On Tue, 17 Jan 2012 00:12:36 -0800 (PST), dsi1 >
wrote:


>>
>> >Why would you want a pan that requires so much maintenance? I want to
>> >cook not scrub. *A non-stick cleans in seconds.



>
>I never said that one is better than the other. I said that I don't
>care for uncoated pans. There's an important difference there. It's
>none of my business what kind of pans you like to use nor do I care.
>Why would you care about my cookware?

As you can see above, yo asked why I'd use a pan with high
maintenance. It does not have high maintenance when properly used. I
really don't care what you use, but I'm pointing out your reason is
incorrect.

On Jan 17, 1:19*am, Ed Pawlowski > wrote:
> On Tue, 17 Jan 2012 00:12:36 -0800 (PST), dsi1 >
> wrote:
>
>
>
> >> >Why would you want a pan that requires so much maintenance? I want to
> >> >cook not scrub. *A non-stick cleans in seconds.
>
> >I never said that one is better than the other. I said that I don't
> >care for uncoated pans. There's an important difference there. It's
> >none of my business what kind of pans you like to use nor do I care.
> >Why would you care about my cookware?
>
> As you can see above, yo asked why I'd use a pan with high
> maintenance. *It does not have high maintenance when properly used. *I
> really don't care what you use, but I'm pointing out your reason is
> incorrect.

I believe you but it just doesn't work for me,

In article
>,
dsi1 > wrote:

> On Jan 14, 4:49Â*pm, Brooklyn1 <Gravesend1> wrote:

> > Your initial premise was "I guess", you're still on a guessing roll,
> > Mr. Know Nothing.
>
> You must think that the heat gets drawn to the bottom of the pan like
> a magnet or maybe you think it get sucked into the pot by magic. If I
> know nothing, you know less than nothing. ?

That's not correct. Sheldon knows everything. He isn't constrained by
those "truth" or "facts" things. He just makes stuff up.

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA

On 1/13/2012 11:14 PM, sf wrote:

> On Fri, 13 Jan 2012 13:20:36 -0800, > wrote:
>
>> I find it almost
>> impossible to simmer anything. It's more like a cycling of boiling and
>> not boiling.
>
> That's the fault of your particular electric stove, not electric
> stoves in general. The fact is that you can do long untended
> simmering on an electric stove without a heat diffuser and without
> constantly checking the liquid level in longer intervals than you can
> on any gas stove, even if the flame is as low as possible on the
> smallest BTU burner you have.

I also think it has a lot to do with the cookware. My owners manual for
the GE ceramic top electric says to use heavy cookware, I'm using all
aluminum. The cookware will retain enough heat between cycling to keep
a simmer going.

On 1/18/2012 10:44 PM, Cheryl wrote:
> On 1/13/2012 11:14 PM, sf wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 13 Jan 2012 13:20:36 -0800, > wrote:
>>
>>> I find it almost
>>> impossible to simmer anything. It's more like a cycling of boiling and
>>> not boiling.
>>
>> That's the fault of your particular electric stove, not electric
>> stoves in general. The fact is that you can do long untended
>> simmering on an electric stove without a heat diffuser and without
>> constantly checking the liquid level in longer intervals than you can
>> on any gas stove, even if the flame is as low as possible on the
>> smallest BTU burner you have.
>
> I also think it has a lot to do with the cookware. My owners manual for
> the GE ceramic top electric says to use heavy cookware, I'm using all
> aluminum. The cookware will retain enough heat between cycling to keep a
> simmer going.

Umm, I have no idea why I wrote "aluminum". I'm using all stainless
steel.

On 1/18/2012 5:06 PM, Dan Abel wrote:
> In article
> >,
> > wrote:
>
>> On Jan 14, 4:49 pm, Brooklyn1<Gravesend1> wrote:
>
>>> Your initial premise was "I guess", you're still on a guessing roll,
>>> Mr. Know Nothing.
>>
>> You must think that the heat gets drawn to the bottom of the pan like
>> a magnet or maybe you think it get sucked into the pot by magic. If I
>> know nothing, you know less than nothing. ?
>
> That's not correct. Sheldon knows everything. He isn't constrained by
> those "truth" or "facts" things. He just makes stuff up.
>

Thanks for the info. Hopefully he help me with my sentences long time!

After waiting three days for somebody to talk "to their manager", they
have agreed to install a new glass top. I pay the installation $80,
which I'm told is "labor at cost". The switch--the initial reason for
the call--will be another $325 to replace.

What the hell, I'll pay the $80 to get my cooktop back. Y'all have
generally spooked me off the gas stove; the rationale being the heat in
an air-conditioned home, and the fact that I'd have to replace the vent
which has a troubled motor and hasn't been run in 10 years.

Many thanks for the input and the all the entertaining side-fights.
--
I do not feel obligated to believe that the same God who has endowed us
with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forego their use.
-- Galileo

gtr wrote:
>
> After waiting three days for somebody to talk "to their manager", they
> have agreed to install a new glass top. I pay the installation $80,
> which I'm told is "labor at cost".

If the repairman cracked your glass top, you should NOT pay the $80 for
installation either. WTH? If he broke it, it should cost you nothing at all
to replace. And they should be darn happy that you don't sue them for the
down time and inconvenience.

Gary

On Sat, 21 Jan 2012 17:47:24 -0500, Gary > wrote:

>gtr wrote:
>>
>> After waiting three days for somebody to talk "to their manager", they
>> have agreed to install a new glass top. I pay the installation $80,
>> which I'm told is "labor at cost".
>
>If the repairman cracked your glass top, you should NOT pay the $80 for
>installation either. WTH? If he broke it, it should cost you nothing at all
>to replace. And they should be darn happy that you don't sue them for the
>down time and inconvenience.
>
>Gary

Not so fast... in-home appliance repair contracts typically contain a
clause limiting responsibilty same as when one signs for a medical
procedure... especially when out of warranty. Because one can't expect
the tech to be responsible against breakage to a cooktop that may have
been misused and abused for years. These are exactly the situations
that arise when one does not keep up the extended warranty.

On 2012-01-21 22:47:24 +0000, Gary said:

> gtr wrote:
>>
>> After waiting three days for somebody to talk "to their manager", they
>> have agreed to install a new glass top. I pay the installation $80,
>> which I'm told is "labor at cost".
>
> If the repairman cracked your glass top, you should NOT pay the $80 for
> installation either. WTH? If he broke it, it should cost you nothing at all
> to replace. And they should be darn happy that you don't sue them for the
> down time and inconvenience.

At this point *I'm* glad I'm not suing them and hopefully will get back
to my life.
--
I do not feel obligated to believe that the same God who has endowed us
with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forego their use.
-- Galileo

dsi1 wrote:
> On Jan 16, 6:12 pm, "Jean B." > wrote:
>> dsi1 wrote:
>>> On Jan 14, 5:31 pm, "Jean B." > wrote:
>>>> dsi1 wrote:
>>>>> On Jan 13, 7:25 am, sf > wrote:
>>>>>> On Fri, 13 Jan 2012 01:55:30 -0500, Cheryl >
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> On 1/12/2012 10:49 PM, John Kuthe wrote:
>>>>>>>> I like gas better for cooking though. Better control over the amount
>>>>>>>> of heat. Temp is the same (combustion temp of the gas being burned)
>>>>>>>> but I can vary the "amount" of heat very nicely.
>>>>>>> I don't have the option for gas for cooking but I've learned with my new
>>>>>>> electric ceramic cooktop that it's easy to control the heat when you
>>>>>>> need to cool it down by just moving the pan to either over a cold spot
>>>>>>> or over half hot, half cold.
>>>>>> Electric is very easy to cook with, so reasonable people disregard the
>>>>>> nay-sayers who have an agenda (gas) to push.
>>>>> I'd rather have high output electric elements also. Gas might be ok if
>>>>> the burners are high output but my memory or our all gas kitchen when
>>>>> I was growing up was that it was unpleasantly hot and that the burners
>>>>> were pretty wimpy. I don't care for the halogen systems either because
>>>>> the glass is a bitch to keep clean. Induction is ok I guess. I like
>>>>> the superfast warmup but the restrictions on the pans you can use is a
>>>>> drag.
>>>> Not really, for me, anyway. You acquire more stainless steel.
>>>> That's it.
>>>> --
>>>> Jean B.
>>> I really don't like cooking with uncoated pans. They increase the time
>>> it takes to wash them considerably. I hate washing pans, who doesn't?
>> Why would the outside have to be coated????
>>
>> --
>> Jean B.
>
> I'm talking about non-stick coatings on the inside. I don't like any
> coating on the outside because I'm a man and those things are mainly
> for women and French people. 🇫🇷�

Excuse me if I've forgotten, but ISTR that this was about nonstick
pans on induction cooktops, and one can use them.

--
Jean B.

dsi1 wrote:
> On Jan 16, 6:13 pm, "Jean B." > wrote:
>> dsi1 wrote:
>>> On Jan 15, 10:16 pm, (Steve Pope) wrote:
>>>> dsi1 > wrote:
>>>>> I really don't like cooking with uncoated pans. They increase the time
>>>>> it takes to wash them considerably. I hate washing pans, who doesn't?
>>>> Is enamel a suitable coating?
>>>> Steve
>>> That stuff seems more sticky than stainless. Woks and cast iron are
>>> pretty easy to clean. I like to flip and toss stuff but can't do it
>>> with cast iron. As it goes, I've used non-stick most of my life and it
>>> has spoiled me. I have a SS chicken fryer and that's the only SS pan I
>>> like using - but only for fried chicken. It works great for that!
>> You can use nonstick pans. They just have to have an SS exterior.
>>
>> --
>> Jean B.
>
> I don't have 200 or so bucks for a set. All I have is one coated pan
> that I use all the time for frying. Maybe one of these days...

So get one pan! I got a cheap set of Farberware SS classic pots
to augment the few pieces I had that would work on an induction
cooktop. (Note I say "pots" because I didn't notice that the pans
were NOT SS.) I have seen NO need to buy anything else since
then. I won't say "never", but so far my few pieces of All-Clad
(mostly small and purchased before I decided I didn't like it)
plus the Farberware have been fine. (I might add that to my
extreme joy, I discovered some of the All-Clad pots can be covered
with my Revereware lids.)

--
Jean B.

Cheryl wrote:
> On 1/13/2012 11:14 PM, sf wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 13 Jan 2012 13:20:36 -0800, > wrote:
>>
>>> I find it almost
>>> impossible to simmer anything. It's more like a cycling of boiling and
>>> not boiling.
>>
>> That's the fault of your particular electric stove, not electric
>> stoves in general. The fact is that you can do long untended
>> simmering on an electric stove without a heat diffuser and without
>> constantly checking the liquid level in longer intervals than you can
>> on any gas stove, even if the flame is as low as possible on the
>> smallest BTU burner you have.
>
> I also think it has a lot to do with the cookware. My owners manual for
> the GE ceramic top electric says to use heavy cookware, I'm using all
> aluminum. The cookware will retain enough heat between cycling to keep
> a simmer going.

Ewwww. Cycling. I REALLY hated that.

--
Jean B.

On 1/23/2012 4:12 PM, Jean B. wrote:
> dsi1 wrote:
>
> Excuse me if I've forgotten, but ISTR that this was about nonstick pans
> on induction cooktops, and one can use them.
>

I don't blame you for forgetting. I'm pretty sketchy myself. Anyway,
non-stick pans work fine with an induction cooktop. The problem is that
most non-stick pans tend to be made of spun aluminum these days. You can
find pans that are non-stick with a clad-construction however, none of
my pans were magnetic which means they won't work with induction.

My guess is that non-stick aluminum pans of clad construction with a
ferrous core will come back into favor as more people switch to
induction cooking.

dsi1 wrote:
> On 1/23/2012 4:12 PM, Jean B. wrote:
>> dsi1 wrote:
>>
>> Excuse me if I've forgotten, but ISTR that this was about nonstick pans
>> on induction cooktops, and one can use them.
>>
>
> I don't blame you for forgetting. I'm pretty sketchy myself. Anyway,
> non-stick pans work fine with an induction cooktop. The problem is that
> most non-stick pans tend to be made of spun aluminum these days. You can
> find pans that are non-stick with a clad-construction however, none of
> my pans were magnetic which means they won't work with induction.
>
> My guess is that non-stick aluminum pans of clad construction with a
> ferrous core will come back into favor as more people switch to
> induction cooking.

Well, yes, you would have to get nonstick pans with the correct
exterior. I have All-Clad ones. (They are pretty small, so I
don't absolutely hate them.) I would like to try a ScanPan. I
forget what has kept me from doing that, because they do have a
stainless steel line. I guess I should say, I forget, other then
the price....)

--
Jean B.

On 1/23/2012 9:18 PM, Jean B. wrote:
> Cheryl wrote:
>> On 1/13/2012 11:14 PM, sf wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, 13 Jan 2012 13:20:36 -0800, > wrote:
>>>
>>>> I find it almost
>>>> impossible to simmer anything. It's more like a cycling of boiling and
>>>> not boiling.
>>>
>>> That's the fault of your particular electric stove, not electric
>>> stoves in general. The fact is that you can do long untended
>>> simmering on an electric stove without a heat diffuser and without
>>> constantly checking the liquid level in longer intervals than you can
>>> on any gas stove, even if the flame is as low as possible on the
>>> smallest BTU burner you have.
>>
>> I also think it has a lot to do with the cookware. My owners manual
>> for the GE ceramic top electric says to use heavy cookware, I'm using
>> all aluminum. The cookware will retain enough heat between cycling to
>> keep a simmer going.
>
> Ewwww. Cycling. I REALLY hated that.
>

I really haven't had a problem with this cooktop. I'm happy with it. I
missed your reply earlier about worrying about cracking the glass by
moving a hot pan from the burner to a cooler spot when hot, but this
thing heats up so fast I didn't even think moving a hot pan from a
burner that's "on" to a cooler spot might cause cracking. I will have
to ask GE about that.

On 1/23/2012 9:16 PM, Jean B. wrote:
> dsi1 wrote:
>> On Jan 16, 6:13 pm, "Jean B." > wrote:
>>> dsi1 wrote:
>>>> On Jan 15, 10:16 pm, (Steve Pope) wrote:
>>>>> dsi1 > wrote:
>>>>>> I really don't like cooking with uncoated pans. They increase the
>>>>>> time
>>>>>> it takes to wash them considerably. I hate washing pans, who doesn't?
>>>>> Is enamel a suitable coating?
>>>>> Steve
>>>> That stuff seems more sticky than stainless. Woks and cast iron are
>>>> pretty easy to clean. I like to flip and toss stuff but can't do it
>>>> with cast iron. As it goes, I've used non-stick most of my life and it
>>>> has spoiled me. I have a SS chicken fryer and that's the only SS pan I
>>>> like using - but only for fried chicken. It works great for that!
>>> You can use nonstick pans. They just have to have an SS exterior.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Jean B.
>>
>> I don't have 200 or so bucks for a set. All I have is one coated pan
>> that I use all the time for frying. Maybe one of these days...
>
> So get one pan! I got a cheap set of Farberware SS classic pots to
> augment the few pieces I had that would work on an induction cooktop.
> (Note I say "pots" because I didn't notice that the pans were NOT SS.) I
> have seen NO need to buy any thing else since then. I won't say "never",
> but so far my few pieces of All-Clad (mostly small and purchased before
> I decided I didn't like it) plus the Farberware have been fine. (I might
> add that to my extreme joy, I discovered some of the All-Clad pots can
> be covered with my Revereware lids.)
>

I've discovered that with some cooking, lids don't have to fit exactly
so I have a couple of lids and various sized pots and pans.

New Even-more-final status:

On 2012-01-21 20:16:08 +0000, gtr said:

> After waiting three days for somebody to talk "to their manager", they
> have agreed to install a new glass top. I pay the installation $80,
> which I'm told is "labor at cost".

I carped about paying for labor when he acquised to replacing the top,
and he was quick to turn from professional to edgy, so I backed off.
At least I was getting the glass top--I figured I was ahead in the game.

> The switch--the initial reason for the call--will be another $325 to replace.
>
> What the hell, I'll pay the $80 to get my cooktop back. Y'all have
> generally spooked me off the gas stove; the rationale being the heat in
> an air-conditioned home, and the fact that I'd have to replace the vent
> which has a troubled motor and hasn't been run in 10 years.

So the the glass top was broken by UPS on it's way from NY to CA. So
broken that UPS threw the package away completely. That must have been
picture-worthy. The applicance repari compnay they called me to tell
me it would be another week while they tried to get one from elsewhere,
though somewhat differnt in color. At this point I said, "Okay, but I'm
not paying any labor costs!" He was quick to back off this time.. "No
problem," he said.

Hooray! For my $130 service charge I'll only be without a cooktop from
4 to 6 weeks (an estimate) and then have it back with the switch still
broken. I must be living in paradise!

More exciting episodes as the story unrolls...
--
I do not feel obligated to believe that the same God who has endowed us
with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forego their use.
-- Galileo

On 2012-02-04 21:04:30 +0000, gtr said:

> So the the glass top was broken by UPS on it's way from NY to CA. So
> broken that UPS threw the package away completely. That must have been
> picture-worthy. The applicance repari compnay they called me to tell
> me it would be another week while they tried to get one from elsewhere,
> though somewhat differnt in color. At this point I said, "Okay, but I'm
> not paying any labor costs!" He was quick to back off this time.. "No
> problem," he said.
>
> Hooray! For my $130 service charge I'll only be without a cooktop from
> 4 to 6 weeks (an estimate) and then have it back with the switch still
> broken. I must be living in paradise!
>
> More exciting episodes as the story unrolls...

The final episode:

They finally replaced the glass top, the one larger burner remains
conflicted about when/if it will operate the outside, expanded ring.
That was the initial rationale in contacting a repairman. For $130 and
6 weeks I am back where I started.

Which is the wife continues to bitch about not having two larger
burners available. Guts tells me we're going to replace it eventually.

The end...
--
I do not feel obligated to believe that the same God who has endowed us
with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forego their use.
-- Galileo