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

Confessions of a Michelin Star Inspector

luxeat.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 314 posts

Re: Confessions of a Michelin Star Inspector

#41

Post by OJFord »

tomcam wrote: post #25
OJFord wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know, McDonalds over Starbucks on food? (Or any metric!) At least the latter has sandwiches. But I don't think I really understand any scale that has either of them as well as actual restaurants?

I am disappointed every time I eat food from Starbucks. It feels mediocre and way over priced. That always surprises me slightly.

It's ages since I've been and I rarely ate then; I agree it's not great, but I personally I never expected anything more than decent supermarket sandwich level, except I suppose that they can toast it. Overpriced/more expensive for sure - but what're you going to do, bring cheaper food in to eat? They somehow prey on that being poor etiquette, even if you've bought coffee etc., I suppose.

Re: Confessions of a Michelin Star Inspector

#42

Post by Ansil849 »

SilasX wrote: post #38
Ansil849 wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a bit like saying that most people have used pretty horribly-designed apps, but they did what they needed to do, so the user couldn't tell that they were horrible. For example, most people could not care less that their password manager recently switched to Electron. They don't even notice the alleged resource lag that their coder friends keep banging on about. They simply neither notice nor care. Fine craftsm…

So the Michelin Inspectors are discovering measureable, objectively bad things about the food/restaurant, just as you would be able to identify objectively bad things about the good-enough app? What are those things and what is the objective measurement?

Curiously, what is your opinion of UX/UI researchers? Or of design in general? Is the pretense of 'objectivity' something which denotes more value to you, generally?

Re: Confessions of a Michelin Star Inspector

#43

Post by zarzavat »

OJFord wrote: post #37
kragen wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you mean "the former"? Sandwiches are the principal dish served at McDonalds, but Starbucks has some sandwiches too.

Err, no? We may have an unexpected (to me) dialect barrier. To the best of my knowledge, McDonalds serves primarily burgers (is a burger what you're calling a sandwich?), Starbucks serves (coffee aside) mostly sandwiches, and also salads and stuff. (It is about ten and three years since I've been to one, respectively, but I doubt that much has changed!)

To be fair, McDonalds does call their burgers "sandwiches", I suspect some marketing person thought that "sandwich" sounded healthier than "burger".

Re: Confessions of a Michelin Star Inspector

#44

Post by blunte »

Michelin Star restaurants, in my 6 or 7 different experiences, are as much about the title as the food. Indeed the service is more formal, to the point of being a bit ridiculous in some cases. But the food itself was not so much more special than a really good unknown restaurant.

It's really a bit silly, a status symbol that allows pomp and circumstance to satisfy people who need something "special" to talk about.

I have had food from street vendors and family restaurants that blew my mind - unique flavors and textures that I had never experienced before, and which were so magnificently balanced that they surpassed any expensive meal I ever had. And I've had expensive meals which were truly excellent. But my few MS experiences were not markedly better than my best other experiences.

It reminds me of the studies of wines and wine tasting. People just like to believe they're getting something special. And if you give it a special award, charge more, and have 4 servers per table, the guests love it.

Re: Confessions of a Michelin Star Inspector

#45

Post by ValentineC »

Singaporean here. I don't know how Michelin shortlisted the eateries here when the guide first launched here in Singapore, but the selection was oddly similar to TripAdvisor's top food places — and missed out quite a few gems.

Not that I blame them — I wouldn't want some of my favourite street food haunts to be overwhelmed by long tourist queues.

Re: Confessions of a Michelin Star Inspector

#46

Post by cameronh90 »

tracerbulletx wrote: post #23
tomcam wrote: post #3

Went to Paris and dined at a number of Michelin-starred places, including Le Cinq. The food was fine, but... I didn't get it! I think there is a culinary language that I understand as little as a typical Michelin-starred chef would be able to evaluate a tightly-written C program. On the other hand I was lucky enough to dine at Poppy Seattle every year of its existence and felt their completely original approach to th…

Jeez Cheesecake Factory must have really wronged you or something.

As a non-American, I found The Cheesecake Factory baffling. Far more baffling than any other restaurant I've been to in the USA.

The restaurants appear to be trying to look fancy, with their extravagant yet tastelessly cheesy interior design. I wasn't sure if it was some kind of ironic inside joke that everyone from the USA is in on?

Despite the OTT design, the food was unremarkable. Not too surprising given that the menu has so many items, and it comes in such giant portions - but hard to reconcile with the decor and reputation.

And indeed, despite the name, the cheesecakes were easily the worst part of the meal.

Re: Confessions of a Michelin Star Inspector

#47

Post by blunte »

kragen wrote: post #18
tomcam wrote: post #3

Went to Paris and dined at a number of Michelin-starred places, including Le Cinq. The food was fine, but... I didn't get it! I think there is a culinary language that I understand as little as a typical Michelin-starred chef would be able to evaluate a tightly-written C program. On the other hand I was lucky enough to dine at Poppy Seattle every year of its existence and felt their completely original approach to th…

I think there's a significant question about the linearity of the scale. Is this quadratic, linear, logarithmic, exponential? If quadratic, then the Cheesecake Factory experience gives you 9 "utils" and Poppy gives you 100 utils. You'd rather eat at Poppy once a month than Cheesecake Factory 11 times a month, but you'd rather eat at Cheesecake factory 12 times a month than either. (If 12 times a month is too much, sw…

Wow. I'd just rather never eat at Cheesecake Factory. Please let me take you to some good restaurants :).

Re: Confessions of a Michelin Star Inspector

#48

Post by refurb »

This just seems like someone sharing their own subjective take on food?

I mean there is no right answer, it’s personal preference?

It reminds me of audiophiles who can hear the difference in oxygen free speaker cables or prefer the “warmth” of vinyl.

I’m like “ok? seems like that works for you so keep doing it?”

Re: Confessions of a Michelin Star Inspector

#49

Post by ska »

blunte wrote: post #44

Michelin Star restaurants, in my 6 or 7 different experiences, are as much about the title as the food. Indeed the service is more formal, to the point of being a bit ridiculous in some cases. But the food itself was not so much more special than a really good unknown restaurant. It's really a bit silly, a status symbol that allows pomp and circumstance to satisfy people who need something "special" to talk about. I…

> But my few MS experiences were not markedly better than my best other experiences.

This is just as you would expect, given sufficient samples, from any classification process that really doesn't want false positives but isn't too concerned about false negatives.

Re: Confessions of a Michelin Star Inspector

#50

Post by grecy »

tomcam wrote: post #29
Ansil849 wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The food was fine, but... I didn't get it! I think there is a culinary language that I understand as little as a typical Michelin-starred chef would be able to evaluate a tightly-written C program. Correct. I don't know why this is a revelation that seems especially hard for HN audiences to grasp, or why it's a revelation at all. Every single domain has its own expertise. It is absurdly arrogant and deeply condesce…

That’s right of course. But what bothers me is it I greatly enjoy eating out, I’ve done it a whole lot, and I’m still surprisingly bad at it.

Over the years I've learned simply doing something is not a great way to get good at it, and neither is taking lessons from someone else that is good at it.

Now I'm a snowboard instructor I can teach someone in a week what took me months and months to learn on my own, and I can teach them the right way from the beginning.

Same story for mountain biking, lifting at the gym and even writing books. Of course the story is the same for programming, technical writing and everything else.

If you want to get good at something, take courses from a professional instructor of that thing (NOT just someone who is good at it!)

Post reply on HN