RIGHT NOW, there are people in this board that depend on a GADJET for one of the simplest tasks humans were ever faced with.
It just werks, bro. Stop being a giga-autist about what other people choose to do.
>>17275991Based and rice-pilled.I personally use a caldero to make my rices. Anyone who uses an automatic rice cooker is an uncultured wannabe jap cooklet.
>>17276000is that one purpose item worth the counter and landfill space?
>>17276092Yes? My house is huge and I use my rice cooker every day
>>17276040>Uncoated untreated aluminumYou will have Alzheimer's
>>17277504So you don't use aluminium foil?
>>17277504Aluminium is non-toxic, stop it already with this "aluminum causes dementia" b.s it's been debunked a million times.
>>17277515But, muh netflix fearmongering docudrama...
>>17275991>depend onIf you can make 5 pots of rice as good as my fuzzy logic rice cooker can, I will smash the rice cooker on the floor right then and there. I guarantee you cannot. Then again, you're definitely from the midwest or something and have no idea of the subtle flavors you unlock in Jasmine rice by cooking it perfectly.
>>17277537>the subtle flavors you unlock in Jasmine rice by cooking it perfectly.You've been conned, bro. Just accept it.
>>17275991you literally run it high heat until it boils and then cover and turn to very low or off and let it sit.Entire skill of cooking rice is managing to measure water to your first knuckle. And even then you have ways of unfucking too much/too little water.It's more difficult to boil eggs than rice.
RIGHT NOW, there are people in this board who need more than 2 minutes to cook rice.
Because im doing other stuff and the rice cooker automatically stops so its really fire and forget until ready. My rice cooker also doubles up as a steamer which is very convenient. Just kidding i bought it because i was pussy whipped by my fucking taiwanese bitch of an ex ane now its just sitting there collecting fucking dust. Cooking your rice allows for greater control so that you don't eat mushy crap.
>>17277584>Cooking your rice allows for greater control so that you don't eat mushy crap.I'm sorry, but you don't own a rice cooker if you think it would EVER give you mushy crap (assuming you know how to use it)
>>17275991Japanese literally have rice competitions every year, and these are used to assess rice strain quality, along with rice cooker quality as well.Judges taste a difference between stovetop and cooker, as >>17277537says. Sorry. You can't out-autism Japs when it comes to rice. Pots work fine, but it is conclusively, absolutely, 100% false to say that they produce an equivalent product to a top-tier fuzzy logic masterpiece, even when using the finest stovetop cookware, and perfect technique. Accept that you're wrong and just keep making rice that's 80% as good.
>>17275991And they get it done quicker and don't talk about it... Who's the real loser?...
>>17277556Yeah I'm so upset that I spent 40 dollars and make *actual* perfect rice every single time without watching it at all, and the rice stays warm for me. Really sucks. That 40 bucks could have been spent so much better elsewhere... Now I'm depressed...
>>1727762080% is pretty generous, man. I've never seen pot rice come out fragrant with the correct moisture level. Not once. It's always overcooked or too wet.
>>17277666>I've never seen pot rice come out fragrant with the correct moisture level. Not once. It's always overcooked or too wet.I see..And because YOU have never seen it, OF COURSE it DOESN'T exist.
personally i just put a straight out of the pot hard boiled egg in my rice bag. you know what happens next
This sloppa was proudly made with stove top rice (cooked on its own)
>>17277675It COULD happen, but a pot on the stove has too many variables going on to really expect prefect rice every time.A fully sealed insulated rice cooker using computer controlled cooking is clearly going to give more consistent results than a pot on the stove top that can be affected by differences in the ambient air temp, humidity, and the fact the heat is only being applied from directly underneath and then radiating up and into the air making the top of the pot cooler than the bottom of the pot which will cause inconsistent heating throughout the pot.Good rice cookers are not only insulated and computer controlled, but can also have multiple heating elements placed underneath, on the sides, and even above the inner pot, giving a MUCH more controlled heat that reaches the entire pot equally and consistently.
>>17276040>>17275991Steps to make rice:>1. Wash & put in pot>2. Add appropriate quantity water>3. Ignite flame>4. Determine when rice is finished & turn off flame >5. Let rest before openA rice cooker eliminates two of these steps, specifically 2 and 4, which are the crucial parts where the process can go wrong. A rice cooker indicates the proper quantity of water needed, and it automatically turns off when the rice has finished cooking and before it burns. I can cook rice in a saucepan, I've even done it on a campfire. The ability to walk away and forget about your rice, and just come back later to a perfectly done batch each time without burning or misjudging water and getting crunchy/soggy rice, is definitely worth the $15 and pantry space to get a rice cooker.
>>17275991For me, it's my $10 chinese rice cooker, I just throw that shit in there and will get rice in like 20 min
>>17277682lol a frogposter calling others fags...
My rice turns out fine without a gadget, so I wn't get yet another thing taking up space and gathering dust. HOWEVER I would go for it if I had rice on a daily basis, especially for breakfast
>>17275991This is what, the fourth thread you’ve made seething about rice cookers? What is going on with you OP.
>>17277776'muh space' how small is your kitchen? Do you even have a kitchen or you have one of those kitchen - bathroom-laundry hybrids city fags have?
>>17275991>RIGHT NOW, there are people in this board that depend on a GADJET for one of the simplest tasks humans were ever faced with.Non-americans. It is people who have shitty kitchens without the 4-5 burners, and ample counter space of an American stove cooktop and conventional kitchen. I use your pic related, OP, glass top saucepan that fits the job. I one up you with nonstick to ensure the fastest wipeout style cleaning up possible. Zero sticking, even if I keep it on low longer.>>17276124>Yes? My house is huge and I use my rice cooker every dayDaily rice? That's utterly boring.
>>17277819>Daily rice? That's utterly boring.t. Cooklet
>>17277675Really grasping for straws here, bud.
>>17277779>every thread about rice cookers is posted by the same personAnd I'm sure everyone that replies to you is the same person too?
>>17275991Lol holy shit imagine seething so hard because other people are eating better rice than you
>>17277715Nah, it only eliminates 4. Adding the right amount of water is your job.>b-but the pot has markingsIf you actually care about the quality of your rice, you'll notice that different rice demands different amounts of water, even the same type (like jasmine) can vary by brand. Furthermore, while a rice cooker can do a basic job of 4, it's not quite as good as timing yourself in my experience, rice will overcook on the bottom a little bit. After a few trials you can do better on the stove. Keep warm is a nice feature though and is more annoying to do yourself.I'm sure an expensive rice cooker is worth it if you constantly cook the one variant of rice it's optimized for, but that doesn't seem too common outside of japan. Go for it if you're that much of a weeb I guess.
>>17278696You're a dipshit if you've ever overcooked your rice with a rice cooker, and you're an even bigger dipshit for thinking stovetop rice is the same.
>>17275991Depend? No, but I can make rice for two without taking up a burner.
>>17278696>expensive rice cookerIt makes sense that such a thing would exist, but I've only ever seen the <$50 variety.
>>17278726He's talking out of his small penis. Yeah, there are $200+ rice cookers out there, but you get better results than stovetop with a $10 one. If you shell out 40 bucks, you get significantly better rice with a fuzzy logic cooker. To make rice as good as one of those would require a watched pot and LOTS of trial and error--definitely not worth the hassle.
>>17278713How fucking retarded are you? The rice cooker controls the heating element, not the user. When a rice cooker makes the bottom of your rice crispy, it's because the rice cooker is a primitive device that doesn't turn off fast enough. It's not even possible for the user to control this unless they time and turn off the whole thing, which defeats the entire point of a rice cooker.
>>17276124lol imagine lying about yourself AND eating rice everyday lmaooo
>>17278738You've clearly never used a fuzzy logic zoji or similar
>>17278736It depends on the rice in my experience. Jasmine's great and Basmati's on par in a rice cooker. I've never had luck with sticky rice, wild rice or arborio in them... plus all the other ways to make rice.They're definitely worth it for plain-ass-rice, and sometimes that's exactly what I want.
Idgi, why is extra labor for zero flavor worth it? Can you add ingredients to stovetop rice during cooking that you couldn't in an electric cooker? It doesn't seem like there would be much overlap between people who to cook rice and people who don't own a rice cooker, so if they make the same food with same flavor, there's no reason to set the rice cooker aside.
>>17278738You're a retarded piece of shit. "Primitive device that doesn't turn off fast enough" it's literally a switch that exploits the curie point of a magnet. It switches off at the same water content every time, INSTANTLY. You obviously are a little confused as to how they work, hence your shitty overcooked rice. >>17278751No luck with sticky rice? You must be a retard like the other guy. Are you not changing the amount of water you use for different types of rice? Holy shit, anon.
>>17278755They don't make the same flavor. Rice cookers make better rice, period. If you wanna make disgusting goblina rice with tomatoes and shit, go ahead and fuck it up in a giant pot and enjoy your porridge.
im a retard, what’s the difference between a rice cooker and cooking rice in a pot
>>17278772You are a retard. Read the thread.
>>17278772A rice cooker is an electronic pot whose sole purpose is to cook rice, although they can be used for other things.
>>17278776like what does a rice cooker do though? It’s a pot that gets hot? Ok
>>17278743>fuzzy logic zojiI wasn't even arguing against those really, hence>I'm sure an expensive rice cooker is worth it if you constantly cook the one variant of rice it's optimized forBesides really only being worth it for japanese rice, it also takes a lot longer to cook, but it could be worth it for some.More against cooklets like >>17278736who think a cheap $10 rice cooker does anything that pot doesn't. It's just a crude automatic version of what you could do yourself, and you'll do a better job with even minor experience. Heat is heat and a cheap cooker isn't doing anything special.>watched potNo>LOTS of trial and errorNo. Here's how it goes when cooking in a potFirst try>slightly worse than rice cooker but perfectly edibleSecond try, adjusted for whatever went wrong>equal to rice cookerThird try, adjusted again>better than rice cookerAs long as you measure and have a brain cell available to identify what went wrong, you'll make better rice than a cheap cooker by your 3rd batch. And so on forever more, unless you get amnesia, or change your pot/stove and have to recalibrate a little.And BTW you should be adjusting like that with a rice cooker, too, in terms of the amount of water you put in, if you want good rice.
>>17278776i gave you a simple fucking task. did I give you permission to reply to me? my time is valuable and I'm not gay enough to read through a thread about rice. do not reply again. you've outlived your use to me.>>17278783Thank you very much
>>17278783Whose sole purpose is to cook rice perfectly, consistently, and extract more flavor out of the rice*
>>17278766Same quantities as stovetop. It's not that I don't have luck with it - my cheap rice cooker just overcooks the bottom layer when I make sticky rice. I have no such issue stovetop, so I just make it in a pot.You seem very quick to lose your shit. You doing alright?
>>17278791>it's so easy to cook rice, literally any retard can do it>but you have to do it exactly right
>>17278813If you can follow directions, you can cook rice. There are one or two fewer directions with a rice cooker.
>>17278794rice doesn’t have flavor though
>>17278836Some do, but your parcooked, re-dried instant rice does not.
>>17278819yes, i can follow directions, but why do that when there is a cooker that does it for me. I'm not eating plain rice so why give a fuck if my cheap rice is cooked to 90% perfection or 70%
>>17278850You still have to put the correct ratio of water to rice to get good results.
>>17278788A barebones rice cooker automatically cooks the rice such that there is zero water at the bottom of the pot at the time the element shuts off. It does this by using a magnetic switch that loses magnetism once it goes above 100c, which is what would happen if the water evaporated. Doing this ensures the rice is never left soggy like >>17278791's is. You can make 70% good rice in a pot on the stove, but you'll never make it right because the rice will dwell too much at a lukewarm temperature with the typical stovetop method of boiling rice and water together and then covering and letting them sit with the heat off. Obviously, this creates goopy and unappealing rice that doesn't have its fragrances fully extracted, but it's apparently good enough for retards who want to save 10 dollars and a cubic 10 inches of counter space. Fuzzy logic rice cookers are even better at holding the rice at the correct temperature and shutting off at the correct time.>>17278791You have poor reading comprehension. Reread what I wrote above and you'll understand why you're literally publicly coping about your mediocre stovetop rice. >>172787932/10 Shit comment>>17278819The real benefits are listed above, but yes, rice cookers are basically foolproof, which makes it even more ironic that there are *idiots* ITT who won't use one.>>17278802>le epic chiding patronizing comment xd I totally won after making this commentJesus christ.>no issuesYeah, you know how many idiots are out there who have "no issues" with overcooked spaghetti and well done steaks? Do you kinda see how you sound now?
Last night I made rice and then didn't feel like eating it. Thanks to my rice cooker, I didn't have to. I just let it sit in the cooker keeping warm overnight. In the morning I woke up to warm, perfectly cooked rice, just as good as if it were freshly cooked.
This thread is literally>good enough for me!Boomers vs>I'll always be skeptical of single use items, but sometimes, they really are by far the best tool for the jobChads.
>>17278856exactly, i can correct things with only one parameter. there is no guessing if i cooked my rice for a minute longer, used slightly higher temperature or shit like that.
>>17277620>Pots work fine, but it is conclusively, absolutely, 100% false to say that they produce an equivalent product to a top-tier fuzzy logic masterpiececaveat emptor, monica
>>17275991I hate the people on this site that eschew ultra-minimalist lifestyle shit. "Bro don't buy a lighter just use a ferro rod" "Bro don't buy a nonstick pan for your eggs use cast iron for literally everything" "No bro you don't understand bro a rice cooker is excessive you can just make that shit in a pan" Yes, all of these things are possible, but we live in the 21st century and it's easier to use a tool that's been developed to do that thing instead of the lower tech "one size fits all" solution. >>17277569This is the exception, packaged rice is really easy to make in a pan.
>>17277702>a pot on the stove has too many variables going on to really expect prefect rice every time.literally the exact same variables as a rice cooker though: temp and timeare you the big dumb, or are you merely pretending?
>>17278872I agree. In the case of rice cookers, it's really a no brainer. I feel the same way about few other tools. If you eat rice even occasionally, you'd be retarded to not have one. It also frees up stove space. No fucking brainer.
>>17277620Rice cookers are great and the people who advocate against them are trying to cope their way out of cognitive dissonance. It's ok to not own one, but don't try and deceive yourself into believing that you'll get a superior product.
>>17278878Read the thread. Temperature and time are measured and controlled by the rice cooker's function. You don't think rice cookers are just cooking on a static timer, do you? Are you actually that stupid? Read the thread.
>>17278878i don't control temp and time on my fucking rice cooker, it works as intended to make good rice
>>17278878Ambient temperature and humidity would have zero effect on a rice cooker, but extremely significant effects on a pot of rice on the stove. Rice cookers hold the rice at a cooking temperature for the entire duration while stoves hold them below proper cooking temperature and rely heavily on thermal mass to finish the cooking.
>>17278864>Eating rice that remained warm for the nightYikes, dawg. Enjoy food posoning.
>>17278878There's no point arguing with this. You're clearly trying to justify a shitty life decision, but you're not going to find validation here. Live your life without a rice cooker. I don't fucking care. Your rice is going to be not as good.
>>17278910I think he actually has something going on mentally because he's not understanding the multitude of real world benefits we've given him ITT. Perhaps we should back off in case we're actually, unironically dealing with someone who has decreased brain capacity.
I just use steamer instead of pot on stove.It's easier and better for every grain I tried.As a bonus you can cook in the same bowl you eat from and it stays hot for a longer time because the bowl is heated up too. If you forgot about it for some reason it will never burn.You can also cook something else at the same time in it.
>>17278919A mentally challenged challenger approaches
>>17278909I didn't get food poisoning dummy
>>17278907are you retardedonce you get the water to a boil the pot stays at 100c, since it can't exceed that until the water is goneall you ahve to do is get it to a boil and turn down the heat for 10 mins, let it cool for another 10 and your rice is doneif this is too hard for you then you're obviosuly a horrible cook and your 'perfect rice' isn't going to do much for you
>>17278947So in your example, your rice spends 10 minutes cooking below 100c. Goopy rice. Good job making your point, dumbass.
>>17278941I do know that environments that remain warm and humid for a while provide perfect conditions for bacterial growth, right? You may have gotten lucky, but I wouldn't chance it going forward.
>>17278916I don't know if it's mental illness or just extreme cognitive dissonance, either way it's fucking stupid and the thread needs to die.
>>17278956>>17278941I would not let rice stay in a cooker overnight. It's just kind of gross and rice is so cheap that there's really not a lot of advantages that you'd get from it. That said it's your body and ultimately your call.
>>17278857>automatically cooks the rice such that there is zero water at the bottom of the pot at the time the element shuts offI get that idea, but I've used two different cheap rice cookers in my time (partly because I believed the meme about better rice, stovetop is hard, etc) and each one made the bottom a bit too crispy to the point of being a bit burnt. I'd love if it gave me "perfect" rice like you say, but apparently waiting for the bottom to exceed 100c required it to get a bit too dry. Hell the "nonstick" coating always had some shit stuck to it, which doesn't happen in my uncoated pot on the stove.I kinda liked the keep warm feature anyway, although it definitely wouldn't last overnight like >>17278864 said, the rice would get noticeably worse in like an hour. But it wasn't worth the counter space at all, and I sometimes like to cook rice differently, like toasting it, sauteeing garlic in a bit of butter first, etc. I don't see how a pot is hard at all and in practice I get better rice without the burning.>>17278857>covering and letting them sit with the heat offIs that what people do? Seems like it wouldn't work well, since the temp would be too low like you say. I just leave the heat on low until the water should be just about evaporated, then let it rest. I'm pretty sure a cheap cooker isn't doing anything that I'm not doing, besides the fact that I have to guess at the time. But after a few goes that guess is more accurate than my cooker was apparently
>>17278968Sounds like you were not adding the correct amount of water, bud. Perhaps your method has more wiggle room to the goal of not crisping up the rice, which isn't surprising, but the very obvious caveat is that your rice is not cooking properly. I'm sure this doesn't bother you because you have things like pride and low standards ingrained in you from whatever gay upbringing you had, but you should be more open. Technology isn't scary, and this piece's been around since the 50s, so don't worry!
>>17278857You asked why you should follow directions when a rice cooker follows directions for you, in response to a post saying that a rice cooker is fundamentally the same as cooking rice in a pot, with one or two fewer directions.It's great that you've found a hobby, but man... arguing on a cooking board? Maybe take up cooking.>>17278968It isn't that the rice takes 30+ minutes to get up to temp, it's that it has to absorb water to soften. The hotter the water is, the faster it will do this, but it can even be done with tepid water, given enough time... give it a brief boiling period - some microbes that like rice can really shit up your day (literally)
>>17278995>see, this handy temperature sensor means your rice can't burn! It automatically stops! The magic of TECHNOLOGY>but... it just burned my rice>Y-you added the wrong amount of water it's your faultSo what the FUCK was that sensor for, then? Also I don't believe you because it cooked the rest of the rice just fine, only the bottom was crisped. I get the same thing if I simmer for too long on the stove, but in that case I can just decrease the time. Rice cooker fucks up, you can't fix that.
>>17278934It's better in every way. Except that you need a steamer, but it's very versatile and always stays on my stovetop anyway.
>>17279024If you follow the instructions it's basically impossible to fuck up rice in a good rice cooker ($100+ rice cookers, not some shitty $20-40 one with a design from 1950)
>>17279024Was it designed to make a specific amount of rice? It might just be fucked.
>>17279044If you follow the instructions, it's hard to fuck up rice in a $20 rice cooker or a $20 pot. Rice is hard to fuck up if you follow the instructions.
>>17279054That's probably part of it, I might have been making a bit less rice than it was "optimized" for, although it didn't say so. Sensor could have also been slightly fucked, or maybe it just stayed hot for too long after switching off. It wasn't inedible or anything, just not as good as I can do in a pot. Nice thing about the pot though, is that most people have multiple sizes, so you can use a little pot to make little rice, big pot for lots of rice. It would be retarded to multiple sizes of rice cooker like this. Team pot wins again>>17279064"following instructions" isn't the whole story. The package of rice won't know what pot or cooker you're using, and the rice cooker manual won't know exactly what rice you're making. You should be willing to adjust yourself desu, although it's hardly rocket science
Why do you cooklets seethe so hard at rice cookers?
>>17278956The inside of the cooker was already heated to boiling or near-boiling for an hour. There's not a single bacterium alive in there when it's done. As long as it stays closed you could keep it warm for weeks and nothing would grow.
>>17278968>Crispy bit at the bottomThis is actually the starch in the water settling down to the bottom and hardening when it dries. You prevent this by washing the rice or by stirring it halfway through cooking to redistribute the starch. Though I don't bother with either, I actually like that crispy starchy paper that forms.
>>17275991>be asian>love rice>rice makes me fat>replace rice with salad>forget how to make rice>burn rice>room mates and friends jokingly tell me my asian card is revoked
>>17279108Do you remember the brand? I'm curious how it could fuck up now.
>>17279350mfw i was thinking this but never looked it up. doesn't taste bad so i never cared
My rice cooker has a little tray where I can put stuff that needs to be steamed on. Whenever I have leftover chicken I put it on there while the rice boils to reheat it, pretty based desu. I dont use it to steam vegetables tho, because that's extremely homosexually gay.
>>17279645>he reheats his chicken by steaming it for ~40 minutes
>>17280969it takes like 15 minutes, my dude
>>17277537 >>17277620>fuzzy logicWhy do they like saying this so much? Hey I've got a fuzzy logic masterpiece too, it's called my BRAIN I guess you snake oil tards have never heard of that one before though.
>>17277504didn't know facebook boomers browsed 4chan outside of /pol/
>>17275991>relyniggas never heard of convenience and disposable income
>>17278864Bruh you gotta make some lifestyle changes
Pretty sure ricecooker rice is sour, anyway. I'm glad I learned the invaluable skill of stovetop rice cooking.
>>17282562funny!! haha I laughed
>>17275991water double the amount of rice, bring to boil, reduce to medium low, cook 5-10 min, remove from heat and let sit for 5 min, done. EASY
Try cooling Thai homali rice without a rice cooker, you'll end up with a mess. A $20 rice cooker works perfectly and allows me to cook something else while the rice is cooking.
>>17282644water double amount of rice, push button
>>17282652https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OlD1btQwWBwI could cook it.
I haven't bought a rice cooker because I rarely eat it but I sympathise with rice cooker fags, when you're desperate for some perfect rice over curry and you try to make it in the pan there's a fail rate of like 1/20 for me and when you get shitty rice it ruins the whole meal
>there are literally people here to have stoves and don't light fires by rubbing two sticks together>fucking unitasker stove faggots are the worst it takes up all the space and only burnsThis is what you non-rice cooker faggots are like.
>>17282688these retards don't understand that most of the world outside of a very small east asian region cooks rice on a stove
>>17282847>small east asian regionMost humans other than dirt poor pajeets who eat rice on a daily basis use rice cookers which makes up more or less 3 billion people in the world which is about 40% of the world population and not 5 guys.
>>17282847wrong, everyone in China uses rice cookers now
>>17275991Yes, you should be using an open flame instead of a stove. Pampered bitch.
>>17275991>using a timer, when you could just count the seconds yourself
>>17282847You mean everyone that can afford a rice cooker buys one, and everyone that can't works with what they've got.
There is no logical reason why rice from a stove and pot can't be as good as a rice cooker. They do the exact same thing, but instead of having a machine control the heat and time, it is controlled manually when using a stove and pot. As long as you control the heat and time correctly, rice from a stove and pot should be just as good as a rice cooker. There is no special magic, its just heat and time.
You guys are washing your rice, right?
>>17283022Depends on the type.
>>17283021To make rice as good *as a cheap rice cooker* on a stove would require watching the pot almost the entire time, which is a huge bitch, and it would require a lot of guesswork. To make rice as good as an expensive (well, $40) rice cooker on the stove is borderline impossible. I really don't understand why you would want to one-pot rice of all things when you could have perfect rice EVERY TIME, not just ONE TIME in a while, while the entire process is hands off and frees up your stove space. What are you gonna do, never cook something else while you have rice going on the stove? You're out of your fucking mind, especially because you'll also be lacking the keep warm function of a rice cooker. Honestly unbelievable that anyone would shill against them.
>>17283302>To make rice as good as an expensive (well, $40) rice cooker on the stove is borderline impossible.
>>17283329I'll an hero if you can prove me wrong. I live in Vancouver BC
>>17275991Yes, and I'm so glad I got mine. So much easier of an experience and produces better rice.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=65suiR_2O9UI cook rice in a 2 qt Pyrex bowl in the microwave. Best way to make it.
>>17283355I don't want you to kill yourself, baby.
>>17283425Well I might. I've been suicidal for the last few days and because of that, my GF has been moving her things out without talking to me. My rent is gonna be FAT next month if I don't off myself soon
>>17283021And yet it’s not just as good. It never is. What is just as good is rice cooked in clay or heavy iron pots over a flame. Which is what good rice cookers are designed to emulate. But long grain poverty gruel on a stovetop is never good.
Are americans really so notoriously embarrassingly stupid and brown they need a unitasker to make fucking rice? Seriously mutts this a troll right?? Your average mutt DNA is 75% spic surely rice comes genetic to you.
>>17283496Yes I'm sure all of Japan and all of developed China use rice cookers because they can't make rice otherwise.
Rice is for people from the global South, so I refuse to eat it.
>>17283558>>17283779Cope harder mutts, you are an international embarrassment
my rice comes out great and im not going to buy a rice cooker never ever you can be mad about it though :)>>17279356https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jesoRk8K21s
>>17283021surprised there aren't more asian anons answering this. the high end rice cookers are a bit more than this. it's a computer controlled pressure cooker. It will precisely control temp and pressure release. The rice containers also have very even heat distribution so the rice cooks evenly. it's probably a bit more critical for short grain rice which seems to be a bit harder to cook well than long grains. another thing they do well is keep rice moist and fresh for long periods of time. easily 24 hours and even 48 hours is pretty acceptable.for people who eat rice every day getting consistently high quality rice, automatically is worth the $400 rice cooker price tag. it's a convenience thing. if you ate bread every day that you couldn't buy from the store and had to make at home, wouldn't you invest in a bread maker that makes consistently superior bread every time with no effort? pic related, about $350 retail where i am. they wear out and have to be replaced every 5 years or so with daily use.
>>17277537Based, they crying cuz they know it's true
>>17285186It's been mentioned in the thread before, they just refuse to acknowledge it or insist it doesn't actually provide any benefit over the pot.see >>17277702
I can and have and will make rice on the stove hundreds of times, but 99% of the time I use my cooker, keeps it warm, does the entire process for you, makes it perfect every time, essentially: poorfag cope
>>17285332No, clearly you just can't cook rice on the stove, cooklet
>>17277508No>>17277515>DEBOOONKEDI hope you remember your post as you lay dying in a nursing home one day. The only memory the aluminum didn't take. You will ask yourself "was that all my life ever was?". The priest will finish giving you your last right. No family to stand by your side at your final moment, was that really worth it?
>>17278864I get it anon, still it's better to eat some of it fresh so the left over rice has has a chance to lose some moisture. It lasts longer that way. Don't go over two days on extended settings, it gets hella gross.
>>17282562only if you use vinegar?
>>17282897also in Vietnam
I bought a $300 zojirushi and it tastes pretty much the same as the rice from my $40 no-name cookerDoesn't burn on the bottom though so I guess there's that
>>17286361What rice do you buy
>>17277679Kek nice one