What are some products you remember as being awesome back in the day, that you steer clear from and why?
There could be various reasons.
Quality has gone down, taste different, too expensive, product has shrunk in size.
Mine is a very personal one, Carmel Snack Packs- those were the bomb, I could eat 6 in one sitting. Then they released this ghastly new and "improved" version. Was never the same, and not surprisingly that flavour is not on the shelves anymore.
Yeah, seriously it would be shorter to write the things that have improved over time.
Virtually everything manufactured… has gone backwards. Tools, Music, Car build quality, Keyboards, Air conditioners, Chocolate… etc.. all backwards.
I agree that virtually everything has gone back wards and doesnt work as well.
Everything seems diluted be it fly spray, lawn fertilizer or even denture cleaner all watered down to buggery
Buy some Aldi cockroach spray and tell me it's weaker. Man alive, that stuff is disgustingly powerful. A tiny squirt in the air NEAR a cockroach kills it - and the postman if he delivers more than two letters at a time.
@realfamilyman: That reminds me of one of the cartoon I've seen. "Made in China cockroach spray, if it is bad for us, it must be worse for the roaches."
I take it you have never restored a car.
build quality now days is 1000% better than it used to be.\
the rest i agree with you
back in the day, new cars didn't need restoring.
:)
good luck with those "simulated metal" finishes.
cars built in the 70's honestly where a piece of crap (best cars visually)
i have restored plenty of 70s muscle cars and they where built terribly. spot welds missing, hardly any rust protection, no safety at all. they guys probably had a stubbie of VB in there hand at the same time. lucky to find any seam sealant on them and if there was some there it wasn't on the seam. plus paint was crap.
no way the cars would be allowed on the road with today's regulations.
@Squidmcsproggen: you are no doubt correct on aussie/american cars of the 70's. I had assumed you were talking about German cars. (sorry, i forget which site I am on) (old Benz's and some Porsche's are pretty much all I am into) Or even collectable Jap cars of around that era were superb. (would do anything for a 2000GT!)
@Son ofa Zombie:
60s-70s Honda: S500/600/800, Civic
Toyota: Corolla, Celica, 2000GT
Mazda: RX-2,3,4,5 & 7 rotaries
Datsun: 1600, 1200 variants inc ute
Still considered very important cars, legendary to some. It's unreasonable to embark on a restoration of a 30-50 year old car and not expect some surprises.
As for legality?
Even many 80s and 90s built cars wouldn't meet ADRs or have bugger-all hope of passing collision tests in 2015.
never looked at german cars apart from bugs lol so i cant really coment on them.
i guess they would be built pretty good though
its not so much not expecting surprises, i always expect the worst and hope for the best when restoring.
its the WTF where they thinking that gets me
example, some Toranas had a plenum chamber that basically collected water to drain out threw the side guard.
when they built it the drain hole was higher than the plenum WTF!!! lol
The legality bit i was mainly talking about quality of workmanship not so much ADR.
The legality bit i was mainly talking about quality of workmanship not so much ADR.
I was addressing this bit:
no way the cars would be allowed on the road with today's regulations.
What automatically comes to mind for me is the pedestrian/occupant safety thing. Since it's been so high a priority for consumers and regulators for 20+ years.
We can blame (or thank) Benz engineers for much of that. I have an interview from the late 80s regarding vehicle safety with just such a fellow.
In a magazine. Under the bed.
DSLR cameras haven't gone backwards. Minor steps back in certain features maybe, but if you don't believe me pick up a 10 year old DSLR and have a play with it alongside something modern.
I still keep my Nikon D70 for the flash sync speed (which has gone backwards). But it doesn't even compare to a D7100 for image quality, resolution, ease of handling, high ISO performance, AF speed, dynamic range, metering and features.
Heck a Canon 600D which can be had for $400 on clearance outperforms the D70 which cost somewhere around triple that new. By a WIDE margin.
Bacon and cheese rolls 6/pk purchased from Coles, the number of pieces of 3x3mm bacon are disappearing fast, lucky to get 2-3 pieces on each and every bun these days.
Buttercup bread (the one with sesame seeds on the top) also has a few pathetic sprinking of seeds these days.
Used to work in a Coles bakery, lots of the bacon ends up in the bottom of the box it comes in.
Iphone
same shit year after year.
Well one thing is changed for sure. They make the apps heavier in size, so the old ones run really sluggish so you have to buy the latest one..
So this is how my computer works…the apps are like black holes, constantly getting bigger.
And they cost more!
Not an Apple fanboy at all, but the iPhone (and mobile phones in general) are one of the very very few products that are improving each year.
Improveing yes but when it has been only. Implementing features that android has had all along I hardly think that counts.
I'm a fan of whatever's the best.
Depends… I have the Galaxy s5 and it's gone overboard. Nothing really requires a quad core processor on the phone and I don't need a heartbeat monitor on a device i use for calls and music.
Waterproofing however is superb, love how i can use my phone while in the rain and not have to fear that it will suddenly brick itself (looking at you Xperia z3)
@Serapis: I agree, more features does not equal better. Waterproofing is a great feature that I'd actually want in my phone, but gimmicks like heartbeat monitor or quad core are merely ticks in a box and aren't necessarily an improvement.
I think they are improving but the rate of improvement has become stagnant on most, if not all, of the OS. This year should be more interesting, with Samsung finally realising adding more bloat is hated by everyone (They are trying to make TouchWiz lighter for S6), Windows Phone finally getting what it should've had (More integration with Windows PC), Apple releasing a smartwatch (Apple has relatively large fanbase, it should spice up the smartwatch industry at the very least).
For that reason, I hope to god that Qualcomm fixes Snapdragon 810, without throttling it down so much that it's on par with 805 in terms of performance.
But the new one has a bend function. Try bending your Nokia 3310.
Nokia 3310 would bend you…
Big Mac? It's more medium Mac these days.
Wheres the evidence that there not getting smaller?
Except for Mcdonalds actually saying that they did shrink the burgers.
http://www.smh.com.au/national/mcdonalds-in-bun-fight-over-b…
Official response:
https://yourquestions.mcdonalds.com.au/questions/5966
Although I don't quite believe the official respnose…
@TtiGeR: Ill take this as some sarcasm but you obviously can't read.
I did mention the bun may have a very slight degree of change due to supplier and Maccaz response was exactly that:
We did slightly reduce the width of the Quarter Pounder bun
However no doubt, the claims i've been hearing from irrelevant people asking why it's significantly smaller is due to their increased appetite, nothing else
I used to work at McDonalds and the burgers did get smaller as time went by. It's not just the Bigmac but also Quarter Pounders are now smaller than they were before.
It's not because I grew up.
Just like Dominoes Pizza, the pizza's have become smaller than what they used to be. But they are also now cheaper.
Forget the appetite part.
I remember when they came in boxes, they Big Mac and the Quarter Pounder filled the boxes. Unless the boxes have increased in size that would not happen now. Now and then I come across a place that uses boxes, the boxes are small
@Baghern:
That guy on Supersize Me who'd eat two per day since the early 70s reckons that HAVE gotten smaller. Just his observation, nothing scientific about it.
If u look at the shrinkage of the diameter itself, it doesn't sound like much, but the overall surface area is actually a lot more than it seems!
I don't have the before and after sizes of the Big Mac, but if I go by the dimensions of the Quarter Pounder, specified in the SMH article that Thorton82 has linked above (http://www.smh.com.au/national/mcdonalds-in-bun-fight-over-b…), they were:
Before: 11.43cm
After: 10.16cm
Shrinkage of 1.27cm - which is about 11.1% of the original size.
Going by my calculations on surface area,
Before: 102.61 square centimetres
After: 81.07 square centimetres
That's a reduction of 21.53 square centimetres of bun, which is approx 21% of the original! Not exactly the 30% that you say the "idiots" claim, but not too far from it!
I wouldn't exactly call that "barely noticeable!"…esp when I'm hungry! :D
PS: I've left out the inconsistent thickness of the bun in the calculations to keep things simple.
@frostman: so after stressing to all the 'knobs' that the burgers havent shrunk noticeably, now you are saying it is fair that the burgers have shrunk because the price have stayed relatively similar? Okay…
@frostman: Well that was a quick change of tune. Can I suggest you don't start a blog until you actually get some facts? Cheers.
Err, not they didn't. They reduced the BUN size of the Quarter Pounder/McChicken. The patty and everything else is the same. And it's not a Big Mac.
The Big Mac hasn't changed.
I worked at McDonald's too and they most definitely did not get smaller.
The Quarter Pounder BUN did get smaller to align with global standards but everything else is the same.
[@ozeebee](/comment/2 538385/redir):
If you really did work at McDonald's.. You would know that 10:1 meat for big macs is still the same as it is today..
1/10 of a pound.
Same goes for quarter pounder which uses 4:1 meat.
AKA 1/4 pound. Thus quarter pounder.
They did officially say that the buns got smaller for the quarter pounder going by the links below but other than that it's the same.
Source: Worked there for 6 years in high school from 2002 to 2008.
Ow and of course half of Maccas are franchised and staff are asked by bosses to go easy on the lettuce etc.
Whereas as xxx years ago I imagine there were more corporate owned Maccas whose managers didn't really care as much.
If you make a claim the onus is on you to provide evidence to prove it, not on everyone else to disprove it.
@frostman: on the organic thing - no. It's only to do with the thickness of the meat and how dry the environment is for the first week or so. The same thing will happen to an organic burger as will happen to a Maccas burger of the same dimensions.
@antzz: Hey Mama, give this giant baby a dummy, he thinks he's smarter and more intelligent than you are by posting short parables.
I feel like even if they haven't gotten smaller, the name is a misnomer and a joke at $5.15 (prices vary slightly at some franchises). I weigh maybe 70kg max and I can eat two of them and start feeling hungry again soon after.
I feel like a whopper is very much a whopper in size and effect. Especially given the frequent availability of coupons offering two of them for $7.35. A Big Mac would be better titled the Bigger Mac. It's not objectively big, just bigger than the snack/kid burgers.
$5.45 at my local Maccas. (Innaloo, WA)
But the free fries and coke makes it bearable. :)
When the burger was named in the late 60's, it was one of the biggest burgers available. People used to buy "snack/kid" hamburgers as a normal sized burger and Big Macs for a big appetite. Now, there are so many products much bigger (and higher in energy content) that it seems to be a standard size. So comparatively, it may not be so big. Maybe it should be renamed to "we-were-healthier-in-the-60's" burger…
I wasn't around then, and even if I was I wouldn't have been in America, but I would bet my left nut people back then weren't just buying the one normal size burger and fries and calling that dinner. I don't think appetites have changed. I could be wrong, but at least I'll still have good ol' righty.
@hetzjagd: You're definitely wrong.
The whole reason larger and larger portions were introduced was because studies in the 70's showed that people would eat/drink more if presented with larger portions for a modest increase in price
Its no different than say, when you are at home you might cook enough for you. when you're full, you stop eating. Now how about if you go home for the holidays and your parents prepare a feast. people will stuff themselves silly because theres lots of good food. not because they are hungry.
You'll also notice that default portion sizes at mcdonalds varies from country to country. For example, here in Australia, a EVM (Meal) includes a small soda and a small fry. Same goes for France. However in the US and Canada, the meal comes with a Medium Fry and Medium Drink, and they will not let you downsize. you can get them smaller, but you still pay for a medium.
Mmm I don't argue with the studies as far as marketing strategy and portion size but I just don't buy that an adult American male could have had the single McDonald's hamburger, fries and drink for dinner and been full. It's just not very much food no matter how you spin it - UNLESS the burgers were a lot bigger back then. People ate larger home cooked meals than that before the advent of fast food. Regardless of my theory, without someone from late 60's/early 70's America who fancied McDonald's around I think we'll have to agree to disagree.
Have you not seen the weight of the average american BALLOON over the last 40-50 years?
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/82/USObesity…
In 1960 the percentage of adult americans considered overweight was about 40%. In 2004 that percentage was 70%! and part of that figure obesity has DOUBLED.
And maybe the adult american may have had 2 hamburgers, a fry and a drink and been full. but they certainly weren't eating 2 double quarter pounders with cheese which would have been unheard of in the 60's but quite common today. average size increases and so do appetites. there are still people today, usually women, that still order a single cheese burger meal. hell im overweight and i find that 2 double cheeseburgers does more than satisfy me without the fries. im sure someone that is fit and not considered overweight by medical standards would suffice with less.
We are discussing different things now and/or definitely not going to convince each other to change our mind or strongly consider the points we are each raising. Maybe I'm an idiot but that graph is a nightmare to read out of context, which it is, and if I have to explain why then there is no discussion here anyway. That said, thank you for taking the time to engage me politely. Have a good day
Not true. Aussie big macs are now the smallest in the world.
Wagon Wheels have shrunk big time. If your using that as your standard of measurement it may explain your inaccuracy.
Lol. Only very rarely partake when on the road but got a rude shock when I last ordered one. Perhaps my memory had enhanced the older product but I'd plump for Small Mac as a better description these days. Definitely fills the OP's bill.
Making Big Macs smaller could potentially be seen as improving the product!
We've just improved the bun to meat ratio, which not only improves mouthfeel, but also ensuring that you get more meat for your bun, thus more bang for your buck!
WHHOOOAAHHH!! 'Bun to Meat Ratio'….ease up poindexter! There are people measuring these things? A triumph for Marketing folks somewhere no doubt. Sounds like vital work that could be outsourced to 'The Ponds Institute'.
@2ndeffort:
I used to partake in consumer focus groups for Sensometrics.
They'd pay me to eat, drink and rank things such as sweetness, bitterness, crispness, aftertaste and yes…mouthfeel!
Good times.
Cadbury's "Picnic" bar. NOTHING like it was. In fact all of Cadbury's chocolate we no longer purchase. It used to be "a glass & a half of full-cream dairy milk" - I think it's now just a ton of sugar. It used to taste smooooth….remember?
Whittakers all the way. Very similar to the old Cadbury's.
Was in NZ recently, and they still get 250gram blocks of Whittakers. Ours have been downsized to compete with Cadburys :(
Try something better. Aldi moserroth chocolate. The best chocolate bar in the world. No kidding they did survey for that and this bar has similar taste and quality with the 30dollar one
LOL DAMN YOU!
We don't have Aldi in Tasmania. Or GyG either.
I love their coconut block!
That was my favourite until I dared try the Peanut Butter one :o
I try to make a block last one week. It's not easy!
My nan was say that other day.
smooth = butter / oil
Lenovo ThinkPads. Or in the good ol' days, IBM ThinkPads.
You beat me to it :(
Though, be fair, I think Lenovo brought the price down to a reasonable range.
Other than the complaints coming from the fact that Lenovo has one of the worst customer services, things that people hate about the changes seem to be relating to how their target audience have changed. i.e. changing arrangement of the keys and removing some of the function keys, screen ratio changes (4:3 to 16:9, 4:3 is better for document editing and office works imo), loose quality control etc. I think these are all because Lenovo changed its target from businessmen to just people who want a reasonably decent laptop at reasonable price for work.
It does sadden me a little that Lenovo brought down ThinkPad like that. Though, from what I have seen with Sony selling off VAIO branding/division, I guess it could've been worse.
I may have digressed from the original topic with my rant, but this is my 2c on Lenovo ThinkPad.
They've turned a decent business class machine into a prosumer crap. Leave that market to Dell/HP please.
The keyboards/ThinkPoint devolved over the course of the last decade, I've started off with a 770z then X30 then various T/W's over the years then X201 and now a X1 Carbon. The build quality have massively downgraded over the years. That 770z is probably bomb proof except the solder in the RAM slot dried out, the X30/60 still function 100% other than a crack HDD cover, my 5 year old X201 already got a stuffed camera and ThinkLight (somewhere in the mobo is stuffed, not the cable to the light itself…I've changed that already) and I don't have much faith with the X1 lasting longer than the warranty period.
You haven't even talked about the abomination known as X1 Carbon adaptive keyboard.
@scotty: Havent the newer thinkpads reverted to a more conventional keyboard now? Nice to see other thinkpads out in the wild too. I rocked an x60. Loved it to hell.
@meatgasm: the X60 is rock solid, on its 3rd battery now. Nowhere near on its last leg either. Gets thrown around all day everyday. Upgraded to newer wireless NIC, more RAM and that's it. Still using the original hard disk even.
@mini2: consider switching to Linux. It breathes new life into older hardware. The newer distributions are really easy to use too.
@meatgasm: the user (i.e. not me) is computer illiterate and I don't need extra, unnecessary and unpaid headaches.
@mini2:
Arguably all the more reason to put a more secure OS on it…
ZorinOS has a similar look and feel to windows.
Any of the stain removers like Preen for example is mostly water these days.
weren't they always mostly water?
Back in the day. More than 10 years ago, they were predominately active ingredients. (I remember the checkout show mentioned this before)
I find SARD much better than Preen
@bargdebarg thanks for that, I may switch and see myself. Been disappointed using preen for some time now.
Just use eucalyptus oil on stains, works far better than any bought ones that I have tried
I should clarify I use this for underarms to stop the build up of deodorant stains
None of the sprays worked for me. The ONLY thing I found that does (and from memory I found it recommended here, and I will be forever grateful to whomever it was) is Biozet powdered detergent. None of the liquid detergents dealt with it at all, none of the sprays, no eucalyptus oil, vinegar, nothing.
Coles brand spray is also good, it still is solvent based rather than water based (i'm looking at you preen)
http://shop.coles.com.au/online/national/coles-stain-remover…
Ha, just saw a checkout snippet which had napisan new vs old package, the only difference they found was that the measuring cap had increased in size.
Cadbury chocolate. Pascalls' Chocolate Eclairs. Latina bolognese sauce.