I've been doing some price comparisons on an item I want to buy for my kitchen, so I've been surfing some housewares/cooking utensil sites. It never ceases to amaze me just how many different types of kitchen doodads there are out there. Heading into the holiday season, many of these sites are touting "amazing" items to give as gifts.
One item in particular has me scratching my head. It's a pot, but a pot with a difference. This pot is divided into three sections on the interior. The three sections are different sizes. Two of the sections share one pot lid; the other section has its own lid. It's non-stick, of course. Total capacity is 7 quarts. The manufacturer is touting this as perfect for the cook with limited cooking space. The pot fits over one burner but allows you to cook three different items at one time on that burner. The advertisement just gushes about this pot. "No more having to find three pots to fit those items you are cooking!" "A meal in one pot!" "No more waiting to reuse a pot for a different dish!" And the best is "No more having to scrub and wash out three different pots--saves the cook time and inconvenience!"
Okay, I hate all the washing up after I'm done cooking, but please explain to me how this pot saves me any cleaning up time? Don't those three sections equal three pots worth of washing up to do? And doesn't this pot presuppose that everything that is being cooked will need to be cooked at the same temperature and for the same amount of time? And how are you supposed to drain the contents of one section without tipping out the items in the other sections? And while I'm thinking strange thoughts, is it even possible that one or two sections of this pot could be considered pareve while the other part is considered milchig or fleishig?
Okay, cooks out there, is this pot something that you'd consider a valuable addition to your kitchen? If so, why? What might you use it for?
9 comments:
What would I use this for? As a pass along gift to someone else. This so wouldn't work with three items that need three different flame sizes to cook.
If I got this as a gift I might enjoy using it as a novelty. I probably wouldn't pay actual money for it.
i don't quite understand the problem with different flame sizes. what's the difference which flame size to use? just use the highest flame that doesn't cause any of the 3 sections to boil out.
Seems pretty worthless. Only use I can think of is maybe making 3 small soups or sauces. Possibly maybe 3 different vegetables.
Seems like it would be awkward for anything else as I imagine it having narrow but deep compartments which would make stirring or mixing difficult.
I dunno, I'd rather use 3 different pots or just take more time by reusing the same pot 3 times and waiting for each dish to be done.
Obviously it's for people with kids so picky that they won't even eat the same shape of pasta. Just boil water in all three compartments, and then add the pasta at the appropriate times so that it will all be done at once. You will have to use a slotted spoon for at least the first two shapes, though, as dumping it all into the colander together will just backfire - resulting in mixed shapes and kids refusing to eat.
But seriously, no, I can't really see a use for it.
Not a chance.
Even ignoring the idiotic multi-compartment design, I'm sure the nonstick surface is cheap as all get-out.
These days, I tend to get my cooking equipment from restaurant supply stores -- they need it to be actually useful.
Without seeing it (got a link?), I'd think its only advantage would be for someone forced to cook over a single burner, with one pot (like if you're on vacation). You could put pasta in the big one, veggies in a small one, and sauce in the third. Leave the lid off the pasta and you can pull it out of whatever's left of the water (drainage does seem to be a problem). Not that I'd buy it, but I would use it if I got it. Although the though of cleaning a tall and skinny compartment of a pot with interior corners is horrifying.
As an adult with children no way. When I was 20 and in an apartment, absolutely. If you are doing something like a pasta with meat sauce and a side of veges, you can cook it all at once.
Cleanup? Soak or dishwasher immediately, who cars.
Kashrut? In a small efficiency or studio kitchen two of those might handle 75% of your cooking needs.
When a basic meal is throw stuff together and heat it up, which was a big chunk of foot in my early 20s, that would have been very useful.
We had a glass bowl that we used to call the "magic bowl," because 80% of our cooking was "throw stuff in there and nuke it in the microwave."
I would never use this. I like to be able to regulate the temp. for different foods. etc.
Miami Al- Is your magic bowl the pyrex bowl with the lid?
Post a Comment