan every year.

Why do you assume I'm not a woman? And why would that even be a problem? Are you seriously saying that women - particularly married ones - have some problem with cast iron? People - surely women primarily - used them almost exclusively. And surely MANY women love cast iron now, despite lots of options.

Re: Cookware Got Worse on Purpose: Who Owns Pyrex and All-Clad Now

#46

Post by Timon3 »

ungreased0675 wrote: post #44
slowmovintarget wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How? It seems like any legal framework for attempting to prevent something like this would only have worse unintended effects. For example: every sale of a brand or a company has to go through a government committee (bribes, kickbacks, friction...). Restrictions on product changes: the new owner isn't allowed to improve the products, or stop producing older products when newer ones sell better, even if the newer ones…

I don’t actually know what a good government policy would be. I don’t want to add friction to normal business practices. But I’d also like to make it unprofitable to plunder well-established brands. It seems like a form of dishonesty, to sell an intentionally inferior product under a brand that was previously quality. Consumers eventually figure it out and move elsewhere, but the pirates have already cashed out by th…

These days, abusing informational asymmetry feels like one of the primary ways for capitalists to squeeze out the last drops from most of their customers base.
Post reply on HN