Maybe he just means test, because a machine can't be tasted (preferably). The question could be: why does coffee from an office machine taste bad, and I don't have the answer for that. My experience is also every Monday I must get used to the "other" taste at the office, at home I've a espresso machine.
Each number system has exactly 10 different digits.
On the good side, I have seen everything from high end espresso machines to a mini Starbucks in the kitchen (company lunchroom). On the bad side, instant coffee, a mini electric water pot, and small paper cups.
I only recently started drinking coffee; because I believe it's healthier than drinking colas and it's provided at no charge (versus ~$1 for cola in the vending machine). So coffee from the office machine is really all I know.
What is the difference in taste between coffee from the office machine versus other sources? Doesn't most of the flavor come from the cream and sugar either way?
Koen Aerts wrote:Probably because the coffee machine is filthy inside (how often does it get cleaned?), or simply because the coffee is of poor quality?
Yes, these are the most likely explanations.
Although once (many years ago) I was working for a consulting firm, and I was sent to a client in Lloydminster. Most of you have never heard of Lloydminster, but it's a city which sits on the border between the Canadian provinces of Alberta and Saskatchewan. My contact there apologized for the office coffee and explained that the city couldn't get its water system upgraded until both provinces approved the project and the cost-sharing arrangements. The coffee looked and tasted like mud. So sometimes it's the water.
Cafestol, the coffee component that causes all the broo-ha-ha over the French press, is suspected to raise serum cholesterol levels. But it's also thought to be anti-carcinogenic and an inhibitor of Parkinson's disease.
I brew my coffee, so I don't care. But to answer your question, some brands of coffee offered in offices are really good, unless you add some cream to it.... I don't like the natural flavor of coffee to be ruined by the cream...
Henry Wong wrote:On the good side, I have seen everything from high end espresso machines to a mini Starbucks in the kitchen (company lunchroom). On the bad side, instant coffee, a mini electric water pot, and small paper cups.
I've seen a wide variety of quality as well. At a well funded start-up, there was Starbucks coffee in each kitchen. I'm not a big fan of Starbucks, but at least the company tried.
I've also worked in an engineering firm where there was one giant percolator that brewed a few gallons of coffee at a time, and it would then sit on "heat" all day. After a half dozen cups of that coffee, you knew what you were drinking.
I am curious as to whether any coffee aficionados here have ever done a blind taste test. Sure, you can claim to be able to tell the difference, but that could just be your brain tricking you. After all, coffee that costs $20/lb MUST taste better than coffee at $3/lb, right?
There are only two hard things in computer science: cache invalidation, naming things, and off-by-one errors
Pat Farrell wrote: I've also worked in an engineering firm where there was one giant percolator that brewed a few gallons of coffee at a time, and it would then sit on "heat" all day. After a half dozen cups of that coffee, you knew what you were drinking.
We also have exactly same thing. Is it not good to drink? What is the concern here?
author and iconoclast