[saalweachter]

But like, a coffeemaker is a thing.

You can make coffee with a kettle, but if you are making enough coffee often enough, it does make sense to bundle a second kettle into a dedicated coffeemaker, even if you are reducing the functionality of it by doing so.

[wiether]

It's a thing and it's convenient as a smart TV is convenient for people who don't care much.

But as a "power user" of a TV, I want to compose my own setup.

In the same way, "power users" of coffee don't use a coffeemaker. They use things like French press.

(I use instant coffee myself in my non-heating mug so in this comparison I would be the person not owning a TV and watching everything on their phone?)

[kmstout]

> In the same way, "power users" of coffee don't use a coffeemaker. They use things like French press.

As a perpetual intermediate, I find that a pour-over cone is a great balance of convenience and quality.

[IanCal]

Arguably the outcome you’d want there is to be able to add your own kettle to the coffee maker, so you can have the best value/option for you if you want it. Want a cheap thing or none? Fine. Want one with remote start and modded temp controls or whatever? Fill your boots. Got a new coffee part but like the existing kettle? Reuse it.

This applies less for some physical items, I know some people are already preparing to explain why it’d be harder to make or dangerous or something but that would miss the point. Computers are incredibly easy to swap out, we already have so many ways of doing that.

Maybe I want a fast computer. None. Maybe I want to upgrade later. Maybe in a year there’s a faster cheaper one. Maybe mine is just fine right now but I need a new screen. Why do I need to bundle the two things together? There’s a simplicity for users unboxing something but there’s not (I think) an enormous blocker to having something interchangeable here.