My newly remodeled kitchen needs all new cookware and I can't make up
my mind:

All-Clad Stainless, 10 pc set for around $600.
Calphalon One Hard Anodized, 10 pc set for around $550.
Emerilware (made by All-Clad), 10 pc set for around $200.

You can see all of these at http://www.chefsresource.com/cookware.html

There are advantages to each. For instance, the All-Clad stainless set
comes with steel lids, not glass, which I prefer (because glass breaks
too easily) and appears to be the professional choice. The Calphalon
anodized seems to be better for non-stick cooking. And the Emerilware
has a much better price than the All-Clad although it's essentially the
same stuff (but with glass lids and flared edges). Can there really be
that much of a quality difference between the $600 and the $200
All-Clad pots?

I'm hoping one or more of you has experience with each of these and can
give me your impressions (in addition to the reviews I've already read
online). The nearest dealer for any of these is a two-hour drive from
me so it's difficult to actually see them and hold them in person.

-Frank

--
(email: change out to in)

"Frank J Warner" > wrote in message
...
> My newly remodeled kitchen needs all new cookware and I can't make up
> my mind:
>
> All-Clad Stainless, 10 pc set for around $600.
> Calphalon One Hard Anodized, 10 pc set for around $550.
> Emerilware (made by All-Clad), 10 pc set for around $200.
>
> You can see all of these at http://www.chefsresource.com/cookware.html
>
> There are advantages to each. For instance, the All-Clad stainless set
> comes with steel lids, not glass, which I prefer (because glass breaks
> too easily) and appears to be the professional choice. The Calphalon
> anodized seems to be better for non-stick cooking. And the Emerilware
> has a much better price than the All-Clad although it's essentially the
> same stuff (but with glass lids and flared edges). Can there really be
> that much of a quality difference between the $600 and the $200
> All-Clad pots?
>
> I'm hoping one or more of you has experience with each of these and can
> give me your impressions (in addition to the reviews I've already read
> online). The nearest dealer for any of these is a two-hour drive from
> me so it's difficult to actually see them and hold them in person.
>

The best advice I can give you is: don;t buy a set. No one type of cookware,
no matter how good, is ideal for every job. Experienced cooks have an
assortment - 2 or three pans each of stainless steel, copper, non-stick,
cast iron, and enameled are the main ones. I know sets seem appealing
because of the price but are almost never a good idea for a devoted cook. A
better idea would be something like the following:

A non-stick skillet
A cast iron fry pan
A couple of stainless saucepans
An enameled (le Creuset) Dutch oven

Adjust accordig to your cooking style, but you get the idea. By the way, do
not buy Calphalon expecting non-stick - they are anything but!


--
Peter Aitken

Remove the crap from my email address before using.

"Frank J Warner" > wrote in message
...
> My newly remodeled kitchen needs all new cookware and I can't make up
> my mind:
>
> All-Clad Stainless, 10 pc set for around $600.
> Calphalon One Hard Anodized, 10 pc set for around $550.
> Emerilware (made by All-Clad), 10 pc set for around $200.
>
> You can see all of these at http://www.chefsresource.com/cookware.html
>
> There are advantages to each. For instance, the All-Clad stainless set
> comes with steel lids, not glass, which I prefer (because glass breaks
> too easily) and appears to be the professional choice. The Calphalon
> anodized seems to be better for non-stick cooking. And the Emerilware
> has a much better price than the All-Clad although it's essentially the
> same stuff (but with glass lids and flared edges). Can there really be
> that much of a quality difference between the $600 and the $200
> All-Clad pots?
>

Here are the advantages I see for each choice:

All-Clad - vanity brand, looks good, will impress your guests, you will have
$600 less to spend on things that might get you into trouble

Calphalon One - Looks almost as good, will keep your hands busy washing it
because it can't go in the dishwasher, you will always have an excuse for
not being able to make a good pan sauce because of the non-stick coating

Emerilware - See "Calphalon One" plus if you have Tourette's Syndrome, you
will be able to pass off yelling things like "BAMMMM" and people will find
it charming (for a while)

By the way, why do you think that glass lids break easily? That is at odds
with the findings at Cook's Illustrated and my own experience.

If you are buying a fashion accessory for your kitchen and money is no
object, I would get the All-Clad. If you are simply buying new cookware,
then I would widen the search to include stainless cookware with
encapsulated disk bottoms such as Wolfgang Puck, Martha Stewart, and
Cuisinart among others. I wouldn't be without my cast iron skillet and a
porcelain coated cast iron Dutch oven or two.

In article >, Vox Humana
> wrote:

> "Frank J Warner" > wrote in message
> ...
> > My newly remodeled kitchen needs all new cookware and I can't make up
> > my mind:
> >
> > All-Clad Stainless, 10 pc set for around $600.
> > Calphalon One Hard Anodized, 10 pc set for around $550.
> > Emerilware (made by All-Clad), 10 pc set for around $200.
> >
> > You can see all of these at http://www.chefsresource.com/cookware.html
> >
> > There are advantages to each. For instance, the All-Clad stainless set
> > comes with steel lids, not glass, which I prefer (because glass breaks
> > too easily) and appears to be the professional choice. The Calphalon
> > anodized seems to be better for non-stick cooking. And the Emerilware
> > has a much better price than the All-Clad although it's essentially the
> > same stuff (but with glass lids and flared edges). Can there really be
> > that much of a quality difference between the $600 and the $200
> > All-Clad pots?
> >
>
> Here are the advantages I see for each choice:
>
> All-Clad - vanity brand, looks good, will impress your guests, you will have
> $600 less to spend on things that might get you into trouble

Money is not an object; I have plenty enough to get me into trouble.
Quality, and knowing that I have the best tool I can afford, is the
issue here.


> By the way, why do you think that glass lids break easily? That is at odds
> with the findings at Cook's Illustrated and my own experience.

Unfortunately, I came by my money later in life than many other folks.
My hands don't grip as well as they used to, and I drop things more
easily than when I was younger. I do not have to be as careful with a
metal lid, and I like the satisfying clang it makes when it seats
properly on the pan.


> If you are buying a fashion accessory for your kitchen and money is no
> object, I would get the All-Clad. If you are simply buying new cookware,
> then I would widen the search to include stainless cookware with
> encapsulated disk bottoms such as Wolfgang Puck, Martha Stewart, and
> Cuisinart among others. I wouldn't be without my cast iron skillet and a
> porcelain coated cast iron Dutch oven or two.

I have a varied collection of other cookware, everything from treasured
cast iron skillets and dutch ovens to specialty items such as
aebleskiver pans. What I hope to achieve with this purchase is to
replace a hodge-podge of ordinary cookware gathered over the years from
Wal-Mart, Sears, supermarkets and other places with a high-quality
matched set good enough for both display and heavy use.

-Frank

--
(email: change out to in)

>"Frank J Warner" wrote:
>
>My newly remodeled kitchen needs all new cookware and I can't make up
>my mind:

The new Farberware Classic stainless with impact bonded bottoms is
exceptionally well made cookware, cooks perfectly, and very reasonably
priced... also looks great for those who appreciate retro... looks like the
original Farberware Classic but far more high tech.... odds are like the
original Classic version these will serve you well for your entire life. I
have one only because my 40 year old 6qt Classic was my most often used piece
and finally developed a tiny split at the rim... I sent it back and since
original Classics are no longer made they sent me a High Impact replacement
(free)... a really nice product. If I didn't have so many pots and was in the
market I would definitely buy the new Farberware product.

All-Crap and it's ilk are for those with more dollars than brain cells... and
if you display them it *proves* you can't cook.

For typical homemaker type cooks I suggest the new style Farberware Classics
with High Impact bottoms... for the more adventurous I highly recommend PIAZZA
cookware, in the US sold under the "Signature Select" brand, bar none, far and
away, the best cookware on planet Earth

http://www.kerekesequip.com/Signatur...-duraware.html


---= BOYCOTT FRANCE (belgium) GERMANY--SPAIN =---
---= Move UNITED NATIONS To Paris =---
*********
"Life would be devoid of all meaning were it without tribulation."
Sheldon
````````````

Frank J Warner wrote:

> My newly remodeled kitchen needs all new cookware and I can't make up
> my mind:
>
> All-Clad Stainless, 10 pc set for around $600.
> Calphalon One Hard Anodized, 10 pc set for around $550.
> Emerilware (made by All-Clad), 10 pc set for around $200.

I love my Panderno pots. There are fairly expensive but they frequently
have major sales. The pots have nice heavy bottoms to ensure even heat.
They clean up easily and I haven't lost any handles in the 12 years I have
had them.

Frank J Warner wrote:

> My newly remodeled kitchen needs all new cookware and I can't make up
> my mind:
>
> All-Clad Stainless, 10 pc set for around $600.
> Calphalon One Hard Anodized, 10 pc set for around $550.
> Emerilware (made by All-Clad), 10 pc set for around $200.

I love my Panderno pots. There are fairly expensive but they frequently
have major sales. The pots have nice heavy bottoms to ensure even heat.
They clean up easily and I haven't lost any handles in the 12 years I have
had them.

We bought expensive Calphalon commercial cookware, and have babied it
from day one. Hand wash, no metal utensils, each pot hangs on its own
hook.

The nonstick coating is coming off two pots (less than 2 years old).
They make it enough of a hassle that we won't bother to ship it back.
We'll just wait for the rest of them to go, then we'll buy a good
brand.

We bought expensive Calphalon commercial cookware, and have babied it
from day one. Hand wash, no metal utensils, each pot hangs on its own
hook.

The nonstick coating is coming off two pots (less than 2 years old).
They make it enough of a hassle that we won't bother to ship it back.
We'll just wait for the rest of them to go, then we'll buy a good
brand.

"Frank J Warner" > wrote in message
...
> In article >, Vox Humana
> > wrote:
>>
> Money is not an object; I have plenty enough to get me into trouble.
> Quality, and knowing that I have the best tool I can afford, is the
> issue here.
>
> I have a varied collection of other cookware, everything from treasured
> cast iron skillets and dutch ovens to specialty items such as
> aebleskiver pans. What I hope to achieve with this purchase is to
> replace a hodge-podge of ordinary cookware gathered over the years from
> Wal-Mart, Sears, supermarkets and other places with a high-quality
> matched set good enough for both display and heavy use.


Since money is no object, then I would get the All-Clad given only the
choices you offered. Personally, I think there is better looking tri-ply
cookware than All-Clad. I like Kitchen Aid and Viking better than All-Clad.
If you really want to dazzle people, then consider Mauviel Classic Copper.
Most any fully clad cookware is going to do a very good job. In most cases
I believe that cladding on the sides of a pan are unnecessary but if you
want to pay the price there is nothing wrong with buying it.

I don't care for anodized aluminum because it isn't dishwasher safe. I
don't like non-stick because it doesn't develop a fond and is lousy for
browning meat. Stainless is almost non-stick by nature, will develop a
fond, is non-reactive, and is dishwasher safe. You can use oven cleaner on
it to remove that stubborn varnish-like buildup and it will look like new.
Anodized aluminum eventually discolors and there is no way to restore it to
like-new condition. Therefore, you will lose the display quality that you
desire.

In the event that you will consider another brand and can find a good
charity for the excess money you will save, you might consider this
cookware. I have been very pleased and I am probably as old and clumsy as
you and have had no problems with breakage: http://tinyurl.com/4shn2

"Frank J Warner" > wrote in message
...
> In article >, Vox Humana
> > wrote:
>>
> Money is not an object; I have plenty enough to get me into trouble.
> Quality, and knowing that I have the best tool I can afford, is the
> issue here.
>
> I have a varied collection of other cookware, everything from treasured
> cast iron skillets and dutch ovens to specialty items such as
> aebleskiver pans. What I hope to achieve with this purchase is to
> replace a hodge-podge of ordinary cookware gathered over the years from
> Wal-Mart, Sears, supermarkets and other places with a high-quality
> matched set good enough for both display and heavy use.


Since money is no object, then I would get the All-Clad given only the
choices you offered. Personally, I think there is better looking tri-ply
cookware than All-Clad. I like Kitchen Aid and Viking better than All-Clad.
If you really want to dazzle people, then consider Mauviel Classic Copper.
Most any fully clad cookware is going to do a very good job. In most cases
I believe that cladding on the sides of a pan are unnecessary but if you
want to pay the price there is nothing wrong with buying it.

I don't care for anodized aluminum because it isn't dishwasher safe. I
don't like non-stick because it doesn't develop a fond and is lousy for
browning meat. Stainless is almost non-stick by nature, will develop a
fond, is non-reactive, and is dishwasher safe. You can use oven cleaner on
it to remove that stubborn varnish-like buildup and it will look like new.
Anodized aluminum eventually discolors and there is no way to restore it to
like-new condition. Therefore, you will lose the display quality that you
desire.

In the event that you will consider another brand and can find a good
charity for the excess money you will save, you might consider this
cookware. I have been very pleased and I am probably as old and clumsy as
you and have had no problems with breakage: http://tinyurl.com/4shn2

>Frank J Warner attempts to hustle us with:
>
>What I hope to achieve with this purchase is to display.

Why your need to display your cookware... are you so insecure in your cooking
abilities that from your displaying expensive cookware folks should extrapolate
that you are a kitchen wizard... when I see expensive cookware displayed I know
with absolute certainty not to ever eat there.


---= BOYCOTT FRANCE (belgium) GERMANY--SPAIN =---
---= Move UNITED NATIONS To Paris =---
*********
"Life would be devoid of all meaning were it without tribulation."
Sheldon
````````````

>Frank J Warner attempts to hustle us with:
>
>What I hope to achieve with this purchase is to display.

Why your need to display your cookware... are you so insecure in your cooking
abilities that from your displaying expensive cookware folks should extrapolate
that you are a kitchen wizard... when I see expensive cookware displayed I know
with absolute certainty not to ever eat there.


---= BOYCOTT FRANCE (belgium) GERMANY--SPAIN =---
---= Move UNITED NATIONS To Paris =---
*********
"Life would be devoid of all meaning were it without tribulation."
Sheldon
````````````

" blathers:
>
>We bought expensive Calphalon, each pot hangs on its own hook.

What a moron.


---= BOYCOTT FRANCE (belgium) GERMANY--SPAIN =---
---= Move UNITED NATIONS To Paris =---
*********
"Life would be devoid of all meaning were it without tribulation."
Sheldon
````````````

" blathers:
>
>We bought expensive Calphalon, each pot hangs on its own hook.

What a moron.


---= BOYCOTT FRANCE (belgium) GERMANY--SPAIN =---
---= Move UNITED NATIONS To Paris =---
*********
"Life would be devoid of all meaning were it without tribulation."
Sheldon
````````````

>What a moron.

Why, exactly, am I a moron for trying to steer someone away from a
poor quality product?

I see you chose to quote the fact that our pots and pans hang on a pot
rack. I also see from your reply to someone else that you have a
problem (for some reason) with people who use a potrack.

What strange insecurities you have.
So basically if someone doesn't have enough cabinet space for
cookware, and they choose to hang them on a rack, they are
"displaying" them. Seems like you're the only one angry about this.

I think we see who the moron actually is.

>What a moron.

Why, exactly, am I a moron for trying to steer someone away from a
poor quality product?

I see you chose to quote the fact that our pots and pans hang on a pot
rack. I also see from your reply to someone else that you have a
problem (for some reason) with people who use a potrack.

What strange insecurities you have.
So basically if someone doesn't have enough cabinet space for
cookware, and they choose to hang them on a rack, they are
"displaying" them. Seems like you're the only one angry about this.

I think we see who the moron actually is.

Hmmm, never mind. I see from your past posts that you're just another
hate-filled old complainer sitting at the computer looking for fights.

Have a nice life.

Hmmm, never mind. I see from your past posts that you're just another
hate-filled old complainer sitting at the computer looking for fights.

Have a nice life.

In article >,
"> wrote:

> We bought expensive Calphalon commercial cookware, and have babied it
> from day one. Hand wash, no metal utensils, each pot hangs on its own
> hook.
>
> The nonstick coating is coming off two pots (less than 2 years old).
> They make it enough of a hassle that we won't bother to ship it back.
> We'll just wait for the rest of them to go, then we'll buy a good
> brand.

Yikes!

Well then, scratch that one off the list.

Thank you for the information.

-Frank

--
(email: change out to in)

In article >, PENMART01
> wrote:

> >Frank J Warner attempts to hustle us with:
> >
> >What I hope to achieve with this purchase is to display.
>
> Why your need to display your cookware

Conspicuous ****ing consumption, of course.

And, as you haven't been invited, it shouldn't be your problem.

-Frank

--
(email: change out to in)

In article >, PENMART01
> wrote:

> >Frank J Warner attempts to hustle us with:
> >
> >What I hope to achieve with this purchase is to display.
>
> Why your need to display your cookware

Conspicuous ****ing consumption, of course.

And, as you haven't been invited, it shouldn't be your problem.

-Frank

--
(email: change out to in)

>Frank J Warner squeals:

>>PENMART01 wrote:
>> >Frank J Warner attempts to hustle us with:
>> >
>> >What I hope to achieve with this purchase is to display.
>>
>> Why your need to display your cookware?
>
>Conspicuous ****ing consumption, of course.
>
>And, as you haven't been invited, it shouldn't be your problem.

If you post here everyone is invited... and therefore I AM your problem. With
that name yoose gotta be a dumb achtung kraut... all them loose limbed fraus...
you could easily be one of my offspring... ask yer momma about the best ****
she ever had.


---= BOYCOTT FRANCE (belgium) GERMANY--SPAIN =---
---= Move UNITED NATIONS To Paris =---
*********
"Life would be devoid of all meaning were it without tribulation."
Sheldon
````````````

>Frank J Warner squeals:

>>PENMART01 wrote:
>> >Frank J Warner attempts to hustle us with:
>> >
>> >What I hope to achieve with this purchase is to display.
>>
>> Why your need to display your cookware?
>
>Conspicuous ****ing consumption, of course.
>
>And, as you haven't been invited, it shouldn't be your problem.

If you post here everyone is invited... and therefore I AM your problem. With
that name yoose gotta be a dumb achtung kraut... all them loose limbed fraus...
you could easily be one of my offspring... ask yer momma about the best ****
she ever had.


---= BOYCOTT FRANCE (belgium) GERMANY--SPAIN =---
---= Move UNITED NATIONS To Paris =---
*********
"Life would be devoid of all meaning were it without tribulation."
Sheldon
````````````

>I'm hoping one or more of you has experience

Buy whatever's on sale.

>I'm hoping one or more of you has experience

Buy whatever's on sale.

"Frank J Warner" > wrote in message
...
> My newly remodeled kitchen needs all new cookware and I can't make up
> my mind:
>
> All-Clad Stainless, 10 pc set for around $600.
> Calphalon One Hard Anodized, 10 pc set for around $550.
> Emerilware (made by All-Clad), 10 pc set for around $200.
>
> You can see all of these at http://www.chefsresource.com/cookware.html
>
> There are advantages to each. For instance, the All-Clad stainless set
> comes with steel lids, not glass, which I prefer (because glass breaks
> too easily) and appears to be the professional choice. The Calphalon
> anodized seems to be better for non-stick cooking. And the Emerilware
> has a much better price than the All-Clad although it's essentially the
> same stuff (but with glass lids and flared edges). Can there really be
> that much of a quality difference between the $600 and the $200
> All-Clad pots?
>
> I'm hoping one or more of you has experience with each of these and can
> give me your impressions (in addition to the reviews I've already read
> online). The nearest dealer for any of these is a two-hour drive from
> me so it's difficult to actually see them and hold them in person.
>
> -Frank
>
> --
> (email: change out to in)

Before you buy anything, heft a couple of the pans in a working position and
check the balance for you. If the pot/pan is too heavy or the handles are
poorly shaped for a comfortable grip or the bottom weight throws the balance
off, you aren't going to be comfortable using it. Buy from a brand that has
open stock. Everyone has different cooking habits. I might have to have a
12 inch skillet and you may never need anything larger than 10 inches.
Janet

"Frank J Warner" > wrote in message
...
> My newly remodeled kitchen needs all new cookware and I can't make up
> my mind:
>
> All-Clad Stainless, 10 pc set for around $600.
> Calphalon One Hard Anodized, 10 pc set for around $550.
> Emerilware (made by All-Clad), 10 pc set for around $200.
>
> You can see all of these at http://www.chefsresource.com/cookware.html
>
> There are advantages to each. For instance, the All-Clad stainless set
> comes with steel lids, not glass, which I prefer (because glass breaks
> too easily) and appears to be the professional choice. The Calphalon
> anodized seems to be better for non-stick cooking. And the Emerilware
> has a much better price than the All-Clad although it's essentially the
> same stuff (but with glass lids and flared edges). Can there really be
> that much of a quality difference between the $600 and the $200
> All-Clad pots?
>
> I'm hoping one or more of you has experience with each of these and can
> give me your impressions (in addition to the reviews I've already read
> online). The nearest dealer for any of these is a two-hour drive from
> me so it's difficult to actually see them and hold them in person.
>
> -Frank
>
> --
> (email: change out to in)

Before you buy anything, heft a couple of the pans in a working position and
check the balance for you. If the pot/pan is too heavy or the handles are
poorly shaped for a comfortable grip or the bottom weight throws the balance
off, you aren't going to be comfortable using it. Buy from a brand that has
open stock. Everyone has different cooking habits. I might have to have a
12 inch skillet and you may never need anything larger than 10 inches.
Janet

Frank J Warner > wrote in message >...
> In article >, PENMART01
> > wrote:
>
> > >Frank J Warner attempts to hustle us with:
> > >
> > >What I hope to achieve with this purchase is to display.
> >
> > Why your need to display your cookware
>
> Conspicuous ****ing consumption, of course.
>
> And, as you haven't been invited, it shouldn't be your problem.
>

HAH! You go, Frank. Sounds like you've earned the right to spend your
money as you please.

Why do people bitch about the purchase of a $600 set of pots that will
last 20 years, but never peep about a $3,000 computer that's obsolete
before the next Presidential election?

I had a friend in Berkeley years ago who sneered at my purchase of
fine china upon my marriage (relatives gave us money specifically
marked for it). If I'd spent the same money on a mountain bike or a
computer, she would have approved. THe china could very well outlast
me. I've been married 6.5 years, and the hypothetical computer and/or
mountain bike would be nearly shot by now.

Leila

Frank J Warner > wrote in message >...
> In article >, PENMART01
> > wrote:
>
> > >Frank J Warner attempts to hustle us with:
> > >
> > >What I hope to achieve with this purchase is to display.
> >
> > Why your need to display your cookware
>
> Conspicuous ****ing consumption, of course.
>
> And, as you haven't been invited, it shouldn't be your problem.
>

HAH! You go, Frank. Sounds like you've earned the right to spend your
money as you please.

Why do people bitch about the purchase of a $600 set of pots that will
last 20 years, but never peep about a $3,000 computer that's obsolete
before the next Presidential election?

I had a friend in Berkeley years ago who sneered at my purchase of
fine china upon my marriage (relatives gave us money specifically
marked for it). If I'd spent the same money on a mountain bike or a
computer, she would have approved. THe china could very well outlast
me. I've been married 6.5 years, and the hypothetical computer and/or
mountain bike would be nearly shot by now.

Leila

"Leila A." > wrote in message
om...
> Frank J Warner > wrote in message
>...
> > In article >, PENMART01
> > > wrote:
> >
> > > >Frank J Warner attempts to hustle us with:
> > > >
> > > >What I hope to achieve with this purchase is to display.
> > >
> > > Why your need to display your cookware
> >
> > Conspicuous ****ing consumption, of course.
> >
> > And, as you haven't been invited, it shouldn't be your problem.
> >
>
> HAH! You go, Frank. Sounds like you've earned the right to spend your
> money as you please.
>
> Why do people bitch about the purchase of a $600 set of pots that will
> last 20 years, but never peep about a $3,000 computer that's obsolete
> before the next Presidential election?
>
> I had a friend in Berkeley years ago who sneered at my purchase of
> fine china upon my marriage (relatives gave us money specifically
> marked for it). If I'd spent the same money on a mountain bike or a
> computer, she would have approved. THe china could very well outlast
> me. I've been married 6.5 years, and the hypothetical computer and/or
> mountain bike would be nearly shot by now.

You have mixed two issues here. First, it is really up to the person with
the money how he spends it. That is a matter of values. The second issue
is of durability. I disagree with your analogy using electronic or
mechanical equipment. Both do wear out. The computer not only is subject
to wear and tear, but will become obsolete even if remains in perfect
working condition. Decent cookware does not wear out or become obsolete. A
decent pan that is 100 years old will perform as well as a new one. The
question is what is decent. There comes a point in cookware where there are
diminishing returns on your investment in relation to function. Once you
cross a certain threshold, you are paying for something intangible. The
same is true with your china. A person can buy very serviceable tableware
for a few dollars. Even the most expensive tableware can end up being
"obsolete" from a fashion point of view. The cool china pattern that you
picked out when you were married at 19 may not be reflective of your taste
or social position when you are 50. While still quite functional, it may be
for all practical purposes "obsolete." I always wonder if this will be the
case with expensive, elaborate tattoos that I see on young people. I
chuckle when I think about the possibility of an elaborately tattooed person
eventually diapered, sitting in front of the TV in an assisted living
facility in the middle of the century.

"Leila A." > wrote in message
om...
> Frank J Warner > wrote in message
>...
> > In article >, PENMART01
> > > wrote:
> >
> > > >Frank J Warner attempts to hustle us with:
> > > >
> > > >What I hope to achieve with this purchase is to display.
> > >
> > > Why your need to display your cookware
> >
> > Conspicuous ****ing consumption, of course.
> >
> > And, as you haven't been invited, it shouldn't be your problem.
> >
>
> HAH! You go, Frank. Sounds like you've earned the right to spend your
> money as you please.
>
> Why do people bitch about the purchase of a $600 set of pots that will
> last 20 years, but never peep about a $3,000 computer that's obsolete
> before the next Presidential election?
>
> I had a friend in Berkeley years ago who sneered at my purchase of
> fine china upon my marriage (relatives gave us money specifically
> marked for it). If I'd spent the same money on a mountain bike or a
> computer, she would have approved. THe china could very well outlast
> me. I've been married 6.5 years, and the hypothetical computer and/or
> mountain bike would be nearly shot by now.

You have mixed two issues here. First, it is really up to the person with
the money how he spends it. That is a matter of values. The second issue
is of durability. I disagree with your analogy using electronic or
mechanical equipment. Both do wear out. The computer not only is subject
to wear and tear, but will become obsolete even if remains in perfect
working condition. Decent cookware does not wear out or become obsolete. A
decent pan that is 100 years old will perform as well as a new one. The
question is what is decent. There comes a point in cookware where there are
diminishing returns on your investment in relation to function. Once you
cross a certain threshold, you are paying for something intangible. The
same is true with your china. A person can buy very serviceable tableware
for a few dollars. Even the most expensive tableware can end up being
"obsolete" from a fashion point of view. The cool china pattern that you
picked out when you were married at 19 may not be reflective of your taste
or social position when you are 50. While still quite functional, it may be
for all practical purposes "obsolete." I always wonder if this will be the
case with expensive, elaborate tattoos that I see on young people. I
chuckle when I think about the possibility of an elaborately tattooed person
eventually diapered, sitting in front of the TV in an assisted living
facility in the middle of the century.

In article >,
(Leila A.) wrote:
[snip]
>Why do people bitch about the purchase of a $600 set of pots that will
>last 20 years, but never peep about a $3,000 computer that's obsolete
>before the next Presidential election?

Interesting point. In fact only last night while using my s/steel
frying pan I was thinking how well it still looked and worked,
considering that my father bought it for me when I first set up in a
flat 41 years ago. (However, I also admit that I'm still using a pine
cutting board that was an off-cut from a small contrivance I was
making in that same era.

Cheers, Phred.

--
LID

In article >,
(Leila A.) wrote:
[snip]
>Why do people bitch about the purchase of a $600 set of pots that will
>last 20 years, but never peep about a $3,000 computer that's obsolete
>before the next Presidential election?

Interesting point. In fact only last night while using my s/steel
frying pan I was thinking how well it still looked and worked,
considering that my father bought it for me when I first set up in a
flat 41 years ago. (However, I also admit that I'm still using a pine
cutting board that was an off-cut from a small contrivance I was
making in that same era.

Cheers, Phred.

--
LID

> (Leila A.)
>
>"Vox Humana" wrote:
>> "Frank J Warner" wrote:
Vox Humana wrote:
>> >>
>>
>> In the event that you will consider another brand and can find a good
>> charity for the excess money you will save, you might consider this
>> cookware. I have been very pleased and I am probably as old and clumsy as
>> you and have had no problems with breakage: http://tinyurl.com/4shn2
>
>I am really impressed with the look of the
>Wolfgang Puck collections, especially at the price.

Why do so many consider the appearance of cookware its most important aspect???

I see no real bargain in that Puck cookware, they offer a lot of pieces per set
but they include the lids as pieces and all those spoons and spatulas as
well... you don't get much in actual pots per set. And glass lids really
suck... they use glass because they are mush less expensive to manufacture, and
they fog so you can't see through when cooking, not that there is really any
good reason to... and those metal rims on the lids are filthy schmutz
collectors. Those sets are really quite expensive considering the pots
themselves are a no name brand... you have no idea who manufactures them...
mostly you pay for marketing the Puck name. I guess that's important for those
who buy pots based on appearance... display pots... so it appears they actually
know to cook.


---= BOYCOTT FRANCE (belgium) GERMANY--SPAIN =---
---= Move UNITED NATIONS To Paris =---
*********
"Life would be devoid of all meaning were it without tribulation."
Sheldon
````````````

"PENMART01" > wrote in message
...
>> (Leila A.)
>>
>>"Vox Humana" wrote:
>>> "Frank J Warner" wrote:
> Vox Humana wrote:
>>> >>
>>>
>>> In the event that you will consider another brand and can find a good
>>> charity for the excess money you will save, you might consider this
>>> cookware. I have been very pleased and I am probably as old and clumsy
>>> as
>>> you and have had no problems with breakage: http://tinyurl.com/4shn2
>>
>>I am really impressed with the look of the
>>Wolfgang Puck collections, especially at the price.
>
> Why do so many consider the appearance of cookware its most important
> aspect???
>

I think I'd automatically wonder about anyone who goes out of their way to
display their cookware. Are they more for show than anything else?
Displaying fancy cookware doesn't mean one can cook. My cookware is visible
rather than displayed-only because I don't have the cabinet space to hide it
all. And it is of no particular brand of note-indeed it is not a full set of
any one manufacturer and/or name (i.e. Puck, Emeril, etc.). I use what I
like, rather than what some infomercial says I should have.

"Kswck" > wrote in message
et...
>
> "PENMART01" > wrote in message
> ...
> >> (Leila A.)
> >>
> >>"Vox Humana" wrote:
> >>> "Frank J Warner" wrote:
> > Vox Humana wrote:
> >>> >>
> >>>
> >>> In the event that you will consider another brand and can find a good
> >>> charity for the excess money you will save, you might consider this
> >>> cookware. I have been very pleased and I am probably as old and
clumsy
> >>> as
> >>> you and have had no problems with breakage: http://tinyurl.com/4shn2
> >>
> >>I am really impressed with the look of the
> >>Wolfgang Puck collections, especially at the price.
> >
> > Why do so many consider the appearance of cookware its most important
> > aspect???
> >
>
> I think I'd automatically wonder about anyone who goes out of their way to
> display their cookware. Are they more for show than anything else?
> Displaying fancy cookware doesn't mean one can cook. My cookware is
visible
> rather than displayed-only because I don't have the cabinet space to hide
it
> all. And it is of no particular brand of note-indeed it is not a full set
of
> any one manufacturer and/or name (i.e. Puck, Emeril, etc.). I use what I
> like, rather than what some infomercial says I should have.
>

I guess I'm lucky in that I happen to like the less expensive cookware and
there was no infomercial involved.

"Kswck" > wrote in message
et...
>
> "PENMART01" > wrote in message
> ...
> >> (Leila A.)
> >>
> >>"Vox Humana" wrote:
> >>> "Frank J Warner" wrote:
> > Vox Humana wrote:
> >>> >>
> >>>
> >>> In the event that you will consider another brand and can find a good
> >>> charity for the excess money you will save, you might consider this
> >>> cookware. I have been very pleased and I am probably as old and
clumsy
> >>> as
> >>> you and have had no problems with breakage: http://tinyurl.com/4shn2
> >>
> >>I am really impressed with the look of the
> >>Wolfgang Puck collections, especially at the price.
> >
> > Why do so many consider the appearance of cookware its most important
> > aspect???
> >
>
> I think I'd automatically wonder about anyone who goes out of their way to
> display their cookware. Are they more for show than anything else?
> Displaying fancy cookware doesn't mean one can cook. My cookware is
visible
> rather than displayed-only because I don't have the cabinet space to hide
it
> all. And it is of no particular brand of note-indeed it is not a full set
of
> any one manufacturer and/or name (i.e. Puck, Emeril, etc.). I use what I
> like, rather than what some infomercial says I should have.
>

I guess I'm lucky in that I happen to like the less expensive cookware and
there was no infomercial involved.

In article >, Kswck
> wrote:

> I think I'd automatically wonder about anyone who goes out of their way to
> display their cookware. Are they more for show than anything else?
> Displaying fancy cookware doesn't mean one can cook. My cookware is visible
> rather than displayed-only because I don't have the cabinet space to hide it
> all. And it is of no particular brand of note-indeed it is not a full set of
> any one manufacturer and/or name (i.e. Puck, Emeril, etc.). I use what I
> like, rather than what some infomercial says I should have.

I think we should put this "display phobia" to rest right now. Although
I said in an earlier post that I wanted to display my cookware out of
some vain sense of conspicuous consumption and lording it over those
that can't afford nice stuff, that's only part of the story.

A far bigger reason for "displaying" your cookware is, as you said, to
have it handy when you need it. If it's on a shelf above your cooktop
or on a pot rack over an island, it's much easier to reach up and grab
it when you need it, rather than rummaging around in a cabinet or
cupboard somewhere, shoving stuff out of the way, impeding the cooking
process.

Additionally, like many other fine tools, high quality cookware _looks_
fabulous. What is gained by hiding it?

-Frank

--
(email: change out to in)

In article >, Kswck
> wrote:

> I think I'd automatically wonder about anyone who goes out of their way to
> display their cookware. Are they more for show than anything else?
> Displaying fancy cookware doesn't mean one can cook. My cookware is visible
> rather than displayed-only because I don't have the cabinet space to hide it
> all. And it is of no particular brand of note-indeed it is not a full set of
> any one manufacturer and/or name (i.e. Puck, Emeril, etc.). I use what I
> like, rather than what some infomercial says I should have.

I think we should put this "display phobia" to rest right now. Although
I said in an earlier post that I wanted to display my cookware out of
some vain sense of conspicuous consumption and lording it over those
that can't afford nice stuff, that's only part of the story.

A far bigger reason for "displaying" your cookware is, as you said, to
have it handy when you need it. If it's on a shelf above your cooktop
or on a pot rack over an island, it's much easier to reach up and grab
it when you need it, rather than rummaging around in a cabinet or
cupboard somewhere, shoving stuff out of the way, impeding the cooking
process.

Additionally, like many other fine tools, high quality cookware _looks_
fabulous. What is gained by hiding it?

-Frank

--
(email: change out to in)