On Jul 24, 7:12 pm, "Edwin Pawlowski" > wrote:
> "Pete C." > wrote in message
> > None of the big chains generally qualify as five star, but they are
> > usually consistently decent. A result of that corporate homogenization
> > where all the brands in the chain end up pretty much identical except
> > for their decor. Cracker Barrel and Outback are pretty typical in that
> > you can usually count on being able to stop at one pretty much anywhere
> > and get a reasonable meal that at least beats the fast food places.
>
> > Pete C.
>
> I don't disagree with you, and that "consistent sameness" is one of the
> reasons the chains do so well. I have, however, become much more
> adventurous in the past few years. I go out of my way to try local places.
> I've found more winners than losers and sometimes you find a real gem.
> --
> Edhttp://pages.cthome.net/edhome/

Ed,

I too prefer the little, hole-in-the-wall places. I think the owner
should either be cooking or greeting the customer at the door. Every
once in a while, I'll get a terrible meal at a mom-and-pop-place, but
the good meals more than make up for it.

I know for sure I'll be disappointed at Applebees, Marie Calendars,
etc. Some of the worst food I've ever eaten has been at Olive Garden.
It's just pureed tomatoes, lots of garlic, and more salt than I'd eat
in a week.

Near my job, there's a little taqueria with great food. They make
everything there, even the tortillas. It's so small the food is
either take-out or eat on the patio; no indoor seating. I'd rather
eat there any day instead of the chain places. I've eaten there in
the middle of winter, sitting on the concrete patio benches. That
tells you how good the tacos are. I sure wouldn't freeze my tail off
for Applebees.

Ken (Trying to not sound like a food snob.)