Scott's Pet Peeve #2519
by Scott Hardie on December 21, 2010
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
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 »Not in My Back Yard
I love Unsolved Mysteries. The show told such interesting stories in perfect bite-size pieces, and knew how to make the hair on your neck stand up. I wish they were more objective in their reporting and didn't rely on pseudoscience as evidence (using psychics to prove ghosts and polygraph results to condemn criminals), but damn they put on an entertaining show. Go »White Christmas
We're enjoying our winter vacation in central Illinois so far. Tue 12/22 - When you're hitting the road for your vacation right after work is over, every extra minute feels like an hour, which means I did 45 hours of overtime. The drive was easier than we thought, probably because we had days to prepare this time. Go »Shoulda Seen It Coming
The news that Princeton's infamous ESP research lab is soon to close (link) is both heartening and a little disappointing. On one hand, if there's anything at all to ESP, then skeptics should have no objection to private donations funding some bonafide scientific research into it – no harm done except for a hint of legitimacy. On the other hand, this lab was a black bruise for Princeton and its "findings" were routinely debunked, and a facility investigating exceptional claims must have exceptional adherence to scientific standards. Go »All King and No Kubrick Make Jack a Dull Boy
I recently got to talking with friends who liked The Shining, both Stephen King's novel and Stanley Kubrick's film adaptation of it, but who were unaware that King has always loathed the movie, despite its reputation as one of the best horror films ever made. It's hard to imagine that a writer doesn't know his own work better than someone interpreting it, but I think this is one of those rare cases where the writer is just too close to the story to get it. Here are three reasons why I think Kubrick's film better understands the material, and is better overall, than King's novel: 1) In King's version, Jack Torrance is a fundamentally decent man who wouldn't hurt a fly, but who is down on his luck and desperate. Go »
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.