Why do some microwaves have a convenient quick-start option if you press 1 or 2 or 3, so that they instantly start cooking with 1:00 or 2:00 or 3:00 on the clock... but DON'T have this same functionality programmed into 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, or 9, which do nothing when pressed alone? How does an engineer possess both the vision to provide the former and the lack of imagination that results in the latter? If it's about cutting cost, is it really that expensive to add a few more instructions to the same circuit board? This doesn't bother me because I'm too lazy to press time-four-zero-zero-start so much as because I'm baffled how a machine could have turned out this way.


Eight Replies to Scott's Pet Peeve #2519

Denise Sawicki | December 21, 2010
Our microwave is like that. I assumed maybe it's a safety thing like 4 minutes would generally be too long for many purposes and would burn something. It is odd though.

Matthew Preston | December 21, 2010
My guess is that it's a safety-don't-want-to-be-sued issue. Some legal person somewhere along the line probably figured that cooking things over 3 minutes could cause problems. Either with destroying food, or causing damage to the microwave itself. Americans are quick to sue for the littlest things.

Ours has the same thing, but pressing the same button more than once usually compounds the time. For example when I want to cook something for 4 minutes, I press 3 - 1.

EDIT: whoops, sorry Denise. I had this window open for a bit and hadn't noticed you had replied. Looks like we were on the same wavelength! :-)

Denise Sawicki | December 21, 2010
Another question, why do microwaves have a popcorn button when every bag of microwaveable popcorn says "do not use the popcorn button". Do the microwave instructions also say not to use the button? If so, why do they have the button? If not, why are they risking getting sued? By the way, I use the button and it works fine :P

Matthew Preston | December 21, 2010
A marketing gimmick perhaps? I always secretly think the popcorn button is just set for 3 minutes.

Lori Lancaster | December 21, 2010
[hidden by author request]

Erik Bates | December 22, 2010
[hidden by author request]

Scott Hardie | December 22, 2010
I guess since I eat frozen entrées for most meals (diet status: haven't lost or gained weight since last message), I'm accustomed to 3-7 minutes being a pretty standard use for a microwave.

At the apartment we just moved out of, the quick-start buttons went up to 5, which was a little more reasonable. But this new one has a little spinning carousel that cooks my food evenly and doesn't require me to stir halfway, so I guess it's a step up.

I don't recall ever using the popcorn button or the number of minutes written on the box. I just put the bag in the microwave and stand there until I can hear the popping stop.

Denise Sawicki | December 22, 2010
I didn't think there still were any non-spinning microwaves in this century. :)


Logical Operator

The creator of Funeratic, Scott Hardie, blogs about running this site, losing weight, and other passions including his wife Kelly, his friends, movies, gaming, and Florida. Read more »

Emails!

Does the Internet baffle you? Try Gabe & Max's Internet Thing. Thanks, Marlon. Go »

Normal Paranormal

This will offend believers in the paranormal, so read at your own peril. Socially, I've tried to keep it a polite secret that I don't believe in any paranormal phenomena, including the everyday sort. Several of my local friends practice feng shui, buy healing magnets, size people up based on their birth signs, and go to dieticians who tell them not to eat foods of certain colors. Go »

Downtown A-Town

I can't write about why I spent the week in Atlanta because it's too confidential and work-related, but I can say that I had a good time around the margins of that event. The first day was the only loss. I got so little sleep the night before (seemingly a part of every trip I take) that I spent it groggy and exhausted. Go »

Throw Out Your Caller ID

I'm all for scientific research into the paranormal, since it will benefit humankind whether the results are affirmative or negative – but apparently it's awfully hard to keep such research scientific. For instance, I never fail to be amused by ghost hunters who claim to have proven a haunting because electromagnetic readings are higher in the area, a phenomenon that has no demonstrated correlation with hauntings. And let's not even get into the ones who claim to have proven a haunting because a "psychic" said they sensed ghosts nearby. Go »

Not Exactly Red Hot

Her: "What's that CD you're holding?" Me: "Chili Peppers. I still haven't gotten over their album from last summer." Go »

New Baby Upstairs

WAAAH WAAAH WAAAH WAAAH WAAAH WAAAH WAAAH WAAAH WAAAH WAAAH WAAAH WAAAH WAAAH WAAAH WAAAH WAAAH WAAAH WAAAH WAAAH WAAAH WAAAH WAAAH WAAAH WAAAH WAAAH WAAAH WAAAH WAAAH WAAAH WAAAH WAAAH WAAAH WAAAH... Go »